Re: Kat's 8bit sequences
irv mullins wrote:
>
> Dan Moyer wrote:
> >
> > irv mullins wrote:
>
> > > I learned a long time ago two things about programming:
> > >
> > > 1. I could manipulate many megs of data using only a few hundred bytes of
> > > memory.
> > > 2. I would be an idiot to try to do it that way.
> > >
> > > Why take weeks to create a slow, complex, probably bug-ridden program when
> > >
> > > you can throw cheap hardware at the problem and get the results much
> > > quicker,
> > > with less chance for errors, using a simple script?
> >
> > Because what "cheap" hardware means to one person may mean unaffordably
> > expensive to another, and their TIME may be much more easily spent?
> >
> > Dan
>
> I think any reasonable person would understand that if they are asking you
> to massage gigabytes of data, there should be at least a few hundred
> dollars provided to buy appropriate hardware.
> Somewhat easier to come up with that than a few thousand dollars for
> programmers' time.
>
> If you are doing this without funding on discarded old hardware,
> and your time is worthless, and there's no profit to be made, then it's
> a hobby, so whatever works...
Irv,
Given that this is a thread about KAT's sequences, I was trying, without
knowing exactly what she's doing, to relate to what some have suggested
might be useful to her. That said, I don't think we can presume what her
margin of profit is and what she can and cannot spend it on.
And I never said anything about anyones time being worthless, just that some
may find spending time easier to do than spending money. Nor did I say that
there was no profit to be made.
I don't think scrounging to eke out a living can truly be considered
a "hobby".
Dan
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
