Loose Change - Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Welcome Sir Knight,

Wow, I should have joined this board sooner. Everyweek it is another new fun character added.
 
sir knight are you going to say anything of substance AT ALL? You are simply repeating yourself.
 
Sir Knight,

I don't care about your past, present or future. This thread is to debate Loose Change. The only claim about Loose Change that you have made so far (that I have been able to discern) is that the government did it because they can. That is not proof this is just a statement. If you think that what you have gone through proves anything you have to post it, I am not going to take you on faith and I doubt you would take anything I say on faith. Gravy, MarkyX, etc. have written guides that explain alot of what is in the video or made videos. That along with my background makes me willing to accept the official story. If you can show me any proof(*) that I haven't seen I'll examine it, but until then I will continue to believe as I do.

(*) Proof for me would consist of some verifiable physical evidence. At this point in time it is too far away datewise for me to accept a story from someone who was there just remembering what happened.
 
Sir Knight:

I'm not sure what you might have heard or read about James Randi, but when I joined this forum I expected it to be the major leagues of skepticism, based on what I knew about Randi from seeing him on various programs. And I haven't been disappointed. I had quite a lively discussion on another topic where I held the affirmative (non-skeptical) view. I presented my views and evidence as best I could, and was greeted with the skepticism that I expected. Another poster and I kicked the issue around a bit, came to an acceptable "middle ground", shook hands and walked away.

The point of this story is that this is a SKEPTICS' forum, and you'll not find a tougher audience anywhere if Randi's name is on it. The responses you got, while maybe unkind, were not unexpected, at least not by me. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" would be carved on a wall here, if the forum had walls.

That being said, if you want to talk about Loose Change, I for one remain all ears.
 
LOL

Nice, changed the website now.

Sorry, but the claims seem too similar for that not to be you...or, at least, for that not to be the person you based your delusions on. But I'd bet that's you.

And while it may not say where you are, the whois information does. major security breach, there. Of course, anyone who's worked with computers (such as myself) would understand the securoty risks in whois info, and how to mitigate them. Such as using a general name such as "Administrator" instead of a real name, and using a PO Box contact address instead of a physical address, and not using a personal phone number.

But that's just me, I've only been working with computers 10 years or so, what would I know?

Think this pretty much puts paid to the idea that you're being "hunted". Anyone with basic computer knowledge and an extra five minutes could track you.
 
Last edited:
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent
Click to expand...

Sorry you loose, you either don't know what PROBABLY means, nor did you read the whole thing, you did NOT finish your research, let me show you something, the balance of what you left off. Please read carefully. Please note the two words PROBABLY and the APPLIED for, just because you APPLY on a date that is NOT the date or even proof you will GET the patent. But below please note when it was issued, 1980 quite a few years later, so maybe they were the first patent to be APPLIED FOR but not necessarily the first one issued. I applied for mine and it took 3 years to get it. Now that I have done your home work and research, let me clarify something, what they patented is quite different from what I patented, and the patent relates to solving simultaneous linear equations. which really isn't necesarily a sofware process if you read the whole article, it could be done with a mechanical device such as an old type of adding machine. Mine was a complete software process and mine was in the U.S. so maybe to make things more fair, mine was the first Patent for sofrtware in the U.S. But based on what I can find on this I think what my patent attorney told me and Microsofts attorney's told me is more correct. But PROBABLY doesn't mean ABSOLUTELY. The definition of SOFTWARE is problamatic at best in this particular circumtance. And you took the PROBABLY to be a CERTAIN but if that is how you do your research and draw you conclusions on anything I can see where you don't know your UP's FROM your DOWNs. Please read my larger cut and paste completely which addresses more than you suggested.

And I quote:

The first software patent ever granted is probably a patent for a "computer having slow and quick access storage, when programmed to solve a linear programming problem by an iterative algorithm, the iterative algorithm being such that (...)" applied for in 1962 by British Petroleum Company ([2], see end of page 3). The patent relates to solving simultaneous linear equations.
The USPTO has traditionally not considered software to be patentable because by statute patents can only be granted to "processes, machines, articles of manufacture, and compositions of matter". In particular patents cannot be granted to "scientific truths" or "mathematical expressions" of them. This means that most of the fundamental techniques of software engineering have never been patented.
The USPTO maintained this position, that software was in effect a mathematical algorithm, and therefore not patentable into the 1980's. The position of the USPTO was challenged with a landmark 1981 Supreme Court case, Diamond v. Diehr. The case involved a device that used computer

I rest my case,

Sir Knight
 
But to talk about the movie isn't really why I came to this place. I was looking for something, maybe someone and I just don't think it was the right place to come I guess
Click to expand...

Here's a novel idea, Sir Knight. Why don't you state specifically what or who you're looking for?. Then we'll be able to tell you if it or he/she is here or not.
 
Sir Knight said:
I rest my case,

Sir Knight
Click to expand...
Your reading comprehension and interpretation skills are terrible. "Probably" includes the possiblilty that there were software patents issued prior to 1962.

Now, since you've rested your case based on the positon of the USPTO in the 1980s, please tell us where the 1962 BP patent was issued.

Once you've done that, please give the names, workplaces, and approximate dates of disappearance of the doctor and mechanic you referred to, so that I can verify their existence and disappearance.

Fair enough?

Then we can proceed to discussing 9/11 issues, which is why you came here, correct? Or are you just howling at the moon?

Edited to add: Never mind. I read above that you're just howling at the moon. Please seek professional help. There are lots of non-disappearing psychiatrists out there. http://www.nmha.org/infoctr/FAQs/treatment.cfm
 
Last edited:
Huntsman said:
LOL

Nice, changed the website now.

Sorry, but the claims seem too similar for that not to be you...or, at least, for that not to be the person you based your delusions on. But I'd bet that's you.

And while it may not say where you are, the whois information does. major security breach, there. Of course, anyone who's worked with computers (such as myself) would understand the securoty risks in whois info, and how to mitigate them. Such as using a general name such as "Administrator" instead of a real name, and using a PO Box contact address instead of a physical address, and not using a personal phone number.

But that's just me, I've only been working with computers 10 years or so, what would I know?

Think this pretty much puts paid to the idea that you're being "hunted". Anyone with basic computer knowledge and an extra five minutes could track you.
Click to expand...

Hello? I have been doing this 30+years now and I guarantee that you could NOT track me down using a computer. Oh if I was using a land line maybe, even DSL or CABLE, but not with me using satellite, guess again my friend. And I thought you knew so much, but as you said you only have been doing this for 10 years.

And I can be on different SAT very quickly and even the SAT company don't know where I am. LOL They have a post office box. And don't send me anything there anyway.

And you draw conclusions too easily for me. You are skeptical but gullible all at the same time, how do you do that and no choke to death?

Now you have been fun, or should I say funny.

Doing a battle of intellect with you is like dealing with an unarmed animal with me having a macine gun, it just don't seem fair. I must laugh now, and I have laughed hard with all of you saying that I am a liar and all of this isn't true, when I am setting back here with all the truth in the world, you have to admit it must seem funny to me.

Your powers over facts, evidence, research, detective skills and deductive reasoning just overwelms me. NOT! You are deluding yourself if you think you know anything about me. And the truth I speak of is just that, ALL TRUTH. But you are so busy labeling it on the NEG side you show no interest in really wanting to know the truth, you ask in doubt without concern or appreciation of my situation, what ever happened to "Innocent till proven guilty?" You have not proven me insane nor a liar, and I am sure glad you are not on any jury I have to be in front of, for I feel sorry for the person that you would pass judgment on.

So many of you on here, NOT ALL, please I am not insulting ALL of you, those who the shoe fits know it, profess to be such super sleuthers and be able to add two and two and come up with four have proven to me beyond a reasonable doubt that you don't know your head from the south end of a north bound horse.

I can't believe any of you (again that noted exception) ever really took the time to reasearch anything to draw any reasonable conclusion. It would take too much thinking that it might hurt you. If someone gives you one or two simple facts WANTING you to go there, you just do, like lambs to the slaughter. Why do you think I put the web address there? Because I didn't want anyone to see it? I knew you would, well I hoped someone would eventually, thought it would happen much sooner than it did. That was a big dissapointment that it took so long actually.

You are too easliy led down one path and given to draw conclusions on one simple fact or maybe two which when you have no connection between the two other than a slight reference you jump on it like ugly on an ape.

That my friends is not logic, reason or wisdom. It is shear foolishness which you endeavor to wallow in.

I came not to play mind games, nor have fun here, I came to find, and if I found something I was going to test it before TRUSTING IT, that is WISDOM. You never find out who you are dealing with by saying YES, but you quickly find out who you are dealing with by saying NO. Try it sometimes.

But tis not a surprise what I found here at all just a disappintment.

Oh and I do think there are some nice people here, just not the majority.

Sir Knight or you can call me Betty if you like LOL toooooo funny but tragic at the same time.
 
Gravy said:
Your reading comprehension and interpretation skills are terrible. "Probably" includes the possiblilty that there were software patents issued prior to 1962.

Now, since you've rested your case based on the positon of the USPTO in the 1980s, please tell us where the 1962 BP patent was issued.

Once you've done that, please give the names, workplaces, and approximate dates of disappearance of the doctor and mechanic you referred to, so that I can verify their existence and disappearance.

Fair enough?

Then we can proceed to discussing 9/11 issues, which is why you came here, correct? Or are you just howling at the moon?

Edited to add: Never mind. I read above that you're just howling at the moon. Please seek professional help. There are lots of non-disappearing psychiatrists out there. http://www.nmha.org/infoctr/FAQs/treatment.cfm
Click to expand...


No not howling at the moon but talking to you is like beating my head against the wall I am sure.

You have offered nothing to get me to want to give you any proof and based on your attitude and position you are not a person I would want to assist me in any way for anything. I am looking for someone real, obviously you are not that person. And everything I said before goes double now. Don't bother me again, this whole thing is pointless because if you were to sit down with me and go over the evidence you still wouldn't believe it. You are mesmerized by your own self worth but you are a dollar short and a day late. You have not even taken a minute to think about a person that might be in my situation for real, which is definitely the case here, and you have shown no compassion.

So I am not wasting another minute on the likes of you.

I am just trying to be prudent with my time and I have been forced to the simple conclusion you are a major waste of it.
 
Sir Knight said:
Meaningless drivel
Click to expand...

*chuckle*

No, I didn't spend much time researching, and I could well be wrong (I don't think so, but that's based on personal opinion rather than fact).

However, see how easy it is to jump to a conclusion? Just like many do after watching Loose Change, before they actually research the facts.

Of course, I bet if I go to a certain address on a certain street in a certain town in Florida, I'd find a person posting on a certain account.

And your talk about SAT and DSL and land line really has nothing to do with what I posted.

In any case, it's not really a subject that interests me, it's just funny to see someone as ignorant of the relevant issues claiming insider knowledge.

You call us all gullible, but then berate us for refusing to accept your word as gospel. Gotta love that.

So, if I drive to Carol Springs and knock on a certain door, tell me you won't be the one answering :)
 
gah, I usually don't complain about thread drift because i'm usually an instigator but this thread is freaking huge enough without trying to keep track of who's best in computers. We have a computer forum for that, could we shift the software patent and/or who knows computers better to that forum?
 
kevin said:
gah, I usually don't complain about thread drift because i'm usually an instigator but this thread is freaking huge enough without trying to keep track of who's best in computers. We have a computer forum for that, could we shift the software patent and/or who knows computers better to that forum?
Click to expand...

It's not about who's best in computers. It's about showing up someone who is misrepresenting himself. I did nothign that takes any amountof expertise at all. Nothing I posted has any relation to the best in computers, in fact, it's all very basic information.

If I wanted to show who's best I'd ask questions and get technical, not that I'd expect any response.

IN any case, I'm simply working to disprove his claims, and having a bit of fun with it. I'm pretty much done now. Not much sport in it.
 
kevin said:
gah, I usually don't complain about thread drift because i'm usually an instigator but this thread is freaking huge enough without trying to keep track of who's best in computers. We have a computer forum for that, could we shift the software patent and/or who knows computers better to that forum?
Click to expand...
Agree.

Until Sir Knight decides to talk about Loose Change or 9/11, I think this portion of this thread, beginning with his first post in it, should be moved to the Abandon All Hope Forum.
 
Huntsman said:
I did nothign that takes any amountof expertise at all. Nothing I posted has any relation to the best in computers, in fact, it's all very basic information.
Click to expand...

My comment wasn't directed at you. It was for sir knight, he's the one claiming to have taught a thing or two to Ada Byron. If he wants to argue about software patents, i'm perfectly willing to do so in the computer or science forums.
 
Sir Knight said:
Let me tell you a little about myself before you write me off as a looney toon. I am 55 years old, an inventor, well educated, a writer, investigator, been in computers for over 30 years and I was issued the first patent issued on software. Now with that said I will get to WHY I came to this site and WHY I am posting here.

Sir Knight
Click to expand...

For all of us concerned it might be simpler to tag your posts if you are saying things which are less than truthful. For example {what follows is a complete pile of horse manure} I was issued the first patent issued on software {end of horse manure}. Otherwise I will just have to use my current method of regarding everyting you say as the ravings a Loony toon.

Thank you ever so much,

By the way is there anything you have to offer new to the discussion of Loose Change or 9/11? If not why are you here?

Steve
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom