"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
? Thanks again. I'll spare you my lecture on the topic. The simple
? version is from Sherlock Holmes, where Watson "sees" but does not
? "observe". Plastic rot is similar in that we "see" mold, but few have
? the time, abilities, and equipment to test if it's really mold.

Or in other words, another failure of the proper application of
Occam's Razor. All things being equal, the simplest explanation is that
it is mold.

The failure is that accepting the simplest explanation "it is mold"
limits the search for "all things" and some important facts are missed.

I see this all too often in computers, where people without a clue, fix
a broken system by replacing parts randomly.

If there are 5 componens in a system, replacing any one of them has a chance
of fixing the system, possibly as much as 20% and then declaring themselves
"experts".


Shotgunning is the true mark of a very poor tech. They don't want to
learn why things fail, or what parts are actually needed.