In article <KZWGb.95600$2We1.41867@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>,
tomstdenis@iahu.ca says...
Tom no in university. University libraries are not free to just anyone,

Universities in Canada will not allow you entry into the building without
an ID? I've never encountered that before. To check out books yes, to
use them inside the building, no.

Still the point is if free stuff exists on the web [GMP, the HAC book,
LTM,
etc...] that's a better place to start than with a CC and Amazon.com

If and only if other resources are not better suited. Not everyone even
likes "soft copy" of documents. Perhaps I'm old-style in that regard, but
I much prefer a printed copy which I can use anywhere to a softcopy where
I have to be planted in front of a monitor to use it.

If the resources you specified solve the OP's needs, then that is fine.
There is still no need for you to argue with any and all recommendations
which do not include your work.

The fact that I act wickedly different in person apparently plays
no bearing on this.

Again, it's easy to disrepect people

I suppose it never crossed your mind that the purchase of one of the
most respected textbooks in the industry could serve no useful purpose
after the immediate problem is resolved? He'll never have a question
about any other topic that might be covered there? Why are you the
one best suited to judge that?

Look, I understand that you want people to look at your work. What I
do not understand is why you *insist* upon it while denigrating the
recommendations of anyone that refers someone to a much more established
and respected source. You already told them about your book, that
should be sufficient. A 2x4 shouldn't be needed, or beneficial.

I say if good free alternatives exist you offer those first and then get
into the $$$ alternatives.

That's almost precisely what happened. BOTH were recommended, and if the
OP didn't have the money, he could go your route, if money was no object
he was free to pursue both, or neither at his option. Where's the beef?

I even recommended HAC above my book so this isn't an ego trip this is
just pure realism.

You "realism" is colored by your current financial situation. That's
perfectly understandable, but you shouldn't expect or require that
everyone operates under that same circumstance.

In article <e42Hb.101650$2We1.92070@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>,
tomstdenis@iahu.ca says...
The fact that I act wickedly different in person apparently plays
no bearing on this.

(I've taken courses under
the man, and I can assure you he has more coherent thoughts
on his worst day than you ever have).

Admitedly I'm a bit peeve to be ignored

but there are still other free sources out there.

Recommending texts you have to purchase is just another sign of ignorance.

I mean it isn't even as if Knuths algorithms are complete to begin with
[they don't cover all MP cases you may run into].

Point being the dude wanted to learn MP division so he could implement it.

I'd say either GMP or LTM would be an excellent place to start [I'd say LTM
over GMP for learning but I'm a bit biased].

but there are still other free sources out there.

Once again, I'll point out that they do not have to be free to be
useful. If they happen to be both, that's great.

Recommending texts you have to purchase is just another sign of
ignorance.

Denying that any books which are not freely available are worth reading
is a huge sign of ignorance.

I mean it isn't even as if Knuths algorithms are complete to begin with
[they don't cover all MP cases you may run into].

No book is complete for all cases of all readers. I've never encountered
anyone claiming that Knuth was not worth buying until now. Either way,
you simply cannot let anyone entertain the notion of using a resource
that has not been recommended by you. Why is that exactly?

Point being the dude wanted to learn MP division so he could implement
it.

And he got several recommendations. Case closed.

I'd say either GMP or LTM would be an excellent place to start [I'd say
LTM
over GMP for learning but I'm a bit biased].

Of course you are, and it's extremely obvious without you admitting it.
Since you are biased, I suppose it's easy to understand why you do it,
but that does not make it palatable.

"Randy Howard" <randy.howard@FOOmegapathdslBAR.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a56d9feb9a09283989a2c@news.megapathdsl.net...
I suppose it never crossed your mind that the purchase of one of the
most respected textbooks in the industry could serve no useful purpose
after the immediate problem is resolved? He'll never have a question
about any other topic that might be covered there? Why are you the
one best suited to judge that?

Perhaps. That's not what the OP asked for.

