From: Chad Perrin <code@...>
Date: 2011-04-05T02:57:17+09:00
Subject: Re: Lambda Shambda

--y0ulUmNC+osPPQO6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 12:16:39AM +0900, Phillip Gawlowski wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Chad Perrin <code@apotheon.net> wrote:
> >
> > This is true, of course -- but there is still an influence there
> > where research publications will surely be expected to serve some end
> > Microsoft executive policy finds worth of approval. =A0After all, if
> > Microsoft Research consistently failed to serve Microsoft's bottom
> > line in some way, it would be shut down.
>=20
> There's more to the bottom line than, well, the bottom line. That can
> be, for example, public relations, or staying on the cutting edge of a
> market.

I never said otherwise.  What does this (dis)prove?


>=20
> But that doesn't matter: The paper linked in this thread credits two
> researcher from non-MS institutions.

What *does* matter is that everything I said about the situation applies
to my central point: argument from authority proves nothing, *especially*
when your chosen authority works for the maker of whatever you're trying
to talk up.


> >
> > You're not making the same claim here that was originally made.
>=20
> That could be because I'm not making the same the claim. OTOH, your
> statement was drifting too much into the opposite direction (i.e.
> spreadsheets being useless without a proper programmer, to exaggerate a
> bit).

Uh . . . what?  I never said anything like that.  My entire involvement
here has been focused on the core fact that MS Excel is not a programming
language, and should not be used as one.


> >
> > Sure. =A0That doesn't change what was actually said prior to this,
> > however.  Reorienting the pro-Excel argument so that it agrees with
> > things others (including me) have already said does not make the
> > preceding pro-Excel arguments any less wrong.
>=20
> Considering that I am making the same argument I always have in this
> threat (that Excel isn't the best choice of tool, and is highly
> specialized), that isn't all that surprising. ;)

I don't recall you making that argument.


>=20
> I'm not, nor have I ever been, a member of the Commu^W^W^W^Wproponent
> of Excel as a language VM.

Interesting.  A lot of what you said seemed to lean in that direction,
unless you have a name substantially similar to someone else who was
making such statements and I missed the distinction.

--=20
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]

--y0ulUmNC+osPPQO6
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAk2aA44ACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKU/kwCgv/09DPBsg2KvM/Or8XaLV4Jw
tDwAn2MHD3At7xQ0FuHFvbKj1OH/sixA
=P03H
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--y0ulUmNC+osPPQO6--