Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
(, Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
According to him, every new setup/system or whatever, I'm not a physicist used to have the most convoluted acronyms just to spell out some stupid word e.g. one paper had something that spelled out TOAD so later research from another group shoe-horned in the definition FROG.
Some scientists should be smacked round the head until, well, just for their own good for a bit.
(, Mon 6 Dec 2010, 22:45, 1 reply, 15 years ago)
'I know, I'll call it something well snazzy but which has almost no relation or resemblance to what I'm trying to describe'
(, Mon 6 Dec 2010, 22:53, Reply)
I've just remembered how lame I was. One of the first workshop papers I had published featured an implementation of my supervisor's already popular system with several usability improvements. I prefixed the name of his system with Nu (I was listening to lots of Korn, Staind and Deftones at the time - very little has changed).
I was 21! I didn't know any better!
(, Mon 6 Dec 2010, 22:59, Reply)
that that really is a little lame. But it doesn't really surprise me - I have read far worse!
(, Mon 6 Dec 2010, 23:02, Reply)
Didn't I say up there ^ somewhere? I was going to do knob shaped biscuits but it's really hard to find a CDC shaped cookie cutter...
(, Mon 6 Dec 2010, 23:06, Reply)
Just let me tell everyone how they were made after they've eaten one.
(, Mon 6 Dec 2010, 23:13, Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread