"Examine what is said, not who speaks"
Hey, I think I've seen that in someone's signature! Um, anyway...
I can't speak for the other monks, but I've found content analysis to be expensive enough to be worth optimizing. As such, it's expedient to apply a simple memoization/caching technique whereby the source of some assertion influences the time and effort I spend evaluating the assertion based on past experiences with that source.
It's true that a stopped clock is right twice every day, and even kooks can have insights worthy of deep consideration. Still, I don't want to waste my time looking at a clock I already know is broken any more than I want to waste my time pondering the rantings of someone whose rantings I've already pondered at a length greater than their value.
I'm not talking about anyone in particular here. I just find the "ignore the source" meme a little irritating.
Heuristics have their place.
In reply to Re^3: Difference arrays.
by kyle
in thread Difference arrays.
by BrowserUk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |