In article <svte5ktf1rg2sahjp9e6k6j9kkje2maq2f@4ax.com>
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 21 Jun 2025 10:32:25 -0500,
VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
"s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
micky wrote:
How can I get my newreader to show lines more than 15 characters long? >>>>>Wrong newsgroup... again.
No it was a joke about Norman Nescio's last two posts in THIS newsgroup, >>>> one of which had lines 1 character long, and another about 15 characters >>>> long. I thought you all would get it, but no one who posted did.
Many of us hide/ignore/delete any posts submitted via sewer sources,
like mixmin (hey, that's what mixmin sometimes calls itself), dizum, or
I don't normally look at the address people post from, but even if I
had, this is the first I've heard anything a bout mixmin, dizum, etc.
other remailers. Use a rule on the injection node specified in the PATH >>> header (which is not an overview header, so you need to configure your
client to download full messages, headers & body, to have the
non-overview headers on which to test) to filter out the sewer sources.
Use rules to determine what view YOU want of Usenet. If you want to
continue viewing the sewage, don't whine about how it is formatted.
I rarely keep track of individual posters, and I don't remember anything
about Norman, certain nothing that labels him sewage. And I wasn't
whining about his formatting. I was making a joke. And I fully accept
his explanation about the wordwrap length changing even though he didn't
do it. Just 3 days ago the alarms on my phone turned on even though I
didn't do that. So again, I was making a joke.
My explanation for those goofy formatted posts was -
---
"Those were my posts. Somehow my word wrap program got an incorrect
setting which caused those goofy posts.
Problem was solved."
---
It's amazing how in today's screwed up world the simplest explanation
for an accidental mistake can engendered such animosity.
Also, thank you, micky, for simply accepting my simple explanation of a setting gone wrong.
Now, If you'll excuse me for a while, I'm going to go back in my sewer
and get a few more hours of sleep.
In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sun, 22 Jun 2025 17:28:23 +0000, Flush
Out Rats <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 22/06/2025 18:14, Nomen Nescio wrote:
In article <svte5ktf1rg2sahjp9e6k6j9kkje2maq2f@4ax.com>
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 21 Jun 2025 10:32:25 -0500,
VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:I don't normally look at the address people post from, but even if I
"s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
micky wrote:
How can I get my newreader to show lines more than 15 characters long? >>>>>>>Wrong newsgroup... again.
No it was a joke about Norman Nescio's last two posts in THIS newsgroup, >>>>>> one of which had lines 1 character long, and another about 15 characters >>>>>> long. I thought you all would get it, but no one who posted did.
Many of us hide/ignore/delete any posts submitted via sewer sources, >>>>> like mixmin (hey, that's what mixmin sometimes calls itself), dizum, or >>>>
had, this is the first I've heard anything a bout mixmin, dizum, etc.
other remailers. Use a rule on the injection node specified in the PATH >>>>> header (which is not an overview header, so you need to configure your >>>>> client to download full messages, headers & body, to have the
non-overview headers on which to test) to filter out the sewer sources. >>>>> Use rules to determine what view YOU want of Usenet. If you want to >>>>> continue viewing the sewage, don't whine about how it is formatted.
I rarely keep track of individual posters, and I don't remember anything >>>> about Norman, certain nothing that labels him sewage. And I wasn't
whining about his formatting. I was making a joke. And I fully accept >>>> his explanation about the wordwrap length changing even though he didn't >>>> do it. Just 3 days ago the alarms on my phone turned on even though I >>>> didn't do that. So again, I was making a joke.
My explanation for those goofy formatted posts was -
---
"Those were my posts. Somehow my word wrap program got an incorrect
setting which caused those goofy posts.
Problem was solved."
---
It's amazing how in today's screwed up world the simplest explanation
for an accidental mistake can engendered such animosity.
I suspect there is nothing new about these days, except that there is so
much anonymous communication. It's a lot easy to be ridiculous,
hostile, nasty, or worse when one is anonymous. And it's a lot easier
to be anonymous than when you had to write letters to the newpaper, or publish pamphlets under a pseudonym.
Also, thank you, micky, for simply accepting my simple explanation of a
setting gone wrong.
Now, If you'll excuse me for a while, I'm going to go back in my sewer
and get a few more hours of sleep.
I have found that:
Product of 98745636214564698 x 7459874565236544789 =
736630060025131838840151335215258722
Prove me wrong!
Well, it looks reasonable. When you multiply two 4-digit number, the
product is either 7 or 8 digits long, depending on the leading numbers. 1000x1000 is 1,000,000, but 3000 x 4000 is 12,000,000. Your 2 numbers
begin with 9 and 7. (9999 x 9999 is also only 8 digits.)
So the number of digits in a product is either the sum of the numbers in
each factor, or one less.
Looking at your numbers again:
Product of 98745636214564698 x 7459874565236544789 = 736630060025131838840151335215258722
And deleting all but the numbers in the first line gives: 987456362145646987459874565236544789
736630060025131838840151335215258722
So your alleged product does indeed have the same number of digits as
the sum of the number of digits in the two factors
The leading numbers are greater than 3 and 4, so that means that the
product will not have one less digit.
The product of the leading numbers, 9 and 7, is 63, not too far below
73, and the product of the last two numbers, 8 and 9, is 72, ending in
2, the same last number as in your alleged product.
So it passes all the simple tests, but I'm not going to verify all the numbers in the middle. I'll leave that to someone else.
I have used "int128_t" of multiprecision boost library,
<https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/latest/libs/multiprecision/doc/html/index.html>
I have found that:
Product of 98745636214564698 x 7459874565236544789 = 736630060025131838840151335215258722
Prove me wrong!
| Sysop: | Tetrazocine |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
| Users: | 8 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 89:31:47 |
| Calls: | 161 |
| Files: | 21,502 |
| Messages: | 78,348 |
