Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Fact and Fiction in nz.comp

Reply
Thread Tools

Fact and Fiction in nz.comp

 
 
H.O.G
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-21-2005
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 17:30:11 +1200, steve
<(E-Mail Removed)> spoke these fine words:

>H.O.G wrote:
>
>> The first is, is this just a sign of the times? As we all know, the
>> industry is full of cowboys who think they know everything, don't base
>> their recommendations or comments on fact, have a fuzzy understanding
>> of fact and fiction, and lack the experience, qualifications and
>> training that used to be a part of the game. Is this spilling over
>> into Usenet just a further sign of the decline of our profession?

>
>USENET began to degrade the moment the non-computer literate folks joined us
>all on the Internet.
>
>That would be about 1995-96.
>
>Since then, most newsgroups are inhabited to a greater or lesser degree by
>psychiatric out-patients and various types of obsessive-compulsives.
>

Yup. I've always wondered whether Usenet is inhabited by the minority
of obsessives of our society (with the odd "normal" person as well),
or whether society is actually brimming full of obsessives who hide it
well, until confronted with a pseudo-anonymous environment (with the
odd "normal" person about as well). But I guess that's another
thread...

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
H.O.G
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-21-2005
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 17:30:52 +1200, "Max Burke"
<(E-Mail Removed)> spoke these fine words:

>> H.O.G scribbled:
>> Usenet has changed over the last few years, and especially technical
>> newsgroups such as nz.comp.

>
>I only have one response....
>
>You're taking Newsgroup discussions WAAAAYY to seroiusly... (IMO)


It's just because I care....

You're probably right.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
H.O.G
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-21-2005
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 16:49:18 +1000, Harry <(E-Mail Removed)>
spoke these fine words:

>> The first is, is this just a sign of the times? As we all know, the
>> industry is full of cowboys who think they know everything, don't base
>> their recommendations or comments on fact, have a fuzzy understanding
>> of fact and fiction, and lack the experience, qualifications and
>> training that used to be a part of the game. Is this spilling over
>> into Usenet just a further sign of the decline of our profession?

>
>You have just added more useless noise.


Hmm, probably quite true...

>BTW it really means that everyone has a computer these days
>so nz.comp is hardly the reserve of professionals.


True, but many of its inhabitants are computing professionals.

>> And secondly, what of the legal ramifications? For instance, I had a
>> couple of people arguing thick and thin that using any old
>> heatsink/fan and thermal paste on an AMD processor would not void the
>> warranty, and that they didn't have to use the heatsink/fan that came
>> with the processor. It mattered little to them that I was speaking
>> fact, am AMD Gold Certified, have dealt with literally thousands of
>> AMD processors, that this was AMD's stated position, and they were
>> just spouting forward an opinion, they were still "right" and would
>> argue come hell or high water. That in itself doesn't worry me (we all
>> know the world's full of idiots), but the question is, would they
>> become liable if a layman took their advice, smeared thermal paste all
>> over their processor, stuffed it, and promptly voided their warranty?
>>

>No. Otherwise you'd be suing your lawyer, doctor, politician,
>and supermarket every day for bad advice.


People often do sue their lawyers and doctors, actually. It happens
all the time, although usually by insurance companies.

>You should sue yourself first because you have just advised everybody
>that this is a technical newsgroup. Well it aint. It is just nz.comp.


Hmm, but my interpretation is unlikely to cause loss. If someone could
prove that my "advice" caused them loss, they would actually have the
right to test it in court.

>>
>> Just interested in other people's opinion.

>
>Advice is advice, nothing more.
>You cannot sue somebody for stating their opinion.


You can, though, if they are giving professional advice, and this
advice turns out to be wrong causing loss.

The question is, is someone giving flagrantly incorrect advice here
liable? Interesting concept.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Roger_Nickel
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-21-2005
H.O.G wrote:

>>
>>Advice is advice, nothing more.
>>You cannot sue somebody for stating their opinion.

>
>
> You can, though, if they are giving professional advice, and this
> advice turns out to be wrong causing loss.
>
> The question is, is someone giving flagrantly incorrect advice here
> liable? Interesting concept.


Unlikely; there's nothing by way of a contractual professional
relationship.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Harry
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-21-2005
H.O.G wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 16:49:18 +1000, Harry <(E-Mail Removed)>
> spoke these fine words:
>
>>> The first is, is this just a sign of the times? As we all know, the
>>> industry is full of cowboys who think they know everything, don't base
>>> their recommendations or comments on fact, have a fuzzy understanding
>>> of fact and fiction, and lack the experience, qualifications and
>>> training that used to be a part of the game. Is this spilling over
>>> into Usenet just a further sign of the decline of our profession?

>>
>>You have just added more useless noise.

>
> Hmm, probably quite true...
>
>>BTW it really means that everyone has a computer these days
>>so nz.comp is hardly the reserve of professionals.

>
> True, but many of its inhabitants are computing professionals.
>
>>> And secondly, what of the legal ramifications? For instance, I had a
>>> couple of people arguing thick and thin that using any old
>>> heatsink/fan and thermal paste on an AMD processor would not void the
>>> warranty, and that they didn't have to use the heatsink/fan that came
>>> with the processor. It mattered little to them that I was speaking
>>> fact, am AMD Gold Certified, have dealt with literally thousands of
>>> AMD processors, that this was AMD's stated position, and they were
>>> just spouting forward an opinion, they were still "right" and would
>>> argue come hell or high water. That in itself doesn't worry me (we all
>>> know the world's full of idiots), but the question is, would they
>>> become liable if a layman took their advice, smeared thermal paste all
>>> over their processor, stuffed it, and promptly voided their warranty?
>>>

>>No. Otherwise you'd be suing your lawyer, doctor, politician,
>>and supermarket every day for bad advice.

>
> People often do sue their lawyers and doctors, actually. It happens
> all the time, although usually by insurance companies.
>
>>You should sue yourself first because you have just advised everybody
>>that this is a technical newsgroup. Well it aint. It is just nz.comp.

>
> Hmm, but my interpretation is unlikely to cause loss. If someone could
> prove that my "advice" caused them loss, they would actually have the
> right to test it in court.
>
>>>
>>> Just interested in other people's opinion.

>>
>>Advice is advice, nothing more.
>>You cannot sue somebody for stating their opinion.

>
> You can, though, if they are giving professional advice, and this
> advice turns out to be wrong causing loss.
>
> The question is, is someone giving flagrantly incorrect advice here
> liable? Interesting concept.


Most professionals make you sign an indemnity.

 
Reply With Quote
 
H.O.G
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-21-2005
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 19:55:57 +1200, Roger_Nickel <(E-Mail Removed)>
spoke these fine words:

>H.O.G wrote:
>
>>>
>>>Advice is advice, nothing more.
>>>You cannot sue somebody for stating their opinion.

>>
>>
>> You can, though, if they are giving professional advice, and this
>> advice turns out to be wrong causing loss.
>>
>> The question is, is someone giving flagrantly incorrect advice here
>> liable? Interesting concept.

>
>Unlikely; there's nothing by way of a contractual professional
>relationship.


True, but is that needed?

If someone says "jump in this water", and there is a shark in the
water, and that person had reason to expect there to be a shark in the
water, could that person be sued, whether or not there is a
"contractual professional relationship"?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Harry
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-21-2005
H.O.G wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 19:55:57 +1200, Roger_Nickel <(E-Mail Removed)>
> spoke these fine words:
>
>>H.O.G wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>Advice is advice, nothing more.
>>>>You cannot sue somebody for stating their opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>> You can, though, if they are giving professional advice, and this
>>> advice turns out to be wrong causing loss.
>>>
>>> The question is, is someone giving flagrantly incorrect advice here
>>> liable? Interesting concept.

