Re: Classic RW (was: Rounding errors

On 29 Aug 2004 13:33:38 -0700, riplin@Azonic.co.nz (Richard) wrote:

>Glenn Someone < dontspamme@whydoyouneedmyaddressspammers
.com> wrote
> 
>
>I have seen others express that point. However, from my point, I am
>not arguing against Robert, I argue against what I see as
>misinformation wherever I see it.

Like the fact that rounding biases numbers upward?
 
>
>He has an unfortunate habit of extrapolating from a single data point
>to being the 'universal truth'.  Many of us will use such terms as
>'there is a tendancy to', or 'some' or 'it may be that', or even 'many
>of us'.  Robert will tend to use absolutes in those cases with implied
>'all' and 'every'.  I mean 'fish in a barrel', one counter example and
>he is wrong.

If the numbers all end with 000, there is no error.

>Examples:
>
>"""I like Kenny G but the cognosenti don't. They say he's
>repititious."""
>
>It may well be that some do and some don't, or is RW defining
>'cognosenti' as "those who say Kenny G is repititious" ?

The majority of the ones I happened to read.

>"""Academics don't call it Classical, they call it Art Music."""
>
>Again: is this supposed to mean that if they don't call it 'Art Music'
>then they aren't Academics and vv ?  and he based this on a single
>example.

I based it on reading the literature. Here is an example:

http://www.munb.com/artx2.html

>In the past he has made staements that 'all mainframe programmers' are
>incompetent and made other insults about people he has never known.

All mainframe programmers aren't giving me a hard time here .. nor did
they name you as their spokesman.
 
>
>That is debatable.  Sometimes he has answers, sometimes he presents
>misinformation.

We all make mistakes. That's not it. People become irritated when I
question 'prevailing wisdom', when I challenge practices they've been
following for 30 years.

>The hard part is that he has absolute beliefs in his own rightness. He
>seems to never bother checking when he presents misinformation and is
>told that he is wrong. He will simply keep repeating bad information.
>He was a Marine (apparently) and this may have set his attitudes in
>his formative years, ones that he can't grow out of.  This is why the
>discussions go on.  RW seems to have learnt the Marines way that if he
>keeps repeating things eventually he will 'win' (ie everyone gives up
>goes away), therefore, he concludes, he is right.

It's true that the Marines teach perseverance, but the most important
thing they teach is Superior Tactical Firepower. In the context of
this forum, that means Truth eventually wins. If I didn't believe
that, I wouldn't be here.

My observation about rounding error is not widely known.

My sort demos showed how to build trees and linked lists, and call C
functions .. things readers might not have thought of on their own.

They showed how to sort the OO way and how to sort ten times faster
than the Micro Focus library.

Those seem more valuable contributions than answers to beginners'
questions.

>So RW may not be a troller* but he just acts like one.

I sometimes overstate to stimulate discussion in a positive direction.
Trollers post outright falsehoods intended to attract negative
attention.
 
>
>Of course I may have completely misinterpreted what you are saying
>here. There is a completely diffent third meaning to 'troll' which
>relates directly to 'coming out' but is something that you would never
>accuse a Marine of.
>
>Given the parallel discussions of british high camp humour, ... no
>that can't be what you mean     ;-)

I don't know what relevance my sexual taste has to programming, but
since you brought it up I'm straight.