Foxconn, Apple's factory of death
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Sunbathing Photo
Next: Why P&S's should do some reading before taking the plunge with real cameras
From: tony cooper on 3 Jun 2010 18:55 On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:16:00 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >news:ivrf065q14tlc0j91nn044ldc65lve8rd6(a)4ax.com... >> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 11:05:44 -0400, "Peter" >> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >> >>>"John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message >>>news:hu8ela$hn7$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>> whisky-dave wrote: >>>>> "John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message >>>>> news:hu6mj2$dms$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>>>> Savageduck wrote: >>>>>>> On 2010-06-02 14:32:26 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> >>>>>>> said: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Allen wrote: >>>>>>>>> Peter wrote: >>>>>>>>>> "Allen" <allent(a)austin.rr.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:PpCdnX5mia8P-JvRnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >>>>>>>>>>> Savageduck wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>>>>> Given that you are not going to find 72% of any test population >>>>>>>>>>>> scoring below 95. >>>>>>>>>>> One exception: the population of my killfile for this group. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I have yet to meet a member of Mensa who had any intelligence. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I've known many people (including myself) who qualified for Mensa, >>>>>>>>> but only one who was actually a member. She proves your statement. >>>>>>>> Now, now, we who exceed the so-called Mensa standard by a hundred >>>>>>>> points or more ("Uber-Mensaists") >>>>>>> Huh! That remark just got you removed from any consideration for >>>>>>> MENSA >>>>>>> qualification, or membership at any level "uber" or standard . >>>>>> I know I shouldn't reveal this, but I am on the admissions committee >>>>>> for >>>>>> the uber class, and the extra secret one that's above it such that I >>>>>> cannot mention its name, and probably shouldn't mention its >>>>>> existence.... If you wish to be considered for candidacy, we have a >>>>>> secure and non-googleable web site I will invite you to to start the >>>>>> process. Hit me off line. >>>>>> >>>>>> Good luck! >>>>> >>>>> What does it cost ? >>>>> >>>> >>>> It's a bargain at $800.00. The real costs are underwritten by the Trust. >>>> You get a couple of really nice wall hangings, framed sheepskin (real), >>>> hand lettered: a lifetime supply of stationery; and a gold pen set (18 >>>> kt). Application fees are $150.00. >>> >>> >>>And well worth the cost, if your ego requires it. Many years ago I >>>considered applying for membership. Although I clearly qualified, I could >>>not see any benefit to me. I get more enjoyment from a Gropper lithograph >>>that was purchased for $10 and given to me because it reminded my client >>>of >>>me. >> >> If - as you claim - you "clearly" qualify for MENSA, then you have >> taken MENSA's tests. I can only imagine that being done by someone >> whose ego requires stroking. > > >Straw man argument. Mensa also accepts certified results not administered by >them. >From th4e website, which you are free to look up' >"Generally, there are two ways to prove that you qualify for Mensa: either >take the Mensa test, or submit a qualifying test score from another test. >There are a large number of intelligence tests that are "approved". More >information on whether a test you have taken is approved, as well as >information on the procedure for taking the Mensa test, can be obtained from >the nearest Mensa office. " Why would you take - allegedly - any IQ test? The Stanford Binet test is administered to people from two to twenty-three for various reasons. The Wonderlic is a personnel test. Other tests are given to criminals and people with psychotic disorders. But why anyone would take a full-blown IQ test for other than ego stroking is beyond me. If you have the smarts, it shows. If you don't, you claim to be clearly qualified. >> >> If - as you claim - you "clearly" qualify you are hiding your >> intellectual qualifications under a bushel based on your posts. > >I fully realize that compared to you, I am an imbecile. IOW, I have no >intention of engaging you in a battle of wits. I do not fight unarmed >people. I really appreciate original barbs. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: tony cooper on 3 Jun 2010 19:11 On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 20:08:06 +0100, Pete <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote: >On 2010-06-03 19:38:45 +0100, tony cooper said: > >> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 16:39:26 +0100, Pete >> <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote: >> >>> On 2010-06-03 16:01:13 +0100, tony cooper said: >>> >>>> On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 06:59:55 -0700, ASCII <me2(a)privacy.