And I'd say Tim passes the Turing Test. :-)

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer,
zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator,
Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: [email protected]

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker



From:   Aled Hughes <[email protected]>
To:     [email protected]
Date:   09/04/2015 15:45
Subject:        Re: A New Performance Model
Sent by:        IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]>



Seymour J Metz said, 

"How do I know that yopu exist?" (sic)

I felt I had to reply to this. Contrary to your somewhat puerile comment 
Seymour, Timothy DOES exist. I have had some excellent advice from him 
over the years which didn't necessarily involve purchasing more IBM H/W 
and/or S/W. 

I would also venture that Timothy knows much more about the ''real" world 
of mainframe computing today than you do. (Even your web link doesn't 
work!)

My apologies to Darren for this rant. Sometimes, Seymour does make idiotic 
comments. 

Cheers!

ALH





 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) <[email protected]>
To: IBM-MAIN <[email protected]>
Sent: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 13:22
Subject: Re: A New Performance Model


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



Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

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

Reply via email to