|
I hope you understand that we never understood (me, and hope, you too) the notion of "sanity" literally or, in fact, even seriously.
One of the best wonders of mathematics is revealing the inertia of thinking in human, which is the first step into expanding the mind (last expression can also be easily associated with "smoking").
All right, did you notice that Chris provided me with my text saved from the database?.. so I preserved it. This is great.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Your post was:
Quote: Some questions are clever, some are silly or naive, some are not well-defined. But this question is worse. It's about nothing; the question of a person who has nothing to do. Please forgive me for these words; I know that it might be not true, I just say that the question looks like that. Maybe, this is just a matter of misunderstanding.
I guess I should explain why there is such impression.
Well, everyone understands that it's way too easy to check up if "Android" is the name of some OS or not. No need to ask a question; the answer would come much faster if you consult Wikipedia or other source. As to the word "technology", the situation is much worse. One could suspect that you are unfamiliar with all the uses of this fuzzy notion, "technology". But then you would probably need to get some idea on that, which would be well behind your interest in Android. But if you have a good idea of the patterns of the use of the word "technology" (which is much more likely), it means that you have a wrong idea of how knowledge works, and this would be more troublesome.
Maybe you don't understand that there is no such thing as verbal knowledge. (Of course, except the knowledge related to words themselves, such as knowledge of language, linguistics, and so on.) For example, as new OS often introduce some new technologies, OS itself can be call "technology", or the name of the OS could be associated with the OS name, as in "Android technology". But there is no any valid statement in telling that "this OS is a technology" or "this OS is not"; and the question "is it OS or technology?" sounds as a total absurd. This is because none of those statements means anything to the understanding of that OS. There is no such thing as verbal knowledge. Discussing such things is only possible in some imitation of "clever discussion". About nothing.
Please consider two previous paragraphs also as an answer to the question about "technology".
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris, you saved me a day. (Not measured in time, of course, but in my gratitude. )
Thank you so much!
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
I've been trying to edit my article http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/278901/MVVM-Pattern-Made-Simplede-Simple">MVVM Pattern Made Simple[^].
When I click on "Update your article link" I am getting the default page to edit as if I am starting a new article:
Introduction
What the article/code snippet does...
etc.
Please fix it.
Thanks
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
That's because we're all eagerly waiting new articles from you. The existing ones are just fine.
|
|
|
|
|
Speaking seriously - there was smth I wanted to correct. There is some style mess after the words
" and you'll see a MessageBox popping up"
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I see. Also there's some problem after "For ItemsControl sample, see ItemsControlDataTemplateTest.sln solution".
For what it's worth, I tried to edit few of my articles and that worked out just fine so this behaviour isn't affecting all articles...
|
|
|
|
|
I can also edit my other articles, but for some reason not this one.
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm. I think I saved it? Try now.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Now it works, thanks!
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
|
You should be able to now.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Pasted links to Online Etymology Dictionary are resulting in the message being amputated in various odd places.
Here's the link in plain-text, followed by the link as transformed by the CP editor after a paste, and "reduced" by me to only the content between brackets for posting:
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=sarcasm
Here we go: [^]
Is it going to be amputated ?
thanks, Bill
« I had therefore to remove knowledge, in order to make room for belief » Immanuel Kant
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like the same bug as this[^], or at least related to it.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
|
So ... what is the result [^]?
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: spammer accounts
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
|
|
|
|
|
One spam question reported here[^]. The other account posted an identical spam question, but I didn't report it because I initially thought it was the same user. Both questions have been closed.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Great. You should report it as still alive sock puppets in SA.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
|
|
|
|
|
There's a space in the second username. But yes, odds on it's the same person.
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
But not in the permalink to the user. Look under the "Member since" line, and you'll see the same link for both users.
They also have the same "@" name under the display name.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
When I go to:
http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?waid=141926&aid=821999[^]
I get the message:
This article is not currently available for viewing.
And:
Closed because This post is spam, abusive or otherwise inappropriate. Reported by ... (3 names) on Tuesday, September 23, 2014 9:46am.
But below that I still get the full article.
If the article is closed / not available for viewing / ... shouldn't I not be able to see it?
Or is it a reputation thing? (I really wouldn't know why I would be able to see it as I have 0 author points)
|
|
|
|
|
You can see it because of your privileges to approve articles...
The content is visible only for those have that privileges and the reason is to enable debate over others decision...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
hmmm k, figured it might be something like that.
Just thought I'd point it out in case it was a bug
|
|
|
|