Re: What databases have taught me

From: Cimode <cimode_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 12 Jul 2006 09:17:25 -0700
Message-ID: <1152721045.649600.170910@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

The following pointers are meant to help you and guide you through this NG. The comments issued are in no way made to undermine you.

Bruno Desthuilliers a écrit :

> Bob Badour wrote:
> > topmind wrote:
> >
> >> Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
> >>
> (snip)
> >>>
> >>> Bob,
> >>>
> >>> "topmind" is our pet crank here on comp.object.
> >
> >
> > I have been aware of topmind for many years. While I don't always agree
> > with him, he exhibits none of the psychosis common among cranks.

> Not being able to back up an assertion with anything else than "I don't
> know why but it is so" is enough for me - and this has nothing to do
> with the validity or absence of of the assertion.

> > Bruno,
> > you, on the other hand, quickly and easily made it into my twit-filter.
>
> Mostly due to reaction to your usual behaviour of insulting people to death.
Make no mistake. Most *knowledgeable* theorists in this NG have one purpose : stick to their conviction and prove they are right to others. They mainly bring *defensive* insight about RM but are totally incapable of anything else than try to disqualify their opponent different perspective no matter whether it is right or wrong. I call them BB's barking dogs (they will be the first to call you *crank*, *idiot* or other insults and call for group effect to marginalize you)...

I expose their behavior, incoherence or ignorance in the FEW (Fraud Exposal Wall)...The best response to them is exposing their ignorance but you must first do a lot of reading.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.databases.theory/browse_frm/thread/a32a4f2f9c0ccbaa?hl=fr Keith Duggar
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.databases.theory/browse_frm/thread/9ce33a3eff21084d?hl=fr Bob Badour
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.databases.theory/browse_frm/thread/cd1f9674bab7af85?hl=fr Kenneth Downs
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.databases.theory/browse_frm/thread/52775e265013cbd5?hl=fr UGene
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.databases.theory/browse_frm/thread/f76650c73bdc9375?hl=fr JM Davitt
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.databases.theory/browse_frm/thread/32908da39b71a373?hl=fr Marshall

> >>> He has a great record of
> >>> asserting things without being able to back them with anything else than
> >>> "I don't know why but it is so"
> >>
> >>
> >> This is bull.

>
Too vague to be convincing.

> > The only thing I said that about is why change patterns
> >> happen a certain way in biz apps.

>
Too vague to be convincing.

> > Answering that would probably require
> >> deep psychological analysis of marketers, lawmakers, and upper
> >> management. I don't understand their psychology and will readily admit
> >> that. I can only observe the patterns of changes of mind, not explain
> >> them. This is what I get for admitting that I don't know everything.
> >> One of the key aspects of business modeling is that you end up modeling
> >> personalities of decision makers far more than modeling say laws of
> >> nature such as chemistry, geometry, etc. The latter would make life a
> >> lot easier.

You are wrong. Data management is a science based on sound principles independent of subjectivity. You can't know it because you don't posess the sufficient education to reconsider your position.

> > Hear! Hear!

BB's example of contemptuous attitude (he calls for group effect with people to make fun of you, thinking he posess sufficient knowledge to mock you). For example of his incoherence and ignorance... He is exposed in the FEW.

> Hear what ? That lots of rules in business apps are subject to rapid and
> arbitrary change, and are very far from having the same cohesion and
> stability as most technical/scientific rules ? Wow, now that's a scoop,
> for sure...

*Change* strategy is optimized under RM.

> >>> , then challenging the others to prove
> >>> him wrong, then dismissing answers as either "lab example" (implied :
> >>> can't work in real life)

You are wrong. *can't work in real life* is not a valid argument on logical and abstract standpoint. You need to educate yourself to be able to formulate other kind of assertions.

> >>> or "irrelevant to it's own 'niche'" (which is
> >>> defined as "custom biz apps", whatever this may mean).
> >>
> >> So? X being good at domain Y does not automatically mean it will be
> >> good in domain Z.
> >
> >
> > Do you mean like something that's passably good at simulation used for
> > everything from dessert toppings to floor wax?

> So? X being bad at domain Y does not automatically mean it will be
> bad in domain Z.

> FWIW, the question was:

> """
> (BD) Why do you think the same technical problem would require a
> different technical solution according to the domain ?
> """

> And the brillant answer :

> """
> (-T-) Are you asking why OO techniques that apply for one domain don't
> apply for another? That is a very good question. I don't know why, it
> just does.
> """"
> (http://groups.google.com/group/comp.object/msg/159be5dce37fe314)

> The first problem here is not the truth value of assertion "OO
> techniques that apply for one domain don't apply for another", but how
> this assertion is backed. The second problem is that it doesn't answer
> the question.

> And no, I'm not defending the "DBMS is just a byte-bucket" position.
> Pointing all the crappy marketing stuff around OO for what is it (crap)
> is mostly sane. But "I don't know why but it just does" is just not a
> valid argument.

You are wrong. To be able to appreciate the truth of a valid argument, you must first possess some understanding of the logical and abstract issues of data management only- proven-as-sound logical model for data management: RM. You statement indicate you lack such knowledge. You need to do some reading and then make up your mind...I suggest you get some education on data management issues then rethink about it.

> bruno desthuilliers
> python -c "print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
> p in 'onurb_at_xiludom.gro'.split('@')])"
Received on Wed Jul 12 2006 - 11:17:25 CDT