Your problems solved NOW
No more excuses
Monday, 31 January 2011
Millenium Y 2 K it all happened before you know? 2000 Years ago
Let me whisk you all back 2000 odd years
lets take a peek into a Roman officer's intray
we might well have read something like
THIS
Imperial Palace, Rome
January 18, 1 B.C.
Dear Cassius,
Are you still working on the Y zero K problem? This change from BC to
AD is giving us a lot of headaches and we haven't much time left. I
don't know how people will cope with working the wrong way around.
Having been working happily downwards forever, now we have to start
thinking upwards. You would think that someone would have thought of
it earlier and not left it to us to sort out at the last minute.
I spoke to Emperor Augustus the other evening. He was livid that
Julius hadn't done something about it when he was sorting out the
calendar. He said he could see why Brutus turned nasty. We called in
the consulting astrologers, but they simply said that continuing
downwards using minus BC won't work. As usual, the consultants charged
a fortune for doing nothing useful. As for myself, I just can't see
the sand in an hourglass flowing upwards.
We have heard that there are 3 wise guys in the east working on the
problem, but unfortunately they won't arrive till it's all over. Some
say the world will cease to exist at the moment of transition. Anyway
we are continuing to work on this blasted Y zero K problem and I will
send you a parchment if anything further develops.
Regards,
Plutonius
January 18, 1 B.C.
Dear Cassius,
Are you still working on the Y zero K problem? This change from BC to
AD is giving us a lot of headaches and we haven't much time left. I
don't know how people will cope with working the wrong way around.
Having been working happily downwards forever, now we have to start
thinking upwards. You would think that someone would have thought of
it earlier and not left it to us to sort out at the last minute.
I spoke to Emperor Augustus the other evening. He was livid that
Julius hadn't done something about it when he was sorting out the
calendar. He said he could see why Brutus turned nasty. We called in
the consulting astrologers, but they simply said that continuing
downwards using minus BC won't work. As usual, the consultants charged
a fortune for doing nothing useful. As for myself, I just can't see
the sand in an hourglass flowing upwards.
We have heard that there are 3 wise guys in the east working on the
problem, but unfortunately they won't arrive till it's all over. Some
say the world will cease to exist at the moment of transition. Anyway
we are continuing to work on this blasted Y zero K problem and I will
send you a parchment if anything further develops.
Regards,
Plutonius
T H O U G H T S and T H I N K I N G
PSYCHOANALYSIS and some THINKINGS
===================================
===================================
Psychoanalysis, which is easier to understand than to
spell, tells us what we really think when we think we think a thing.
Without psychoanalysis we should never know that when
we think a thing, the thing we think we think is
not the thing we think we think, but only the thing that
makes us think we think the thing we think we think.
It is all a question of the Unconscious. The Unconscious
enables us to think we are thinking about the thing
we think we want to think about, while all the time the
thing we really want to think about is being thought about
unconsciously by the Unconscious.
The Unconscious is a survival from our barbaric ancestry
and has no manners.
As the the sort of thing the Unconscious thinks about is
not the sort of thing we care to think about, the
Unconscious takes care not to let us think it is thinking about
what it is thinking about. If we are in danger of thinking
that we are thinking about what we are really thinking
about, the thing we are thinking about is sublimated
into something we don't mind thinking we are
thinking about.
Actually the Unconscious is divided into parts: the part
that thinks the thing, and the part that prevents our
thinking we are thinking the thing.
This preventing of our thinking we are thinking the thing
we do not care to think we are thinking is called Repression.
Repression is due to the Super-Ego, which is very genteel.
There is friction between the Super-Ego and the Coarse part
of the Un-conscious, or the Id. The Id thinks a thing that the
Super-Ego thinks it ought not to think, and the Super-Ego
represses the thing the Id thinks, so that we never think we
think it. But unless the Id thinks we are thinking it, the Id becomes
dissatisfied and causes trouble.
As the Id thinks we can only think we are thinking the
sort of thing the Super-Ego thinks we ought to think, we
have to make the Id think we are thinking the thing Id
thinks, by thinking we are thinking something that is
something like the thing the Id is thinking. If we can fool
the Id we are all right. If not, there is no thinking
what we may be thinking.
