JDK version popularity
in [Java Programming]
|
From: Tom Anderson on 23 Mar 2010 22:30 On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Lew wrote: > Nathan wrote: > >> Those are the numbers I'm after - I would have guessed approximately >> the same, but it helps to hear someone agree. Anyone else agree or >> disagree with this estimates? > > I agree that they're guesses, but there would have to be *some* factual > basis behind them to call them "estimates". > > Umpteen people agreeing on a guess doesn't make it correct. Did you specifically have the project management team i'm working under right now in mind when you wrote that? tom -- Also giving up smoking (cigarettes) today so apologies if it reads wierd or I trail off into maddness at any point!! -- Agent D, 20051129
From: Lew on 23 Mar 2010 23:21 Tom Anderson wrote: >>> No, because they're a contradiction in terms - a firm is a business, >>> and a business is not amateurs. They might well be incompetent, but >>> by definition, not amateurs! Lew wrote: >> By one definition. There is a definition in common use that allows a >> professional (i.e., someone paid for their work) to be an amateur: >> <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/amateur> >> "3. Someone who is unqualified or insufficiently skillful." >> >> Pretending that definition does not exist or is not a very common use >> of the word is disingenuous at best. Tom Anderson wrote: > Oh, i [sic] don't claim either of those things. Merely that it's wrong. That makes you wrong, then, since by definition the definition is what the word means as people actually define it. Definitions change as language changes, which happens as people use words differently over time. The definition you define as wrong has definitely been around for so long, and is so widespread, that it's become official in the dictionary. Or do you believe that it means still "devotee, admirer", and reject the relatively new meaning of "one who engages in a pursuit, study, science or sport as a pastime rather than as a profession"? <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/amateur> How is it that you reject the dictionary definition anyway? Do you follow the Humpty Dumpty standard, then? "'When _I_ use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less.'" - Lewis Carroll, /Through the Looking-Glass/ -- Lew
From: Nathan on 24 Mar 2010 01:56 On Mar 23, 11:17 am, Lew <no...(a)lewscanon.com> wrote: > Umpteen people agreeing on a guess doesn't make it correct. Do you agree that two guesses are better than one though?
From: RedGrittyBrick on 24 Mar 2010 06:23 On 24/03/2010 05:56, Nathan wrote: > On Mar 23, 11:17 am, Lew<no...(a)lewscanon.com> wrote: >> Umpteen people agreeing on a guess doesn't make it correct. > > Do you agree that two guesses are better than one though? Sue: The canoe's sinking! Joe: I think the North shore is nearer. Sue: I think the South shore is nearer. Are Joe and Sue better off for having two guesses? -- RGB
From: RedGrittyBrick on 24 Mar 2010 06:33
On 24/03/2010 03:21, Lew wrote: > Tom Anderson wrote: > <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/amateur> > > How is it that you reject the dictionary definition anyway? Do you > follow the Humpty Dumpty standard, then? > That meddling Webster, who'd trust him? amateur • noun 1 a person who takes part in a sport or other activity without being paid. 2 a person regarded as incompetent at a particular activity. • adjective 1 non-professional. 2 inept. — DERIVATIVES amateurism noun. — ORIGIN French, 'lover'. From the concise version of the /definitive/ dictionary ;-) -- RGB |