old MSP wants to know what they did wrong
-
@travisdh1 said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@art_of_shred said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizza_box_form_factor
It's even got an official encyclopedia entry. This is NOT something one can just make up and hope no one notices.
Oh, and please don't confuse Wikipedia with an official encyclopedia.
It's the MOST official encyclopedia. Don't confuse "paid publications" with the world's most peer reviewed resource.
Yet it's known to get the real science behind global warming completely wrong. All the known mistakes and purposeful fabrications are still published.
Plus that article did a horrible job of actually describing the form factor
No publication is perfect, using examples of inaccuracy is not useful unless you do it statistically. Statistically, tests have shown that no published encyclopedia has ever come close to Wikipedia in accuracy. The less you trust Wikipedia, all you force yourself to do is trust all other sources even less.
-
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
You are talking about intent, which doesn't apply here as my point is specifically that there was no intentional re-use, only accidental misuse and repetition.
And what makes you think there's an accidental misuse here?
I didn't say that, it was intentional misuse. Bluffing.
-
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
Your theory is that you can call anything by any name you want, any time regardless of knowing that you are using specific names and meanings as accepted by the group and knowing that you will be misleading them (lying.) Lying applies the same with nicknames.
You have a friend that everyone calls Chuck. You know that they call him that. You punch him. You go to court. The court asks you if you punched Chuck and you say no. You are lying, Chuck is the reference to him. You can't choose to just dereference him without clearly designating that you are not using the accepted reference.
This implies that those using the term pizzabox knew about the sparcstation - I didn't when I was using the term.
-
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
But I never made that mistake (I've never seen a sparcstation in person, or ever had use of one, so they don't exist in my world). So my use isn't a mistake.
So you are saying that you were totally unaware that the nickname pizza box existed, you saw a 1U server, you determined you would make a new nickname and just happened to pick pizza box? You are confident you had no idea that there was such a name used in the industry?
-
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@art_of_shred said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@art_of_shred said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
If I feel like calling a spoon a dinglehopper, even though Ariel already taught us that a fork is a dinglehopper, I'm not wrong. Neither of them is actually a dinglehopper. It's a nickname and has nothing to due with anything that actually means something.
You are talking about intent, which doesn't apply here as my point is specifically that there was no intentional re-use, only accidental misuse and repetition.
Nicknames are aliases and they do have definite meaning, though.
Unless you were standing there the very first time that it was supposedly used incorrectly, you don't know the intent. It could easily have been someone thinking a 1U server looks like a box of pizza. It's not codified.
Right, and I've seen that first use case over and over again, that was part of my point.
You've seen people who used Sparcstations, and called them pizzaboxes, then use the term pizzaboxes while talking about something completely different? and they did this on purpose just to confuse (lie) you? huh, I'll have to take your word for it.
-
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
I would agree with this argument if the Sparcstation was officially named 'PizzaBox', but I can find no such indication. This is just a nickname given by those who used them
Exactly. And an accepted industry nickname is a specific thing. Knowing that there is a thing known in the industry as a pizza box and then calling something else a pizza box knowing you didn't use the thing accepted by that reference is intentionally lying. That's how nicknames / aliases / references work.
There is no exact definition of mainframe either. But if you claim you worked on one because you now call your laptop a mainframe, that's lying.
This would only be true in the case of those who knew what a sparcstation is and knew that it was called a pizzabox - something I didn't until after I joined SW.
-
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@art_of_shred said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@art_of_shred said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
If I feel like calling a spoon a dinglehopper, even though Ariel already taught us that a fork is a dinglehopper, I'm not wrong. Neither of them is actually a dinglehopper. It's a nickname and has nothing to due with anything that actually means something.
You are talking about intent, which doesn't apply here as my point is specifically that there was no intentional re-use, only accidental misuse and repetition.
Nicknames are aliases and they do have definite meaning, though.
Unless you were standing there the very first time that it was supposedly used incorrectly, you don't know the intent. It could easily have been someone thinking a 1U server looks like a box of pizza. It's not codified.
Right, and I've seen that first use case over and over again, that was part of my point.
You've seen people who used Sparcstations, and called them pizzaboxes, then use the term pizzaboxes while talking about something completely different? and they did this on purpose just to confuse (lie) you? huh, I'll have to take your word for it.
No, I've seen people lie about having experience on pizza boxes not knowing what they were in an attempt to impress people talking about Sparcstations. Of course they did this on purpose. THe idea that humans are zombies and don't decide to do anything and no one is accountable for anything thing is weird, they weren't dribbling idiots that needed people to feed them.
-
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
I would agree with this argument if the Sparcstation was officially named 'PizzaBox', but I can find no such indication. This is just a nickname given by those who used them
Exactly. And an accepted industry nickname is a specific thing. Knowing that there is a thing known in the industry as a pizza box and then calling something else a pizza box knowing you didn't use the thing accepted by that reference is intentionally lying. That's how nicknames / aliases / references work.
There is no exact definition of mainframe either. But if you claim you worked on one because you now call your laptop a mainframe, that's lying.
This would only be true in the case of those who knew what a sparcstation is and knew that it was called a pizzabox - something I didn't until after I joined SW.
No, that's where you are completely wrong. It's true in any case where someone knew that the term existed. It doesn't matter if they know what it means. Using a term knowing you don't know what it is is lying. If I asked you if you've ever flown a starship before and you didn't know what a starship was and said yes is lying, as plain and plain can be. Not knowing what a starship is is in no way whatsoever relevant to the fact that you fabricated the answer.
-
@travisdh1 said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@art_of_shred said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizza_box_form_factor
It's even got an official encyclopedia entry. This is NOT something one can just make up and hope no one notices.
Oh, and please don't confuse Wikipedia with an official encyclopedia.
It's the MOST official encyclopedia. Don't confuse "paid publications" with the world's most peer reviewed resource.
Yet it's known to get the real science behind global warming completely wrong. All the known mistakes and purposeful fabrications are still published.
Plus that article did a horrible job of actually describing the form factor
Citation? The global warming and climate change articles are one of the most sourced and peer reviewed articles on wikipedia. It's right up there with evolution.
-
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
Your theory is that you can call anything by any name you want, any time regardless of knowing that you are using specific names and meanings as accepted by the group and knowing that you will be misleading them (lying.) Lying applies the same with nicknames.
You have a friend that everyone calls Chuck. You know that they call him that. You punch him. You go to court. The court asks you if you punched Chuck and you say no. You are lying, Chuck is the reference to him. You can't choose to just dereference him without clearly designating that you are not using the accepted reference.
This implies that those using the term pizzabox knew about the sparcstation - I didn't when I was using the term.
No, again. You are missing how deceit works. It doesn't require them to know what a pizza box is, only that it is a thing and that they don't know what it is. Then claiming to own one, know how to use one, have worked on one or whatever is clearly lying. In no way does knowing what it actually is matter.
-
adjective
2.
telling or containing lies; deliberately untruthful; deceitful; false:
a lying report.
Synonyms: deceptive, misleading, mendacious, fallacious; sham, counterfeit. -
@coliver said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@travisdh1 said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@art_of_shred said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizza_box_form_factor
It's even got an official encyclopedia entry. This is NOT something one can just make up and hope no one notices.
Oh, and please don't confuse Wikipedia with an official encyclopedia.
It's the MOST official encyclopedia. Don't confuse "paid publications" with the world's most peer reviewed resource.
Yet it's known to get the real science behind global warming completely wrong. All the known mistakes and purposeful fabrications are still published.
Plus that article did a horrible job of actually describing the form factor
Citation? The global warming and climate change articles are one of the most sourced and peer reviewed articles on wikipedia. It's right up there with evolution.
Ever actually read the IPCC report?
