Assume v. Presume

MikeSh said:
Well in that case calling electric cars electric cars is also wrong. ... You are taking the definition of a device outside of the device.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with your logic. The UPS is the device. The electric car is the device. The UPS is interruptible (big red button). The car is run by electricity.
MikeSh said:
... but ultimately it's BA's ship.
Click to expand...
You've found the problem. BA are supposed to be flying aeroplanes, not sailing ships. :D
 
This does solve the problem of the third runway at Heathrow, though. It isn't needed any more.
 
EEPhil said:
I don't agree with your logic. The UPS is the device. The electric car is the device. The UPS is interruptible (big red button). The car is run by electricity.
Click to expand...
No. The big red button (in BH's and most other cases) is external to the UPS(s). UPSs will have controls to allow them to be switched off, etc, but these are normally in a form that a casual user cannot accidentally do so.
I won't deny that the term uninterruptible (or unbreakable) is perhaps a bit optimistic, along the lines that impossible is often used for things that have happened. But it's in the technical dictionary now.
 
I remember a particularly vocal review of a document I produced where nobody would accept that "The job runs continually" was accurate for something that kicks off several times an hour. They wanted "periodically" but it wasn't on a regular schedule. In the end, the customer was paying so I changed it.
 
af123 said:
I remember a particularly vocal review of a document I produced where nobody would accept that "The job runs continually" was accurate for something that kicks off several times an hour. They wanted "periodically" but it wasn't on a regular schedule. In the end, the customer was paying so I changed it.
Click to expand...
How about "repetitively"?

MikeSh said:
Not just us then:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/05/the-35-words-youre-probably-getting-wrong

There are a few in there I wasn't fully au fait with.
Click to expand...
That gets a like from me!
 
MikeSh said:
I'd say "as required".
Click to expand...
That implies user input to initiate it.

As a former tech author, "periodically" seems adequate to me, even though it may not be on a specific schedule. "Continually" implies constantly in the mind of anyone less than an English pedant. "Frequently" might work.
 
af123 said:
I remember a particularly vocal review of a document I produced where nobody would accept that "The job runs continually" was accurate for something that kicks off several times an hour. They wanted "periodically" but it wasn't on a regular schedule. In the end, the customer was paying so I changed it.
Click to expand...

If the job sits in memory, is idle and activates itself sometime - I'd say it was running continually.
(eg. We had a job running on each node of a VAXCluster that changed the pre-login announcement to indicate the number of interactive/batch jobs per node. This ran continuously, but only did any real work for a fraction of a second every minute).

If the job runs, re-submits itself to a queue with a start time of now+15 minutes, exits and is no longer in memory - periodically.
(eg. On the VAX we had a job that did an accounting run once a day and as the last item re-submitted itself to run a day later)
 
MikeSh said:
Not just us then:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/05/the-35-words-youre-probably-getting-wrong

There are a few in there I wasn't fully au fait with.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of the Prof. of Electrical Machines who thought he was a) funny and b) clever with the English language. Whilst describing the function of a motor he was referring to the orientation of the field. On more than one occasion he said something like: "The field is orientated not oriented - which means to become a Chinaman". :rolleyes:
 
There was a documentary on telly recently where the presenter was saying oriented rather than orientated, an American scientist I think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top