Did you recently have a run in with an illogical cellphone repair tech?
P.S. I used to work with a guy who dropped a Palm Treo 650 in to the ocean while it was on and it still worked flawlessly when he dried it out.
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
it would follow that if it actually worked to start with, a dip in the ocean should not be a problem.
Sorry, we deployed a large number of Treo's and had nothing but trouble, my bias is showing.
Sorry, we deployed a large number of Treo's and had nothing but trouble, my bias is showing.
It was a different time. I remember the Treo 650 being the best thing out there. Everyone wanted a Treo and a bluetooth. Especially suits and image concious "players". The only problems I remember them having is they would often come back with shattered screens.
If you knew how to use it you had the most powerful device available at the time.
If you knew how to use it you had the most powerful device available at the time.
that the user got so mad at the unit that they punched it out, or threw it across the room where it met an untimely demise with the next wall.
There were a few that worked fine but I never found the cause of the unreliability factor but most failed in a matter of weeks.
We then switched to Blackberry and in support of your original post there were some that said don't take my Treo, I love it. Yes it was a fine product but the reliability was just not there, we spent too much time with the failed units, so it was on to Blackberry.
Blackberry is not without problems as well, but usually battery out/battery in fixes most, or wipe and re-provision fixes the rest.
I think the lack of a good web experience is what kills the Berry and we are looking at the i-phone and droid for our next change, time will tell.
There were a few that worked fine but I never found the cause of the unreliability factor but most failed in a matter of weeks.
We then switched to Blackberry and in support of your original post there were some that said don't take my Treo, I love it. Yes it was a fine product but the reliability was just not there, we spent too much time with the failed units, so it was on to Blackberry.
Blackberry is not without problems as well, but usually battery out/battery in fixes most, or wipe and re-provision fixes the rest.
I think the lack of a good web experience is what kills the Berry and we are looking at the i-phone and droid for our next change, time will tell.
To enable one to easier gets one's head around the relationship between sufficient and necessary conditions it is better to define a necessary condition like this: A necessary condition is one that, if NOT met, absolutely guarantees the ABSENCE of a certain result. Try it, you will see that it works.
logic only performs correctly when supplied with exactly true premises.
How many exactly true and non-trivial statements can you come up with?
Try it.
How many exactly true and non-trivial statements can you come up with?
Try it.
When you turn the thing on itself.
I don't recommend it. Doing so would get you banished from here with record-breaking negative votes.
I don't recommend it. Doing so would get you banished from here with record-breaking negative votes.
If I read you correctly, I believe you may be in error, which is the reason for my uncertainty. I see plenty of the involute here. And everywhere else.
Most logic errors, come from mixing proposition and conclusion....
...this is on the right track, but try "many errors of logic come from improper understanding/use of logic, and many more come from applying logic to assumptions". Another rule required for this article to do any good would be "check your assumptions":
The application of logic is the application of a set of tools. Alone, that accomplishes nothing; you must know how to use tools (what this article's tips are about), and you must use them on the proper "materials" (data, including assumptions, are the materials to which logic is applied). You can have the best set of carpenter's tools available, but if you don't know how to use them, you'll fail as a carpenter; whereas a really good carpenter can work wonders with only adequate tools. At the same time the best carpenter on earth will not be able to build a good structure of inferior materials or on an inadequate foundation.
It's the same with everything, including computers. The most efficient program of ironclad logic will produce faulty results if applied to faulty data (garbage in - garbage out). Where human thought most often fails is in the selection of the data that thought is applied to.
Humans appear to be the only creature with the ability to imagine things that were not, are not, and cannot be (i.e., unrelated to anything in reality, defined as "that which doesn't go away when you stop believing in it"). For some reason, this ability comes with the ability to mentally replace reality with those imaginings; and perhaps this is why people do not always adequately discriminate among all the variations from testable truth to blind faith in their "data".
The application of logic is the application of a set of tools. Alone, that accomplishes nothing; you must know how to use tools (what this article's tips are about), and you must use them on the proper "materials" (data, including assumptions, are the materials to which logic is applied). You can have the best set of carpenter's tools available, but if you don't know how to use them, you'll fail as a carpenter; whereas a really good carpenter can work wonders with only adequate tools. At the same time the best carpenter on earth will not be able to build a good structure of inferior materials or on an inadequate foundation.
It's the same with everything, including computers. The most efficient program of ironclad logic will produce faulty results if applied to faulty data (garbage in - garbage out). Where human thought most often fails is in the selection of the data that thought is applied to.
Humans appear to be the only creature with the ability to imagine things that were not, are not, and cannot be (i.e., unrelated to anything in reality, defined as "that which doesn't go away when you stop believing in it"). For some reason, this ability comes with the ability to mentally replace reality with those imaginings; and perhaps this is why people do not always adequately discriminate among all the variations from testable truth to blind faith in their "data".
int Foo(int i)
{
try
{
return numbers;
}
catch
{ return -1;
}
}
No need to test i so see if it's in bounds.....