It comes, then, to this: The things to think we think are
the things that the Super-Ego thinks are the things to
think, and that the Id thinks are the
things {it} thinks.
I think that's perfectly clear.
spell, tells us what we really think when we think we think a thing.
Without psychoanalysis we should never know that when
we think a thing, the thing we think we think is
not the thing we think we think, but only the thing that
makes us think we think the thing we think we think.
It is all a question of the Unconscious. The Unconscious
enables us to think we are thinking about the thing
we think we want to think about, while all the time the
thing we really want to think about is being thought about
unconsciously by the Unconscious.
The Unconscious is a survival from our barbaric ancestry
and has no manners.
As the the sort of thing the Unconscious thinks about is
not the sort of thing we care to think about, the
Unconscious takes care not to let us think it is thinking about
what it is thinking about. If we are in danger of thinking
that we are thinking about what we are really thinking
about, the thing we are thinking about is sublimated
into something we don't mind thinking we are
thinking about.
Actually the Unconscious is divided into parts: the part
that thinks the thing, and the part that prevents our
thinking we are thinking the thing.
This preventing of our thinking we are thinking the thing
we do not care to think we are thinking is called Repression.
Repression is due to the Super-Ego, which is very genteel.
There is friction between the Super-Ego and the Coarse part
of the Un-conscious, or the Id. The Id thinks a thing that the
Super-Ego thinks it ought not to think, and the Super-Ego
represses the thing the Id thinks, so that we never think we
think it. But unless the Id thinks we are thinking it, the Id becomes
dissatisfied and causes trouble.
As the Id thinks we can only think we are thinking the
sort of thing the Super-Ego thinks we ought to think, we
have to make the Id think we are thinking the thing Id
thinks, by thinking we are thinking something that is
something like the thing the Id is thinking. If we can fool
the Id we are all right. If not, there is no thinking
what we may be thinking.
It comes, then, to this: The things to think we think are
the things that the Super-Ego thinks are the things to
think, and that the Id thinks are the
things {it} thinks.
I think that's perfectly clear.
Anon..
Pondering on the FUTURE: Year 2000 Plus Y2K etc What happened?
Some reflections 17 years ago (6 Years Prior to Y2K)
Well its been over 2000 years since the Romans offered
us the I, II, III, IV etc, but as you all know these forms
of numerical indentity do not easily "parse" in computer terms
so, taking this into consideration, I have designed
an easy solution to the problem, which I intend to offer to
an easy solution to the problem, which I intend to offer to
the European union the Esperanto society
and any other sensible? body.
Let me outline the changes I am proposing to avoid confusion in the numbers game.
Starting from NOTHING, so its easy for computer programmers to understand we get ...
ZEO, WON, TWO, THE, FOR, FIV, SIX, SEV, ATE, NIE.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
You will of course notice that each has 3 characters only, this makes the
computer tables much easier to organise for example in a calender.
Now we come to the more complicated business of larger numbers, no longer will the teens be alone, they will take their place like the rest of the TEN's in the 20's, 30,s etc, so you will get statements like
WONTZEO = TEN or using the alternate form TEN
WONTWON = ELEVEN or TENTWON
WONTWON = ELEVEN or TENTWON
through to-
WONTNIE = NINTEEN or TENTNIE
TWOTTWO, THETTHE, FORTFOR, FIVTFIV, SIXTSIX, SEVTSEV, ATETATE, NIETNIE etc.
I'm sure you are begining to see how much easier it will all be for young people when they first get introduced to numbers, and especially for computer programers who have far less data TYPES to consider.
Right, where do we go from here then ? well next comes the bigger units like
HUN, THO, MIL etc, all again three characters so easier to spell and understand
for the computer programmer!
Again the construction is simple and easy understood by computer programmers.
Its WONTHUNTNIE for 109
Its THETHUNTSIX for 306
Its THETHUNTSIX for 306
etc
etc
etc
Going on to ..
TWOTTHOTFORTHUNTSIXTATE for 2468
I'm sure we all appreciate that !
1996 that could be the way we will ALL have to write ... If the EUrocrats
have their say...Yes even computer programmers will have to learn to count.
This was written in 1994 in advance of the impending threat of major changes to be brought in the 1996 European summit
(C) Nando ONETNIETHUNTNIETFOR
Strangeness in the English Language
Why English is such an Obtuse language
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let's face it-English is a crazy language.
There is no egg in eggplant nor ham in hamburger;
neither apple nor pine in pineapple.
English muffins weren't invented in England or French fries
in France.
Sweetmeats are candies while sweetbreads, which aren't sweet,
are meat.
We take English for granted. But if we explore its paradoxes,
we find that quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square
and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.
And why is it that writers write but fingers don't fing, grocers
don't groce and hammers don't ham? If the plural of tooth is
teeth, why isn't the plural of booth beeth? One goose, 2 geese.
So one moose, 2 meese? One index 2 indices?
Doesn't it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend,
that you comb through annals of history but not a single annal? If
you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of
them, what do you call it?
If teachers taught, why didn't preachers praught? If a vegetarian
eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat? If you wrote a
letter, perhaps you bote your tongue?
Sometimes I think all the English speakers should be committed to
an asylum for the verbally insane. In what language do people
recite at a play and play at a recital? Ship by truck and send
cargo by ship? Have noses that run and feet that smell? Park on
driveways and drive on parkways?
How can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same, while a wise
man and a wise guy are opposites? How can overlook and oversee be
opposites, while quite a lot and quite a few are alike?
How can the weather be hot as hell one day and cold as hell another?
Have you noticed that we talk about certain things only when they
are absent? Have you ever seen a horseful carriage or a strapful
gown? Met a sung hero or experienced requited love? Have you ever
run into someone who was combobulated, gruntled, ruly or peccable?
And where are all those people who ARE spring chickens or who would
ACTUALLY hurt a fly?
You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language in which
your house can burn up as it burns down, in which you fill in a form
by filling it out and in which an alarm goes off by going on.
English was invented by people, not computers, and it reflects the
creativity of the human race (which, of course, isn't a race at all).
That is why, when the stars are out, they are visible, but when the
lights are out, they are invisible. And why, when I wind up my watch,
I start it, but when I wind up this essay, I end it.
There is no egg in eggplant nor ham in hamburger;
neither apple nor pine in pineapple.
English muffins weren't invented in England or French fries
in France.
Sweetmeats are candies while sweetbreads, which aren't sweet,
are meat.
We take English for granted. But if we explore its paradoxes,
we find that quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square
and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.
And why is it that writers write but fingers don't fing, grocers
don't groce and hammers don't ham? If the plural of tooth is
teeth, why isn't the plural of booth beeth? One goose, 2 geese.
So one moose, 2 meese? One index 2 indices?
Doesn't it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend,
that you comb through annals of history but not a single annal? If
you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of
them, what do you call it?
If teachers taught, why didn't preachers praught? If a vegetarian
eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat? If you wrote a
letter, perhaps you bote your tongue?
Sometimes I think all the English speakers should be committed to
an asylum for the verbally insane. In what language do people
recite at a play and play at a recital? Ship by truck and send
cargo by ship? Have noses that run and feet that smell? Park on
driveways and drive on parkways?
How can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same, while a wise
man and a wise guy are opposites? How can overlook and oversee be
opposites, while quite a lot and quite a few are alike?
How can the weather be hot as hell one day and cold as hell another?
Have you noticed that we talk about certain things only when they
are absent? Have you ever seen a horseful carriage or a strapful
gown? Met a sung hero or experienced requited love? Have you ever
run into someone who was combobulated, gruntled, ruly or peccable?
And where are all those people who ARE spring chickens or who would
ACTUALLY hurt a fly?
You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language in which
your house can burn up as it burns down, in which you fill in a form
by filling it out and in which an alarm goes off by going on.
English was invented by people, not computers, and it reflects the
creativity of the human race (which, of course, isn't a race at all).
That is why, when the stars are out, they are visible, but when the
lights are out, they are invisible. And why, when I wind up my watch,
I start it, but when I wind up this essay, I end it.
ANON
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)