Re: Leslie Lamport is a Jew - His book is NOTORIOUSLY uninsightful and obfuscatory

Re: Leslie Lamport is a Jew - His book is NOTORIOUSLY uninsightful and obfuscatory

[David Kastrup]

small Pox <smallpox911@gmail.com> writes:

> Leslie Lamport is a Jew - His book is NOTORIOUSLY
> uninsightful&obfuscatory (nothing on the design of LaTeX and macros,
> no insights)
> but he made millions from his book as you can tell from the number of
> copies sold, ie even if he got a dollar from a copy, he made millions.
>
> Stephen Wolfram is also a jew. I wonder how his Univ of Phd studies
> let him get away with the copyright to the work he did as a Phd
> student.

With this posting you highlight two obviously highly intelligent people
whom you identify as jews (I have no idea whether this would be
accurate, but that's not really relevant) and one hate-mongering bigoted
complete moron (namely yourself) who you implicitly identify as a
non-jew.

It appears to me that you are doing a spectacularly bad job at whatever
point you are trying to make.

-- 
David Kastrup
UKTUG FAQ: <URL:http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html>

Re: Leslie Lamport is a Jew - His book is NOTORIOUSLY uninsightful and obfuscatory

[David Kastrup]

"Christian Stapfer" <nobody@nowhere.nil> writes:

> "nanothermite911fbibustards" <nanothermite911fbibustards@gmail.com>
> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:a2d56454-8d61-4cff-b726-b3306e3ff30f@q12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Can one of REGULAR SYCOPHANTs of STEPHEN WOLFRAM tell me where is the
>> section of references in WOLFRAM's 1988 book on mathematica ?
>
> It starts on page xvi, titled "Background and Acknowledgements".
>
>> Does he steal any idea from LISP ?

[...]

>> What is the DEFINITION of PLAGIARISM ?
>>
>> Is it ETHICAL to use a SEMINAL IDEA from someone and not GIVE
>> ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ?
>
> Many scientists are using theories they don't feel required
> to give credit for to anyone. - Why? - Because those to whom
> they might have given credit are so well known by all who
> are in the know that is not really necessary to even mention
> them - although, of course, one might want mention them
> anyway (as to the ignoramuses: those names would  be
> without any deeper meaning to them).

Well, the original poster also did not give credit to "Mein Kampf" and
its preceding works reaching right back into Middle Ages and beyond.

It's not like he is the inventor of antisemitism and his particular
conspiracy theories, and yet he does not give his references, either.

-- 
David Kastrup
UKTUG FAQ: <URL:http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html>