Re: cdt glossary [Function] (was: Terminology question)

Oops!! sorry Christopher,

   for some strange reason I wrote Bob instead of Cimode.    Sorry about that :))

   Dont' worry, I will get the book, to your heart content.

PS
Hmm ... I have just found a site with the full pdf version :))

Cimode ha scritto:

> > > Subjectivity and limited scope context does NOT redefine mathematical
> > > concepts. It is actually the characteristics of mathematical empirical
> > > sound reasonning to be objective and context independent. If you try
> > > to define such concepts according to context then you are setting
> > > limited scope reasonning which in most cases can be applied in one and
> > > only one concept.
> >
> > I agree with the above. I am not talking of "define such concepts
> > according to context ".
> > I am talking to make clear the scope of the definition.
> So you are contradicting yourself. On one hand, you state that
> definition of abstract concepts is made by context, then you state that
> you agree with the precise opposite.
>
> I have wasted time reading some of the stupid pointers you indicated.
> NONE of them is directy related to relational algebra to data
> management. Until proven otherwise, they are all irrelevant and off
> topic to reasonning in relational modeling. RM is a direct application
> of Set theory not probabilistic math or Measure theory...But because
> you have heard a bit in discussion about such concepts, you try to brag
> about it but in fact you are doing nothing but making a foll out of
> yourself...
>
>
> > > Reading the definition of random variable you provided, it seems clear
> > > to me that random variables have pretty much nothing to do with
> > > relations as they have been defined in the past 30 years.
> >
> > A rv is a function. This is by definition. It's a lost war.
> I have NOT stated that rv is or is not a function. The argument is not
> here. I do not give a damn getting in a war with an ignorant.
>
> > You would
> > > spend better your time educating yourself on the subject by reading
> > > some knowledgeable about the subject of relations instead of trying to
> > > redefine concepts that are sound and that regulate the field of data
> > > management more than ever . That way you would avoid getting bashed by
> > > people like BB or one of his barking dogs... Here are a few pointers
> > > that may help...
> >
> > You are sounding offensive because you are suggestion I have not done
> > so, which you evidently cannot know. This does not hurt me anyway
> > because I do not need recognition by everybody I meet.
> It is obvious you have no education in the field of RM and set theory
> else you would not be dumping so much nonsense on totally off topic
> theories without anything to back it up.
> It is funny that *recognition* comes as a prime motivator for educating
> yourself...
>
> So now I am sounding offensive because I encourage you to become more
> knowledgeable about the field you wish to pronounce yourself onto.
>
> > Also why are you addressing Bob as a barking dog? He may have his
> > reason to behave like that. I do not blaim him for his continuous
> > insults.
> I stated BB and his barking dogs in the sense that they bark at people
> right away and bash people right away while making some serious
> mistakes in what they advance. However, compared to your abysmal and
> unassumed ignorance *Barking dog* is rather a compliment...In a word do
> not try to divert attention on an off topic subject because several
> people on this thread have pointed out to you your ignorance.
>
> > After all this is a relatively unarmful way to get rid of our own life
> > frustations
> The only frustration I have in my life is meeting ignorants like you
> who stick to their ignorance instead of admitting it and doing
> something about it...
>
> > (papers not published, awards not achieved, sentimental failure, not
> > keeping
> > up with science and tech advances ...).
> You are clearly delluding yourself. Projecting your own imagination or
> frustrations on me won't help. Doing cheap bar psychology won't help
> either. You will remain ignorant about data management unless you do
> something about it.
>
> > >
> > > http://www.dbdebunk.com/books.html
> > > Introduction to database systems
> >
> > Please reference only free sources. I believe that for this kind of
> > things
> > Internet, while it can contain errors, as textbooks do, is the most
> > uptodate
> > source. Often (not always) people who write books do that to teach and
> > make clear concept to themselves...
> It's funny how ignorant people ALWAYS expect everything is due to them
> in terms of education. They don't mind paying money on a snake oil
> salesman selling them training on a specific product that won't work
> but they do not want' to invest a dime onto education. The material
> provided is rare and quality and unanimously recognized as references
> by knowdedgeable audiences on the NG. If you are not convinced get
> back to "Learn Databases in 24 hours"...
>
> Besides, if you consider that CJ DATE and Fabian PASCAL make materials
> for themselves while these guys have spent nothing less than 30 years
> of their life dedicated to the subject that just shows how ignorant you
> are.
>
> If you believe you don't need to read to have some basic knowledge
> about data management concepts that just means you refuse educating
> yourself and prefer cookbook approach to education. In which case (I
> hate to admit that) BB was right to bash you at first...
>
>
> > Take it easy: life is short :)
> An additional reason for not filling it with meaningless crappola. ;)
Received on Thu Sep 07 2006 - 16:12:43 CEST