Quite right. It sounds like enforcement here was handled by a bunch of jackbooted thugs. The "perpetrator" here should have had a chance to remedy the situation without it getting escalated. They should have been given the chance to "cease and desist". That's just being civilized.
Otherwise you end up with a slightly dressed up version of drive by shootings and gang wars.
The project/corporation should have been given the chance to fix this, revert it, and to revoke repository access to the offending party.
> At the really high end, the machines automatically call home and report a fault to the vendor.
Not everyone that does "Enterprise Storage" wants to pay for that kind of pampering. This is true in general and doesn't just apply to storage devices that you think no one else here has ever managed.
Even under that model an absurdly high number is still an absurdly high number. He can never repay it. Thus it will never be repaid. The "punitive benefit" of that number is entirely bogus.
Justice is never served by an unreasonably high number.
It's far more likely to increase disrespect for the law.
> Obviously, you've never tried plugging a USB cable into the back of a tower that can't easily be moved
That's just the result of piss poor planning. A reversible connector won't help that. You will still be fumbling like Helen Keller trying to figure out where your cable should go.
Don't be a total idiot. Think a step ahead. Use a hub.
In the 80s and 90s you had format churn. An album released in 1981 might have been bought in 4 different formats before the gravy train ended.
Although even in those days, you had used media cutting into the "god given rights of media moguls to make money". You could still build an absurd music collection even then without spending a ton of money.
You could also just record off of radio. Some stations even played entire albums all at once.
_...and "thousands" of files really isn't that much really. Any record album comes with a lot of individual tracks. So it's easy to inflate these numbers to the benefit of media shills.
Plus you have a lot more distractions now. There's the internet with silly websites and mobile devices with cheap or free games. The AOR dinosaurs have to deal with an entirely different world now.
Oracle is indeed a deep rabbit hole that can lead to alchoholism and depression... except for that bit you're whining about right there. Trivial stuff easily found through Google.
Oracle's applications are ugly things. Their core engine is great but pretty much anything else they try to build is a steaming pile. It's probably everything else above the RDBMS in the Oregon system that's a disaster.
Plus Oracle charges by the CPU, so there is really no incentive for them to do things efficiently. They want you stuck paying 3x or 5x more for your infastructure than you really need to.
You can bet that this thing is built specifically to lock Oregon into Oracle products in the future. So more upgrades in the future and no feasible means of escape.
> Oracle is so maddingly fragile (through their stored procedures
An entirely avoidable artificial and self-inflicted problem.
People pay for commercial databases because the biggest free one still gets delivered with something as simple as foreign keys turned off.
A commercial RDBMS might not be able to handle whatever Facebook is doing but supporting the ACA website should be no problem with 10 year old copies of Oracle, DB2 or even SQL Server.
It's like that shopping site thrown together in a couple of days by 3 guys. You don't put all of this together all at once as one big monolithic piece. You put it together in stages as discrete components.
Parts of both websites could have been functional on time due to priorities set when milestones were missed.
Having something to present and taking responsibility for missing the deadline on the rest likely would have been seen as much less of a debacle.
"mostly working" is not bad when compared to "total clusterf*ck".
> Younger people who didn't evolve from those systems find these systems hard to use
Younger people are fine with whatever you throw at them. They are not the sort of inflexible morons you are trying to make them out to be. They are the ones that can actually adapt and learn new things. They are not the ones that have problem with "stuff that's too old".
It's the aging dinosaurs that could never adapt to PCs that have problems with PCs and may or may not be helped by a less useful device.
> You can only do things with Linux if you're willing to devote your life to learning to use the damn thing,
It has the same shiny happy GUI interfaces that Windows and MacOS has and always has.
> The only OS maker that makes an OS that you can freely (and easily) install on almost any piece of computer hardware on the planet is Microsoft.
Not really. That's a nice fantasy you have there but the reality is much harsher. Lemmings are always trying to tell us that Microsoft finally got it right this time and they are always full of sh*t.
Windows only has an advantage because it's pre-loaded.
You don't actually have to get your hands dirty in order to "build" a PC. You never have. Even in the days of Computer Shopper, the numbers of bespoke box builders was legion.
You get a similar price point to Dell but better gear and more interesting and useful options.
Even HP and Dell offer this to a similar degree but with inferior components.
PCs did fine before they became a mass market consumer products. Some of them were even cheaper and more powerful than the Macs and DOS clones a lot of people like to fixate on now to the exclusion of all else.
Plus business computing of various kinds will support x86 clones for a long time.
> You really have no idea what you're trying to say, do you?
It's pretty clear really. Moral awareness implies natural rights. The presumption that human children aren't sufficiently developed in this capacity is generally why they are treated as lesser creatures.
Instinct has nothing to do with it. As non-herbivores, there are only certain kinds of foods we can derive sustenance from and others that provide a considerable advantage.
You are not a cow. It doesn't matter how much you want to ignore your physical body.
I dunno. Chimps seem like a poor choice for a food source. Their numbers are far too small. They might make a nice appetizer for today but they would get depleted too quickly if you exploited them with gusto.
Wildebeasts or somesuch would probably work out better.
> Corporations are run by and owned by people, not by machines. They are treated as legal persons
_...because it benefits corporations and corporations have lots of money and with that money comes power. This is a condition that predates our nation (USA).
A corporation is not a person. It is is a MOB constructed to shield that mob from the legal consequences of their actions.
As an entity with limited legal responsibilites, it should also have similarly limited rights.
It's kind of like a child or a chimp in this respect.
Slashdot Mirror
Quite right. It sounds like enforcement here was handled by a bunch of jackbooted thugs. The "perpetrator" here should have had a chance to remedy the situation without it getting escalated. They should have been given the chance to "cease and desist". That's just being civilized.
Otherwise you end up with a slightly dressed up version of drive by shootings and gang wars.
The project/corporation should have been given the chance to fix this, revert it, and to revoke repository access to the offending party.
You have done nothing to argue against the OPs primary thesis. Namely that:
"An API is a collection of facts"
> At the really high end, the machines automatically call home and report a fault to the vendor.
Not everyone that does "Enterprise Storage" wants to pay for that kind of pampering. This is true in general and doesn't just apply to storage devices that you think no one else here has ever managed.
> Yeah, because no business ever adds computers to a domain
Quite a few don't. Not every business is a Fortune 100 multi-national monstrosity. By definition, most are not.
The real problem is that he's likely never going to be able to repay it. This fine is a fiction. Such fiction undermines the law and respect for same.
Something sane that this person could actually pay would have been much more meaningful in terms of law and order.
> So every time I break a window, the worse thing that can happen, in the very unlikely event that I get caught, is that I pay to replace the window?
Pretty much. This is a very basic and OLD legal principle.
It's BIBLICAL even.
You know... all of that "eye for an eye" stuff. It's not just about poking people's eyes out.
But we all know that there's a blatant double standard here. Tort reform for the rich, crime and punishment for the poor.
Even under that model an absurdly high number is still an absurdly high number. He can never repay it. Thus it will never be repaid. The "punitive benefit" of that number is entirely bogus.
Justice is never served by an unreasonably high number.
It's far more likely to increase disrespect for the law.
> Obviously, you've never tried plugging a USB cable into the back of a tower that can't easily be moved
That's just the result of piss poor planning. A reversible connector won't help that. You will still be fumbling like Helen Keller trying to figure out where your cable should go.
Don't be a total idiot. Think a step ahead. Use a hub.
In the 80s and 90s you had format churn. An album released in 1981 might have been bought in 4 different formats before the gravy train ended.
Although even in those days, you had used media cutting into the "god given rights of media moguls to make money". You could still build an absurd music collection even then without spending a ton of money.
You could also just record off of radio. Some stations even played entire albums all at once.
_...and "thousands" of files really isn't that much really. Any record album comes with a lot of individual tracks. So it's easy to inflate these numbers to the benefit of media shills.
Plus you have a lot more distractions now. There's the internet with silly websites and mobile devices with cheap or free games. The AOR dinosaurs have to deal with an entirely different world now.
Oracle is indeed a deep rabbit hole that can lead to alchoholism and depression... except for that bit you're whining about right there. Trivial stuff easily found through Google.
Oracle's applications are ugly things. Their core engine is great but pretty much anything else they try to build is a steaming pile. It's probably everything else above the RDBMS in the Oregon system that's a disaster.
Plus Oracle charges by the CPU, so there is really no incentive for them to do things efficiently. They want you stuck paying 3x or 5x more for your infastructure than you really need to.
You can bet that this thing is built specifically to lock Oregon into Oracle products in the future. So more upgrades in the future and no feasible means of escape.
> Oracle is so maddingly fragile (through their stored procedures
An entirely avoidable artificial and self-inflicted problem.
People pay for commercial databases because the biggest free one still gets delivered with something as simple as foreign keys turned off.
A commercial RDBMS might not be able to handle whatever Facebook is doing but supporting the ACA website should be no problem with 10 year old copies of Oracle, DB2 or even SQL Server.
It's like that shopping site thrown together in a couple of days by 3 guys. You don't put all of this together all at once as one big monolithic piece. You put it together in stages as discrete components.
Parts of both websites could have been functional on time due to priorities set when milestones were missed.
Having something to present and taking responsibility for missing the deadline on the rest likely would have been seen as much less of a debacle.
"mostly working" is not bad when compared to "total clusterf*ck".
> Mostly functioning.
Beats nothing.
> And with security like a sieve.
As if the Obamacare website that's designed to funnel personal data to Experian is any better...
This is Oracle, the king of high priced proprietary software. Why do you think that "Open Source" has anything to do with this?
> Younger people who didn't evolve from those systems find these systems hard to use
Younger people are fine with whatever you throw at them. They are not the sort of inflexible morons you are trying to make them out to be. They are the ones that can actually adapt and learn new things. They are not the ones that have problem with "stuff that's too old".
It's the aging dinosaurs that could never adapt to PCs that have problems with PCs and may or may not be helped by a less useful device.
> You can only do things with Linux if you're willing to devote your life to learning to use the damn thing,
It has the same shiny happy GUI interfaces that Windows and MacOS has and always has.
> The only OS maker that makes an OS that you can freely (and easily) install on almost any piece of computer hardware on the planet is Microsoft.
Not really. That's a nice fantasy you have there but the reality is much harsher. Lemmings are always trying to tell us that Microsoft finally got it right this time and they are always full of sh*t.
Windows only has an advantage because it's pre-loaded.
Nobody wants to install their own OS.
You don't actually have to get your hands dirty in order to "build" a PC. You never have. Even in the days of Computer Shopper, the numbers of bespoke box builders was legion.
You get a similar price point to Dell but better gear and more interesting and useful options.
Even HP and Dell offer this to a similar degree but with inferior components.
PCs did fine before they became a mass market consumer products. Some of them were even cheaper and more powerful than the Macs and DOS clones a lot of people like to fixate on now to the exclusion of all else.
Plus business computing of various kinds will support x86 clones for a long time.
A lot of poor people are dumb as rocks. Their ineptitude at making personal choices is a big part of their dire financial situation.
> You really have no idea what you're trying to say, do you?
It's pretty clear really. Moral awareness implies natural rights. The presumption that human children aren't sufficiently developed in this capacity is generally why they are treated as lesser creatures.
Instinct has nothing to do with it. As non-herbivores, there are only certain kinds of foods we can derive sustenance from and others that provide a considerable advantage.
You are not a cow. It doesn't matter how much you want to ignore your physical body.
> humans can live with without eating meat.
They also tend to do poorly at it since we aren't actual herbivores.
You are not a cow, no matter how much you want to be one.
I dunno. Chimps seem like a poor choice for a food source. Their numbers are far too small. They might make a nice appetizer for today but they would get depleted too quickly if you exploited them with gusto.
Wildebeasts or somesuch would probably work out better.
> Corporations are run by and owned by people, not by machines. They are treated as legal persons
_...because it benefits corporations and corporations have lots of money and with that money comes power. This is a condition that predates our nation (USA).
A corporation is not a person. It is is a MOB constructed to shield that mob from the legal consequences of their actions.
As an entity with limited legal responsibilites, it should also have similarly limited rights.
It's kind of like a child or a chimp in this respect.