Some may find this post of great interest ? Vas?

[benstoker]

Then Zach thinks BB's claims that his analysis was derived without a tool such as IDA is ridiculous.

No, you have completely misunderstood what I said.

You wrote it. What did you mean then?

you can't understand this:

It is very impressive, but IMO the most impressive part about it is that BB says he did this without IDA or any other tool, but just by using the output of objdump. Pretty ridiculous.

Hint:

ridiculous: amazing. astounding. remarkable. Etc.

not

ridiculous: bullshit. nonsense. impossible. bogus. Etc.

I had absolutely no problem understanding what he meant without even a second's worth of thought. Note the key words "very impressive". as opposed "what a crock" or whatever.

No doubt one of the virtues of working in an environment with students: you stay up to speed in colloquialisms.

No, this is not a colloquialism, the key word "ridiculous" simply follows the statement "it is very impressive." I don't think one would use those words if he thought the idea was bogus. He could have used a dozen different words there and the general "feeling" would remain the same, because of those first 4 words. IMHO of course.

It is very impressive that you claim to have single-handedly brought peace to the world. Pretty ridiculous.

Does ridiculous above mean amazing, or does it mean absurd?

In context, "absurd". "claim to have single-handedly ..." If you leave out that part, then "amazing".

How about:

It is very impressive that you say you brought peace to the world. Pretty ridiculous.

It all depends on how unlikely the feat is. Zach's statement is quite borderline unless you think BB's claim is commonplace, which then leaves 'pretty ridiculous' completely open to interpretation.

And as an aside the use of ridiculous to mean "amazing" *is* a colloquialism.

A "world-wide" one? I've seen that used many times. "Watch my car dance (via hydraulics)." "That's ridiculous, man..." Etc.

Well, first of all, even if it were world-wide, that wouldn't make it less of a colloquialism. As to the car dancing via hydraulics example.... That was a pretty funny choice, because it is extremely American, not world-wide. Not that you implied otherwise, but it was still a funny choice after claiming it was 'world-wide'.

Anyhow, if you look up even recent editions of Websters, you won't find ridiculous defined as you suggest. One can find it, however, at the Online Slang Dictionary: Ridiculous.

This debate is ridiculous.

[Albert Silver]

Then Zach thinks BB's claims that his analysis was derived without a tool such as IDA is ridiculous.

No, you have completely misunderstood what I said.

You wrote it. What did you mean then?

you can't understand this:

It is very impressive, but IMO the most impressive part about it is that BB says he did this without IDA or any other tool, but just by using the output of objdump. Pretty ridiculous.

Hint:

ridiculous: amazing. astounding. remarkable. Etc.

not

ridiculous: bullshit. nonsense. impossible. bogus. Etc.

I had absolutely no problem understanding what he meant without even a second's worth of thought. Note the key words "very impressive". as opposed "what a crock" or whatever.

No doubt one of the virtues of working in an environment with students: you stay up to speed in colloquialisms.

No, this is not a colloquialism, the key word "ridiculous" simply follows the statement "it is very impressive." I don't think one would use those words if he thought the idea was bogus. He could have used a dozen different words there and the general "feeling" would remain the same, because of those first 4 words. IMHO of course.

It is very impressive that you claim to have single-handedly brought peace to the world. Pretty ridiculous.

Does ridiculous above mean amazing, or does it mean absurd?

In context, "absurd". "claim to have single-handedly ..." If you leave out that part, then "amazing".

How about:

It is very impressive that you say you brought peace to the world. Pretty ridiculous.

It all depends on how unlikely the feat is. Zach's statement is quite borderline unless you think BB's claim is commonplace, which then leaves 'pretty ridiculous' completely open to interpretation.

And as an aside the use of ridiculous to mean "amazing" *is* a colloquialism.

A "world-wide" one? I've seen that used many times. "Watch my car dance (via hydraulics)." "That's ridiculous, man..." Etc.

Well, first of all, even if it were world-wide, that wouldn't make it less of a colloquialism. As to the car dancing via hydraulics example.... That was a pretty funny choice, because it is extremely American, not world-wide. Not that you implied otherwise, but it was still a funny choice after claiming it was 'world-wide'.

Anyhow, if you look up even recent editions of Websters, you won't find ridiculous defined as you suggest. One can find it, however, at the Online Slang Dictionary: Ridiculous.

I simply try to read what is written and take it at face value rather than trying to figure out how the words might best fit what I want to see written...

Tsk, tsk, tsk. You are presuming that is what happened, rather than accepting that his slang use of 'ridiculous' is not as internationally widespread as you might think.

[Albert Silver]

Then Zach thinks BB's claims that his analysis was derived without a tool such as IDA is ridiculous.

No, you have completely misunderstood what I said.

You wrote it. What did you mean then?

you can't understand this:

It is very impressive, but IMO the most impressive part about it is that BB says he did this without IDA or any other tool, but just by using the output of objdump. Pretty ridiculous.

Hint:

ridiculous: amazing. astounding. remarkable. Etc.

not

ridiculous: bullshit. nonsense. impossible. bogus. Etc.

I had absolutely no problem understanding what he meant without even a second's worth of thought. Note the key words "very impressive". as opposed "what a crock" or whatever.

No doubt one of the virtues of working in an environment with students: you stay up to speed in colloquialisms.

No, this is not a colloquialism, the key word "ridiculous" simply follows the statement "it is very impressive." I don't think one would use those words if he thought the idea was bogus. He could have used a dozen different words there and the general "feeling" would remain the same, because of those first 4 words. IMHO of course.

It is very impressive that you claim to have single-handedly brought peace to the world. Pretty ridiculous.

Does ridiculous above mean amazing, or does it mean absurd?

In context, "absurd". "claim to have single-handedly ..." If you leave out that part, then "amazing".

How about:

It is very impressive that you say you brought peace to the world. Pretty ridiculous.

It all depends on how unlikely the feat is. Zach's statement is quite borderline unless you think BB's claim is commonplace, which then leaves 'pretty ridiculous' completely open to interpretation.

And as an aside the use of ridiculous to mean "amazing" *is* a colloquialism.

A "world-wide" one? I've seen that used many times. "Watch my car dance (via hydraulics)." "That's ridiculous, man..." Etc.

Well, first of all, even if it were world-wide, that wouldn't make it less of a colloquialism. As to the car dancing via hydraulics example.... That was a pretty funny choice, because it is extremely American, not world-wide. Not that you implied otherwise, but it was still a funny choice after claiming it was 'world-wide'.

Anyhow, if you look up even recent editions of Websters, you won't find ridiculous defined as you suggest. One can find it, however, at the Online Slang Dictionary: Ridiculous.

This debate is ridiculous.

[bob]

When Bruce Moreland nominated me for the "outstanding publication award" from ICCA, because of my releasing the source to Crafty, they gave me yet another dedicated box (I'll have to go to my office to see what it is, but something sparc based I think, with "diamond" in the name?).

not sure what year you received the ICCA award
im guessing you have a Novag Diamond released in 1995 or the Diamond II released in 1997.. both Risc Processors



Steve

That is it, in fact, although I think it is the I. Not particularly strong, I have beaten it myself many times. In fact, I am not sure it is as strong as the old challenger I had.

[bob]

Then Zach thinks BB's claims that his analysis was derived without a tool such as IDA is ridiculous.

No, you have completely misunderstood what I said.

You wrote it. What did you mean then?

you can't understand this:

It is very impressive, but IMO the most impressive part about it is that BB says he did this without IDA or any other tool, but just by using the output of objdump. Pretty ridiculous.

Hint:

ridiculous: amazing. astounding. remarkable. Etc.

not

ridiculous: bullshit. nonsense. impossible. bogus. Etc.

I had absolutely no problem understanding what he meant without even a second's worth of thought. Note the key words "very impressive". as opposed "what a crock" or whatever.

No doubt one of the virtues of working in an environment with students: you stay up to speed in colloquialisms.

No, this is not a colloquialism, the key word "ridiculous" simply follows the statement "it is very impressive." I don't think one would use those words if he thought the idea was bogus. He could have used a dozen different words there and the general "feeling" would remain the same, because of those first 4 words. IMHO of course.

It is very impressive that you claim to have single-handedly brought peace to the world. Pretty ridiculous.

Does ridiculous above mean amazing, or does it mean absurd?

In context, "absurd". "claim to have single-handedly ..." If you leave out that part, then "amazing".

How about:

It is very impressive that you say you brought peace to the world. Pretty ridiculous.

It all depends on how unlikely the feat is. Zach's statement is quite borderline unless you think BB's claim is commonplace, which then leaves 'pretty ridiculous' completely open to interpretation.

And as an aside the use of ridiculous to mean "amazing" *is* a colloquialism.

A "world-wide" one? I've seen that used many times. "Watch my car dance (via hydraulics)." "That's ridiculous, man..." Etc.

Well, first of all, even if it were world-wide, that wouldn't make it less of a colloquialism. As to the car dancing via hydraulics example.... That was a pretty funny choice, because it is extremely American, not world-wide. Not that you implied otherwise, but it was still a funny choice after claiming it was 'world-wide'.

Anyhow, if you look up even recent editions of Websters, you won't find ridiculous defined as you suggest. One can find it, however, at the Online Slang Dictionary: Ridiculous.

I simply try to read what is written and take it at face value rather than trying to figure out how the words might best fit what I want to see written...

Tsk, tsk, tsk. You are presuming that is what happened, rather than accepting that his slang use of 'ridiculous' is not as internationally widespread as you might think.

TO take your side, one has to assume "that is impressive" and assume it is some sort of sarcasm, or means something other than what was written. Had he meant something "between the lines" he would almost certainly have added more explanation to avoid someone missing the point. It simply read to me as "this guy is good..."

[Albert Silver]

I simply try to read what is written and take it at face value rather than trying to figure out how the words might best fit what I want to see written...

Tsk, tsk, tsk. You are presuming that is what happened, rather than accepting that his slang use of 'ridiculous' is not as internationally widespread as you might think.

To take your side, one has to assume "that is impressive" and assume it is some sort of sarcasm, or means something other than what was written. Had he meant something "between the lines" he would almost certainly have added more explanation to avoid someone missing the point. It simply read to me as "this guy is good..."

FWIW, I read it as sarcasm the first time round, since the alternate use of ridiculous didn't occur to me. Think of it this way from my end: suppose he had written 'Pretty absurd', and there were no alternate meanings. To fit the phrase, you would automatically conclude he was adding this to show clear sarcasm, no?

Anyhow, a welcome deviation from all the rampant vitriol of late. Peace.

[Eizenhammer]

Tsk, tsk, tsk. You are presuming that is what happened, rather than accepting that his slang use of 'ridiculous' is not as internationally widespread as you might think.

Zach's choice of words was open for wrong interpretation, of course, there is no doubt, but it makes no sense to discuss this with Bob, you as a long time member should really know this. His preferred style are simple clear words like "that's a no no" or similar, everything above this level is beyond his expertise. Every second you argue with him is a lost one ...

[Steve B]

When Bruce Moreland nominated me for the "outstanding publication award" from ICCA, because of my releasing the source to Crafty, they gave me yet another dedicated box (I'll have to go to my office to see what it is, but something sparc based I think, with "diamond" in the name?).

not sure what year you received the ICCA award
im guessing you have a Novag Diamond released in 1995 or the Diamond II released in 1997.. both Risc Processors



Steve

That is it, in fact, although I think it is the I. Not particularly strong, I have beaten it myself many times. In fact, I am not sure it is as strong as the old challenger I had.

not too shabby
Diamond I clocks in at 2080-90 Elo for long time controls(more then 1 min per move)
and 2150 at active chess(30 Sec /Move)

Steve

[bob]

I simply try to read what is written and take it at face value rather than trying to figure out how the words might best fit what I want to see written...

Tsk, tsk, tsk. You are presuming that is what happened, rather than accepting that his slang use of 'ridiculous' is not as internationally widespread as you might think.

To take your side, one has to assume "that is impressive" and assume it is some sort of sarcasm, or means something other than what was written. Had he meant something "between the lines" he would almost certainly have added more explanation to avoid someone missing the point. It simply read to me as "this guy is good..."

FWIW, I read it as sarcasm the first time round, since the alternate use of ridiculous didn't occur to me. Think of it this way from my end: suppose he had written 'Pretty absurd', and there were no alternate meanings. To fit the phrase, you would automatically conclude he was adding this to show clear sarcasm, no?

Anyhow, a welcome deviation from all the rampant vitriol of late. Peace.

This reminds me of a deck of cards I use in my AI class from time to time. I pass the cards out, one per student, and then ask "OK, everyone that got a picture of the dog raise your hand." I then say "OK, everyone that got the picture of a girl raise your hand." Hopefully the other group raises their hands, although on rare occasion one or two won't see either. I then tell the group with their hands up the second time to swap with someone with their hands down. I then ask for the same response again, and the same group _still_ has the picture of the girl. It is one of those optical tests where once you "lock on" to the dog, or the girl, it takes some concentration to block that out to see the other picture.

Apparently that is what happened here, which is certainly not poor behaviour. You saw one thing, I saw another. Nothing to worry about given that perspective of things.

[bob]

Tsk, tsk, tsk. You are presuming that is what happened, rather than accepting that his slang use of 'ridiculous' is not as internationally widespread as you might think.

Zach's choice of words was open for wrong interpretation, of course, there is no doubt, but it makes no sense to discuss this with Bob, you as a long time member should really know this. His preferred style are simple clear words like "that's a no no" or similar, everything above this level is beyond his expertise. Every second you argue with him is a lost one ...

I just wasted 10 seconds reading a post with zero useful content.

touche'