>>
>>Unlikely; there's nothing by way of a contractual professional
>>relationship.

>
> True, but is that needed?
>
> If someone says "jump in this water", and there is a shark in the
> water, and that person had reason to expect there to be a shark in the
> water, could that person be sued, whether or not there is a
> "contractual professional relationship"?


No. If I told you to cut your arm off, and you cut it off, then
it would be your fault not mine.


 
Reply With Quote
 
H.O.G
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-21-2005
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 18:17:02 +1000, Harry <(E-Mail Removed)>
spoke these fine words:

>H.O.G wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 19:55:57 +1200, Roger_Nickel <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> spoke these fine words:
>>
>>>H.O.G wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Advice is advice, nothing more.
>>>>>You cannot sue somebody for stating their opinion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You can, though, if they are giving professional advice, and this
>>>> advice turns out to be wrong causing loss.
>>>>
>>>> The question is, is someone giving flagrantly incorrect advice here
>>>> liable? Interesting concept.
>>>
>>>Unlikely; there's nothing by way of a contractual professional
>>>relationship.

>>
>> True, but is that needed?
>>
>> If someone says "jump in this water", and there is a shark in the
>> water, and that person had reason to expect there to be a shark in the
>> water, could that person be sued, whether or not there is a
>> "contractual professional relationship"?

>
>No. If I told you to cut your arm off, and you cut it off, then
>it would be your fault not mine.
>

Yes, but if I didn't know the consequences of cutting it off, and you
did, or reasonably should have, it's a different matter.

For instance, if you asked someone severely retarded to chop their arm
off, and they did, you would be in a heap of trouble.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Shane
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-21-2005
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 20:40:10 +1200, H.O.G wrote:

> Yes, but if I didn't know the consequences of cutting it off, and you did,
> or reasonably should have, it's a different matter.
>
> For instance, if you asked someone severely retarded to chop their arm
> off, and they did, you would be in a heap of trouble.


But if you told someone that Ladas are the greatest Vehicle on the planet
and they bought one, whos at fault?

--
Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked

The best way to get the right answer on usenet is to post the wrong one.

 
Reply With Quote
 
H.O.G
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-21-2005
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 20:44:10 +1200, Shane <(E-Mail Removed)-a-geek.net>
spoke these fine words:

>On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 20:40:10 +1200, H.O.G wrote:
>
>> Yes, but if I didn't know the consequences of cutting it off, and you did,
>> or reasonably should have, it's a different matter.
>>
>> For instance, if you asked someone severely retarded to chop their arm
>> off, and they did, you would be in a heap of trouble.

>
>But if you told someone that Ladas are the greatest Vehicle on the planet
>and they bought one, whos at fault?


It depends if it is believable. If I presented myself as an "expert",
and said that, for their circumstances it was the greatest vehicle
they could get, and following my advice ended up costing them, they
could technically seek reimbursement for costs incurred.

But now we're starting to get a little abstract.

If someone, presenting themselves as an expert (or at least apparently
being an expert) said that a 100w PSU would be more than enough to
power a P4, and a consequence was it fried taking out the motherboard
and processor, they could possibly take legal action to recover the
costs. Correct?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fact or Fiction? Ron Computer Security 13 03-26-2009 12:04 AM
Re: CMOSS battery questions .... fact or fiction? doS Computer Support 1 10-06-2006 11:37 PM
The 24 hour iPod Battery: Fact or Fiction? @ The TechZone Silverstrand Front Page News 0 09-21-2006 11:00 PM
google OS, fact or fiction? Plato Computer Support 8 02-27-2006 06:25 AM
The Adolescent RebelliHOWES Stage - FACT, FICTION, MYTH Or The PREDICTABLE RESULT OF MISHANDLING? I Am Digital Photography 2 02-15-2005 07:08 PM



Advertisments