|
I predicted you would say that 
We can’t stop here, this is bat country - Hunter S Thompson RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Everybody with a computer and an Excel sheet now thinks they can program.
If you tell them you're a "programmer", or even a "developer", they start telling you your job.
And trying to explain that there's a difference, seems to have no effect.
I'm thinking, as "Logicians", we may be able to paint a clearer picture; and establish proper "ground rules" for the next project:
Living, Working, and Generally Dealing with Logicians.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
Never come across this. Usually people who use computers and have an interest are very respectful of the complexity of our work.
|
|
|
|
|
They'd just tell you that their system of Logic is different, and equally as valid as yours. 
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I only saw one reference to "We’re probably in the wrong here" and this was followed up with "but that’s just how we see it".
I once heard a good quote on this area - "There's nobody who is less rational than a rational person", which does fit with my experience.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: "There's nobody who is less rational than a rational person"
That's totally irrational.
|
|
|
|
|
You beat me to it (+).
Let me feed you another one:
"It's the exception that proves the rule"
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
modified 17-May-18 7:50am.
|
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: "It's the exception that proves the rule"
Makes perfect sense if you apply the correct interpretation:
... the presence of an exception applying to a specific case establishes ("proves") that a general rule exists.
...
exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis ("the exception confirms the rule in cases not excepted")
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Of course, since the are now known to be exceptions to said rule then the such a rule cannot be relied upon - thus it is not a rule.
Why not just call it what it is: A good bet.*
* And don't even begin to consider "The Rule of Law" !
also - the quoted text (w/latin below) is written - but that doesn't make it correct
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: since the are now known to be exceptions to said rule then the such a rule cannot be relied upon
No, I don't think you've understood the explanation.
Quote: For example, a sign that says "parking prohibited on Sundays" (the exception) "proves" that parking is allowed on the other six days of the week (the rule).
And: Quote: A more explicit phrasing might be "the exception that proves the existence of the rule."
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote:
No, I don't think you've understood the explanation. 
Quote: For example, a sign that says "parking prohibited on Sundays" (the exception) "proves" that parking is allowed on the other six days of the week (the rule).
That, my friend, is a leap-of-faith.
What you do know does not give you information about what you do not know. Not, at least, until the point where you know everything that is to be know, including that you know that you know everything that is to be know, about all other possibilities.
E.g: suppose said sign was in a village which had no on-street parking, except on Sundays. This is only adding to the rules for that particular street, excluding Sunday, as well. Q.E.D.
With the above possibility, it know gives a counter example to an invalid concept that, itself, is "proven" with invalid proof.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: E.g: suppose said sign was in a village which had no on-street parking, except on Sundays. This is only adding to the rules for that particular street, excluding Sunday, as well. Q.E.D.
In which case, the sign would say "No parking at any time". Putting up a sign saying "No parking on Sundays" - without also adding "in addition to the existing parking prohibition covering all other days of the week" - would just cause confusion.
If there is no sign, then the ambient rules apply. If there is a sign, then the rules on the sign are the rules that apply. If the sign says "No parking on Sundays", then that is the only restriction that applies.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: In which case, the sign would say "No parking at any time".
Only because you want that to be used. There is, again, a leap of faith that such wording would be used.
That wording, however, may be used where needed by expanding the little hamlet's rules:
No parking anywhere, except on Sunday, except holidays in shopping districts.
There can be any number of rules that are not taken into account by your initial sign. It's only information is "No Parking Sunday" - Everything which is not forbidden is allowed - Wikipedia[^] - but here's "The Rule" one could compose for this, a corollary, if you will.
You need to know, unambiguously, what is forbidden. Incomplete information is not an excuse to modify reality to fit one's limited perception of the situation.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly!
I must therefore be a logician.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: There's nobody who is less rational than a rational person
Uncle Π is.
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes, I feel like a magician.
Don't ask about the other times. 
I am not the one who knocks. I never knock.
In fact, I hate knocking.
|
|
|
|
|
Why does that read like a guide for planing a trekkie convention?
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
That's a pretty wide net.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
Not quite so bad as that (where I am, at least).
Two types of 'clients', if I take the extrema.
Those who listen to suggestions and my 'why' - and are invariably glad when they need to modify things later (as needs change!) and it happens so quickly.
Those who want what they want and don't understand that it's absurd. Depending upon who it is, I often have the power to just say "No".*
Oh oh! Then, of course, there are those who ask for something they need in general terms and want me to do all the work for them (i.e., their job). If it works, they'd get the credit. If it fails, they would blame me. Or, I send them away and ask them to tell me what it is they want as I don't know how they do their job.
Upon reflection, I've somehow managed a lot of autonomy. Goodness triumphs over evil!**
* That's almost invariably backed up based on explaining why and track record.
** We'll see how long that lasts.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
I prefer to borrow Douglas Adams' term, "other professional thinking persons".
|
|
|
|
|
I think that would make a catchy business card: Senior Thinker
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
Gerry Schmitz wrote: If you tell them you're a "programmer", or even a "developer", they start telling you your job.
My experience is that they start telling me about a programming course they took in college when vacuum tubes were still in vogue.
Technically, everyone is a programmer, even an engineer. We do social engineering on each other every day without even realizing it. This post is social engineering.
“A person who is skilled in logic.”
I actually rarely encounter programmers that are actually skilled in logic.
"a person who is, by their very nature, highly methodical, cerebral, and fact-oriented."
 Where?
Having to constantly cater to highly emotional people.
Wait. I resemble that remark. I guess I'm too emotional to call myself a logician. 
|
|
|
|
|
I just wanted to know "why" I had to this or that.
Never got an answer from this particular outfit.
I thought perhaps it was my problem.
It was.
I think they call it "insubordination". Or failure to submit.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
If you are one ![Green Alien | [Alien]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/alien.gif) ian working and living there I want to ask you a question.
I'd like to get a salary reference/life cost for Switzerland.
Let's say:
- Two people living there.
- Only one of them have a job.
- 1 gasoline car.
- Rent a flat.
One annual salary of 100.000 CHF would be:
A) A normal salary that allows you to go on holidays out of the country twice per year.
B) A normal salary that allows you to go on holidays out of the country once per year.
C) A not so good salary, you reach the end of the month if you are careful.
D) A bad salary. You are dead by the second week of the month.
Thank you!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
