I refuse to enter technical discussion, e.g. feasible or not, before understanding ***what we want.**** <br><br>If no one agrees with this research method, I won't have any feedback. That's OK. <br><br>I am not surprised by your reaction because, currently we publish the feasibility of ideas, not the ideas themselves.<br>
<br>This doesn't mean that Discrete IP is not feasible. This means that I am honest beyond your comprehension. <br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Eggert, Lars <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lars@netapp.com" target="_blank">lars@netapp.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:16, Pars Mutaf <<a href="mailto:pars.mutaf@gmail.com">pars.mutaf@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> What you don't seem to understand is that the research method currently<br>
> used on this planet is a wrong one.<br>
><br>
> We should first discuss the idea, then discuss the technical details.<br>
<br>
</div>I refuse to discuss ideas that are articulated so vaguely that they cannot be understood. You refuse to expand on them in your memo. I guess we won't be having a discussion. I can live with that.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Lars</font></span></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><a href="http://www.content-based-science.org" target="_blank">http://www.content-based-science.org</a><br><br>