The only possible way your personal information gets out here is if YOU distribute it. In that case it's YOU, not this company, that is violating your privacy.
"Liberal" used to mean What we call libertarian in the US. "Liberal" just got hijacked to mean socialism, so the American classical liberals needed a new term.
Nah, they're right to get excited. The ALA is just another leftist advocacy group and its positions will fall right in line with the usual Slashdot bias.
Ever heard of privateering? That was privately contracted miliary.
Governments have long privatized public works, too. For example, in Massachusetts the Charles River Bridge company was chartered by the state to, you guessed it, build a toll bridge over the Charles River.
Governments were privatizing services as long as there were government services.
Don't worry about the goofball in office. Nancy Pelosi is only House minority leader and, thanks to gerrymandering, has just about no chance of becoming Speaker in January.
Oops.. I meant "bringing an RDBMS *expert* on staff"
And my footnote:
* I'm talking about economics here, not law or politics. The user of Oracle faces a monopoly of support for Oracle, not a competitive market of RDBMSes, because his data and code are tied to that database.
If they use an RDBMS they have the code to, yes, they have the option of bringing an RDBMS on staff and doing custom improvements and fixes. However, they also have the option to go hire some other company to make the fixes and improvements they need.
The user of PostgreSQL has a whole market of developers to choose from. The user of Oracle has only one choice, and that company is known for taking a monopolist*'s rents from its customers.
Oracle for "mission-critical"? I don't see how any one could feel comfortable putting the life of their company in the hands of another company like that.
Once in a while, we get an article or comment on this site suggesting that if only software design and implementation were licensed, goverment-regulated professions, software reliability would improve.
Here's why it's no silver bullet. The bureaucratic overhead of testing and certification would slow what was once a fast-moving industry to a crawl, harming reliability in other ways.
Internet worms would force internet shutdowns because unplugging the network would be the only legal recourse left, because legally-mandated testing of the installation of a software patch would take too long.
No, they do get it. Selling software as a product has made Microsoft a wildly successful organization.
The people who don't understand what's going on are their customers. They're content to get a junk product with no service, and Microsoft cleans up at their expense.
Slashdot Mirror
Repeating the assertion doesn't make it so.
The only possible way your personal information gets out here is if YOU distribute it. In that case it's YOU, not this company, that is violating your privacy.
How is this a loss of privacy unless you were planning to violate the company's copyright?
Who is going to see your personally tagged tarball that you download?
"Liberal" used to mean What we call libertarian in the US. "Liberal" just got hijacked to mean socialism, so the American classical liberals needed a new term.
Nah, they're right to get excited. The ALA is just another leftist advocacy group and its positions will fall right in line with the usual Slashdot bias.
I meant to say, the Charles River Bridge Company was chartered in 1785, long before Pinochet.
Ever heard of privateering? That was privately contracted miliary.
Governments have long privatized public works, too. For example, in Massachusetts the Charles River Bridge company was chartered by the state to, you guessed it, build a toll bridge over the Charles River.
Governments were privatizing services as long as there were government services.
Thatcher/Pinochet/Reagan?
Let me guess, you prefer socialists like Blair/Hitler/Kerry?
No, his job is to sit and count the money he made in the buyout of slashdot.
Typical, you're too blinded with hate to notice that this event took place in Canada.
Too blinded with hate to be bothered with facts, I guess.
The customer isn't right when he's as 16 year old anarchist who likes sticking it to the companies that shell out millions to produce what he likes.
Don't worry about the goofball in office. Nancy Pelosi is only House minority leader and, thanks to gerrymandering, has just about no chance of becoming Speaker in January.
Sounds like Oracle makes money off of middle managers who get paid whether the company succeeds or fails then.
What an interesting world.
You can't sue a piece of software.
Good answer. Does anybody actually sell Oracle insurance, though?
We want to block because we're talking about windows. We want light and sight but not heat.
I *am* management. I don't actually want my competitors to stop wasting money on Oracle. It just amazes me that people do.
Oops.. I meant "bringing an RDBMS *expert* on staff"
And my footnote:
* I'm talking about economics here, not law or politics. The user of Oracle faces a monopoly of support for Oracle, not a competitive market of RDBMSes, because his data and code are tied to that database.
If they use an RDBMS they have the code to, yes, they have the option of bringing an RDBMS on staff and doing custom improvements and fixes. However, they also have the option to go hire some other company to make the fixes and improvements they need.
The user of PostgreSQL has a whole market of developers to choose from. The user of Oracle has only one choice, and that company is known for taking a monopolist*'s rents from its customers.
Oracle for "mission-critical"? I don't see how any one could feel comfortable putting the life of their company in the hands of another company like that.
And yes, I could add arguments to that:
Obviously this is a simplified example, but you get the idea. And I assume that this capability extends to other embedded language like perl or ruby.
Using postgresql 7.4.2:
That will print all the company names in my database.
Once in a while, we get an article or comment on this site suggesting that if only software design and implementation were licensed, goverment-regulated professions, software reliability would improve.
Here's why it's no silver bullet. The bureaucratic overhead of testing and certification would slow what was once a fast-moving industry to a crawl, harming reliability in other ways.
Internet worms would force internet shutdowns because unplugging the network would be the only legal recourse left, because legally-mandated testing of the installation of a software patch would take too long.
killall httpd prevents those pesky links, too.
You're almost right.. those are Isaac's three laws alright.
No, they do get it. Selling software as a product has made Microsoft a wildly successful organization.
The people who don't understand what's going on are their customers. They're content to get a junk product with no service, and Microsoft cleans up at their expense.