GeorgeDewar
Joined 10 years ago
Joined 10 years ago
In my experience, errors which go away within a few seconds are quite rare, and are mainly due to flaws which are usually caught in testing.
I think a very careful cost/risk/benefit analysis should be done when adding automatic retries to things. As well as potentially causing cascading failures, it is a degraded user experience when it doesn't succeed.
As a user I would rather see an error straight away than see many seconds of spinning while something silently retries, and THEN an error.
By very unsuccessfully, I mean that the commands to change input didn't work. I can't remember if they did nothing or crashed the monitor, but subsequent investigation led me to realise I was lucky not to brick it, as some people found certain commands cause non-recoverable issues on that monitor!
So, I suggest caution in the form of maybe checking that others have successfully used DDC commands on your particular model.
Do you remember if it blew a fuse or tripped a breaker?
So that is to say I think a small amount of secret reasoning would be possible, e.g. if the location is known or guessed from the beginning by another means and the reasoning steps are made up to justify the conclusion.
The more clearly sound the reasoning steps are, the less plausible that scenario is.
I think a great illustration is an extreme case. If I have a house and just enough income to cover all my needs and wants (including retirement savings), then depending on my attitude an extra $1000 per year might have no effect at all - I have nothing I want to spend it on and nothing to save for.
But losing my home would still be devastating. So the utility value of the $1000 per year for the rest of my life is low or none, but the utility value of the previously earned money I would lose from losing my house is high.
Thankfully it can be turned off, and it stays off.
"1236 800", "1236 + 800", etc. also do it, but 1236800 does not. The two numbers have to be separated and in that order.
It'd be interesting to know why.
It's high on my list of things to see in the US when I next get a chance to spend some time there (which could be several years away so I hope it keeps going strong).
Some people just do not work this way - maybe it's being somewhere on the autism spectrum, but whatever the cause, some people need to take a more methodical approach to do this.
I think what this blog post shows is that such an approach really can result in true friendships.
It's a bit like online dating I suppose. That idea is abhorrent to some (or used to be - the stigma has reduced considerably over time), but when it works, there's nothing preventing the resulting relationship from being as genuine as one that started any other way.
Edit: don't know how the similar sibling comment didn't appear to me when I was writing this, since it's from 4 hours ago and I loaded the page less than one hour ago...