And in 2016, STILL the juvenile potshots at Microsoft are being perpetuated. So, I'll take one of my own: I suppose you like Postgres (which is a great alternative) or Oracle (which sucks so hard you probably owe it money now) simply because they're more difficult to use, and therefore must be better somehow.
I used to think that MS-SQL was a toy, but, now, in 2016, for probably 95% of all the database installations out there, assuming you have a choice, MS-SQL is a cheaper and easier to administer than either Postgres or Oracle. This is coming from a guy that has been doing this for 20 years, and have actually holds the title of DBA, administering Oracle, Postgres, MySQL and MS-SQL side by side.
A license for MS-SQL is a whole lot cheaper than an Oracle or Postgres DBA, by the way.
Reminds me more of "Brave New World". Mustapha Mond would be proud; we're working ourselves into exactly the population that Huxley describe:
- "[T]hey also want to be social and never lonely" (Very nearly a direct quote from the book) - "Millennials are staying single longer than previous generations" (No more moms and dads...)...and the comments here are filled with examples of the sexual angle...
Of course, the quotes from the article are, like, that guy's opinion man, but I'm assuming he's done the research enough to see that those are at least somewhat accurate assertions.
Between Orwell and Huxley, I think Huxley was more accurate.
While I know it's bad form to use Wikipedia as a scholarly reference, the article on the Founding Fathers does indicate that the term is a broad one, and specifically references the group that signed the Declaration as being encompassed by the term.
Additionally, I would assume that putting your signature on something that would mean your death sentence for treason against the crown means that you agree with it so wholeheartedly that you may as well have written it for yourself.
I'm not sure why there's so much vitriol coming my way. I am sincerely sorry that I, personally, am responsible for your anger at "religion".
By the way, I'm a religion major; I'm pretty sure I know a good bit about both my own religion and many others that you probably are not familiar with.
Again, friend, these aren't my words (though I do agree with them). These are the words of the people who decided that maybe it's a good thing to start a new country and this is how it should run. Please re-read the declaration of independence. Not a legally binding document, of course, but it does demonstrate what was going through the head of those to whom you owe a great debt.
Thank you for a well-reasoned, cogent response. I disagree with your definition of what a right is (as evidenced from my comments), but I do appreciate your civil comment.
Let's start at the beginning. The declaration of independence says that among our rights are "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". The 14th amendment says that a state shall not deprive anyone of "life, liberty or property"....essentially their rights.
And again, I reiterate what I said earlier. Where do rights come from?
If they come from God, well, the religions practiced by virtually all people worldwide have consistently said throughout their history that such a marriage is not a marriage.
If they do not come from God, then they are simply a social construct, freely defined by humans. And the humans in many states said that such a marriage is not a marriage.
Nowhere does it say "as defined by a bigoted interpretation of a specific god".
It sure as fuck doesn't say "unalienable rights except as overruled by a ratified vote".
And yet the "three great religions" practiced by the vast majority of the people who inhabit your biosphere have for their entire collective history said that this same creator says that such a marriage is not a marriage.
Where do rights come from again? If you do not subscribe to any sort of God (and it sounds like you may not), then you have to say that rights are a social construct made up by people. And then you're back to square one with prop 8 and all the constitutional amendments.
The religious argument is irrelevant here, because marriage has legal rights and protections which have nothing at all to do with any church.
The declaration of independence would seem to disagree with you: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights". It's not me saying that...it's the founding fathers.
Prop 8 was of the people, as are all the constitutional amendments passed in many states explicitly defining what marriage is or isn't. Isn't that independence of the people? Who is it that's against independence now?
Wow. If I hadn't seen that, I would not have believed it. What a jerk!
Re:Big shoutout to Tridge and the whole Samba team
on
Samba 4 Enters Beta
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
This is about much more than just the filesystem. You can run a full-on AD controller now, complete with group policies, etc. It really is a drop-in replacement for most of Active Directory does.
You're not going to end up as some freedom fighter in a post-apocalyptic future where end users can't control their software. You're just a nerd at a computer. There are no "stakes".
