00:00:41 ok, the definite article developed in Middle Bulgarian (12th-15th century) 01:48:41 ratspin 01:50:22 how many rats can a ratspin spin if a ratspin can spin rats? 01:51:25 ratspin rats 01:52:33 my hair is full of spiderwebs 01:52:38 stupid spiders 01:54:41 That was a poem. 01:57:57 * oerjan doesn't manage to google a straight definition of ratspin. 01:58:17 I'm wondering which definition of the word "straight" you're using :P 01:58:35 eh, straight forward 01:58:55 i would be suprised if you could find a definition 01:59:34 i have found some uses, apparently meaning something like "hogwash" especially by politicians 02:00:18 So, not some very fetishist gay sex maneuver. 02:01:33 * bsmntbombdood tries to figure out what that would be 02:01:34 but, i wondered if it had a more direct meaning of some kind 02:01:50 something involving gerbils, i take 02:02:22 the ass gerbil 02:02:32 with a spin 02:02:51 that would probably kill the gerbil 02:03:39 I think that the anal gerbil penetration would kill the gerbil anyway :P 02:03:57 in the story the gerbil lives 02:04:04 they use a toilet paper tube 02:04:11 Also: I've seen gerbils chew through plastic. The gerbil is not a good rodent to use X-D 02:04:47 i'll keep that in mind 02:04:47 barely beats the xenomorph 02:06:54 Y'know, I've looked for gerbiling/hamstering/whatever on Wikipedia. 02:06:57 I can't find it :( 02:07:10 uuuh 02:07:12 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerbilling 02:07:14 i would imagine snopes.com a better place. 02:07:24 Well. 02:07:25 I'm stupid 02:07:42 "The notion of gerbilling (not necessarily restricted to homosexuals — the insertion of items into the rectum for purposes of autoeroticism is practiced by heterosexuals as well) appears to be pure invention, a tale fabricated to demonstrate the depravity with which "faggots" allegedly pursue sexual pleasure." 02:08:17 The lack of medical evidence for gerbilling is not surprising when one considers that (1) rodents have claws, (2) frightened animals are likely to bite, and (3) rodents can be quite large. 02:08:18 X-D 02:08:26 yeah really 02:09:37

Y'know, I've looked for gerbiling/hamstering/whatever on Wikipedia. \ I can't find it :( 02:09:42 weak 02:10:32 For whatever reason, just using the word didn't occur to me :P 02:10:39 I tried to find it from 'Gerbil' 02:10:41 (etc) 02:10:47 i searched for "ass gerbil" 02:10:50 first result 02:11:52 Hmmmmmm .... the page on "Rectal foreign object" says that Scrubs refers to two such instances. I can remember a third :P 02:14:30 I read about a guy putting wet concrete up his ass 02:14:38 Hahahaha 02:14:43 yeah, it hardended 02:14:53 In the unlikely scenario that that was true, that somebody would be infinitely stupid :) 02:15:13 I got the impression i was reading a medical report 02:15:41 I feel bad googling for "wet cement rectum" 02:15:42 i just recently read somewhere that concrete will set under water, so it must be true ;) 02:16:16 turns out it's the first google result 02:16:36 there was another article, even had a picture of the cement 02:17:14 yes, http://www.well.com/user/cynsa/cement.html 02:18:09 GregorR-L: Well, if someone actually *did* it, there'd be instant medical evidence. 02:18:18 see my link 02:18:47 I was thinking about gerbiling, not the cement bit. 02:18:53 "the anus was dilated and two Foley catheters were inserted alongside the rectal mass to relieve suction. A concrete case of the rectum was delivered without incident." 02:19:07 "he attending physician recommended a psychiatric consultation, but the patient declined." 02:19:27 "A layer of concrete was chipped off the upper part of the specimen and revealed a white plastic ping-pong ball." 02:19:29 wtf 02:20:19 WTF?!? 02:20:30 lol 02:25:34 "In one review of colorectal foreign bodies and their management, all patients were male and mostly in the fourth and fifth decades of life." 02:25:38 interesting 02:28:04 "mostly in the fourth and fifth decades of life" 02:28:09 What an awkward way to say that. 02:28:24 http://www.well.com/user/cynsa/explicar.jpg 02:28:57 That == hilarious X-D 02:29:15 -!- poiuy_qwert has joined. 02:30:28 hi poiuy_qwert 02:30:36 hello oerjan 02:32:01 and then it exploded, almost all over my keyboard 02:32:10 but i got it away in time 02:32:52 * oerjan wonders if bsmntbombdood has changed subject or not 02:33:22 it's part of some qdb or bash.org quote 02:33:51 the guy is talking about opening a coke, a guy enters the channel, he says what i said, guy leaves with a quit message of something like "sick fucks" 02:34:49 hmm, by representing strings as trees you get constant time concatenation and O(log n) time indexing 02:35:15 that's what haskell's Data.Sequence does 02:35:26 Also, constant time splicing. 02:35:32 But by representing strings as *arrays* of trees of lists, you get to be *really* confusing! 02:35:33 Erm 02:35:38 Not constant, O(log n) 02:35:41 But spacially constant 02:36:29 i sort of figured you had timed that exploding message to poiuy_qwert's arrival 02:36:49 yeah 02:37:07 Pikhq: what would be the point of that 02:37:08 but then, i think it would have worked better if you had _not_ changed the subject :) 02:37:41 bsmntbombdood: First step in creating something more evil than Malbolge. 02:38:15 oh, i approve 02:38:23 * Pikhq thinks about it. . . 02:39:10 http://images.andyblume.com/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=475&g2_serialNumber=1 02:40:43 http://images.andyblume.com/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=544&g2_serialNumber=1 <-- similar 02:42:27 i had to do it 02:42:43 darn the second one took me a while 02:42:55 but it was worth it 02:43:09 i think that's a real add 02:43:20 for real lube 02:43:34 Brilliant. 02:45:05 yes, http://www.manix.net/index.html 02:45:41 -!- nuba has joined. 02:46:30 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evMBjes_vnw 02:48:37 That was less than subtle. . . 02:48:56 Must ... find ... good ... image comparison algorithm ... 02:50:06 GregorR-L: Obviously what you need is the very, very powerful "Plof reference counting" algorithm. 02:50:20 (sorry, I'm really not helpful) 02:50:31 lol 02:50:53 GregorR-L: the "esp game" route 02:51:42 http://www.espgame.org/cgi-bin/description 02:51:58 there's a good talk somewhere that he explains it in detail 02:52:52 ... something called "esp game" is an image comparison algorithm? 02:53:11 does "algorithm" mean deterministic? 02:53:16 Oh, I see. That wouldn't help my target problem at all. 02:53:23 Ideally. 02:54:16 here's the talk: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8246463980976635143&q=human+computation 02:54:36 What, is that a mechanical turk sort of thing? 02:55:00 The ESP game wouldn't help my problem at all. 02:55:15 I need to be able to take two totally arbitrary images and get a comparison. 02:55:21 Pikhq: yeah 02:55:46 GregorR-L: md5sum. 02:55:58 I COMPARISON, not equality X_X 02:56:15 Would you like a halting problem solver on the side? 02:56:26 probably depends on the images 02:56:45 the type, and the kind of comparison you want 02:57:09 Let's say I have three pictures. Two are of faces, the third is of a house. 02:57:22 The result of comparing the two faces should be lower than the result of comparing one of the faces to the house. 02:57:32 google has a face recognition algorithm 02:57:40 * GregorR-L bashes his head into a wall. 02:57:51 I'm thinking you might want to write that algorithm, and use it for a pH.D thesis. 02:57:56 Heh 03:00:05 maybe an algorithm to find "blobs", and then compare the shape of the blobs 03:02:00 blobs being regions of similar color 03:04:48 blob finding doesn't seem hard 03:08:02 and you can compare blobs by putting their centers in the same spot, and taking the area of the region the both cover 03:59:24 i was thinking today about a method for assesing the danger of some activity, by multiplying the probability of failure by the gravity of failure 03:59:41 i couldn't figure out how to generalize it to multiple failure modes 04:02:20 One should average the individual dangers. 04:04:12 i'm rusty on my statistics--what's the probability that either of two independent events happen? 04:06:30 1-(1-p)*(1-q) 04:06:55 -!- clog has joined. 04:06:55 -!- clog has joined. 04:07:24 I'm sucky on my statistics. .. 04:07:49 Unless it can be defined in terms of a derivative or integral, my brain doesn't handle it any more, I fear. 04:07:53 and that goes to 1 - \prod_i {1 - a_i} for a sequence of probabilitys? 04:08:08 well you need to consider what is the gravity of two things happening simultaneously 04:08:19 -!- sp3tt has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 04:08:19 -!- GregorR has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 04:08:20 it is just deMorgan's law, really 04:08:49 it is the probably that it is _not_ the case that neither happens 04:09:21 and the probability that _both_ of two independent events happen is the product 04:10:33 _if_ you assume that the gravity of two things happening simultaneously is the sum of the gravities, then you can just add the risks. even if they are not independent. 04:10:41 -!- sp3tt has joined. 04:10:58 because the expected value of a sum is the sum of the expected values 04:11:01 -!- GregorR has joined. 04:11:58 and the danger/risk is just the expected value of the gravity of the actual outcome 04:13:19 so, what Pikhq said 04:13:30 average all the dangers 04:13:42 not average, sum 04:14:12 Multiply the average by the number of dangers, not sum! 04:14:40 sheesh 04:14:46 that's the same 04:14:48 expected value is average, isn't it? 04:14:58 sort of 04:15:16 oerjan: That's the joke. 04:15:39 only if all outcomes have the same probability. 04:15:53 (1+2+3)/3*3=1+2+3 04:16:33 expectation is the integral with respect to probability. 04:16:57 (which is a sum if probabilities are discrete) 04:18:51 ok, i think a sum follows intuition 04:26:47 an average doesn't: three dangers of .25 together have an average of .25, clearly wrong 04:30:16 on the other hand this doesn't work if dangers don't sum, like lethal ones (you can only die once) 04:31:42 i'm thinking death has infinite gravity 04:32:04 at least a painful dishonerable death does 04:35:21 i read a discussion on that recently 04:36:01 in the context of a game where you could win a million dollars simply by showing up, but there was a chance that you would die 04:37:08 the paradox being that most people say they wouldn't participate for any price, yet most take greater risks every day just by crossing the street 04:37:37 oh, death can't be infinite gravity 04:37:44 you could die by crossing the street 04:37:49 basically the idea that death has infinite gravity doesn't hold up against people's actual behavior 04:38:17 yeah 04:39:33 i think a better "rational" behavior might be to maximise your expected total remaining life quality 04:40:01 although real people probably don't work by that either :) 04:40:23 real people dont try to quantify dangers 04:41:07 not in small tasks at any rate 04:41:21 but perhaps in economical matters 04:42:01 although i am not one of those that do that, either... 04:46:49 in economic matters it's easy to quantify the gravity of failure/success 05:01:31 if death has inifinite gravity, the subject will do nothing. 05:01:42 if i understand what we're talking about 05:01:45 and that's ai. 05:02:19 except you can die from doing nothing too, i'm sure 05:02:37 in fact you can probably die from excess worrying 05:03:09 * SimonRC likes the (Flash) game Mindscape. 05:03:22 It's the humour, I think. 05:03:26 It has non of the usual run-along-2d-landscape-collecting-stuff-to-save-the-world crap 05:03:30 No, you must run arond in your hallucinations cause by your delusional state of mind, to save your sanity. 05:03:40 And the cute bunnies, despite their claims to the contrary, are EEEEVIL! 05:03:42 zzzzzzz 05:05:05 well, if every action is calculated a value indicating how good it is, death being a negative inifity means even a slight change of death will make that goodness index inifitely small, which means every action is as bad as the next one 05:05:37 now school -> 05:11:16 if you think of death as infinitely bad, if someone asks you whether you want a bullet in your head or eternal life, you will pick a random choise. 05:11:33 because you might have a heart attack just before the eternal life. 05:13:34 SimonRC: Thanks, now youv'e got that addicted. 05:16:41 oerjan: i meant 'random', by 'doing nothing' i meant it will be a sucky ai 05:27:28 i would usually interpret "infinitely bad" in a relative sense: you could still compare different probabilities of dying, it's just that unless the probabilities of dying are the same, no other kind of danger would have any effect on the comparison. 05:28:59 so then eternal life would be the preferable choice. 05:29:48 inf*n=inf. 05:30:08 it would not be that kind of inf 05:30:27 yours requires a more complex view of assigning goodness values, which is only better in the case of infinite gravities. 05:30:38 indeed 05:30:44 i don't see the point, let's just say infinite values bug here 05:30:51 hmm 05:30:53 school? 05:30:54 yes. 05:30:55 ----------> 05:31:20 i was wondering about why you hadn't left yet. have a good day. :) 05:35:02 maybe it makes more sense to rank gravitys in [0, 1] rather than [0, inf] 05:35:34 that doesn't work with stuff like money though 05:37:30 depends. money inflates if there is too much of it. 05:37:59 how can you convert monetary winnings into [0, 1] though? 05:38:37 -!- poiuy_qwert has quit. 05:38:44 logically 1 would have to represent the maximal possibility. 05:39:00 there is no maximum amount of money though 05:39:28 what i am saying is that an infinite amount of money does not necessarily have infinite value, because of inflation. 05:39:50 ok 05:41:04 if one person has unbounded moneys...money isn't worth anything anymore 05:42:17 unless that person is smart enough not to spend it all 05:42:40 that person looks a lot like a central bank 05:43:04 or rather, a government with complete access to the central bank 05:43:37 a smart government knows not to mint unbounded moneys, and back their moneys by something that actually is limited 05:43:40 like gold 05:44:56 nowadays i thought interest had taken the place of gold 05:45:20 what do you mean interest? 05:46:06 haha 05:46:11 the bank will mint unlimitedly, but those that want any of it must pay interest and give collateral 05:46:12 forgot my essay 05:46:22 nice, since i waited for the bus for 5 min 05:46:24 ------------> 05:46:30 hmm 05:46:33 i guess the collateral limits it 05:47:51 i also suppose this system can only work during economic growth 05:55:21 bsmntbombdood: Currently, most monetary systems are based, not on something of actual value, but merely the trust that it *is* valuable. 05:55:31 Welcome to the credit-based economy. 06:01:57 trusting the government, where does that lead 06:02:42 I think there's a level of hell reserved for that. 06:07:53 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_currency 06:11:10 demanding taxes to be paid in a certain currency gives it value also 06:35:39 -!- oerjan has quit ("Good something"). 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:53:34 I have insanely written a neural network for comparing images. 08:53:43 It asks the human operator which image is more similar. 08:53:52 So the training function is ultra-slow (as slow as a person ;) ) 08:54:01 I doubt highly that it'll work to any useful degree. 08:56:13 put it on a website, and make it fun to do 08:57:19 then do it in batch 08:57:39 lol 08:57:54 How to make it fun to do ... 08:57:57 *snaps* I know! 08:58:02 * GregorR-L types "tits" into google image search 08:58:17 one comparison, one tit 08:58:38 lol 08:58:55 There aren't enough tits on the internet to train this neural net :P 08:59:35 ...yeah there are 09:00:40 That statement was an exaggeration for the sake of emphasis :P 09:01:09 you can use other body parts too 09:02:01 Select sexuality upon registering. 09:02:44 you mostly get only male opinions if you use porn 09:03:10 To get my training set, I just used google image search with the following search terms: 09:03:16 a, the, art, architecture, man, woman 09:03:58 Shockingly, there is very little porn. 09:04:10 (Yes, safe search was off) 09:04:26 I think that porn doesn't generally use the term "woman" :P 09:09:20 "WATCH THESE ATTRACTIVE WOMEN ENGAGE IN CARNAL RELATIONS WITH PHYSICALLY GIFTED GENTLEMEN!" 09:10:21 lofl 09:14:40 Laughing ... on the floor ... laughing? 09:14:49 no, just lofl 09:37:36 aah, i can't stay up all night anymore 09:42:19 -!- GregorR-L has quit ("Leaving"). 10:23:06 how can you convert monetary winnings into [0, 1] though? <<< 1-1/money 10:23:53 plus, the rise of gravity for money grows logarithmically over the amount of money. 10:24:20 i mean... a billion might be 10 times better than a million 10:26:44 also, it is so even if we assume an infinitely big world where inflation is impossible 10:27:41 because people simply don't see a difference between "one helluva lotta money" and "one thousand helluva lots of money" 10:28:19 i myself, don't really even see a difference between a billion and a million... since i've rarely even had a thousand 13:34:03 -!- jix_ has joined. 16:58:48 -!- fizzie has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:58:48 -!- GregorR has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:58:49 -!- nuba has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:58:49 -!- meatmanek has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 17:01:44 -!- nuba has joined. 17:02:20 eh 17:02:32 i certainly do see the difference between a billion and a million. 17:02:50 a million is enough to buy a decent but not a very good house. 17:02:57 there're cars that cost over a million. 17:03:11 a billion is enough to live the rest of your life without having to worry about money. 17:03:21 (this is in dollars, anyway) 17:03:43 sounds like a pretty significant difference to me :) 17:10:12 -!- meatmanek has joined. 17:11:21 -!- GregorR has joined. 17:17:55 -!- fizzie has joined. 17:22:37 -!- Izak has joined. 17:43:46 -!- sebbu has joined. 17:46:48 lament: Where, exactly, do you live, Mr. "Million can buy a decent but not very good house"? California? 17:53:19 Pikhq: anywhere in the world. 17:53:38 well, not really, but certainly anywhere interesting in the states or europe. 17:54:09 Well 17:54:12 That's not really true 17:54:24 obviously the definition of 'very good' varies 17:54:24 You can get a really good house for $1mil in most places in the states 17:54:39 mine includes things like location 17:54:43 It depends upon where. . . 17:54:45 view, neighbourhood, etc 17:54:52 Outside of, you know, Manhattan, central LA, etc 17:55:06 I imagine Silicon Valley is somewhat pricey as well 17:55:10 If you want a damned nice house in, say, LA, you're talking a hell of a lot of money. 17:55:15 sekhmet: good houses are expensive everywhere. 17:55:22 lament: Not >$1m expensive, though 17:55:28 i'm not talking McMansion, i'm talking good house. 17:55:32 I mean, unless you mean a Mansion or something 17:55:47 If you want one out in, say, Colorado Springs, you're talking $1 million as your max. . . 17:56:11 i'd prefer to live somewhere on the ocean front 17:56:27 Well, that *would* add up to >$1 million, then. 17:56:30 so there's somewhere to tie the yacht too :) 17:56:35 Obviously if you tack on "want to live on the beach near a major city" then yeah 17:56:58 sekhmet: location is very important. Good locations aren't cheap, and cheap locations normally aren't good. 17:57:05 a good house is in a good location. 17:57:09 it's not good otherwise. 17:57:10 That's not necessary for most people's definition of "a very good house" though 17:57:13 Ah 17:57:18 Well I see we disagree on that 17:57:39 sekhmet: you think if i take my good house on the ocean front and move it to antarctica, it remains a good house? 17:57:44 I agree that location is important, but I take a much broader view 17:57:53 lament: That's pretty extreme 17:58:02 any suburb is not a good location, because suburbs just suck. 17:58:07 lament: If I take my good house on an ocean front and move it five miles inland, it certainly does 17:58:10 IMO anyway 17:58:12 lament: The definition of "good location" does vary. 17:58:13 But whatever, obviously we disagree 17:58:16 :) 17:58:21 * sekhmet steps out of the conversation 18:56:15 -!- ehird` has joined. 18:59:37 -!- ehird` has quit (Remote closed the connection). 19:11:58 -!- Izak has quit ("Farewell"). 19:13:04 -!- aarcane has left (?). 19:27:33 -!- jix_ has changed nick to jix. 19:55:13 " SimonRC: Thanks, now youv'e got that addicted." <--- me no speech broken English 19:55:34 SimonRC: Now you got me *addicted*. 19:57:59 surely you can win that in about 1/2 hour? 19:58:38 Pikhq: You highlighted the wrong word X_X 19:59:10 XD. 19:59:26 SimonRC: Sure. . . If I've got enough of an attention span. 20:04:03 -!- Sgeo has joined. 20:13:53 Just finished. 20:19:39 Trippy, man. 20:19:51 SimonRC: Damned trippy. 20:27:37 Wonderfully dark too 20:27:58 You *did* watch all the cut-scenes, right? 20:36:56 Yup. 20:37:19 I skipped over some when I started it back up today, but that was only because I had already seen them. 20:42:13 ok 20:45:12 did you get all the trophies? 