-
Nowhere in the definition of lying does it require that you know random extra facts. Misleading, deceit, sham, counterfeit... those apply to people intentionally misusing known terms, that someone knows the actual meaning of the term doesn't factor in, only that they use it as if they know it when they don't.
-
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@art_of_shred said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizza_box_form_factor
It's even got an official encyclopedia entry. This is NOT something one can just make up and hope no one notices.
Yup, and it references far more than just the Sparcstation, as well as making mention of 1U servers.
Mention of how 1U was derived from pizza boxes, not that they are pizza boxes. It also specifically pointed out that pizza boxes were not 1U form factor but included 2U and non-standard sizes. Although the pizza boxes were the source of many of the standards. I made it VERY clear that it was a form factor reference and not solely about Sparcstations. The Wikipedia article follows exactly what I explained.
If it's about form factor, then what the heck are we arguing about? a pizzabox is a 1 or 2 U box. Period.. there's not need to imply that it's RISC based. Sure it started there, and morphed into what it is today.
As for your blade thing lying situation - Blades are codified, so that is pure lying when used to describe 1U rackmounted servers.
But pizzabox is not codified, so it's not the same. -
@travisdh1 said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@coliver said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@travisdh1 said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@art_of_shred said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizza_box_form_factor
It's even got an official encyclopedia entry. This is NOT something one can just make up and hope no one notices.
Oh, and please don't confuse Wikipedia with an official encyclopedia.
It's the MOST official encyclopedia. Don't confuse "paid publications" with the world's most peer reviewed resource.
Yet it's known to get the real science behind global warming completely wrong. All the known mistakes and purposeful fabrications are still published.
Plus that article did a horrible job of actually describing the form factor
Citation? The global warming and climate change articles are one of the most sourced and peer reviewed articles on wikipedia. It's right up there with evolution.
Ever actually read the IPCC report?
Yes, I'm not sure what you're getting at?
-
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
If it's about form factor, then what the heck are we arguing about? a pizzabox is a 1 or 2 U box.
Well, that's wrong. Pizzaboxes did not use Us. Us came from pizza boxes. It's not the same. And the current 1u/2u form factors used today are not pizza boxes. We are arguing about people misusing the term; and mostly for doing so deceitfully for personal gain.
-
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
But pizzabox is not codified, so it's not the same.
BUt it is, why do you claim that it is not? What makes one codified and one not?
-
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
You are talking about intent, which doesn't apply here as my point is specifically that there was no intentional re-use, only accidental misuse and repetition.
And what makes you think there's an accidental misuse here?
I didn't say that, it was intentional misuse. Bluffing.
Well, if you were having conversations with people who were claiming they worked on pizzaboxes, and they KNEW that at one time the sparcstation was commonly referred to as the pizzabox, and they were trying to get you to think they worked on those when in fact they hadn't (which you figure out through conversation) then sure, they were lying - but, unless they further went on to say, yeah I know that some old timer's call the sparcstation a pizzabox, but I call a pizzabox any 1U rackmount server (if you actually heard someone say this - wow, just wow!)
-
Both are well understood and long known industry terms for specific things. No rackmount server made in decades uses a pizza box form factor. Misusing either term is wrong, equally. One is more recent, but that is all.
-
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@Dashrender said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
@scottalanmiller said in old MSP wants to know what they did wrong:
You are talking about intent, which doesn't apply here as my point is specifically that there was no intentional re-use, only accidental misuse and repetition.
And what makes you think there's an accidental misuse here?
I didn't say that, it was intentional misuse. Bluffing.
Well, if you were having conversations with people who were claiming they worked on pizzaboxes, and they KNEW that at one time the sparcstation was commonly referred to as the pizzabox,
YOu are totally caught on one thing... that people know the exact definition. That simply doesn't matter and I will repeat the problem to you no matter how many times you misstate it in that way. Knowing that it means Sparcstation or similar form factor simply doesn't matter. They knew it meant something, and they lied about it. Period.
You are trying to redefine lying to make guilty people sound innocent.
