hehe, well played Lubo. People can define themselves as they wish, the
problem is the impression we produce in others with our
self-definitions.
still the more channels people have to reach information , the best,
and as someone says before, if it does not work it will fade out with
no dama
Dear Luis,
I always find weird and sort of funny when someone cannot accept that some
people could call themselves troglodites meaning that they are not very
enthusiastic about ALL what other people call new and progressive or
even an innovation. This is how I understand Larry's comment.
Per
Dear all,
Although not an active player on this list, except maybe in my early
days in late 90,s,(science , took me in a different direction) I still
keep track of what is happening in "the Refinement world" and i would
like to add my thoughts on this non technical matter.
The generation
I "belong" to Facebook, but I almost never post there. My wife uses one of our
Linux machines to read it so that she can keep up with the postings of our
children and grandchildren.As it is very easy to get malware from Facebook, she
never uses her own computer with Windows 7 as OS.
Anything p
To be honest, I can't imagine that crystallographic knowledge can be
effectively transmitted via facebook. Probably one could safe time by
reading some basic textbooks instead of "liking" and "following". The
same holds for other "asocial" (Lubo, I like this statement!) networks
like researchga
Dear all,
What websites are you talking about? Facebook?Twitter? Google? They never,
never exist! How could we visit the websites that never exist?
Just a joke.
It costs time, money and luck for 'some of us' to visit those 'never exist'
websites, so I prefer the mailing list and greetings to Alan
I want say something more about my decision to open the group in FB.
There is many people the use the Rietveld method as a magic black box:
insert the data, read the cif of the phase and obtain the results. Then they
say "twenty-one" and "forty-one" when they see a symmetry group!
Maybe a POP-group
Dear Alan,
There are plenty of people who call usage of so-called social networks
(they are, in fact, very asocial) "a progress". I would suggest to
consider De gustibus non est disputandum, but also Duo cum faciunt idem,
non est idem.
Although I am not member of any of those asocial nets an
Facebook is a commercial operation that is out to mine data from its users.
I’ll stick with the Rietveld listserv.
Jim
James P. Cline
Materials Measurement Science Division
National Institute of Standards and Technology
100 Bureau Dr. stop 8520 [ B113 / Bldg 217 ]
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8523
Alan,
it is only another way to discuss on powder diffraction.
Davide
From: alan.he...@gmail.com [mailto:alan.he...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Alan Hewat
Sent: 08 June, 2015 11:14 AM
To: davide levy
Cc: rietveld_l@ill.fr
Subject: Re: Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook
I can und
I can understand that people have different ideas about the ideal format
for discussion, and for some of us email may seem a little "old fashioned".
I suppose we could also use Twitter or any of the other social chattering
forums. But multiple groups on the same subject disperses the available
info
Good Morning
I created the Powder Diffraction Discussion Group on Facebook, to speak
about powder diffraction, Rietveld etc.. open for all use powder
diffraction.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1087352967946225/
Davide
++
Please do NO
12 matches
Mail list logo
