- Give God your all (live true faith) - 18 Updates
- "Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore" by Henrique Bucher - 7 Updates
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Jun 02 02:10AM -0700 Give God your all (live true faith): As the world dives deeper and deeper into self-absorption, seek your path from the strength and security of the living God. Learn of Him and His ways, and why they are that way. It's not by accident. God has a real plan that is coming to fruition. Be part of the victory by placing your faith in Jesus Christ, and then into motion. Give God your all. Turn your faith into action. Speak the words of life (His words), and watch God grow in those around you, for Jesus is life (the very wellspring of it). ----- A teaching by Pastor Darrell Myatt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzZmxD5o4yI ----- Listen to these lyrics, performed by Lauren Daigle: "Here's My Heart, Lord" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFw42tZVDKI "Once And For All" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oaRYLEIeis ----- The victory of the cross: "It is done. I am the Alpha and Omega," says the Lord God, "The Beginning and the End." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjrivXWczGU Jesus loves you. He wants to forgive your sin and give you eternal life. Receive His free gift and enter into a new phase of your life, one you never thought possible. God makes it possible for you. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| JiiPee <no@notvalid.com>: Jun 02 10:39AM +0100 I am actually a christian myself, but I dont think its a good idea to post these messages in technical forums like this. Maybe a general chat forum? i post these sometimes even in Finnish evolution forum (as people there seems to be fine with it) ... but I dont think people are here fine with this ... you know what I mean? :) On 02/06/2016 10:10, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: |
| JiiPee <no@notvalid.com>: Jun 02 10:41AM +0100 cannot say am 100% sure of this, but thats why I do not send these messsages here. If I was fine with it I would do it here myself as well... :) On 02/06/2016 10:39, JiiPee wrote: |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Jun 02 04:10AM -0700 JiiPee wrote: > but I dont think people are here fine with this ... you know > what I mean? :) Will the people in this forum be in general chat forums? Or evolution forums? Did Jesus die to only save those people who somehow find their way to a church service or religion-only forum? When Jesus was on the Earth, did He stick to synagogues and religious festivals? Or did He speak to five-time divorcées who were shamefully out getting water in the middle of the day? And did He speak to the people in fields and on hills? Did He approach lepers? And heal them? When I look up to that cross, I see His blood stained body, wrongly beaten and put to shame so that I will not have to be judged for my sin. I look around to the people of this Earth, realizing that we are all sinners, we are all in need of forgiveness, of salvation, and I consider that Christ's death was sufficient not just for my sin, but for everybody's sin world-wide, and I remember the deception I was under before I became a believer, and the Lord's commission to go and teach. When I consider these things, I cannot hide His love offer of total forgiveness and eternal life just to certain forums, or just to those places the unsaved would say are appropriate. Of course Satan wants Jesus silenced wherever possible. Jesus really saves people. Really restores. Really redeems. That means defeat for him, hence the call for segregation. It should be Christ, our Lord, guiding our life, not Satan. Where I go in my life I bear within me knowledge of the living God. That knowledge is alive and active and cannot be silenced or compartmentalized. It is fully replete, and occupies the sum total of my being continuously, then naturally outpouring into all things I do. ----- Jesus is life. And I care too much about the people around me to not at least give them the opportunity to hear from my mouth the way to forgiveness and eternal life. Remember that this message is only for those who will be saved. Not one drop of blood, nor one teaching of God is given to those who won't be saved. They are already condemned, and will not share in eternal life, but only eternal torment. Teach those around you wherever you are so they will have the chance to hear and believe, for it is pleasing to God to teach others in this way. Some will hear, and it is for those few we labor. Remember His love, and walk... Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| "Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Jun 02 05:22AM -0700 On Thursday, 2 June 2016 12:41:15 UTC+3, JiiPee wrote: > cannot say am 100% sure of this, but thats why I do not send these > messsages here. If I was fine with it I would do it here myself as > well... :) From receiver's viewpoint it irrelevant if the author of quoted (by you) off-topic spam is Rick or you. such messages fully and then replying to those repeatedly is equivalent to sending those. What is obvious to me is that God (if He exists) is extremely modest. So modest that He is impossible to detect. Various annoying people claiming knowledge and telling things about God in wrong places have apparently nothing to do with neither Him nor His wishes. |
| "Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Jun 02 05:52AM -0700 On Thursday, 2 June 2016 14:11:03 UTC+3, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > evolution forums? Jesus die to only save those people who > somehow find their way to a church service or religion-only > forum? If to read Bible then it writes that Jesus did die because in Judaea the local political authorities (elders), lawyers (scribes) and religious authorities (priests) did demand his crucifixion from prefect Pontius Pilate (who found Jesus innocent of charges himself). Aren't you, Rick, wannabe of one of those types? Wannabe of priest, wannabe of religious authority? Yes, Jesus did die because of people like that and not because of nonsense about hellfire, sins, salvation and other gibberish that such priesty types usually talk about. |
| JiiPee <no@notvalid.com>: Jun 02 01:52PM +0100 On 02/06/2016 12:10, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > Or did He speak to five-time divorcées who were shamefully out > getting water in the middle of the day? And did He speak to the > people in fields and on hills? Did He approach lepers? And heal them? yes he did. But I do not think he went to a school class and in the middle of the class stood up and started preaching :). At least there are no records of this. So there is a place and time for doing it and sometimes not. You can see that he is doing it in public areas, like on the streets, which is totally legal etc. |
| JiiPee <no@notvalid.com>: Jun 02 01:54PM +0100 On 02/06/2016 13:22, Öö Tiib wrote: > From receiver's viewpoint it irrelevant if the author of quoted (by you) > off-topic spam is Rick or you. such messages fully and then replying > to those repeatedly is equivalent to sending those. but answering inside the main topic does not really affect anything. You did not need to look at the answers he got! Why did not read my message?? You did not have to ... and it was under his message so you dont even see it. :) |
| JiiPee <no@notvalid.com>: Jun 02 01:56PM +0100 On 02/06/2016 13:54, JiiPee wrote: > You did not need to look at the answers he got! Why did not read my > message?? You did not have to ... and it was under his message so you > dont even see it. :) At least on my thunderbird I only see the beginning/first message and not the replies to it. I have to open the first message purposely to see its replies |
| David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Jun 02 02:59PM +0200 On 02/06/16 11:41, JiiPee wrote: >> Maybe a general chat forum? i post these sometimes even in Finnish >> evolution forum (as people there seems to be fine with it) ... but I >> dont think people are here fine with this ... you know what I mean? :) Rick is beyond saving. Don't copy his behaviour. The general attitude in technical forums is that religious posts are not particularly welcome. In many forums, there is some tolerance for the /occasional/ off-topic thread, whether it be about religion, science, history, or whatever. There are some people who disapprove of all such posts, but a fair amount who think it is okay within a clearly labelled thread. But while an occasional discussion /about/ religion is not bad, evangelising is /always/ bad. Rick (when posting religious stuff - his technical posts and discussions are absolutely fine) never answers any questions, and takes no heed of anything other people write - he just rambles, posts links that no one ever views, and gives quotations from the Bible as though they were argument enough in themselves. His position is basically that he (and apparently, since he disagrees with other Christians, he alone) knows the truth and the facts - therefore it is neither religion nor a matter of belief, and there is no need to apply any thought or rationality, or consider any evidence or counter-evidence. The Bible is "true" because it says so in the Bible, and that must be correct since the Bible is "true". If you are interested in Rick-style posting, then please do it elsewhere. This is particularly the case if you really believe that you have a duty to help others join your particular flavour of religion - Rick does a fine job of ensuring that no one else would ever want to be like him or believe the stuff he does. But if there is already an active thread about religion, then you might as well post there, within limits - you won't annoy anyone who isn't already annoyed, and if you are able to express your beliefs and opinions rationally, it might be interesting. It can't be worse than than the repetitive posts with Bible quotes, complaints about swearing, more swearing to annoy the complainers, idiotic claims that "evolution disproves the Bible", and equally idiotic claims that there is archaeological evidence that proves it. |
| JiiPee <no@notvalid.com>: Jun 02 02:00PM +0100 On 02/06/2016 13:52, Öö Tiib wrote: > prefect Pontius Pilate (who found Jesus innocent of charges himself). > Aren't you, Rick, wannabe of one of those types? Wannabe of priest, > wannabe of religious authority? I have no reason to doubt his sincerity.... just was saying that preaching has a wrong place. Like in the middle of a maths class. |
| JiiPee <no@notvalid.com>: Jun 02 02:11PM +0100 On 02/06/2016 13:59, David Brown wrote: >>> evolution forum (as people there seems to be fine with it) ... but I >>> dont think people are here fine with this ... you know what I mean? :) > Rick is beyond saving. Don't copy his behaviour. am not saying anything about his faith-sincerity.. .just about this issue. > The general attitude in technical forums is that religious posts are not > particularly welcome. I agree > In many forums, there is some tolerance for the > /occasional/ off-topic thread, whether it be about religion, science, > history, or whatever. like in Finnish evolution forum... they seem to all accept offtopic issues, its more like friends chatting all kind of things...although even there I prefer to FOCUS on evolution, but i dont mind here and there other topics, i think its actuallly good there. But ye, this is about programming, not really suitable here. > There are some people who disapprove of all such > posts, but a fair amount who think it is okay within a clearly labelled > thread. I actgually think nothing else here than programming :). and I believe :). But one can put religious stuff inside their singature, isnt it? Thats ok becouse its optional to read. > But while an occasional discussion /about/ religion is not bad, > evangelising is /always/ bad. well here i disagree. In public area everybody has a right to say their opinion of anything... its just freedom of speech, isnt it? I let muslims/atheists talk... so let me also talk about christianity. > questions, and takes no heed of anything other people write - he just > rambles, posts links that no one ever views, and gives quotations from > the Bible as though they were argument enough in themselves. yes agree that is he starts something should at least answer and be involved. > apply any thought or rationality, or consider any evidence or > counter-evidence. The Bible is "true" because it says so in the Bible, > and that must be correct since the Bible is "true". again, I have not met him... so its difficult to say who he really is only by reading text on my screen. its so much different when you meet in person... > have a duty to help others join your particular flavour of religion - > Rick does a fine job of ensuring that no one else would ever want to be > like him or believe the stuff he does. :). heh. Well, thats one reason I adviced him not to do it... becouse I have a feeling it has just almost totally negative effect . > as well post there, within limits - you won't annoy anyone who isn't > already annoyed, and if you are able to express your beliefs and > opinions rationally, it might be interesting. ye , true its better than totally nonsenses posts. Its one of those things: If I have found something very very good and interesteing (lets imagine I found a place where you can dig a lot of Gold),,,, then is the programming forum right place to say it? :) Like this: "Get Gold for free - I show you how!!!" <- lets imagine that was really true, would you post it (or would it be ok to post) on forums? |
| JiiPee <no@notvalid.com>: Jun 02 02:16PM +0100 On 02/06/2016 14:11, JiiPee wrote: > :). > But one can put religious stuff inside their singature, isnt it? Thats > ok becouse its optional to read. I am a christian, but when I work and I come here.... I am not at that moment looking for Bible scriptures or sermons... I am looking for solutions to my work issues (like how to use c++-threads). So it wastes my time if there are religious posts all over the place. I can look for those topics after the work, but there is no order if they are mixed in work-type of issues. Time and place for everything.... |
| "Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Jun 02 06:21AM -0700 On Thursday, 2 June 2016 16:00:27 UTC+3, JiiPee wrote: > > wannabe of religious authority? > I have no reason to doubt his sincerity.... just was saying that > preaching has a wrong place. Like in the middle of a maths class. I have no doubt in his sincerity. I believe that the priests who demanded death of Jesus from Pontius Pilate were not insincere or evil people. They were good priests in their own mind. They found teachings of Jesus about God wrong, dangerous to society and his popularity very regrettable. They did the right thing in their own mind. They were blind that Jesus is good man but blindness is not sin, blindness is defect. Rick is also good and sincere ... just sort of deaf and blind towards other people like those priests of Judaea. |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Jun 02 06:27AM -0700 JiiPee wrote: > yes he did. But I do not think he went to a school class and > in the middle of the class stood up and started preaching :). What do these verses