Jump to content

capnamerca

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    822
  • Joined

Everything posted by capnamerca

  1. Pulling the rig out of storage and to my in-laws place where they have full hookups. Going to give her a full once-over - aside from the obvious things like water lines/pressure, checking lights / switches, battery charge, smoke alarms, tire and trailer integrity, general shell integrity, the pumps, and the water heater, what other items are usually on your pre-season checklist?
  2. My old days as a firmware programmer in college pop up in weird ways sometimes :). All I want to build is a translation lookaside table (reference to a reference). But yes, moving 24 rows around and joining them with 12 rows in the top table is a drastically simpler way to do things lol. Thanks again.
  3. Apologies for going down a rabbit hole here :). I"m building out a list of matchups for a golf tournament. The player pool is divided - three teams of twelve. We're currently moving teams around, playing with matchups, etc. As we move players around, I want their handicaps to follow. I"m not skilled enough to figure out index+match when the data is in three separate tables. But what I do know is that handicap is always one call to the right of the player name, and so what I really want is an indirect reference that references another reference (lol). In the table above ... two separate tables of players. Building the matchups on the right. G5 contains "=b4", and so gets populated with 'Bill'. What I was gunning for was something I could put into H5 that would say "ah, I see you referenced cell b4, I'll get the value from one to the right of b4" and then it would resolve itself to a reference of "=b5", and thus populate itself with '5'. I think from what you said above that Index can handle searching across multiple tables. I think that's the official answer. What I've done is moved to one large player table, and am now using index+match, and all is well. It's also hard to explain things in writing, and we've now officially spent more time messing with this than it's taken me to just rearrange the data into one big table :). I really do appreciate ya'lls suggestions.
  4. all I want is "when I reference a cell, I'd like the cell next door to grab the cell next to the cell I just referenced." But, I've rearranged my source data to more easily support INDEX MATCH. Appreciate the insight all.
  5. If the data were cleanly in one table, that works. But for various reasons, it's not, thus my desire to be able to operate on a reference. (believe me, I get why the data layout in my sheet is sub-optimal, but here we are ).
  6. This seems to be a relatively recent Excel thread. I have a non-emergency question that is bothering the shit out of me. Also, I'm technically working in Google Sheets (it sucks), and for now that isn't changeable. I have data in two columns - Player and Handicap. We're using this table to put together matchups for a tournament. Without getting into why I'm using the data the way I am, I need the following: * In a separate section, I reference the main players/handicaps table to build matchups. * When I reference a PLAYER (i.e. "=A1") in a cell ... I want the next cell over to reference that players handicap. *Ideally, I could do something like "=A1+1" which would resolve to "=A2" *The behavior is to allow me to change player references and have handicaps follow me around. *The table of player/handicaps cannot be alphabetized (for reasons, this isn't negotiable), otherwise I could just VLOOKUP it. I've already spent WAY more time on this than Ishould, and now it's mostly professional curiosity to see if I can get it to work. I've looked at INDIRECT and OFFSET, as well as playing around with TEXT() options, and nothing gets me what I want.
  7. I mean, didn't you post 87 yesterday? (snark aside, he's definitely old, and definitely a single-digit handicap)
  8. Whoa. That looks amazing. Now I just gotta find someone with an HBOMax sub
  9. you want folks from the vendor side, or only IT operators?
  10. This is rapidly becoming the phone-belt-holster of the 2020's.
  11. Pulled the 'aggressive' all-terrain tires off the truck in favor of a more highway-friendly michelin. These S/T Maxx's have tons of life left. $400 for the set. Tires in South Austin. https://austin.craigslist.org/wto/d/austin-cooper-discoverer-t-maxx-lt295/7432449755.html
  12. Was supposed to be in Scottsdale next fucking weekend, playing Southern Dunes, WeKoPa and TPC Stadium. Omicron is threatening to shitcan that trip - already had 2 of 7 drop out for VERY good reasons, and I might be next. FUCK. Bandon planned March 2023.
  13. Sigh. you guys are working real fucking hard to separate "the government" from "the driving economic force in the US" when we all know they're inextricably intertwined.
  14. Ok, I can get behind much of this. Fully agree that they're both necessary, but we likely disagree on the relative weights thereof. The original point where I jumped into this conversation was around how to *actually* reduce the rates of abortion in this country, which revolve around government-driven programs. There's an assumption baked in there that I'm making, too, that a local charity can't step in a provide said programs in lieu of a government program. I am 100% making that assertion - otherwise, it would have already happened. I also assert that it hasn't happened at least partly because our socio-economic construct (capitalism), left unchecked, has no incentive to provide these programs. That's where the government needs to step in an provide a check and a "forced" amount of investment in those programs. I appreciate you clarifying the points.
  15. With far more socialist leanings and "forced altruism." Which is the original point, that if you want to actually protect your people, and prevent abortion, you need to invest in social programs, education programs, welfare programs, housing programs, etc ... all things which the "Party of No Abortion" fairly steadfastly refuses to do. I'm not knocking capitalism - it's the best economic model the world has ever found. I'm saying that we're not doing enough to controls its more base urges.
  16. I'm not certain the point you're trying to make here (no sarcasm ... I just don't follow).
  17. Comparing our poor to those in China, India and Brazil, for example, is not an apples-to-apples comparison, because no other demographic compares to those countries either, nor do the economies or governmental systems compare. Comparing the US to other 'developed' nations paints a far shittier picture - https://confrontingpoverty.org/poverty-facts-and-myths/americas-poor-are-worse-off-than-elsewhere/. I'll give you that our poor 'make more money' than "most of the worlds poor" ... but what a shitty, low bar you set for what is supposed to be the greatest nation on earth.
  18. Because we broke up monopolies, let the workers unionize, and firewalled the investment banks away from the regular banks (and a bunch of other shit to stimulate growth and manufacturing) after WW1 and WW2. All of which have been repealed, so we're moving quite aggressively back towards the "capitalism" side of that equation.
  19. You know why we have child labor laws? You know why we have 40-hour/5-day work weeks? Social security? Retirement accounts with favorable tax options? State colleges? Capitalism doesn't care about the poor, the sick, the elderly, the dying. The government had to step in so that our economy didn't treat actual, living human beings like fodder. Maybe we don't call it capitalism - it's probably more accurately called "human nature." A person or a group of people are perfectly fine and nice. PEOPLE are assholes, and power congregates as does wealth. There MUST be a social construct with governing power to protect rights. This isn't up for debate. Look at human rights in any theocracy or dictatorship. They don't exist for any outside of the halls of money and power. Fuck, they barely exist HERE and we're the best the human race has ever invented in trying to prevent that sort of nonsense. FOH with your "enforced altruism" label. I willingly choose for my tax dollars to go to the less fortunate, and I want those tax dollars aggregated and then applied where they can do the most good. I ALSO give locally in my community and to chosen causes, but I can't impact how a low-income neighborhood gets access to fresh running water or sewage service, or how electricity is routed, or prevent housing permits from being redlined, without a LARGE aggregation of power and money working towards these goals, driven by my elected officials. That last sentence, btw, is NOT me saying it's perfect. It's simply pointing out that "tithe 10% to your church" doesn't do SHIT for underserved communities in this country. NOr, to keep this on topic, does it help prevent abortion.
  20. Capitalism takes care of lowering the amount of altruism across society. All government does is help ensure access to said altruism isn't reserved for the rich.
×
×
  • Create New...