Warp wrote:

>   Well, programs are usually developed to solve problems (such as, for
> example, make some tasks easier), so they really are solutions to those
> problems. (One could argue from a specific program if it's a *good*
> solution to the problem, but it can still be *a* solution nevertheless.)

Well, that depends...

Some programs are, in fact, designed to solve a specific problem.

Other programs are instead designed to make money. If anything, the 
salesman has to invent a problem and make potential customers believe 
they have this problem so that your program can "solve" it for them.

So while some programs really *are* solutions, others are actually 
non-solutions to non-problems that probably end up making everybody's 
job harder, rather than easier.

So I guess it just depends on how cynical you are. ;-)

Note that the term applies to other technologies too. "Hey, we have a 
new traction solution!" What, you mean you've got some new tires?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

48580d21@news.povray.org...
>  They don't realize that's exactly as silly as saying "we are miles ahead
> of our competitors", or in European, "we are kilometers ahead of our
> competitors". IMO that expression just isn't sensible with a measurement
> of distance.

For what it's worth the distance metaphor is commonly used in French. In 
fact the original distance unit used in the expression is "lieue" (league), 
so I guess it's a couple of centuries old at least, and "leagues away from" 
or "leagues ahead" is also used in English. The metaphor has been updated to 
light-years too but it's so common that there's nothing remarkable with it.

G.

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
>> 110%
> 
>   That's an especially funny expression because it's so easy to defend,
> and so easy to debunk at the same time.
> 
>   "Doing 110% means that you not only do everything you can, but you
> make extra effort and surpass yourself and give a little more."
>   But if you could surpass your efforts by 10%, that means you weren't
> doing it at 100% to begin with...
> 

That's a personal pet peeve of mine.  Especially since, as the article 
pointed out, you get effort inflation ('What? Only 101?')

The one I found most amusing was 'You can't have your cake and eat it, 
so you have to step up to the plate and face the music.'

Now THAT's a lot of mixed metaphors :)

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> Worse still do you use any of these phrases?
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7457287.stm
> 

The thing is, *most* of these aren't that bad, when used appropriately. 
  "Open door policy", "problems are opportunities", "think outside the 
box"...  all of them started out as ways of correcting bad policies and 
/ or attitudes in either the workforce or management...

...until they got overused to the point where you're willing to beat 
your manager to death with a sardine if he utters his favorite phrase 
one more time.

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:

> The thing is, *most* of these aren't that bad, when used appropriately. 
>  "Open door policy", "problems are opportunities", "think outside the 
> box"...  all of them started out as ways of correcting bad policies and 
> / or attitudes in either the workforce or management...
> 
> ...until they got overused to the point where you're willing to beat 
> your manager to death with a sardine if he utters his favorite phrase 
> one more time.

Seems to me most managers have the mental age of a typical 5 year old.

Obsession/compulsive behaviour, egocentric thought processes, 
empire-building, inability to comprehend moderately complex concepts, 
short-term thinking, temper tantrums, etc.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:4858681d$1@news.povray.org...
> Warp wrote:
> >   Yeah, that's how it's usually retconned, but it's only that: A retcon.
> > The original creators most probably didn't have that in mind when they
> > wrote the script.
>
> Actually, watching Obi-Wan's expression as Han says this, it is even
> possible it's *supposed* to be an attempted boast by someone who really
> doesn't know what he's talking about. Like someone bragging they have
> turbo wheels!

Found the script reference I mentioned. Seems to imply that the above
interpretation is correct.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Kessel_Run

  a.. n the original draft of A New Hope in 1976, the description for
"Kessel Run" is put as follows:
HAN: It's the ship that made the Kessel run in less than twelve parsecs!
Ben reacts to Solo's stupid attempt to impress them with obvious
misinformation.

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote

> Some programs are, in fact, designed to solve a specific problem.
>
> Other programs are instead designed to make money.

Well, that also is a specific problem.

Post a reply to this message

In article <c9af54l0kf5ma684rkl2tn6fvbggqshltn@4ax.com>, hob### [at] gatenet 
says...
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:07:13 +0100, Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> 
> >Worse still do you use any of these phrases?
> >
> >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7457287.stm
> 
> The phrases I cringe at, and hear quite frequently are, "low hanging frui
t"

Used not in the context of the page, but in its older meaning as, "The 
stuff you picked because you where too damn lazy to climb the tree." In 
other words, useless, possibly rotted from being on the ground, instead 
of a branch, and not worth any competent persons time. I find it real 
funny that is being used as a "Yippy! The company just scored!" lol

-- 
void main () {

    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Used not in the context of the page, but in its older meaning as, "The 
> stuff you picked because you where too damn lazy to climb the tree."

I didn't hear it to mean no good, but simply easy-to-obtain.  It's 
low-hanging, not on-the-ground. :-)

The low-hanging fruit is that which gives the most reward for the least 
effort. Stuff that's easy to finish.

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
  Helpful housekeeping hints:
   Check your feather pillows for holes
    before putting them in the washing machine.

Post a reply to this message

In article <485823d7@news.povray.org>, war### [at] tagpovrayorg says...
> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> > "A spaceman came travelling on his ship from afar. Twas light years of
 
> > time since his mission did start."
> 
> > Like, WTF?
> 
>   Not only is the term "parsec" used as a unit of time in the original
> Star Wars, but there's actually a second WTF related to the use of that
> unit: It's a unit related to the orbital diameter of the Earth, and Star
> Wars happens "in a galaxy far, far away". No Earth there.
> 
Actually, no. This is explained, oddly enough, in a document on SL 
talking about the Kessel run. In the SL context, it means packing some 
cargo in a physics based "ship", starting at any sim south of a specific 
point, then trying to "make it" as fast as you can to Kessel, without 
having to go around problems, or having your ship derezz on you due to 
sudden loss of user object permissions the moment you cross into some 
new zone. Basically, he made the run from where ever the "start" was, to 
the "end" in less than twelve parsecs, because his ship was fast and 
maneuverable enough to avoid all of the nasty obstacles in the way, like 
the edges of black holes, asteroids, and other things that "sane" people 
avoided.

Supposedly, in the lore, someone else made it in even less than he did, 
but with an even more suped up ship.

So, if you believe this context, one can presume that making the Kessel 
run required some "minimum", but unstated, time frame in which you had 
to get to the destination with the cargo, or you wouldn't get paid, and 
that the more short cuts and faster the path you picked, the more likely 
you where to get their in that time frame. In such a context, its 
reasonable. It would be like scoffing at someone that said, "What? I 
didn't go around the mine field, I went through it!", but not 
impossible, nor incorrect. Just, profoundly unbelievable, and maybe 
stupid, and having nothing to do with "time" at all (well, save for the 
theoretical time constraints of delivery).

Note, this may also be "after the fact" justification and not in any way 
canon.

-- 
void main () {

    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message