Might as well ask him to buy a complete CS series. I mean we'll need a
book on data compression, coding theory, algorithm design [Rivest has
one on that I guess], compiler theory [dragons!], etc, etc, etc.

Look, I understand that you want people to look at your work. What I
do not understand is why you *insist* upon it while denigrating the
recommendations of anyone that refers someone to a much more established
and respected source. You already told them about your book, that
should be sufficient. A 2x4 shouldn't be needed, or beneficial.

So you're saying if I want to learn MP division the best place would be to
goto Knuth as opposed to a solid implementation in either GMP or LTM?

That's almost precisely what happened. BOTH were recommended, and if the
OP didn't have the money, he could go your route, if money was no object
he was free to pursue both, or neither at his option. Where's the beef?

My beef is Gwyn has a habit of these unsupportable opinions that he hands
down. I simply called him on it.

You "realism" is colored by your current financial situation. That's
perfectly understandable, but you shouldn't expect or require that
everyone operates under that same circumstance.

Sure I'm low on the $$$ but that's not why I suggest free alternatives. It
is because I think everyone should have access to knowledge. So I support
openly available sources.

Don't get me wrong, Knuth TAOCP is a good series but if I can find a free
alternative I'll recommend it over Knuth anyday.

Everyone is entitled to an education, not just those willing to be $50K in
debt to go into the workplace and earn $28K a year... [or whatever the
situation].

(I've taken courses under
the man, and I can assure you he has more coherent thoughts
on his worst day than you ever have).

Who's calling who the idiot?

You can't make a point without insulting me.

Anyways, this is OT. If you want to continue this discussion please reply
in private [I actually post with a valid email address... ho hum...]

"Randy Howard" <randy.howard@FOOmegapathdslBAR.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a56e2ad7167d6a9989a2e@news.megapathdsl.net...
Once again, I'll point out that they do not have to be free to be
useful. If they happen to be both, that's great.

Recommending texts you have to purchase is just another sign of
ignorance.

Denying that any books which are not freely available are worth reading
is a huge sign of ignorance.

So you're saying then, that the GPL advocates are just "ignorant" as they
too would like to see a GPL-full world.

Why can't the same be said about knowledge. I mean, where do you think the
knowledge comes from to write half of the software you find out there?

I was simply calling Gwyn on his suggestion.

If he thinks his suggestion was a good one why not back it up?

E.g. show some flaw in the open sources I quoted that is not in TAOCP.

[Again this goes back to how Gwyn behaves in the group].

Well until you started replying tonight I had no intentions to talk about it
again. Funny thing that.

Well when even the author of something doesn't support it why would anyone
else?

Sure I plug LTM but it isn't as if I don't recommend/know of other sources.
I plug LTM because if I didn't nobody would know about it. And it isn't as
if people don't use LTM so I'd say overall I'm doing a good thing here.

Look, I understand that you want people to look at your work. What I
do not understand is why you *insist* upon it while denigrating the
recommendations of anyone that refers someone to a much more
established
and respected source. You already told them about your book, that
should be sufficient. A 2x4 shouldn't be needed, or beneficial.

So you're saying if I want to learn MP division the best place would be
to
goto Knuth as opposed to a solid implementation in either GMP or LTM?

No, I did not say that. You may understand crypto fairly well, but your
English language reading comprehension (and writing skills) could use
some improvement. All I really said was that it should be allowable for
a question to receive multiple answers without you attacking every single
one that does not agree with your OPINION.

That's almost precisely what happened. BOTH were recommended, and if
the
OP didn't have the money, he could go your route, if money was no
object
he was free to pursue both, or neither at his option. Where's the
beef?

My beef is Gwyn has a habit of these unsupportable opinions that he
hands
down. I simply called him on it.

You have unsupportable opinions that you hand down. Hint: An
unsupportable opinion exists variably based upon the person observing it.
You are not always correct. Opinions would be called FACTS otherwise.

You "realism" is colored by your current financial situation. That's
perfectly understandable, but you shouldn't expect or require that
everyone operates under that same circumstance.

Sure I'm low on the $$$ but that's not why I suggest free alternatives.
It
is because I think everyone should have access to knowledge. So I
support
openly available sources.

I have no problem with that. Objecting to any other recommendation for
because you have a bee in your bonnet about cash is just silly.

Everyone is entitled to an education, not just those willing to be $50K
in
debt to go into the workplace and earn $28K a year... [or whatever the
situation].

Actually, I do not believe that everyone is "entitled" to an education. I
do believe that everyone has the right to attempt to obtain one.

Did the OP indicate that he had a problem to solve, but no financial
wherewithal to do so? Otherwise, your just projecting.

In article <ak9Hb.106212$2We1.68134@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>,
tomstdenis@iahu.ca says...
(I've taken courses under
the man, and I can assure you he has more coherent thoughts
on his worst day than you ever have).

Who's calling who the idiot?

Again you seem to be incapable of understanding written text
without seeing it worse than intended. I did not call you
an idiot. The fact is, the man is a genius. You are obviously
more intelligent than average, but I'd be willing to bet you
wouldn't outscore him on an IQ test. That does not mean you
are an idiot. All it requires is that you be willing to admit
than one of the most brilliant men walking the planet might
be smarter than you. Apparently you can not do that. That
should be scary to you.

You can't make a point without insulting me.

If you chose to be insulted, I'm sorry that you are unable to
see past this need to be perceived as the smartest person
on the planet.

If I had said you were not as brilliant as Einstein, would that
have been an insult?

Anyways, this is OT. If you want to continue this discussion please
reply
in private [I actually post with a valid email address... ho hum...]

So you like spam. If you'd like to contact me via email, a brilliant
gentleman such as yourself should be able to figure out how to modify the
reply-to header to do so.

In article <vK9Hb.106601$2We1.26026@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>,
tomstdenis@iahu.ca says...
"Randy Howard" <randy.howard@FOOmegapathdslBAR.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a56e2ad7167d6a9989a2e@news.megapathdsl.net...
Once again, I'll point out that they do not have to be free to be
useful. If they happen to be both, that's great.

Recommending texts you have to purchase is just another sign of
ignorance.

Denying that any books which are not freely available are worth
reading
is a huge sign of ignorance.

So you're saying then, that the GPL advocates are just "ignorant" as
they
too would like to see a GPL-full world.

*sigh* Once again you (intentionally I think now) misunderstand. For you
to say the above, you must be claiming that "zero books which are not
free are worth reading". It's either one or the other.

If you think that
is a rational position to take, so be it. I heartily disagree. I think
there is more than enough room for both. Apparently the GNU crowd agrees,
as I have a hard-copy of Stallman's GNU Make book. I suppose he wouldn't
have published it for sale if he agreed with your position entirely
either. The fact is, I find bound books hold up much better than
printouts. By the time you pay to have one bound (and usually in a larger
form factor) it's more than worth it to me to have the bound version, even
if I could have an 8.5x11 printout, which still costs ink/toner, paper,
binding materials, etc.

Why can't the same be said about knowledge. I mean, where do you think
the
knowledge comes from to write half of the software you find out there?

From textbooks bought and paid for by CS students somewhere along the way,
in combination with other training materials, instructors, freely
available resources and experience. The other half probably comes from
cosmic dust or angels. I don't care which, but I am glad that it happens.

I was simply calling Gwyn on his suggestion.

Why is he not allowed to make a recommendation without clearing it first
through you? Are you arrogant enough to assume that one and only one
poster's recommendations (yours) are worthy of consideration? How do you
know that the Knuth's writing style isn't more suitable to that person
than your own, or any source you happen to specify? Why is it so
unreasonable to let grownups make decisions on their own after being
given recommendations from multiple people?

If he thinks his suggestion was a good one why not back it up?

