Le 2020-10-04 à 17:05, Ingo Klöcker a écrit :
On Sonntag, 4. Oktober 2020 18:43:42 CEST Philippe Cloutier wrote:
Le 2020-10-04 à 11:58, Ingo Klöcker a écrit :
Currently we have a single big bucket for our money. All money that comes
in (e.g. several thousand PayPal donations per year) goes into this
bucket. All money that we spend is taken from this bucket. That's as
simple as it gets.
If we would allow targeted donations then we would have to sort all
donations into multiple buckets. And all of our expenses would need to be
taken from the correct buckets. Additionally, our contractors (e.g. our
marketing contractors) would probably need to start tracking how much
time they spend for a specific project (if we have a bucket for it), so
that we can pay them from the right buckets.
So, maybe it's more a change from O(1) to O(n*m) where n is the number of
transactions and m is the number of different buckets.
Thank you, that is much clearer (and way more sensical). I still don't
fully understand though;
* Would this quantify the resources needed to process a *single*
transaction, or what?
No, all of them.
Thank you, but my question was unfortunately unclear, so let me rephrase
to prevent any confusion (apologies if you had already understood it the
way I meant it): would this quantify the resources needed to process
*each* transaction, or the set of all transactions?
* What resources does this quantify? *Manpower*, or computing resources?
Mainly personpower. (Please try to avoid non-inclusive, patriarchaic
vocabulary.)
Thank you (but please try to avoid non-inclusive vocabulary, in
particular if you're going to request people speaking a second language
to avoid unspecified non-inclusive vocabulary).
Regards,
Ingo
--
Philippe Cloutier
http://www.philippecloutier.com
