Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25858
| From | Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Why “new”? |
| Date | 2011-02-08 07:39 -0500 |
| Organization | albasani.net |
| Message-ID | <iirdha$8e7$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink) |
| References | (12 earlier) <4d4f7823$1@news.x-privat.org> <4d50885f$0$23758$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <iiq23r$flt$2@news.albasani.net> <4d512220@news.x-privat.org> <j6ednZgSg87xqMzQnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@posted.palinacquisition> |
Ken Wesson wrote: >> There comes a point when finding out what someone meant is easier by >> simply asking them rather than googling. I find that point tends to come >> if I'd have to run three or four google queries in a row to get the >> answer rather than, say, one. Peter Duniho wrote: > Really? Incredible! > > Google says it resolves a search in around 2/10ths of a second for me. Even > accounting for network latency, I can get a search done in about 1 second. > Even accounting for the time it takes to type (let's assume you're awful at > typing and can manage only 5 words a minute or so, thus making the typing time > by far the dominant time-consumer in the activity), you ought to be able to > complete a half-dozen three-word queries in a few minutes. > > Is that really so much harder than spending all this time complaining that I > was "snarky" and trying to defend your laziness? For him, it is, because he can't troll a Google search. -- Lew Ceci n'est pas une fenêtre. .___________. |###] | [###| |##/ | *\##| |#/ * | \#| |#----|----#| || | * || |o * | o| |_____|_____| |===========|
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Why “new”? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-02-06 09:13 -0400
Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-08 22:59 -0500
Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-07 05:42 +0100
Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-08 23:07 -0500
Re: Why “new”? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-08 07:39 -0500
Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-08 16:14 +0100
Re: Why “new”? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-08 20:22 +0800
Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-08 11:59 +0100
Re: Why “new”? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-07 19:18 -0500
Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 19:03 -0500
Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 19:01 -0500
Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-08 12:33 +0100
Re: Why “new”? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-08 20:32 +0800
Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-07 04:45 +0100
Re: Why “new”? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-02-06 20:20 -0800
Re: Why “new”? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-07 11:27 +0800
Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-07 04:17 +0100
csiph-web