Ponder the question.

Bob Kolker

"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:

Ponder the question.

Never suspect silicon-based stupidity when carbon-based stupidty is so
cheap and common. I've seen better wetware in failed commercial
laundries.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!

Thats NY Times class burn there uncle )
oriley should have you on his payrole.

In sci.physics, Uncle Al

wrote
on Wed, 01 Oct 2003 16:53:47 -0700
:
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:

Ponder the question.

Never suspect silicon-based stupidity when carbon-based stupidty is so
cheap and common. I've seen better wetware in failed commercial
laundries.


Did you mean:

[1] a failed washing-unit within a laundromat
with a tub full of water and laundry?

[2] a laundromat which goes out of business?

[3] a laundromat in a commercial which failed to achieve the
objectives in said commercial (e.g., selling a certain
amount of laundry soap)?

:-)

But I agree, robots are stupid in such a predictable way;
it's much easier for humans to be stupid. :-)

(No, I don't think Jeff Relf's a 'bot, either.)

--
#191, -- I certainly have my moments
It's still legal to go .sigless.