mean? http://biblehub.com/kjv/colossians/3-17.htm "And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him." http://biblehub.com/kjv/1_peter/4-11.htm "If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen." http://biblehub.com/kjv/2_corinthians/10-5.htm "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;" http://biblehub.com/kjv/james/4-15.htm "For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that." God first in everything. By name. So as to set it right before all. No variance, no slight of turning. Open and honest, purposed on making other people's lives better. ----- We are called to go into all the world and teach and make disciples. It is a life calling, ongoing, in all things, at all times, until we leave this world. David is a non-believer. I advise praying for Him, that God may open his eyes. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| James Lothian <jameslothian1@gmail.com>: Jun 02 02:33PM +0100 Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > Give God your all (live true faith): Time for some killfile maintenance. Sigh. |
| David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Jun 02 03:58PM +0200 On 02/06/16 15:11, JiiPee wrote: >>>> dont think people are here fine with this ... you know what I mean? :) >> Rick is beyond saving. Don't copy his behaviour. > am not saying anything about his faith-sincerity.. .just about this issue. As am I. > I actgually think nothing else here than programming :). and I believe :). > But one can put religious stuff inside their singature, isnt it? Thats > ok becouse its optional to read. Signatures can pretty much be anything you want, including religious stuff. Of course, there are limits - people will rightly be annoyed at racism, bigotry, or other "hate" comments. But religious comments, a link to a website, etc., are all fine if you follow the proper format for a Usenet signature. > well here i disagree. In public area everybody has a right to say their > opinion of anything... its just freedom of speech, isnt it? I let > muslims/atheists talk... so let me also talk about christianity. You have the right to freedom of speech - but you don't have the right to expect people to appreciate whatever you say! So of course neither I nor anyone else can tell you that you may not evangelise here - but I can advise you that people will not like it. >> the Bible as though they were argument enough in themselves. > yes agree that is he starts something should at least answer and be > involved. (Rick, I know you are reading this too - I would not write about someone in the third person without them being aware of it. But you already know everything I am writing below - it is not the first time I have made these points. If you want to discuss any of the points - seriously, without Bible quotations or circular arguments - you know my email address.) He gets involved, in that he continues to post - but he does not appear to properly read posts or consider a what people are asking. (Again, this only applies to his religious posts - I have no problems with his technical posts.) > again, I have not met him... so its difficult to say who he really is > only by reading text on my screen. its so much different when you meet > in person... Absolutely true. And my guess is that any religious discussion with Rick would be far more informative and enjoyable in person than in a newsgroup - Usenet is not a good medium for evangelism or religious arguments. >> like him or believe the stuff he does. > :). heh. Well, thats one reason I adviced him not to do it... becouse I > have a feeling it has just almost totally negative effect . I would go further - I think it has a very strong negative effect, in several ways. One is that he highlights the negative so much - "fire and brimstone" preaching rarely wins new converts. Two is that he jumps straight in - religion is an all-or-nothing affair for Rick, and his "all" is much more extreme than most believers. Anyone who has ever "converted" someone to Christianity, or seen someone converted, knows it is a gradual process of awakening an interest, questioning and answering, over a long period of time. That is something that simply cannot be done on Usenet. And finally, because he writes the way he does, people cannot help but associate his manic behaviour with Christianity - no one wants to be associated with that sort of thing, and I am sure that most Christians in the groups where Rick posts are bothered by that. > Gold),,,, then is the programming forum right place to say it? :) > Like this: "Get Gold for free - I show you how!!!" <- lets imagine that > was really true, would you post it (or would it be ok to post) on forums? Such situations are so rare that it is difficult to know if people would think it were okay. I expect people would assume it is spam - you'd have to work hard to convince anyone. But repeating the same message in much the same words certainly won't help! |
