TeX, LaTeX and Friends

« first day (2768 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2180 days later) »

6:55 AM

@DavidCarlisle Kind David I do not want to win. as I am done I would rather understand that having a negative vote without motivation. With my heart very often I do not understand the questions and exactly what the user asks. I wish you a good day.

skull

are you leaving the site? @Sebastiano

David Carlisle

7:15 AM

@Sebastiano sorry, "you can't win" is an english idiom meaning "you are unlucky" I did not mean you were trying to win anything. In that case I think you did understand the question and the code you posted did produce the requested answer, but you got a downvote anyway. People vote for brexit, there is no way its possible to understand why anyone votes for anything....

Sebastiano

@skull Hi, I like very much this site

@DavidCarlisle I do not know many things and I thank you infinitely for what you wrote to me. With my heart in my hands they tell me so many that I'm unlucky. You are not the first. Of course I can not write here about my life but even if I'm wrong I'll put my soul in it. Greetings again.

skull

Hi :-)

Skillmon

8:12 AM

@DavidCarlisle Should I trust yo' or egreg on math formatting?

David Carlisle

@Skillmon never trust @egreg but you could change the ' to a u the I could answer "trust me"

Skillmon

@DavidCarlisle more seriously, should I use yo's code or egreg (comment) here

@DavidCarlisle or can you provide something better?

David Carlisle

@Skillmon go with egreg :(

Skillmon

@DavidCarlisle at least he doesn't get reputation for the comment.

Paulo Cereda

8:55 AM

HOW DID I END UP GETTING 8 GOLD BADGES

@skull hello mr. skull bloke :)

@DavidCarlisle ooh Brexit for TeX... TeXit

David Carlisle

@PauloCereda we'll all leave and start using Word, and as far as I understand from the news @egreg and the rest of Italy may follow us:-) (he'll make a good Word user)

Harald Hanche-Olsen

@DavidCarlisle We should all go back to ed and nroff/troff.

Paulo Cereda

9:53 AM

@DavidCarlisle ooh

4 hours later…

yo'

1:38 PM

@DavidCarlisle I should really update that answer :D

@PauloCereda well, I got 8 too, 6 of them are Famous Qs. (see, I'm better than @egreg and @DavidCarlisle together)

David Carlisle

@yo' 6 out of 62 isn't so good, all of my questions have a famous question badge.

skull

1:55 PM

all? that makes you a famous-question asker!

an asker of famous questions

David Carlisle

2:07 PM

@skull I am not sure your logical reasoning is sound:-) "All my pigs fly" doesn't imply "I own a flying pig"...

skull

is there any way to get a list of all the comments made by a user in a chat room?

skull

2:25 PM

this is all Martin found

@DavidCarlisle then why did you use the word "my"? :-)

Paulo Cereda

@DavidCarlisle ooh an aviary suine

skull

if something is "mine," then don't I own it?

Joseph Wright

@skull Yes, if it exists: 'All my flying pigs' is true for someone who has none

skull

Aaah yes, the old proof of existence precedence rule. @JosephWright thanks.

I keep forgetting that one :-/

Harald Hanche-Olsen

@skull I don't own my wife. You don't own your children (if you have any). And I certainly don't own my country!

skull

2:38 PM

True dat.

Paulo Cereda

OHM

Harald Hanche-Olsen

@PauloCereda Ω?

Paulo Cereda

@HaraldHanche-Olsen yep. :) Resistance is also futile if <1. :)

skull

:-D

let's not get into negative or imaginary resistance

David Carlisle

@PauloCereda perhaps you could put that bat to good use: bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/44281297

Paulo Cereda

2:43 PM

@DavidCarlisle ooh I am helpful

skull

omg, first time in 97 years!

Paulo Cereda

@skull hm?

skull

the cricket link

> First time since 1921

Paulo Cereda

@skull ooh :)

Harald Hanche-Olsen

@skull ooh, no capacitance nor inductance? But they're so useful!

Paulo Cereda

2:53 PM

@HaraldHanche-Olsen looks like the joke is not current enough

/wink wink nudge nudge say no more

Oh boy, I am way stupider than my usual stupid

Harald Hanche-Olsen

@PauloCereda Watt do you mean by that?

skull

ba dum tiss

Paulo Cereda

@HaraldHanche-Olsen oh no, we entered a MP sketch

Watch @JosephWright appearing out of nowhere

Harald Hanche-Olsen

@PauloCereda Are you insinuating something?

Paulo Cereda

@HaraldHanche-Olsen oh no

/quacks in despair

Help me mr. skull

skull

2:59 PM

wazzup ducky

Paulo Cereda

woo

skull

or do you prefer just "duck"?

wazzup duck?

sounds more like "what's up doc?"

David Carlisle

@skull just call him "dinner"

skull

mr. dinner

Harald Hanche-Olsen

@skull that's right; always respect your food.

Ulrike Fischer

3:14 PM

@DavidCarlisle @PauloCereda @HaraldHanche-Olsen ^^ ^ seems to fit in the current discussion ;-)

skull

That's soooo true @UlrikeFischer

Paulo Cereda

@UlrikeFischer ooh

@DavidCarlisle oh no

skull

3:34 PM

Anybody want some coffee?

garanteed to make you feel smarter :-)

Alan Munn

4:00 PM

@skull Contrary to popular belief, the possession relation is only one of many relations the English possessive can express. :)

skull

interesting

the possessive is not always possessive

As the Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage puts it:

The argument is a case of fooling oneself with one’s own terminology. After the 18th-century grammarians began to refer to the genitive case as the possessive case, grammarians and other commentators got it into their heads that the only use of the case was to show possession. ...

Simply changing the name of the genitive does not change or eliminate any of its multiple functions.

They also cite a study done in 1940, in which only 40% of the possessive forms were used to indicate actual possession.

Harald Hanche-Olsen

@AlanMunn Oh my!

Alan Munn

4:19 PM

@skull I'm impressed with the cogency of this description. It's definitely written by a linguist.

skull

yup

Paulo Cereda

@AlanMunn the what of what?!

Boy, I am really stupider today

Alan Munn

@PauloCereda The description of the possessive from Websters is very cogent (clear, logical, convincing).