Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mmm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mmm!mrgofor
From: mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR)
Newsgroups: net.rumor
Subject: Re: Catastrophic failures
Message-ID: <647@mmm.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 20-Mar-86 15:41:55 EST
Article-I.D.: mmm.647
Posted: Thu Mar 20 15:41:55 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Mar-86 07:10:42 EST
References: <2019@gondor.UUCP> <15400002@ti-csl>
Reply-To: mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR)
Organization: none
Lines: 20

In article <15400002@ti-csl> tgralewi@ti-csl writes:
>
>   On the same lines as the "120 test", I once knew a repair tech that
>had a "perfect" system for finding the problem when a machine blew fuses.
>He kept putting larger and larger fuses in until something else blew.

	Reminds me of a guy I once knew (non-programmer) who was trying
to write a BASIC program. Every time he would get an error message, he
would simply replace the offending line with a REM statement and try the
program again. His programs ended up not doing much, but boy were they
fast!
:-)


-- 
					--MKR

"The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time. The 
 terror of their tyranny, however, is alleviated by their lack of consistency."
						- Albert Einstein