patrick.net

Dan8267 says

The word "equivalent" is not synonymous with the phrase "logically equivalent".

Priceless. Classic Dan.

Not because you might learn anything from me Dan, but instead, just as the mean old man rubbing it in:

Dan8267 says

Every mathematician in the world would have understood what I said.

False. To mathematicians equivalence often has meanings other than equality, depending on context.

For example equivalence can refer to equivalence classes (or equivalence relation):

28 is congruent to 3 (mod 5)

Referring to two conditional statements, because of the context, every
English speaking Mathematician in the world mathematician would know that I was referring to logical equivalence (which I elaborated long before you used this pathetic attempt to wiggle your way out of being wrong).

And they would have known you were wrong and would have no clue that you thought equivalence of logical statements should mean what, some kind of syntactic equality ?

They especially would have known it because they would know that the inverse and the converse of a conditional statement are equivalent logical statements (yes - logically equivalent).

Dan, it's not too late to man up.

Why don't you just say something like, "Okay I was wrong, but I was wrong, because in my need to always be right, it didn't occur to me that equivalence of two conditional expressions (that aren't the same statement) must mean logical equivalence,... my bad."

Marc us, are you really so mother-fucking stupid that you actually think I didn't realize that a converse of a statement is true if and only if the inverse is true when I said

If a statement is true, the contrapositive is also logically true. Likewise, when the converse is true, the inverse is also logically true.

How fucking daft are you?

The fact is you are trying to use nomenclature to argue I don't know the laws of logic that I explicitly stated before all your bitching began. That is a retarded argument.

And don't even start on Group Theory with me. I could kick your ass in Group Theory, Ring Theory, and any other part of Abstract Algebra as I've actually studied these subjects.

And as for predicate logic, don't even talk to me until you can write code like this.

Talk is cheap. All that matters is what you can accomplish.

I've done all of the following. How many have you done?

1. Written open-source code that is used by people on every continent and almost every country.
2. Designed and built a working computer right down to the level of digital logic gates.
3. Built a robot with a neural network capable of learning and obeying commands.
4. Implemented video encoders and decoders.
5. Wrote code that transmits pages of the Wall Street Journal over Dow Jones' corporate satellites.
6. Wrote chess playing AIs.
7. Built ecommerce systems under various architectures.
8. Wrote code for law enforcement that tracks down pedophiles using the information embedded in digital images and displaying the address where the picture was taken on Google Earth.
9. Created 3D rendering engines and applications with 3D interfaces.
10. Wrote various distributed processing systems including audio encoder load balancers and ray tracers.

And that's just to name a few things I've done over the course of my career. You, Marcus, could not do any of those things. Every single one of those things above requires far greater mastery of logic than you could even imagine.

You want to impress me with how good you are at logic? Implement an encoder for MPEG-4. I doubt you'd even be able to figure out how to calculate motion vectors. As they say in Texas, you are all hat and no cattle.

I think someone is overcompensating for a small johnson...

tatupu70 says

I think someone is overcompensating for a small johnson...

I drive a Volvo. 'Nuff said.

Dan8267 says

tatupu70 says

I think someone is overcompensating for a small johnson...

I drive a Volvo. 'Nuff said.

OK--good point.

Dan8267 says

No they are not. The converse of a statement S and the inverse of the statement S are not equivalent.

then later...

Dan8267 says

The word "equivalent" is not synonymous with the phrase "logically equivalent"

I've had time to reflect on this, and I've decided you're right. Any Logician, Mathematician or software architect who was worth their salt, like you, would have interpreted my statement that the inverse and the converse (both conditional statements) "are equivalent,"as

meaning that I was saying they are syntactically equal rather than semantically equivalent.

You're definitely right. I'm sorry you had to go through the trouble of busting out some code again, and listing your accomplishments before I could finally get it through my thick skull that you're right.

( I'm now yelling at myself silently inside my mind..."you idiot !!")

Wow, I actually quite surprised at your change. I had written you off as incapable of abandoning your personal dislike of me and acting rationally. I am glad to be wrong about that, and I appreciate the effort involved in rethinking your position. It gives me hope that if you can correct your behavior, then perhaps there is even hope for Shrek, liv4ever, percat, and others.

In any case, I'm glad that you understand that I wasn't trying to pull one over you, and I hope we can now begin more cordial and sincere discussions of controversial issues. I cannot promise that I won't piss you off again, but I can promise you that everything I say on this site is the honest truth as best as I know it.

Dan8267 says

I had written you off as incapable of abandoning your personal dislike of me and acting rationally.

I know. Before I thought that my personal dislike of you was in fact acting rationally, in the extreme. But I've come to realize that either because of the way others have treated you, and maybe the way they treat you now, when you come to this forum, it's a place for you to liberate your inner asshole, and enjoy a certain degree of intellectual dishonesty that is your true nature.

OF course the other possibility is that you are just a make believe character who writes on this forum. Because I find many of your traits (that I won't list here) to be extremely inconsistent with the personality traits of a good programmer.

Then again, what do I know, I'm just an idiot who has lied to you about having a masters degree in Math, and who couldn't hold a candle to you in any domain.

Please picture me walking away from you backwards, bowing every few steps I take.

marcus says

I know. Before I thought that my personal dislike of you was in fact acting rationally, in the extreme. But I've come to realize that either because of the way others have treated you, and maybe the way they treat you now, when you come to this forum, it's a place for you to liberate your inner asshole, and enjoy a certain degree of intellectual dishonesty that is your true nature.

Well, that didn't last long. I guess I was wrong about being wrong about Marcus being beyond hope or redemption. That will teach me to have any hope in the human species.