Large Scale Central

Something that puzzles me quite often

General Discussion
#41

Actually, there ARE computers designed to take the place of the human brain. :wink:

check out the “Turing Test”, a computer just tested as “human”

There are computers and (more to how it really works) software to do many different tasks.

Yes, people have become WAY too attached in some ways, I will heartily agree!

Yes, posting online lacks many of the “cues” in communication that a real face to face conversation has.

And yes, it allows people to do and say things that would not happen face to face.

But, this is what we have, so we have to do our best to communicate plainly, and sometimes over-reinforce our point… like putting a smiley to ensure people know something is in fun or jest.

Of course, this is less on topic than the OP but more than politics.

Greg

#42

Stacy Krausmann said:

More on topic here. Computers were never designed to take the place of the human brain. Which is, by all accounts, the most unique and complicated computer ever created.

People, in general, have become so attached to these machines that they have become impersonal and
highly dependent upon them.

As for this forum, the people in it and the topics, I believe it is more important to be human towards one another and not look down on others simply because they do not know something or perhaps made an error. I also believe that some make really large assumptions about others. Such leaps in judgment are
wrong period.

This is why I say the PC enables some to be so impersonal as to become bullies when dealing with others on line.

My .02

Yep, straight back to topic. I suppose you know how “assume” can be interpreted.

One of the special features on LSC: the members quite readily follow the drift of a thread — with a few detours.

As for all the rest, a few posts back I mentioned the Professor from UofZ and his modus operandi teaching impressionable apprentices. Just in case you missed it: “either get it or forget it”.

I’m sure he’s long passed on, but knowing his approach I’m sure he would have been “extremely impressed” with your catenary/electric propulsion theory.

#43

Greg Elmassian said:

I identify with Fred’s post, electronics is one of my formal training areas, besides physics.

I cannot blame people at all for wanting a simple way to pick a resistor for an LED, it seems such a simple device.

I always use a 470 ohm resistor

Greg

See, I knew there was a simple answer!

#44

Richard Smith said:

I just wish the people doing research for TV history documentaries would do at least the most basic research. Accuracy seems to be a thing most lack.

Recently there was a quite long and much touted documentary called D-Day. It was certainly a most expensive effort to put on. I learned a lot.

For example did you know London was bombed by formations of “German” 4 engined B-17s? They showed this at least three different times. Also in addition to Me109 and Me110 fighters they also had P-51s. And I’m still baffled at how the allies were able to repel those mighty M-48/M-60 battle tanks the Germans had. In the Philippines in 1941 the US troops already had the pot type helmets instead of the WWI type. There were a number of other rather glaring errors too throughout the presentation. Yep I dun lurned a lot I did.

You would think with the wide availability of film and video available nowadays they could at least find file footage of the correct weaponry used. An occasional blooper I could forgive but the errors were so numerous and obvious I can only conclude the editors were either completely ignorant of the subject or they just didn’t care.

Richard, I watched one recently about the Battle of Midway in which the USS Midway, with an angle deck, no less, stood in for Akagi.

Lately, my usual comment to my wife about these travesties is, “It didn’t happen that way.” Followed by how it really did happen. Then she says I should hire myself out to the writers. And deprive myself of a form of entertainment, seeing how wrong they can get it?

#45

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:

Stacy Krausmann said:

More on topic here. Computers were never designed to take the place of the human brain. Which is, by all accounts, the most unique and complicated computer ever created.

People, in general, have become so attached to these machines that they have become impersonal and
highly dependent upon them.

As for this forum, the people in it and the topics, I believe it is more important to be human towards one another and not look down on others simply because they do not know something or perhaps made an error. I also believe that some make really large assumptions about others. Such leaps in judgment are
wrong period.

This is why I say the PC enables some to be so impersonal as to become bullies when dealing with others on line.

My .02

Yep, straight back to topic. I suppose you know how “assume” can be interpreted.

One of the special features on LSC: the members quite readily follow the drift of a thread — with a few detours.

As for all the rest, a few posts back I mentioned the Professor from UofZ and his modus operandi teaching impressionable apprentices. Just in case you missed it: “either get it or forget it”.

I’m sure he’s long passed on, but knowing his approach I’m sure he would have been “extremely impressed” with your catenary/electric propulsion theory.

Maybe he would have.

#46

Stacy Krausmann said:

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:

Stacy Krausmann said:

More on topic here. Computers were never designed to take the place of the human brain. Which is, by all accounts, the most unique and complicated computer ever created.

People, in general, have become so attached to these machines that they have become impersonal and
highly dependent upon them.

As for this forum, the people in it and the topics, I believe it is more important to be human towards one another and not look down on others simply because they do not know something or perhaps made an error. I also believe that some make really large assumptions about others. Such leaps in judgment are
wrong period.

This is why I say the PC enables some to be so impersonal as to become bullies when dealing with others on line.

My .02

Yep, straight back to topic. I suppose you know how “assume” can be interpreted.

One of the special features on LSC: the members quite readily follow the drift of a thread — with a few detours.

As for all the rest, a few posts back I mentioned the Professor from UofZ and his modus operandi teaching impressionable apprentices. Just in case you missed it: “either get it or forget it”.

I’m sure he’s long passed on, but knowing his approach I’m sure he would have been “extremely impressed” with your catenary/electric propulsion theory.

Maybe he would have.

Certainly, as “impressed” as I am.

