Re: Idempotence and "Replication Insensitivity" are equivalent ?

From: <>
Date: 23 Sep 2006 11:24:11 -0700
Message-ID: <>

Marshall ha scritto:

> Bob Badour wrote:
> > Marshall wrote:
> >
> > I wonder whether this last conclusion is anti-empirical.
> By "anti-empircal" I guess you mean "not supported by
> observation" rather than "refuted by observation?" I claim
> that there are rhetorical techniques that correlate with sex,
> and that my observations of the troll's use of rhetoric leads
> me to the conclusion that he is a man. However this is of
> course a weak conclusion.
> Amusing idea: write a machine learning program and feed
> it texts for which one knows the sex of the author, in order
> to produce a technique for establishing sex from someone's
> writings. I imagine it could be modestly successful.

> Marshall wrote:

>> Also: man.

>Bob Badour wrote:

>I wonder whether this last conclusion is anti-empirical. I really have
>no opinion on Pamela's gender, and I don't see how it matters. Are you
>not creating an opportunity to impugn your own credibility? Is there a
>need to?

Hei Bob do not help him out. It's not fair: 2 Vs one.

I am the only one that can provide arguments in his favor. Here is some "troll" style reply:

> Marshall wrote:

>Nor is there any sin
>in being a man.
> Again, I do that myself all the time.

I do understand you.

I had to work very hard.

Write a lot of lines of code
for a poor salary.

Endless days sitting on a chair.

Working about 20 hours a day.

Sometimes I just wanted to vomit in front of the monitor.

But that was worth.

At the end I succeeded in saving enough money

...for the operation.


Happy? Can we now get back to the tech stuff ?

> Marshall
Received on Sat Sep 23 2006 - 20:24:11 CEST

Original text of this message