+1 LULZ
These people are insane and have little-to-no sense of perspective.
But, if you are, I'd say you actually have a good point. Probably less than 22% of those educated in the California public school system will actually go on to USE basic science in any meaningful way. That same principle could be applied to any other public or private school system.
I used to the type to think that educating every single person in every single subject was a good idea, but as I've gotten older, I'm not so sure of that anymore. Trying to expect every student to be above average (yes, that's impossible) in every subject is simply a demoralizing exercise, and my personal belief is that it causes kids to have either a) unrealistic expectations of what "successful" means or b) they are utter failures at everything they try.
I've not used a NoSQL system (meaning I'm *perfectly qualified to speak*!:-) ), but I would assume that there are abstraction libraries that can apply ORM type mapping on these things.
My co-workers think I'm nuts, but I have for years said that I would only use stored procedures, triggers, functions, what-have-you when I absolutely have no other choice. The reason is that it smears application logic into your database, which most of the time means that all of the fancy, gee-whiz tools you use to write, maintain, version and otherwise manage your code are nearly useless. It's also more difficult to scale that code (you can make copies for sure, but if you've ever had to do change management on a sizable Oracle cluster, for example, it can be painful).
Scaling application logic across cheap hardware is also easier than scaling your database.
So, for me, assuming that I have access to an abstraction layer, I can't see a downside (apart from strict ACID compliance) to a NoSQL system.
My $0.02. And I've been called a crochety old man before, so if you disagree with me you wouldn't be the first.:-)
GP is right though: The fact that there were drawings should have tipped them off that maybe their analysis was incomplete, rather than drawing the unwarranted conclusion of "Well, they must have just made them up".
Slashdot Mirror
*sigh*
And in 2016, STILL the juvenile potshots at Microsoft are being perpetuated. So, I'll take one of my own: I suppose you like Postgres (which is a great alternative) or Oracle (which sucks so hard you probably owe it money now) simply because they're more difficult to use, and therefore must be better somehow.
I used to think that MS-SQL was a toy, but, now, in 2016, for probably 95% of all the database installations out there, assuming you have a choice, MS-SQL is a cheaper and easier to administer than either Postgres or Oracle. This is coming from a guy that has been doing this for 20 years, and have actually holds the title of DBA, administering Oracle, Postgres, MySQL and MS-SQL side by side.
A license for MS-SQL is a whole lot cheaper than an Oracle or Postgres DBA, by the way.
TRIGGER WARNING: Mentions Wikipedia
The Wikipedia article on the book seems to indicate that he thought of Brave New World as a dystopia, so I'm assuming he was against such a future.
Reminds me more of "Brave New World". Mustapha Mond would be proud; we're working ourselves into exactly the population that Huxley describe:
- "[T]hey also want to be social and never lonely" (Very nearly a direct quote from the book) ...and the comments here are filled with examples of the sexual angle...
- "Millennials are staying single longer than previous generations" (No more moms and dads...)
Of course, the quotes from the article are, like, that guy's opinion man, but I'm assuming he's done the research enough to see that those are at least somewhat accurate assertions.
Between Orwell and Huxley, I think Huxley was more accurate.
I heard Steorn was reviewing it.
A thread complaining about how broken American politics is includes a nugget like "[I] forget who vetoes who". Wow.
We should bring back these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0
While I know it's bad form to use Wikipedia as a scholarly reference, the article on the Founding Fathers does indicate that the term is a broad one, and specifically references the group that signed the Declaration as being encompassed by the term.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Additionally, I would assume that putting your signature on something that would mean your death sentence for treason against the crown means that you agree with it so wholeheartedly that you may as well have written it for yourself.
*sigh*
I'm not sure why there's so much vitriol coming my way. I am sincerely sorry that I, personally, am responsible for your anger at "religion".
By the way, I'm a religion major; I'm pretty sure I know a good bit about both my own religion and many others that you probably are not familiar with.
Again, friend, these aren't my words (though I do agree with them). These are the words of the people who decided that maybe it's a good thing to start a new country and this is how it should run. Please re-read the declaration of independence. Not a legally binding document, of course, but it does demonstrate what was going through the head of those to whom you owe a great debt.