He shouldn't have to. It's not a court of law, you are not the grand
inquisitor (although you act like a school yard bully in need of lunch
money) and it is an opinion. If you don't like it, so what? You said
your piece, it's not up to you to decide.

Well until you started replying tonight I had no intentions to talk
about it
again. Funny thing that.

Just desperately in need of the last word then? Stop making unsupportable
claims, misreading evil into things not meant that way and it won't be
necessary. I'm simply arguing for free expression (a fundamental tenet
of the open source movement) and you are acting like a censor. That's a
bit of a hypocritical stance given your feelings on open source is it not?

Well when even the author of something doesn't support it why would
anyone
else?

Strange, I've never seen Knuth running around hawking his books on Usenet,
yet they sell very well for technical books. Rumor is, millions of $$$
over the years. I don't recall seeing Dennis Ritchie or Brian Kernighan
recommending K&R all over the place either, yet even though the last
edition is about 10 years out of date, it is still recommended daily all
over the place. In short, great books sell themselves.

Your premise seems flawed. If your book in its final form is excellent,
and you don't alienate everyone that might otherwise recommend it, you
may also achieve similar notoriety within your chosen field. If you
continue to act like a child yelling "me too, me too" I sort of doubt
you'll be completely satisfied with the results.

Sure I plug LTM but it isn't as if I don't recommend/know of other
sources.
I plug LTM because if I didn't nobody would know about it. And it isn't
as
if people don't use LTM so I'd say overall I'm doing a good thing here.

Writing code and making it publicly available is a good thing. Harassing
anyone that has the gall to recommend anything but your work is a bad
thing. Surely you can see the miles of difference between the two if
you just step back and think about it for a few minutes.

I can support my recommendation with logic, reason and experience. I did,
afterall, write a division routine with some sci.crypt feedback and HAC
algorithm 14.20 [pp. 598] which I obtained for free off the web.

Recommendations require some defense.

I want to give stuff out for free, I want to share what I know, I want to
share what I learn as I learn it. Whoopy.

If you don't like me, killfile me.

You could rephrase what you wrote to be "even at his lowest, he's better
than you".

My point though is there are plenty of people that would like to
see the average desktop user use a GPL'ed OS over MSFT Windows.

From textbooks bought and paid for by CS students somewhere along the way,
in combination with other training materials, instructors, freely
available resources and experience.

You sir, must learn to use google.

Sure textbooks are useful [I own a few dozen on various subjects]. I'd just
rather see an emerging trend of openly available resources.

I just like calling him on stuff like that to see if he will ever support
anything he writes.

==>YOU ARE<== the one who is dragging this on and on. Just say "Tom I don't
like you, probably never will. You suck, die in hell" and go on your way.

I get the last word in because I can

As for arguing for free expression if all we do is make statements and
never questions what sort of expression is that?

Strange, I've never seen Knuth running around hawking his books on Usenet,
yet they sell very well for technical books. Rumor is, millions of $$$
over the years. I don't recall seeing Dennis Ritchie or Brian Kernighan
recommending K&R all over the place either, yet even though the last
edition is about 10 years out of date, it is still recommended daily all
over the place. In short, great books sell themselves.

Not really. I bought TAOCP because I heard people talking about it.

And for the record, Knuth does stand by his texts, 2.56$ per errata.

Your premise seems flawed. If your book in its final form is excellent,
and you don't alienate everyone that might otherwise recommend it, you
may also achieve similar notoriety within your chosen field. If you
continue to act like a child yelling "me too, me too" I sort of doubt
you'll be completely satisfied with the results.

I don't plan on selling my text, in fact the source to the book is PUBLICLY
available for FREE.

I think my works are good and getting better and I want to share.

If you spent half as much time developing something as you do shooting your
mouth off in usenet you might have something to share.

Obviously you're totally clueless to the crux of the problem I *HAD* with
Gwyn's post. It wasn't that Gwyn didn't recommend my text. It was that
Gwyn made yet another random suggestion which was just simply a bad idea [in
most instances]. I called him on it and didn't look back.