X-Received: by 10.50.221.105 with SMTP id qd9mr11086009igc.8.1422902026628;
        Mon, 02 Feb 2015 10:33:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.140.43.10 with SMTP id d10mr233474qga.26.1422902026592; Mon,
 02 Feb 2015 10:33:46 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.cambrium.nl!textnews.cambrium.nl!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!209.85.213.216.MISMATCH!hl2no7870006igb.0!news-out.google.com!q4ni26qan.0!nntp.google.com!bm13no5385486qab.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 10:33:46 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <c8c68b27-d346-42f9-84b1-731209dcf9cd@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=145.94.176.92;
 posting-account=i7Ak-QoAAABlJ1qBkr1tS-dBPg_3Ujft
NNTP-Posting-Host: 145.94.176.92
References: <61044dae-51c9-43d4-87f9-1e12e0e3b15e@googlegroups.com>
 <b0bd15a0-c42a-4858-8482-a50588947377@googlegroups.com> <0f9dea1d-36e1-4378-93a4-cb790a57c893@googlegroups.com>
 <4fcace2f-e767-4beb-8c54-0a7543b2fd30@googlegroups.com> <63393ec9-6afb-4ee8-b2c7-ae0186d4e227@googlegroups.com>
 <c8c68b27-d346-42f9-84b1-731209dcf9cd@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <59cb0248-bdc4-442c-841d-8fffc4cd7aa9@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Why are [Database] Mathematicians Crippled ?
From: Jan Hidders <hidders@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 18:33:46 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref:  news.cambrium.nl

Op maandag 2 februari 2015 16:09:05 UTC+1 schreef Derek Asirvadem:
> Jan
>=20
> > On Monday, 2 February 2015 22:46:11 UTC+11, Jan Hidders  wrote:
>=20
> <snip>
>=20
> I am getting a tiny bit tired of this dancing around the definition tree,=
 which allows you to sit there in some unknown space (to me not science, an=
d no, I am not about to let you redefine science to me), ALLOWing him to be=
 this or that or purple or yellow but neither right nor wrong.

Once you stop redefining standard terminology, I will stop asking for defin=
itions. And as I said, I am perfectly happy to allow you your own definitio=
n of the word "science". Just as long as you are clear that this is not sci=
ence as it is usually defined by scientists.

> > You have yet to give evidence for that claim.
>=20
> I don't have to do any such thing, I have already explained why.  The law=
 stands for forty five years.  This freak (or some freak who wrote the harr=
y potter novel that he is using, came after that.  So it is his job, the au=
thors job, not my job, to explain why the freak is teaching something that =
goes against the law.

Indeed it is, if that is what he was doing. But that you have not demonstra=
ted yet. That should be fairly easy to do. You claimed that his use of the =
term functional dependency is non-standard. So all you have to do is point =
to a particular statement that he made in his lecture about functional depe=
ndencies that is not consistent with the standard definition.

The floor is yours.

-- Jan Hidders