Amen. 

Sent from iPhone - small keyboard fat fingers - expect spellinf errots.

> On Apr 9, 2015, at 8:20 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> In
> <of1f97a172.f079794d-on48257e22.001a26e3-48257e22.001dd...@sg.ibm.com>,
> on 04/09/2015
>   at 01:26 PM, Timothy Sipples <[email protected]> said:
> 
>> How do YOU know it's "even more expensive"?
> 
> How do I know that yopu exist?
> 
>> You haven't articulated an inviolable physical constant, like some
>> theories in physics.
> 
> Theories in Physics are provisional; evidence trumps theory.m
> 
>> This issue is situational,
> 
> Part of the stipulated situation is a regulation with stiff penalties.
> 
>> "wait for 100% bug free, fully performance optimized code"
> 
> Are we having a sale on straw dummies? The issue isn't whether to wait
> forr 100% correct, but whether to do thorough testing before rolling
> code into production.
> 
>> That doesn't mean operators trying to say "No" to everything "new" 
>> is helpful.
> 
> Neither inventing positions that nobody took.
> 
>> Even when I seem to be the only rational voice in the room. :-)
> 
> Responding to imaginary posts isn't rational. Why not address what
> people actually wrote?
> 
> -- 
>     Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
>     ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html> 
> We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
> (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to