From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,232e89dd4cc3c154
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.internetdienste.de!news.tu-darmstadt.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Mart van de Wege <mvdwege@mail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.math,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG.
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2011 17:59:55 +0200
Message-ID: <86sjqo1xms.fsf@gareth.avalon.lan>
References: <4dae2a4b$0$55577$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
	<4dbd6e9c$0$12957$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.octanews.com>
	<925saiFj03U7@mid.individual.net>
	<4dbe2304$0$12961$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.octanews.com>
	<iplmk8$2s6$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk>
	<4dda0486$0$67782$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
	<4dda09ca$0$6629$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
	<4e098093$0$79550$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
	<1bei2e54d4.fsf@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>
	<lANXICIpMgCOFAmv@phaedsys.demon.co.uk>
	<iudg27$1ik$3@speranza.aioe.org> <86iprpz1jy.fsf@gareth.avalon.lan>
	<iumf2l$uag$1@speranza.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: individual.net ROoUwEJo1Kr6CSrb1TfYuw0idO2v85cMVVXheumBQ/PiWGh3dj
X-Orig-Path: gareth.avalon.lan!not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qVddNu5rPLIrb3wcaFUv03ck3P4=
 sha1:8J7xfySQ/24yCfOfMtYvDcLW0dw=
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux)
Xref: g2news1.google.com sci.math:225382 comp.lang.fortran:42792
 comp.lang.ada:20069
Date: 2011-07-02T17:59:55+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Gib Bogle <g.bogle@auckland.ac.nz> writes:

> On 6/29/2011 4:47 PM, Mart van de Wege wrote:
>> Gib Bogle<g.bogle@auckland.ac.nz>  writes:
>>>
>>> The problem with Wikipedia is that it required a lot of discretion and
>>> discrimination on the part of the user.  It is very good in some
>>> areas, and very unreliable in others (just as some people are reliable
>>> sources of information, and others are not).
>>
>> Well yeah, but this is a particularly useless observation.
>
> You want usefulness in a usenet post?  My advice is: look elsewhere.

I am reading this from comp.lang.ada, which is a very useful group,
thank you very much.

Mart

-- 
"We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
    --- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.