| JiiPee <no@notvalid.com>: Jun 02 03:15PM +0100 On 02/06/2016 14:58, David Brown wrote: > to expect people to appreciate whatever you say! So of course neither I > nor anyone else can tell you that you may not evangelise here - but I > can advise you that people will not like it. but I think here its more like an issue: preaching in a class room vs preaching on the streets So its not about do people like it, its more about is it right/legal? The reason I do not want him to do it here is becouse its "wrong" (or thats how I see it), not becouse some dont like it. So I dont think its so much about people liking it. For example if its illegal/wrong, then there is no way there the message is gonna be accepted by anybody. Somebody conveying their message on the streets... its not about whether people like it or not... people always gonna dislike almost anything. Freedom of speech is not about liking in the first place....its about expressing your ideas in public. > think it were okay. I expect people would assume it is spam - you'd > have to work hard to convince anyone. But repeating the same message in > much the same words certainly won't help! Thats the issue: its very difficult to convince people something on the internet even if its true and something very good. And maybe this is one of the reasons actually that its many times a bit waste of time to spread these "good messages" becouse how can people trust it? How can people know its true what the message says? |
| Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid>: Jun 02 08:19AM +0200 On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 16:22:54 -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >devices must wait while that device is accessing the memory. It doesn't >make any difference how many DIMMS and now many memory controllers there >are - the chip's design restricts access to one unit at a time. why each cpu does not has one its 'bus' or line to memory indipendet of other? |
| Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Jun 02 08:15PM +1200 On 06/ 2/16 05:11 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> If you knew anything about the data centre space you would know about >> 100GbE networking. > I know aboutdata center space. But that is limited to the data center. So what? your question "And exactly where are those speeds?" has been answered. > How many places in the world have 100Gbs networking external to a data > center? Under my desk once the adapters and cables arrive.... -- Ian |
| BartC <bc@freeuk.com>: Jun 02 10:41AM +0100 On 01/06/2016 21:22, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > are - the chip's design restricts access to one unit at a time. > So no, you cannot run all of your I/O concurrently at full speed - no > matter what you claim. You decide in advance what 'full speed' it is that you want, and design the memory system to allow that. Anything is possible. You have a memory system that can access a one byte cell in 1ns, so A and B can't simultaneously access that same byte. So you change it so the access can be done 0.5ns. Then A and B can take turns to access the byte (and avoid the problems of both actually writing to it at the same instant), effectively giving both access in that 1ns. You just design in spare bandwidth. -- Bartc |
| Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Jun 02 11:13PM +1200 On 06/ 2/16 05:11 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > RAID, it takes even longer. Now the data may already be in the RAID's > cache (in which case it will operate at speeds near to - but not quite > as fast as - an SSD), but even then the cache size is limited. Hardware RAID is so last century... > And even > an 8 disk RAID can't keep up; eventually it will have to go to disk, and > even the fastest disks max out at around 175MB/s. .. each. -- Ian |
| scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): Jun 02 12:46PM >have data lines. The address lines are used to access a particular >memory location, and the data lines are used to read or write to that >location. I give up. You've missed the last two decades of hardware design advancements. I build processors, do you? |
| scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): Jun 02 12:49PM >>are - the chip's design restricts access to one unit at a time. >why each cpu does not has one its 'bus' or line to memory indipendet >of other? It does. That was one of the great advancements that AMD made in the x86 compatable space over a decade ago - the memory controllers are no longer separate and they're connected directly to the processor package instead of a separate northbridge chip. Thus, modern systems have from two to 12 (or more, depending on socket count) memory controllers driving one or two DIMM's per each. That's not even considering FBDIMMS or other serial connections to memory. |
| scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): Jun 02 12:50PM >byte (and avoid the problems of both actually writing to it at the same >instant), effectively giving both access in that 1ns. >You just design in spare bandwidth. exactly. Standard computer architecture 101. Then, you distribute the physical address space across multiple controllers to allow additional parallelism. |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment