Literally incredible = unbelievable Which probably wasn't very well put, what I meant to ask was: do the people who write these things actually believe this stuff, or are they saying it because it sounds profound (ish), or are they just seduced by in their own BS. There is a pseudo-religious (?) fashion for talking about the rise and fall of corporations and their products in revered mythological terms that sounds like the Greek God stories. If they said "These guys made X, and it has lost popularity" it sounds a bit more normal.
- Jim On 25 September 2013 21:43, Bernard Robertson-Dunn <[email protected]>wrote: > On 25/09/2013 8:11 PM, Jim Birch wrote: > > I find this kind of statement literally incredible, whether taken in it > as > > a direct statement, or as its implied negative: > > > > "Successful companies never get beaten or overtaken on their own turf - > think > > mainframes and IBM, Kodak and film." > > > > The prosaic rendition of the same is that a very large number of attempts > > to overtake these large established activities, and, unsurprisingly, very > > few, but some, have succeeded. Rather than being a sparkling insight, it > > is more or less what you would expect, isn't it. > > If it's what you would expect, why is it literally incredible? > > -- > > _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
