13 Sep 07
Originally posted by demonseedsorry, but i think it is funny someone reads the entire subject on binary to spot where i made it up and where i havent; you must have been on a mission to prove me wrong.... you should work in law
You seem to have blatantly misquoted this wiki article in vindicate a fallacious argument, which is based on a confusion (on your part) between Boolean algebra and binary (which is no more that a base 2 number system regardless of the attributes you attach to it.)
Your quote:"Since the binary numeral "10 + 10" is equal to the decimal value four, it woul ...[text shortened]... mbers, to avoid confusion. This is completely different from what you were suggesting.
13 Sep 07
Originally posted by eatmybishophow about they work in "sorting the facts from the trash, on behalf of the lay-observer"?
sorry, but i think it is funny someone reads the entire subject on binary to spot where i made it up and where i havent; you must have been on a mission to prove me wrong.... you should work in law
Much better.
13 Sep 07
1 edit
Originally posted by eatmybishopWell i never read the thread, i'm just bandwagonning....you're stoopid 😛
sorry, but i think it is funny someone reads the entire subject on binary to spot where i made it up and where i havent; you must have been on a mission to prove me wrong.... you should work in law
Is that better ?
13 Sep 07
1 edit
Originally posted by eatmybishopNot really. You made a silly quote and related it to a wiki article. It sounded bogus to me since wiki, though not ideal, is normally close enough.
sorry, but i think it is funny someone reads the entire subject on binary to spot where i made it up and where i havent; you must have been on a mission to prove me wrong.... you should work in law
All I did was copy and paste the link from your post.
Next, to search for your quoted text I did an edit and find. Got a quote that resembled yours but has a totally different meaning. This took a minute ... tops.
Quick conclusion: eatmybishop is a tard.