>You're supporting my position, not refuting it. Again, most programmers could handle assembly. It's really just that they don't have the motivation to bother. That doesn't mean that less than X% of programmers can't. It just means that most of them won't.
Fair enough. I think we really just disagree on the definition of the word "able".
>When you read X% of subjects in an sex research experiment, it's really X% of available volunteers. That's how you should read it. That's just how it works, within the ethical boundaries of using human subjects in a free society.
That's kind of an odd parallel to draw. Regardless, unless you're the author of the readme we're both just speculating.
I think we've gotten far enough into the weeds here that there's not much point in continuing to pick this apart. We'll just have to agree to disagree.
> I think we really just disagree on the definition of the word "able".
In one sense, "X% able," means "if you held a gun to their heads, X% end up pulling it off." My wife can code and debug. There's no way in hell she'd ever do it for a job. However, if she was in a real life instance of "Saw" and she had to debug something to save my life, I'd like to think she'd at least try.
In a practical survey sense in the western world, it means, "X% of the people you can get to participate." It's nonsense to talk about it in the 1st sense, unless you happen to be a totalitarian dictator with lackeys who would hold a gun to the subject's heads.
That's kind of an odd parallel to draw.
It's an apt parallel. Not all programmers have the inclination to do assembly. However, you can still do an experiment on the population who will. Does the sub-population of subjects you can get affect things? Maybe, but I don't think it makes too much of a difference here.
Fair enough. I think we really just disagree on the definition of the word "able".
>When you read X% of subjects in an sex research experiment, it's really X% of available volunteers. That's how you should read it. That's just how it works, within the ethical boundaries of using human subjects in a free society.
That's kind of an odd parallel to draw. Regardless, unless you're the author of the readme we're both just speculating.
I think we've gotten far enough into the weeds here that there's not much point in continuing to pick this apart. We'll just have to agree to disagree.