Re: Interesting article by Joel Spolsky: The Perils of JavaSchools

In article <slrndsitm7.2efu.willem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Willem <willem@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>wooks wrote:

[ snip ]

>)> I guess you don't wear a seat belt either, because you may not hit a tree ?
>) I wear seat belts because I have to (don't see what that has to do with
>) the discussion).
>Sheesh. Let me spell it out for you: You wear a seat belt because it will
>protect you in case of an accident. If you don't get an accident, it may
>not matter that you are wearing one, so by your logic, you don't need to
>wear one.

Nitpick: In some parts of the US, wearing a seatbelt is a legal
requirement. So it's possible that's what wooks means in saying
"because I have to." Presumably the rationale for the laws requiring
seatbelt use has something to do with protection in case of accident,
but an individual might be more motivated by the law itself than by
the rationale.

Totally off-topic, but possibly of passing interest, since I'm guessing
from your e-mail address than you're not in the US.

[ snip ]

| B. L. Massingill
| ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.