🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1148@maccs.UUCP>, cs4l3az@maccs.UUCP (....Jose) writes:
> In article <50123@sun.uucp> livesey@sun.uucp (Jon Livesey) writes:
> >In article <114@avsd.UUCP>, govett@avsd.UUCP (David Govett) writes:
> >> 
> >> If Beethoven was such a great symphonist, why did he write only nine?
> >> After all, Haydn wrote 104.
> >
> >	If the Japanese know so much about electronics, how come
> >they don't have twenty four RISC architectures?
> 
> 	If this is a science conference, then why do we keep bringing
> up silly, irrelevant, meaningless nationalist gibberish?


	Because it's none of these things, and because creativity is
probably an acceptable subject for sci.misc.     In case this is exchange
has been too cryptic, and it might easily be, given that I was answering
a koan, I'll try to spell it out. 

	Messrs Huntbach and Govett variously allege that the Japanese 
are not a creative bunch and are 'freeloading' on 'US and European' 
science.  Others reply with examples of Japanese scientists and
mathematicians (We forgot Yukawa of meson fame) and I added that creativity
may be wider than simply classical science.   Govett, points out, above, 
that quantity is not quality, and I have replied by noting that while 
we are busily creating something like two dozen RISC architectures, they 
appear to be waiting to see which win, and then, if past performance is 
any guide, they may just adopt it/them and run.

	Now, which approach is more creative?   I think that they both
are.

jon.