> Straw man ?!?!? > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man [See :: structure point 2.5] and > you will understand that simplifying my point of view trying to > invalidate it is ... a straw man technique. > Are you so sure that it is not what you have done concluding rushy that > I do not had read the previous posts and spoofing the rest ???
Wikipedia: "A straw man or straw person, (...) is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position." I say: (...) > * terrain radar code (which'd be especially useful in low visibility > conditions) breaks as it can't probe terrain elevations ahead (...) > So one could simply change the terrain manager to never unload terrain > if it's closer than 20 km - this would basically fix all problems -> Can we do 20 km? It would hep for may things, including radar. Vivian says: > We don't load enough for AG radar to work > realistically in any case. We probably need something between 50 and 100 k > for this , and we're unlikely to accommodate the memory requirements of > this, at least for 32 bit systems. As an aside, with custom detailed > scenery, memory is already marginal for 32 bit systems, reading comments > of the forum. -> For real radar, we'd need much more and we can't do this for memory reasons. I say: > I do agree with that, but if my visibility is 300 m, I'd be more than > happy to take the 20 km ahead resolved in a ground radar rather than > having 2 km of real terrain ahead of me. (...) > I guess for several > applications we'd like to know the terrain out to (far) larger distances > than we render it, but here I do see memory issues. That's why I > proposed to load a minimum of 20 km, not the 100 km -> I agree with Vivian, we can't do realistic distances for radar because of memory issues Lorenzo: > the reason to be of the EQUIPMENT is to override the limit of the EYE > vision. > Are we doing the error to merging this two ? -> Assumes that we want to set the limits by equipment (radar) rather than visuals, although we've just said we don't want to do this because of memory issues, and I've listed several points besides radar why I'd like to do it. Yep - that's a straw man - it's based on misrepresenting my and Vivian's position. > By the way, Mr Thorsten, it was my first post in this mailing list, I > have appreciated a lot the welcome touch. > What was you trying, ... make me feel like a dog in a bowling game ? Well, seems you have quite the way to introduce yourself. This might have to do something with my reaction. ;-) > Is some want to see his argument shinning there far up, he NEED to > develop it and raise it and NOT to bomb and the colleagues arguments and > positions! With all due respect, I think you should read what people have said and you need to try to understand what the ongoing argument is about before entering a discussion. I don't think it's particularly polite what you have done, and you should not be surprised at the reaction. Best, * Thorsten ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
