[MD] Core problemS

[Magnus Berg]

But Ron

If you thought what I wrote made sense, why are you still asking what he (RMP) 
meant? Since there's no longer a contradiction between his two statements it 
should be clear what he meant? Discreteness and dependency are two very 
different relationships. The first quote is about discreteness, the other is 
about dependency. Mystery gone.

(However, I haven't previously noticed the use of the word discreet (instead of 
discrete). But it doesn't make much sense to use "discreet" in that context, 
right between "they are not continuous" and "They have very little to do with 
one another". It also doesn't make much sense to say that some*thing* is 
discreet, that's usually said about some*one*. I'd say it's simply a typo.)

	Magnus





Ron Kulp wrote:
> Ron,
> 
> You think?  You think?  Let HIM tell us what HE thinks.  YOU do not 
> know what he thinks.  Unless, of course, you're him.
> 
> What is the problem with setting up a concrete example?
> 
> 
> Ron:
> sucked me into that one didn't you? ,,
> 
> that's my WHOLE point, WHAT does he mean?
> 
> how can I set up an example 
> when the meaning is in question?
> 
> 
> The meaning is up for interpretation
> this is what I am pointing out.
> 
> All I did was politely ask for some input.