99% of robust coding which is ineffiicient performance wise, is not assuming i is in bounds.
{
try
{
return numbers;
}
catch
{ return -1;
}
}
No need to test i so see if it's in bounds.....
99% of robust coding which is ineffiicient performance wise, is not assuming i is in bounds.
logic must not be a necessary survival trait in modern times. Good article tho, thanks!
...but that phrase came from typesetters, who had to literally 'mind them' as they looked so similar. 'P' and 'Q' were the movable-type letters p and q before they were initials in 'logic'; hence "minding one's p's and q's" means 'paying attention to detail', not (necessarily) 'keeping one's premises and conclusions in order'.
That moveable type-setting existed before the mathematical representations of logic, though I can concede that the origin of the catch phrase might not be related to logic.
Thanks for the precision and simplicity in your explanations. Very interesting
Especially in the light of this article
If I read Techrepublic, I will become educated
But:
Reading Techrepublic is neither a necessary or sufficient condition to becoming educated.
But it is a much more interesting means of refreshing my knowledge of many subjects, and I appreciate everybody's comments.
If I read Techrepublic, I will become educated
But:
Reading Techrepublic is neither a necessary or sufficient condition to becoming educated.
But it is a much more interesting means of refreshing my knowledge of many subjects, and I appreciate everybody's comments.
, you will become educated.
You read tech republic
Therefore, you will become educated.
It IS a sufficient condition, as defined in the premise.
You read tech republic
Therefore, you will become educated.
It IS a sufficient condition, as defined in the premise.
You could have warned readers that it was written by an Attorney!
... it is irrelevant that Mr Sun is an attorney.
Classic logic, or symbolic logic, is most likely to be in the curriculum of the philosophy or mathematics department. Law schools should teach it, but most don't.
Classic logic is a great tool for dissecting sloppy arguments. Well worth studying.
Classic logic, or symbolic logic, is most likely to be in the curriculum of the philosophy or mathematics department. Law schools should teach it, but most don't.
Classic logic is a great tool for dissecting sloppy arguments. Well worth studying.
That's because there is little correlation between the practice of law and truth or logic.
I do remember having a hard time with the following: if p is FALSE, then p → q is TRUE.
All men like fish. (assumption, demonstrabley false as I don't like fish)
Jack is a man.
Therefore Jack likes fish.
P always causes q
if p is FALSE, then p -> q is logically VALID, or true.
Jack is a man.
Therefore Jack likes fish.
P always causes q
if p is FALSE, then p -> q is logically VALID, or true.
Back in the '60s, having never even seen a waterproof camera housing, I was overcome by a wave while filming with a Bolex H16 (windup clockwork powered 16mm movie camera circa 1936-47.) Shortly afterwards, I dropped it into a bucket of fresh water, swished it around a lot, changed the water several times and then put it in the sun to drain and dry. Unbelievably, when dry, it worked perfectly.
More recently, an acquaintance had a similar experience with a modern hi-specced camcorder.
It was ruined.
When dropped in the sea, clockwork powered movie cameras survive and work again.
When dropped in the sea, camcorders don't.
Ergo, clockwork is a more reliable power option for movie cameras than electronics.
Funny, and not really logical, but probably true.
More recently, an acquaintance had a similar experience with a modern hi-specced camcorder.
It was ruined.
When dropped in the sea, clockwork powered movie cameras survive and work again.
When dropped in the sea, camcorders don't.
Ergo, clockwork is a more reliable power option for movie cameras than electronics.
Funny, and not really logical, but probably true.
Was the camera labeled as waterproof.
Usually the environment/conditions are assumed. We need to be careful whether the assumptions are valid.
Example:
P -> Q. If watch is waterproof, and you go swimming wearing it, it will not be spoiled.
Assumption: the watch is waterproof.
If you mix the two thing, it becomes, If you go swimming wearing the watch, it will not be spoiled.
But it the assumption is wrong, then the logic is flawed.
Always think about as many variables as possible while forming the logic, and leave less to assumptions. Else someone may contradict using an assumption which invalidates your logic.
Usually the environment/conditions are assumed. We need to be careful whether the assumptions are valid.
Example:
P -> Q. If watch is waterproof, and you go swimming wearing it, it will not be spoiled.
Assumption: the watch is waterproof.
If you mix the two thing, it becomes, If you go swimming wearing the watch, it will not be spoiled.
But it the assumption is wrong, then the logic is flawed.
Always think about as many variables as possible while forming the logic, and leave less to assumptions. Else someone may contradict using an assumption which invalidates your logic.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
