My python interpreter became mad !

[castironpi at gmail.com]

On Mar 25, 7:45 pm, John Machin <sjmac... at lexicon.net> wrote:
> Furkan Kuru incorrigibly top-posted:
>
> > Ok, you're right.
>
> > but I did not give it a chance "not trying python interpreter in another
> > directory"
>
> I don't understand that sentence.
>
> > so if we assume the problem exists in every directory, it has something
> > to do with  pythonpath.
>
> Why would/should we assume that?

Process of enumeration.

> > you can try setting pythonpath to some directory and put a re.py there
> > and try from any directory starting your interpreter and importing re.
>
> and achieve the same result: importing the bogus re. What's your point?

I'm not so sure that dispute burdens of proof are resolved all that
virtuously (life isn't fair; fair is good).  What are newsgroups like
in the monarchies?  Ever feel you're typing on auto-pilot?  It's not
like you vote on me staying.  However, the things I've said about
myself aren't written intepretation-strict, thence there must be some
distinction between interpretations, or between resident attitudes for
me?

Perhaps my fault for overinvesting hope in the newsgroups.  You're not
a best friend to me!  <awkward>.  If you look like your pets, do we
look like computers?  Restrictions are different for justice: my only
analytically (or never) outweighs my threshold.

By the process of cognition, we ascribe malice (how probabilistically-
malicious is it) to people (as danger to objects?), but the ideal
realm (kingdom Logos), but revising estimates is expensive.

Do visual mirrors make a round-trip error?

Is there emotionally such thing as a computer?  They are certainly
deep, but perhaps only axiomatically; people aren't made of binary.
How far to the nearest indefinite precision computer?  Any pull around
here?  Someone have a thesis on wake-detection in a parallel system?
Can we 'black-box' people?  ("Are you a black box?")  What kind of
accuracy is there in uniform media?  Can we 'black-box' groups?

Wakes and patterned perturbations can be modeled in feature-sets,
abitrary feature collisions not fully particle.  I'd be more
interested in a feature specialty that facilitates to transmit waves,
and a sum-of-waveform native.  Is there a recursive expression of the
taylor expansion of e^x, by the way?

Interface and deface.  Honest and true?  Can you just buffer?

Beliefs might settle wrong, and it's hard to change them: huge
machine, right nail.  Can a spider swarm simulate a macro operation
(building a building), either given a power source or carrying
"lifeform batteries"?  Operator would need interface: thought to
operation: fast enough - idle loop cost: can't be governing every
small bug (once again, features over particles), the machines would
need overall/level/summary operations, read memories.  But you can get
a couple microvolts and a memory cell on a 2-micron spider, and a
radio-static but sees a medium, speed-of-propogation, limitation.
Just think outside the case.

How organized is the newsgroup?  Can I buy a long non-commutative
associative (time order (resort)) record?  It's not.  (That's a tongue
thing, right?)  A place to come to: a place to sit at energy level.
(New you vs. same me here too.)  2-D primitives suck on serial input.
I'd almost rather decode a video of hands.  Would a computer mind
learning?

You could by a perceptive-order code.  What the world needs is a few
good spacers.  I have to think; leave silent, and return broadcasting.

How's yours suck + what's the monkey on your back?  Multi-type time
people for sale, American dollar.  Anyone up for a little register-
base broadcasting?  It's a broad.