vault backup: 2025-10-28 17:01:24

traditional-estimating-methods.md

@@ -61,3 +61,34 @@ and to adjust for all labor conditions and market factors _exactly_.
 
 Most estimators wouldn't rate their margin of error at less than 10%,
 though most would refuse to answer anyway (see [[estimating-culture]]).
+
+#### Required Hyper-Specificity
+
+<!-- TODO:
+This section is a transcription of a dictation.
+To be condensed.
+-->
+
+The reason that it's such a big deal to change between 1-hole straps and and unistrut straps
+is because it takes so long to do.
+If it was as simple as it is to visualize,
+which it could be if you were drawing these things and it was being interpreted,
+rather than having to explicitly specify every aspect of what you wanted.
+Then that would make a huge difference.
+
+In the (granted, limited) market segment that we've worked in,
+I use ~10 assemblies on a regular basis.
+That makes up 99% of the work.
+Why are there hundreds in in our database?
+They just need to be better.
+You could probably get away with hard coding some of this,
+even if that irks me,
+if they were good.
+It's just that it doesn't seem to be a goal
+that Trimble or anybody else has.
+
+#### Assumed Finality
+
+While they may support a multitude of creative methods to create takeoffs,
+traditional methods are rarely as convenient when it comes to modify those takeoffs,
+as is frequently necessary as in the case of mistakes and revisions.