User talk:William R. Buckley

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome!

Hello William R. Buckley, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  DES (talk) 02:56, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] APL - Yeah, baby!

You wrote (on my talk page):

Mr. Siegel:
It is nice to know that there remains a professional APL programmer. When I was 12 years of age, I had the very fortunate experience of living near an IBM beta test site (the Coast Community College District) which had a policy of providing to interested parties (we were known as squirrels) with access to their computer system (in 1972, a 370/155 with 1MByte of semiconductor RAM). At the time, they supported 256 terminals, running STSC APL*PLUS. John Clark was one of my teachers. William R. Buckley 02:41, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I am glad to hear it. My intro to APL was around 1975, when the Sate University of New York had a terminal system accessible to students adn faculty (my father taught at SUNY/Oneonta). It used APL/360. I used APL to do stat work for one of his papers. Then I encounterd APL again at Michigan State University, and then again when i got a job in APL. I was lookign for a programmign job at the time, and listed all laguages I ahd evern worked in on my resume. I was asked if i could pass a technical in APL. "When i said" "In a week" was the response. I went out and got a used copy of APL2 at a glance by Polivka and Brown, and studied for a week. Later I got to know Ray Polivka, and enjoyed telling him how he got me my job (which i still have, through 3 changes of corporate ownership).

Ther are still quite a few APL professionals around, and I just got the latest issue of APL Quote Quad in the mail last week. Thanks for your note, and again welcome to wikipedia. DES (talk) 02:56, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Removing parts of Talk:Core War

Please do not remove parts of talk pages. It is considered vandalism. --Dijxtra 11:31, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmmm... now, you are right, i too can't find where it says that it's vandalism. Now, I'll go and ask at the Help Desk and ask is it OK to delete parts of talk pages (there, I asked) and if they tell me it's OK, then I'll apologise. --Dijxtra 00:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
There. I recieved this answer: "I found your answer in guideline form: archive don't delete and deleting others' comments is not acceptable. Deleting or editing the comments of others is seen as misrepresenting them. [...]" Therefore, don't remove parts of talk pages. --Dijxtra 11:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: John von Neumann

It does not fit in with other articles in this category: 3D Life, Block cellular automaton, Cellular automaton, Cellular image processing, Codd's cellular automaton, Conway's Game of Life, Day & Night, to name but a few. Generally speaking, the CA category appears to be divided between examples of cellular automata (Immigration (CA), QuadLife, Rule 110 cellular automaton) and terms related to cellular automata (Garden of Eden pattern, Gun (CA), Oscillator (CA)) - to such an extent that it might be best to divide this category into two subcategories. What you don't find in this category, however, are people who have contributed to cellular automata, regardless of their distinction. What we can do, however - I'll be glad to contribute, and it'd be nice if you helped to - is possibly create a subcategory, "Scientists who have made a major contribution to cellular automata" (or, for preference, a shorter name, if you can come up with one), and in this category place Mr von Neumann. Tell me what you think. — Itai (talk) 13:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cellular Automaton

Hello - first off, let me acknowledge that I am no expert on (and in fact have very little knowledge of) the Cellular automaton field. My task (as it related to this article) is to prevent and remove spamming (WP:SPAM). When the same or very similar external links and other potentially promotional-type material is added to multiple articles by one editor, it violates these guidelines and is subject to removal.

However, if a neutral editor later comes by and decides the link is useful, I have no issue with it being re-added. As far as I'm concerned, it's no longer spam then. If you find the link and/or reference to be useful, please feel free to re-add it in. Bear in mind though that the references section really ought to be for references that were used to write the article. Other relevent material should go in a section entitled "External links" (if it is only links) or "Further reading" (if it contains a mixture of links and non-links). See the Wikipedia Manual of Style (WP:MOS) for further information on this.

Regarding the question of creating a list link of non-citational (WP:CITE) material, and the question of re-naming the article, the talk page of that article is likely the best place to hash them out. As I mention above I really have no knowledge in the field, and am not in a position to make any sort of judgement call on them.

Please let me know if you have any other questions and concerns that I may be able to assist with. Thanks --AbsolutDan (talk) 16:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FA

FA=Featured Article].--Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 07:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Response from FF

Please do not take umbrage!! It was just a careless mistake. I was simply trying to think up a way to consolidate the introductory paragraph a little bit and could not come up with anything better. Your reasonong is perfectly just. I will revert it ASAP, if you have not already. There's absolutely no desire to take any credit away from von Neumann on my part!! --Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 06:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Artificial life

I would have thought that artificial consciousness is a subset of artificial life. This view is certainly being resisted at Talk:Artificial life. What say you? Paul Beardsell 21:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Also: It does not seem right to me that the artificial life article defines AL as being the study of artificial life. You have seen I have run into resistance here. I note that I have made exactly the same point at artificial intelligence and it was readily accepted. Opinion? Paul Beardsell 21:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Central Coast and RepRap

William: I'm not at SLO, but about 180 km up the coast at Pacific Grove. My son attends UCSB so I get to travel through SLO regularly when I drive down to see him. I love the town. Wish I could justify moving down there.

I'm extremely familiar with Bowyer's reprap project since I'm on the project team (ref Forrest Higgs). I've recently spun off an American approach to the idea which emphasises bootstrapping into the technology from nothing but a description instead of just waiting for somebody to print you up a copy. You can see what I'm up to at...

http://www.3DReplicators.com

Cut me a little slack when you browse it, though. I only bought the domain just before Christmas and am trying to crank out content for the site while doing a day job AND finishing up my Tommelise bootstrap replicator.

Plaasjaapie 17:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merging UC with vNUC

Hi William, just to say I have transferred your comments on the merging to the discussion page of the Universal Constructor article. - CharlesC 18:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reverts

Uh, why did you undo my edit to John von Neumann? I was disambiguating an ambiguous link. Please be more careful with your reverts. Dylan 08:00, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Joint effort

Jay:

I have a proposal for you. It is clear that you have strong interest in nomenclature, and it is probably the case that no papers have been written to address the issue. Artificia life/ALife/Alife/alife and perhaps other forms are to be found in extant literature. Might you be interested to jointly pen a paper, an argument for selection of form? William R. Buckley 20:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that would be interesting. There is certainly alot of ambiguity when it comes to term use, even from the same source. --Numsgil 11:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] John von Neumann

Your message to my talk page does not assume good faith, its tone is strange, and it misrepresents my edits to the von Neumann article. Von Neumann was born to a non-practicing Jewish family. This information belongs in his biography section, not in the lead, and not under the "religion" tab of his infobox, as it doesn't say anything to his religion. According to biographies of von Neumann, he was non-religious, until he was dying, at which point he took heed of Pascal's wager and converted to Roman Catholocism. Robert K S 07:04, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/l/User_talk%7EWilliam_R._Buckley_29b8.html"