lör 2021-06-26 klockan 14:09 +0000 skrev kekronbekron: > To be honest, your whole post below went right over my head. > > - KB >
sorry. Yeah, i read it again ... so: > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > With regards to Shark Tank: it is immaterial ie it is only readable from the server only as long as the media owner wants it to be readable (or it will stay longer because the machine is forgotten...) So Shark Tank as a way of documenting for the future of someones working life or the changes in an industry. Nahh i don't think so. > > one of the worst form of experience documentation: the web. > > Totally disappeared tomorrow... This is what the owner's of Computer world thinks (maybe) about old stories from the computing industry and why it is a bad idea to forget history or lessons of what works and not (including why it didn't work) : > > Why do you want to read that crap (including our old paper issues) > > ? > > Why don't you want to read about dotNet on z/OS ? > > Because i need to explain to my codevelopers why doing that was a > > bad > > > > idea 5 years ago and it's still a BAD idea today... > > > > Which basically is one of the fallacies of this industry ... > > everyone > > > > will once or twice or many more times do the same errors as was > > done by > > > > someone else 5 years ago... Jamie Zawinski wrote a rant like this then the gnome project closed down a boat load of bug reports. He is entirely able to explain why somehing is a bug and why if designers doesnt read and tries to understand why the bug became as it was, that they will write more code with the same weakness. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