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mike Russell wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Why not make fun of some other disease than mental illness, just for a >>>>>> change? >>>>> >>>>> If 'downs' syndrome is a Mongolian Idiot, >>>>> then >>>>> 'ups' syndrome must be a Mongolian Genius. >>>> >>>> It's "Down's Syndrome", but the current trend is to refer to as "Down >>>> Syndrome". The name is derived from the UK physician John Langdon >>>> Down who first described it in 1866. >>>> >>>> Like many conditions, there are levels of impairment. They are not >>>> all so limited in cognitive ability to be classified as "idiots". >>> >>> The UK NHS refers to it as "Down's syndrome" on many of its websites. >> >> There's a trend in medical writing to eliminate the possessive form of >> a disease or condition that is an eponym of the discoverer. The style >> guides of some of the journals call for the elimination of the >> possessive form. Some style guides are silent on this. >> >> Further information at: >> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2667526/ > >If I discover a syndrome and it gets called Pete's Syndrome, I'd be >pissed off if a group of twats decide to call it Pete Syndrome - that >insults and labels the discoverer and implies that he/she also has it. I don't quite follow that. "Pete's Syndrome" says that this is the syndrome that Pete has just like "Pete's hat" is the hat that Pete has. >Here, if an applicant fills in a form to obtain assistance it will be >automatically rejected if it does not match the wording of government >websites. The motto is "If you want to be pedantic, great; we'll save >money and have less work to do." YMMV. I was referring to medical writing, but the government sites will soon catch up. There was an article in _The Lancet_ that says "The possessive form of an eponym should be discontinued, since the author neither had nor owned the disorder." If _The Lancet_ and _BMJ_ (British Medical Journal) move to this writing convention in their style guides, the government sites will follow. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: J. Clarke on 3 Jun 2010 19:21 On 6/3/2010 6:55 PM, tony cooper wrote: > On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:16:00 -0400, "Peter" > <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >> "tony cooper"<tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >> news:ivrf065q14tlc0j91nn044ldc65lve8rd6(a)4ax.com... >>> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 11:05:44 -0400, "Peter" >>> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >>> >>>> "John McWilliams"<jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message >>>> news:hu8ela$hn7$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>>> whisky-dave wrote: >>>>>> "John McWilliams"<jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message >>>>>> news:hu6mj2$dms$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>>>>> Savageduck wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2010-06-02 14:32:26 -0700, John McWilliams<jpmcw(a)comcast.net> >>>>>>>> said: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Allen wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Peter wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> "Allen"<allent(a)austin.rr.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>> news:PpCdnX5mia8P-JvRnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >>>>>>>>>>>> Savageduck wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Given that you are not going to find 72% of any test population >>>>>>>>>>>>> scoring below 95. >>>>>>>>>>>> One exception: the population of my killfile for this group. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I have yet to meet a member of Mensa who had any intelligence. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I've known many people (including myself) who qualified for Mensa, >>>>>>>>>> but only one who was actually a member. She proves your statement. >>>>>>>>> Now, now, we who exceed the so-called Mensa standard by a hundred >>>>>>>>> points or more ("Uber-Mensaists") >>>>>>>> Huh! That remark just got you removed from any consideration for >>>>>>>> MENSA >>>>>>>> qualification, or membership at any level "uber" or standard . >>>>>>> I know I shouldn't reveal this, but I am on the admissions committee >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> the uber class, and the extra secret one that's above it such that I >>>>>>> cannot mention its name, and probably shouldn't mention its >>>>>>> existence.... If you wish to be considered for candidacy, we have a >>>>>>> secure and non-googleable web site I will invite you to to start the >>>>>>> process. Hit me off line. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Good luck! >>>>>> >>>>>> What does it cost ? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It's a bargain at $800.00. The real costs are underwritten by the Trust. >>>>> You get a couple of really nice wall hangings, framed sheepskin (real), >>>>> hand lettered: a lifetime supply of stationery; and a gold pen set (18 >>>>> kt). Application fees are $150.00. >>>> >>>> >>>> And well worth the cost, if your ego requires it. Many years ago I >>>> considered applying for membership. Although I clearly qualified, I could >>>> not see any benefit to me. I get more enjoyment from a Gropper lithograph >>>> that was purchased for $10 and given to me because it reminded my client >>>> of >>>> me. >>> >>> If - as you claim - you "clearly" qualify for MENSA, then you have >>> taken MENSA's tests. I can only imagine that being done by someone >>> whose ego requires stroking. >> >> >> Straw man argument. Mensa also accepts certified results not administered by >> them. >> From th4e website, which you are free to look up' >> "Generally, there are two ways to prove that you qualify for Mensa: either >> take the Mensa test, or submit a qualifying test score from another test. >> There are a large number of intelligence tests that are "approved". More >> information on whether a test you have taken is approved, as well as >> information on the procedure for taking the Mensa test, can be obtained from >> the nearest Mensa office. " > > Why would you take - allegedly - any IQ test? The Stanford Binet test > is administered to people from two to twenty-three for various > reasons. The Wonderlic is a personnel test. Other tests are given to > criminals and people with psychotic disorders. But why anyone would > take a full-blown IQ test for other than ego stroking is beyond me. Mensa accepts, among other things, the SAT, the ACT, and the CEEB. Just about everybody who lives in the US and has any kind of education beyond high school has taken at least one of those. The full list is on their Web site. > If you have the smarts, it shows. If you don't, you claim to be > clearly qualified. >>> >>> If - as you claim - you "clearly" qualify you are hiding your >>> intellectual qualifications under a bushel based on your posts. >> >> I fully realize that compared to you, I am an imbecile. IOW, I have no >> intention of engaging you in a battle of wits. I do not fight unarmed >> people. > > I really appreciate original barbs. >
From: Pete on 3 Jun 2010 20:01 On 2010-06-04 00:11:08 +0100, tony cooper said: > On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 20:08:06 +0100, Pete > <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote: > >> On 2010-06-03 19:38:45 +0100, tony cooper said: >> >>> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 16:39:26 +0100, Pete >>> <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2010-06-03 16:01:13 +0100, tony cooper said: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 06:59:55 -0700, ASCII <me2(a)privacy.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Mike Russell wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why not make fun of some other disease than mental illness, just for a >>>>>>> change? >>>>>> >>>>>> If 'downs' syndrome is a Mongolian Idiot, >>>>>> then >>>>>> 'ups' syndrome must be a Mongolian Genius. >>>>> >>>>> It's "Down's Syndrome", but the current trend is to refer to as "Down >>>>> Syndrome". The name is derived from the UK physician John Langdon >>>>> Down who first described it in 1866. >>>>> >>>>> Like many conditions, there are levels of impairment. They are not >>>>> all so limited in cognitive ability to be classified as "idiots". >>>> >>>> The UK NHS refers to it as "Down's syndrome" on many of its websites. >>> >>> There's a trend in medical writing to eliminate the possessive form of >>> a disease or condition that is an eponym of the discoverer. The style >>> guides of some of the journals call for the elimination of the >>> possessive form. Some style guides are silent on this. >>> >>> Further information at: >>> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2667526/ >> >> If I discover a syndrome and it gets called Pete's Syndrome, I'd be >> pissed off if a group of twats decide to call it Pete Syndrome - that >> insults and labels the discoverer and implies that he/she also has it. > > I don't quite follow that. "Pete's Syndrome" says that this is the > syndrome that Pete has just like "Pete's hat" is the hat that Pete > has. Pete's invention, discovery etc. I'd never questioned it before. Like many things, it just became ingrained. >> Here, if an applicant fills in a form to obtain assistance it will be >> automatically rejected if it does not match the wording of government >> websites. The motto is "If you want to be pedantic, great; we'll save >> money and have less work to do." YMMV. > > I was referring to medical writing, but the government sites will soon > catch up. There was an article in _The Lancet_ that says "The > possessive form of an eponym should be discontinued, since the author > neither had nor owned the disorder." If _The Lancet_ and _BMJ_ > (British Medical Journal) move to this writing convention in their > style guides, the government sites will follow. I hope so. There could be a long delay before our medical practitioners catch up. Many still deny certain illnesses exist even though they have been classified by the WHO for over a decade. -- Pete
From: Peter on 3 Jun 2010 20:12
"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:lbbg065e9vcmseg60rkkvp1d4jd3eu4vug(a)4ax.com... > > Why would you take - allegedly - any IQ test? The Stanford Binet test > is administered to people from two to twenty-three for various > reasons. The Wonderlic is a personnel test. Other tests are given to > criminals and people with psychotic disorders. But why anyone would > take a full-blown IQ test for other than ego stroking is beyond me. I have a pretty big ego. It doesn't need to be stroked. -- Peter |