|
It did get out of hand a bit, however, you're making assumptions about why I asked my question. If the book had made that claim, I would have dismissed it and not bothered with it. If it makes no claims about that, then it's more likely to be an unbiased, hence, more interesting read. And that's why I asked - not because I was jumping to a conclusion, that's why I phrased it as a question.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Mullikin wrote: It gets a little old...
Agreed!
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Mullikin wrote: One of you even went so far as to claim that lying about inventions was an American trait.
Haters gonna hate man.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
You should visit the USAF Museum in Dayton Ohio, last time I was there they had a full size replica of the Wright Flyer on display.
|
|
|
|
|
Very cool. Have to plan a trip and go.
|
|
|
|
|
There is evidence that the Wright Brothers were not the first to fly or even invent the first powered flying machine.
In 1896 Dr. Samuel Langley developed his famous "aeroplane". Though worthy of powered flight, he used a complicated catapult mechanism from a large house-boat that on both attempts caught the landing skid throwing the craft head-first into the water. The famous aviator, Glen Curtis, rebuilt the machine to Langley's specifications while strengthening a few structure in 1914. He successfully flew the craft under power for a quarter mile.
Gustav Whitehead's estate has shown that Whitehead was actually the first to fly a powered machine in the summer of 1903, six months prior to the famous Wright flight. When the Wrights received a patent for their work in later years, Whitehead challenged them demonstrating that they could not receive a patent on something that he had already accomplished. By then then however, the Wrights had become quite nasty in the defense of their work and destroyed Whitehead's reputation in the ensuing lawsuits.
Steve Naidamast
Sr. Software Engineer
blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Naidamast wrote: There is evidence that the Wright Brothers were not the first to fly
I think I stated it most clearly when I said, no one cares.
However, allow me to elucidate upon that answer.
Not a single person who actually knows the history of powered flight cares at all. The rest are uninformed bumpkins.
Allow me to reiterate what has already been iterated with various recursions of repeatedness:
No one cares who was first.
Have you found this funny? Might I suggest you upvote it prodigiously? Yes, I shall suggest it.
Upvote, upvote, upvote. You are in my power. Upvote now!!!
Please take note: I've marked this message JOKE.
|
|
|
|
|
Assume there's a thread in one of the technical discussion forums, started by another member. And one of the replies contains something that sparks your interest but isn't related to the question of the OP: Do you think it's alright to post your question in the same thread? If no, which other option would there be?
edit - for clarification: I'm thinking about a question targeted specifically at the member who posted a reply, not a question which could be answered potentially by anyone.
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
modified 26-May-15 7:28am.
|
|
|
|
|
I would start a new thread that links to the original post, possibly replying to say that you are doing that.
Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them.
|
|
|
|
|
chriselst wrote: I would start a new thread that links to the original post,
|
|
|
|
|
Do you think we should change the voting system on threads?
|
|
|
|
|
P0mpey3 wrote: Do you think we should change the voting system on threads?
No, I won't touch that can! 
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
That's annoying in "linear" boards because you can't ignore a sub-discussion, but that problem doesn't exist in the hierarchical layout used here. But I guess it depends - are you going to start a huge discussion about it or just a couple of posts? Might it be of interest to other readers of the topic?
So, predict the future, then make the choice that leads to the best future. Good luck 
|
|
|
|
|
harold aptroot wrote: So, predict the future, then make the choice that leads to the best future. Good luck
Hrhr, thank you for this foolproof advice 
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
Yes and you can improve on your predictions by using the Thread of evidence left behind 
|
|
|
|
|
Are you thinking about the Fishy thread? 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
If you mean the Pet Fish thread by that - nope.. a thread in a programming forum where the OP complained about thread derailing.
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
OK, because the same thing happened in the Pet Fish thread (guilty as charged)... 
On another note: How about them Dodgers?
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
Johnny J. wrote: On another note: How about them Dodgers?
Do you mean the Artful ones or the awful ones? 
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
If its specific for that user, then PM them.
If it's of general interest too, then post the question as a new thread, and PM the user and ask them if they could respond (or reply in the thread with a link to your unrelated question)
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
What is Sascha's favorite phone OS? MS, Google, or Apple.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
MS-DOS[^] 
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
You think that's bad; I'm trying to set up my home network again after moving this weekend. I found that I had four five-port switches. Now that I'll have all my computers in one rack I think I can consolidate into one sixteen-port switch.
|
|
|
|
|
Be my guest!
I just took a short walk and I'm feeling refreshed.
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
I hear ya; there's nothing like getting out on a boat and bothering some fish. 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