#47

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:

Stacy Krausmann said:

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:

Stacy Krausmann said:

More on topic here. Computers were never designed to take the place of the human brain. Which is, by all accounts, the most unique and complicated computer ever created.

People, in general, have become so attached to these machines that they have become impersonal and
highly dependent upon them.

As for this forum, the people in it and the topics, I believe it is more important to be human towards one another and not look down on others simply because they do not know something or perhaps made an error. I also believe that some make really large assumptions about others. Such leaps in judgment are
wrong period.

This is why I say the PC enables some to be so impersonal as to become bullies when dealing with others on line.

My .02

Yep, straight back to topic. I suppose you know how “assume” can be interpreted.

One of the special features on LSC: the members quite readily follow the drift of a thread — with a few detours.

As for all the rest, a few posts back I mentioned the Professor from UofZ and his modus operandi teaching impressionable apprentices. Just in case you missed it: “either get it or forget it”.

I’m sure he’s long passed on, but knowing his approach I’m sure he would have been “extremely impressed” with your catenary/electric propulsion theory.

Maybe he would have.

Certainly, as “impressed” as I am.

You’re full of yourself, and you don’t care about anyone. You’re not human, you’re a black hole that sucks the life out of people, and I’m done with you. I don’t need to waste my time with someone who’s worthless, because I’m better then that. I don’t treat people the way you do, because I know that giving insults to people, and showing no class, shows how much of a person you really are, and how worthless you are of anyone’s time.

PO

#48

Stacy Krausmann said:

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:

…

Certainly, as “impressed” as I am.

You’re full of yourself, and you don’t care about anyone. You’re not human, you’re a black hole that sucks the life out of people, and I’m done with you. I don’t need to waste my time with someone who’s worthless, because I’m better then that. I don’t treat people the way you do, because I know that giving insults to people, and showing no class, shows how much of a person you really are, and how worthless you are of anyone’s time.

PO

Stacy,

That’s quite a rant!

#49

Yes, but do you get it? Or are you so jaded that you cannot see when your insolent attitude has become enough already.

Jesus

#50

In other words, it is not funny anymore.

#51

Stacy Krausmann said:

Yes, but do you get it? Or are you so jaded that you cannot see when your insolent attitude has become enough already.

Jesus

Stacy Krausmann said:

In other words, it is not funny anymore.

Actually it hasn’t been funny for some time. Seems like you can dish it, but have trouble to take it. Telling others just what you think of them and how LSC should be run, i.e. a case of good for the goose, but not for the gander, eh?

#52

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:

Stacy Krausmann said:

Yes, but do you get it? Or are you so jaded that you cannot see when your insolent attitude has become enough already.

Jesus

Stacy Krausmann said:

In other words, it is not funny anymore.

Actually it hasn’t been funny for some time. Seems like you can dish it, but have trouble to take it. Telling others just what you think of them and how LSC should be run, i.e. a case of good for the goose, but not for the gander, eh?

Project much Hans?

Na, I like a good joke. even at my expense, but you know what you are doing is wrong. Plain wrong.

I will not respond any longer in this thread. God forbid it gets locked up!

.

#53

Its probably good that you cease responding. When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging.

#54

That could solve any conceived problems, but will it happen…

#55

I find the response to HJ puzzling – not in content but as to motive.

Me? Both HJ, Steve, Greg, and the other regular contributors have not shown me any unprovoked responses that are construed as rude or thoughtless. Yes, when provoked, any of us can make a comment that is negative – that certainly goes for both sides of any topic.

Hopefully this topic has come to a close.

Wendell

#56

What puzzles me is why a certain member’s posts always seam to degrade into childish name calling. Its as if that member is just looking to be offended, or that member just doesn’t know how to play nice with others.

:stuck_out_tongue:

#57

He’s been banned for spamming the forums tonight. We wont be seeing him around any more.

#58

Ok Bob.

Sort of back on topic. One of the reasons I chose the Pittsburgh and Castle Shannon Railroad to model, is that information on that railroad is scarce. I know, I have done research at the Shannon library. So I can take certain “liberties” with the subject, and very few people would even know.

#59

Steve Featherkile said:

Richard Smith said:

I just wish the people doing research for TV history documentaries would do at least the most basic research. Accuracy seems to be a thing most lack.

Recently there was a quite long and much touted documentary called D-Day. It was certainly a most expensive effort to put on. I learned a lot.

For example did you know London was bombed by formations of “German” 4 engined B-17s? They showed this at least three different times. Also in addition to Me109 and Me110 fighters they also had P-51s. And I’m still baffled at how the allies were able to repel those mighty M-48/M-60 battle tanks the Germans had. In the Philippines in 1941 the US troops already had the pot type helmets instead of the WWI type. There were a number of other rather glaring errors too throughout the presentation. Yep I dun lurned a lot I did.

You would think with the wide availability of film and video available nowadays they could at least find file footage of the correct weaponry used. An occasional blooper I could forgive but the errors were so numerous and obvious I can only conclude the editors were either completely ignorant of the subject or they just didn’t care.

Richard, I watched one recently about the Battle of Midway in which the USS Midway, with an angle deck, no less, stood in for Akagi.

Lately, my usual comment to my wife about these travesties is, “It didn’t happen that way.” Followed by how it really did happen. Then she says I should hire myself out to the writers. And deprive myself of a form of entertainment, seeing how wrong they can get it?

Yes it is fun and stress relieving isn’t it? I’m analyzing your mistakes now but don’t worry about me being upset with you…everybody irritates me!

:stuck_out_tongue: :wink: