Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: trained dependency

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Suffield <address@hidden> writes:

    Andrew> [I tend to assume people will take the interpretation that
    Andrew> makes sense, and skip defining every detail]

Well, you can do that if you want.  Let me just point out that both
Tom and I got it wrong.  Given how different Tom and I are, you might
want to be more careful.  But then again, you're Discordian.

    >> You are correct that it is not possible to simply employ
    >> credentialed individuals and get the desired effect
    >> systematically.

    Andrew> And that's the relevant conclusion anyway.

No, there are other forms of systematization.  "Hire credentials,
hammer into <shape> hole, run machine" is what we know how to do best,
but it doesn't mean we shouldn't try other systems that might do better.

    Andrew> On the other hand I suspect you're starting from a
    Andrew> position where this problem is incompletely defined and
    Andrew> the task is first to finish specifying it.

Yes.  "That's the relevant task space."  :-)

    Andrew> I prefer to think of it as a sheep farm (very little
    Andrew> difference, only with less cute girls and more shit).

Maybe you should come (return?) to Japan, where the girls are cute and
they save the shit for the Diet![1]


Footnotes: 
[1]  The Japanese national legislature.

-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.