Post is probably unclear and far more offensive than intended. Meandering and probably doesn't make my view clear at all or shed any light on the debate.
The key point in difference of mindset is that software writers are free to redefine terms at will in their own programs and don't need the same respect for clear definitions that most scientists and engineers do. However when you fail to do so it can bite you and you have to apply the same standards of clear use of terms when you work with others on systems or a large program.
As I said much earlier, I'm still surprised you don't get the issue. I simply find it more likely that a software jock wouldn't get it than most types of scientists or engineers.
The "it is what it is" comment is just totally irrelevant. That's true of EVERYTHING. We define terms so we can communicate ideas about the real world.
Regards,
Mark
Space/Science » in reply to Well
That Sucked - Skip Above
The whole thread (27 posts)
- Planetary Scientists Officially Oppose Bad Science
- re:And what exactly is the alternative definition of a planet? (n/t)
- Unclear, but probably closer to original
- Yawn... Much heat and smoke, no light. (n/t)
- Signatures
- re:And what exactly is the alternative definition of a planet? (n/t)