[mythtv-users] Switching away from comcast to online streams

[Stephen P. Villano]

On 1/27/14, 12:13 PM, CACook at Quantum-Sci.com wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:27:30 -0500
> Eric Sharkey <eric at lisaneric.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 1:49 PM,  <CACook at quantum-sci.com> wrote:
>>> One that has so much legacy discordant code and
>>> patches-over-patches, that it can be compared with the Pentagon?
>> The Pentagaon is a building, not code.  If you're trying to compare
>> MythTV with the entire body of software used for all purposes by the
>> U.S. department of defense, I think that that's a laughable
>> comparison.  I can't tell if you're vastly overestimating the
>> complexity of MythTV or vastly underestimating the complexity of
>> government software.
>>
>> Eric
> Obviously my comparison was lost on most of you.
>
> No, I wasn't saying the Pentagon is "code" and I wasn't saying it is a maze.  You have to know more than you apparently do and think bigger than you do, I guess.
>
> In 2000 Rumsfeld started an audit of the Pentagon, with an eye to streamlining, cost-cutting, and reducing duplication, which it is desperately in need of even then.  After a year it became clear that it was impossible to describe the Pentagon's functions and expenditures in any structured report, not least because so many programs were being obscured and protected as someone's pet project, and because the fact is no one knows what everything does in the Pentagon.  It has grown beyond control of anyone and can not be rationalized, if Rumsfeld couldn't do it.  If you know someone who can, say it and be prepared to defend, and explain why they haven't then.
I find it fascinating how one, who objects to regulatory restrictions,
then objects to obscurity to easily ascertaining compliance to other
regulatory restrictions as being objectionable!
Oh, wait. It's because *you* are restricted, but anyone and anything
else is acceptable to be restricted.

So, how long were you inside of the Pentagon? What is your familiarity,
other than some political talking points?
I've been there, so do enlighten me as to DoD operations within its
headquarters. I'm sure I'll be even more amused than I already am by you.
If you want a really big laugh, Rumsfeld's report echoed Truman's
report, indeed, Truman's political career in Washington was based upon,
not griping about the Pentagon's opaque budget, but cutting through and
cutting waste. Something Rumsfeld never bothered with.
> My comparison of Myth to the Pentagon was to say that Myth has grown beyond the control or comprehension of anyone working on it.  I say this because actual advancement has stalled, I would say about 0.24.  Do you know the meaning of a versioning system?  Decimal numbers less than 1 are Alpha versions.  
That is one convention, there are others. But, apparently, you are
unaware of the many versioning schemes in the world.
> Have you looked at XBMC, Sage, WMC or any of the others lately?  Obviously Myth has not implemented any of their better features, and so either devs are in a coma, or it is beyond any of their comprehension.  I prefer to think the latter.
>
>
See the above. Just because someone chooses to use version 13 doesn't
mean it's a production worthy product. If someone produced software
version 1000000, is that good enough for you? Even if it's alpha?
Try getting a clue.