20:54:27 -!- ehird` has joined. 20:54:31 LOLCODE ON MONORAIL 20:54:32 LOLCODE is a much better language than Ruby, and so we need to work hard to make LOLCODE ON MONORAIL the standard web development language! 20:54:32 JESUS CHRIST PEOPLE. 21:04:33 SimonRC: Not yet.. 21:27:39 * bsmntbombdood punches lament in the rich 21:31:00 ow 21:36:00 SimonRC: Now you got me *addicted*. <--- addicted to you 21:36:20 lament: well, i would never buy a big house, just http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-OOGN8YmtE 21:36:44 i prefer living cramped in a corner. 21:37:06 you do? 21:37:13 (i'm not gonna watch videos at work) 21:37:37 oh :< 21:37:52 i do. well, i guess i'd like a big empty storage hall 21:38:23 would your friends like it when you invite them over? 21:38:46 my friends are as insane as i am. 21:38:58 well 21:39:07 you don't know how insane i am, of course 21:39:17 hahahahahah work 21:40:32 school is over \o/ 21:40:49 on a scale of 4-10, i got 8 on the integration test 21:41:08 who uses a scale of 4-10? 21:41:18 i even had a thinking error in one question 21:41:27 others were copy paste ones 21:41:32 finland. 21:42:39 http://www.improveverywhere.com/2005/12/10/suicide-jumper/ 21:43:33 Obviously, countries with Germanic languages can't do anything that makes sense. 21:43:39 Finland has a 4-10 scale. 21:43:41 obviously. 21:43:49 America has an A,B,C,D,F scale. 21:43:57 a 0-100 scale 21:44:14 A,B,C,D,F is pretty brain-damaged 21:44:32 on the other hand, Russia has grades 1-11, but without grade 4 21:44:54 percentiles make sense 21:45:06 yes, they do. 21:45:21 but erf is a bitch 21:46:35 Could they please just throw in an "E" to the scale? 21:46:58 It'd make me happy. 21:47:03 okay 21:47:22 e will be added to the scale 21:47:32 Bona. 21:47:38 with its usual meaning of 2.718281828459.... 21:47:40 he's bona fide 21:47:51 Ne. 21:50:41 -!- lament has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 21:51:01 i think germany used 1-10 21:51:34 grades-- 21:54:00 I'd prefer a system of pass or dumbass. 21:54:11 There is no failure, only being labeled a dumbass. :p 21:55:28 pass/fail, i don't see a need for more 21:56:14 we are moving :( 22:09:57 -!- oerjan has joined. 22:15:40 ehird`! 22:17:30 ehird`: i got your language finished more properly, in python 22:18:00 http://oerjan.nvg.org/esoteric/ehird.py 22:23:30 Pikhq: finnish is not a germanic language. although swedish, which is, is also an official language in finland. 22:24:48 Oh. 22:27:21 We also quite commonly use the scale 0-5 in establishments of higher education, like universities and such. 22:27:52 indeed 22:27:53 when i was in junior highschool the grades were LG,NG,G,M(G),S(G). In senior high school they were 0-6. In university they were 1.0-4.0, although the universities now have changed to an A-F system. 22:28:16 (norway) 22:29:49 (G meaning "good", with an appropriate adverb) 22:30:42 For the very first three or so years of school (age: 7-9 years or so) our school used the grades "H", "K" and "L" (descending order), with the letters meaning: "H" -> "hyvä" ('good'), "K" -> "kaipaa lisäharjoitusta" ('more practice required', basically) and "L" -> "kaipaa runsaasti lisäharjoitusta" ('a lot more practice required'). 22:31:35 I never really understood why exactly the latter two were named "K" and "L". Especially the "L" makes no sense, since the only word it could come from ("lisäharjoitus") appears in both grades. 22:32:18 Maybe it was only for the first two years, not three. 22:32:24 ah yes. in the first 6 years we had essentially "satisfactory" and "could improve". no abbreviation that i recall. 22:32:36 well, pretty much nothing makes sence outside math and programming. 22:33:01 in my school there was no grading before 4th grade :< 22:34:59 well the L is somewhat like G in our system then. 22:35:33 I don't think our "exams" (were there any?) or other work was graded during the HKL years, but those letters appeared in the semiannual certificate-given-at-the-end-of-study-term papers. 22:35:42 oh 22:35:44 indeed they did 22:35:58 well, as if i could remember anything beyond yesterday 22:35:59 same in norway 22:36:26 Oh, it was a common practice? For some reason I thought the silliness was limited to my particular school. 22:36:35