Well, he is in SF, that probably helps.
I have the problem that I'm almost always more analytical, more experienced, and better at explaining things than others at meetings. If I tried throwing out absurdities, everyone else would be like, "I didn't know you could do that".
I suppose it's my fault for sticking around this brain drain.
Tim
John Larkin wrote
I am stunned, philosophy from you. Deeply impressed...
John Larkin wrote
Violation of conversation?
Don't be. You get that kind of superficial profundity in fortune cookies.
We buy parts and solder them to boards. That's not very philosophical.
There are just a lot of ways to do that.
But not quite as many a John Larkin imagines, and rather more than John Larkin is prepared to consider - "try not to use any part that you can't buy from Newark" is a pretty sensible starting point, but you can't afford to make it a rigid rule.
Gimme a break I'm on the Spectrum FFS. :-D
-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
We are /all/ on the spectrum[1]. The question is /where/ on the spectrum.
[1] well, multiple different spectra really.
Well, so am I, but mixing in a little schizophrenia adds flexibility.
Usenet doesn't convey irony as well as, for example, bar stools.
John Larkin doesn't seem to be able to detect irony in usenet posts, but irony is detectable in written communications (at least by sophisticated readers), so the problem may lie more with John Larkin than the usenet.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required