Thank you for a well-reasoned, cogent response. I disagree with your definition of what a right is (as evidenced from my comments), but I do appreciate your civil comment.
Let's start at the beginning. The declaration of independence says that among our rights are "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". The 14th amendment says that a state shall not deprive anyone of "life, liberty or property"....essentially their rights.
And again, I reiterate what I said earlier. Where do rights come from?
If they come from God, well, the religions practiced by virtually all people worldwide have consistently said throughout their history that such a marriage is not a marriage.
If they do not come from God, then they are simply a social construct, freely defined by humans. And the humans in many states said that such a marriage is not a marriage.
Nowhere does it say "as defined by a bigoted interpretation of a specific god".
It sure as fuck doesn't say "unalienable rights except as overruled by a ratified vote".
And yet the "three great religions" practiced by the vast majority of the people who inhabit your biosphere have for their entire collective history said that this same creator says that such a marriage is not a marriage.
Where do rights come from again? If you do not subscribe to any sort of God (and it sounds like you may not), then you have to say that rights are a social construct made up by people. And then you're back to square one with prop 8 and all the constitutional amendments.
The religious argument is irrelevant here, because marriage has legal rights and protections which have nothing at all to do with any church.
The declaration of independence would seem to disagree with you: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights". It's not me saying that...it's the founding fathers.
Prop 8 was of the people, as are all the constitutional amendments passed in many states explicitly defining what marriage is or isn't. Isn't that independence of the people? Who is it that's against independence now?
Indeed. It's a brave new world. By the way, did you read that book?
The credulity is strong with this one......
Wow. If I hadn't seen that, I would not have believed it. What a jerk!
This is about much more than just the filesystem. You can run a full-on AD controller now, complete with group policies, etc. It really is a drop-in replacement for most of Active Directory does.
You're not going to end up as some freedom fighter in a post-apocalyptic future where end users can't control their software. You're just a nerd at a computer. There are no "stakes".
+1 LULZ
These people are insane and have little-to-no sense of perspective.
grr.... "I used to be the type to think..."
/not sure if serious......
But, if you are, I'd say you actually have a good point. Probably less than 22% of those educated in the California public school system will actually go on to USE basic science in any meaningful way. That same principle could be applied to any other public or private school system.
I used to the type to think that educating every single person in every single subject was a good idea, but as I've gotten older, I'm not so sure of that anymore. Trying to expect every student to be above average (yes, that's impossible) in every subject is simply a demoralizing exercise, and my personal belief is that it causes kids to have either a) unrealistic expectations of what "successful" means or b) they are utter failures at everything they try.
They weren't emulating the Amiga. They were emulating Commodore. Looks like they nailed it too. Very Commodore-like..... :-)
Easily the most racist thing I've ever seen on Slashdot. Assuming you're serious.
I've not used a NoSQL system (meaning I'm *perfectly qualified to speak*! :-) ), but I would assume that there are abstraction libraries that can apply ORM type mapping on these things.
My co-workers think I'm nuts, but I have for years said that I would only use stored procedures, triggers, functions, what-have-you when I absolutely have no other choice. The reason is that it smears application logic into your database, which most of the time means that all of the fancy, gee-whiz tools you use to write, maintain, version and otherwise manage your code are nearly useless. It's also more difficult to scale that code (you can make copies for sure, but if you've ever had to do change management on a sizable Oracle cluster, for example, it can be painful).
Scaling application logic across cheap hardware is also easier than scaling your database.
So, for me, assuming that I have access to an abstraction layer, I can't see a downside (apart from strict ACID compliance) to a NoSQL system.
My $0.02. And I've been called a crochety old man before, so if you disagree with me you wouldn't be the first. :-)
Now we know what the water receptacles in Dune were made of.
GP is right though: The fact that there were drawings should have tipped them off that maybe their analysis was incomplete, rather than drawing the unwarranted conclusion of "Well, they must have just made them up".
This is the scientific equivalent of those idiots that drive off of cliffs because of what their GPS tells them rather than what they see with their own two eyes.