Re: Fluorescent Bulbs Are Known to Zap Domestic Tranquillity; Energy-Savers a Turnoff for Wives

[Marc_F_Hult <MFHult@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:58:42 -0400, "Robert L Bass"
<no-sales-spam@bassburglaralarms> wrote in message
<frydnX80l7ibkfPbnZ2dnUVZ_rKvnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>:

>> ... A best I can determine, until this post, you
>> BobbyG are the only person to have ever written
>> "Booby" in the context of your name.
>
>I think you're mistaken.  Please check your post on
>Tue, 05 Jun 2007 at 23:13:00.  You wrote:  "Now it's
>taken BoobyG a while to get taken in by Dave's siren
>song and repeated jibes on this theme."
>
>Considering you spelled his name Bobby in every
>other instance, it should be clear to anyone not
>looking for an excuse to get out of a losing battle
>that it was an unintentional typo.  I also noticed
>Bobby voiced no objection when Houston made
>some clearly nasty "fish" references.

No, I didn't ;-) And I see now why I couldn't find it. I was searching on
what BobbyG said I wrote, namely "Booby", which I did not write.

I mistakenly typed BoobyG, which is different word with more letters.

Most folks would not claim that writing "hello" is the same as writing
"hell".

This sort of mistake can create flaws in home automation programs and rule
sets . We can hope that the mistakes break the code or rules quickly and in
an obvious way but sometimes they don't. It is an example of multiple
mistakes that were hard to find that had pernicious and obviously unintended
effects. I try to write BobbyG, not Bobby, because I thought/think that is
what BobbyG prefers. So in typing a double "o" instead of  double "b", and no
"G" I made not one, but two mistakes.

Home automation systems can be very powerful and so coding and rule mistakes
can have serious negative effects. This is why (as I understand it)
CyberHouse's implementation of the Napco interface required disarming through
Napco hardware, and didn't allow it through the CyberHouse software (there
were work-arounds though).

This is arguably the most challenging part of creating a complex HA system.
But there seems to be almost no discussion of coding or rule-making or
rule-making tools or program logic in this newsgroup.

One of the things I miss most about CyberHouse was how rule making was
handled. One could either write then out with a text editor or use a
rule-building tool. The rule building tool had error-checking intrinsic to it
(as does HomeSeer's). Typically I would create rules with the tool which all
but eliminated typos and naming mistakes and then review the resulting ASCII
code. For me at least, seeing each of the rules laid out line after line let
me catch inconsistencies and suggested ways of streamlining and re-organizing
just as in reviewing other kinds of computer code or written language does.
With HomeSeer, I have yet to learn where to find a readable and editable file
of the rules. I presume there is one. I'd like to review it too in case I
have inadvertently created booby traps there too ;-)

... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org