It sounds like you're interested in participating in the budding e-democracy movement. We're at the beginning of a "space race" to implement something close to what your talking about: A comprehensive online mechanism (with complementary offline events) for petitioning, measure/resolution drafting, peer-moderated deliberations and decision making at various geographical levels. As this "democracy 2.0" phases in, the simple democracy of making "popular" decisions at the voting booths will transform into a democratic meritocracy where issues are decided in a far more responsible manner.
It's not complicated to alter a small bit of my common PHP code that blocks out particular user agents. Besides, it's being reported that Grub doesn't necessarily adhere to robots.txt instructions.
A DDoS is only effective because it's a whole bunch of messages all at once to one target...
Well, no. Many hosted web sites have bandwidth limits entailed in the packages. If Grub makes the bandwidth limits tip over, then that's an effective DOS.
I'm doing SETI@home anyway. SETI is a trusted provider, and I'm not letting my strong devotion to OS get the best of me. SETI has made crystal clear their rationale behind closing their source, and I accept it.
Grub is mainly interested in your excess bandwidth.
And, I would suppose, the excess bandwidth of many web hosting packages. I do not want Grub hitting my hosted sites from all these disparate IP's just to build a new search engine we don't need. To prevent a possible DOS due to running out of purchased bandwidth, I'm going to have to write site code that denies site access to the Grub clients. I can make do with the fact that my sites already have decent listings on Google and dmoz.
I'm working for state government in 15-years-behind Kentucky, and there's rumblings here about switching everyone to StarOffice, simply due to the high costs of managing the MS Office licenses. The state legislature would just love to find another way of cutting expenses with our continued budget shortfalls.
Ellison's big pronouncements ususally turn out to be wrong, so we should expect the opposite to occur; that is, Microsoft will find new businesses to replace the ones that are becoming commoditized.
What really burns me up about Ellison is that he acts so high and mighty for a man who runs a company that produces worst-of-breed software development tools (with the exception of the RDBMS). Forms, JDeveloper... need I say more?
Big corporate databases on big computers, however, tend to be Oracle, because it will handle the complex queries and large data sets effectively.
I wonder how many of these "complex queries" and "large data sets" could be redesigned to be much less complex and therefore not require the "big iron" of Oracle... In six years of experience with DBMS's, I've seen so much needless complexity in data stores developed by hacks that I just have to wonder.
But state of the art isn't what's important with OSS. OSS is about the commodity market and relational databases *are* a commodity now.
Agreed. Further, the so-called "state of the art" advanced by the development tools industry hasn't exactly been in step with the development of best practices in software development. And this applies especially to DBMS's. I understand many by-rote programmers cannot see this, but Oracle has led them down a path of ridiculous design by their encouraging the _dumping_ of so much business logic into the database when what's really called for is middleware of some sort. Business objects that gather their data from just about any source and organize it around business rules are an incredible innovation in computer science. Of course, Oracle wants us to pull these objects into their servers to keep their business going, but is it sound design? I say NO.
I came onto the DBMS scene, as it were, around six years ago (after developing with desktop db's), and I've discovered pretty much the same thing.
Most of the snazzy features in high-end databases are really not needed. And that even goes for stored procedures. Don't get me wrong--stored procedures have their place, but too often, lazy programmers write these procedures by rote choice rather than looking at all the design alternatives beforehand.
Dwelling too much on stored procedures not only makes it difficult to switch to another db vendor (admittedly, not something that's often faced). The real problem is a) [often spaghetti-like] procedural code that b) implements business logic that belongs design-wise in a middle-tier.
In most cases, a DBMS should be used simply as an efficient, indexed, relational data store... nothing else. Packing on "all this other crap" really hasn't done much for the advancement of best practices in computer science.
Perhaps we'll see an article soon about the short attention span of development managers... like when they keep pushing for the impossible silver bullet of getting all projects completed using a single platform, when they should be really looking at the long-term and realizing that it's far more effective to figure out ways to manage the inevitable heterogeneity of IDEs, languages, etc. The practical strategy of choosing the best tool for a specific project seems to evade the short-fused consciousness of most managers.
Slashdot Mirror
Posting jobs that don't exist should probably be made into a crime, as it's not exactly victimless. It borders on out-and-out fraud.
I meant " classes..."
You mean
classes defined in CSS?Anyway, I still use tables. Why? They work. And they work well.
Now, That's a reasoned response!
Your opinion of your fellow human beings is so heart-warming.
It sounds like you're interested in participating in the budding e-democracy movement. We're at the beginning of a "space race" to implement something close to what your talking about: A comprehensive online mechanism (with complementary offline events) for petitioning, measure/resolution drafting, peer-moderated deliberations and decision making at various geographical levels. As this "democracy 2.0" phases in, the simple democracy of making "popular" decisions at the voting booths will transform into a democratic meritocracy where issues are decided in a far more responsible manner.
But who's willing to stand up for the rights of this future generation?
The same people who stand up for computer nerds and other intellectual achievers of high school age.
Uhhh... wait a minute...
Before you get hooked on Hasselhoff too much...
It's not complicated to alter a small bit of my common PHP code that blocks out particular user agents. Besides, it's being reported that Grub doesn't necessarily adhere to robots.txt instructions.
A DDoS is only effective because it's a whole bunch of messages all at once to one target...
Well, no. Many hosted web sites have bandwidth limits entailed in the packages. If Grub makes the bandwidth limits tip over, then that's an effective DOS.
I'm doing SETI@home anyway. SETI is a trusted provider, and I'm not letting my strong devotion to OS get the best of me. SETI has made crystal clear their rationale behind closing their source, and I accept it.
Grub is mainly interested in your excess bandwidth.
And, I would suppose, the excess bandwidth of many web hosting packages. I do not want Grub hitting my hosted sites from all these disparate IP's just to build a new search engine we don't need. To prevent a possible DOS due to running out of purchased bandwidth, I'm going to have to write site code that denies site access to the Grub clients. I can make do with the fact that my sites already have decent listings on Google and dmoz.
Just download version 3.08 to fix it.
I was thinking of writing some software and giving it the acronym "GD-CRAP". (what the letters means is a trade secret :) )
"New Firebird is a browser. New Firebird is a database.
It's a browser. No, honey, it's a database.
It's a browser! It's a database!
It's a browser!! It's a database, you cow!!!
Hey hey hey, no need to fuss.
New Firebird is a browser _and_ a database. {big laughs}
New Firebird can be used to store data in a relational manner.
And just look at it render HTML!"
I'm working for state government in 15-years-behind Kentucky, and there's rumblings here about switching everyone to StarOffice, simply due to the high costs of managing the MS Office licenses. The state legislature would just love to find another way of cutting expenses with our continued budget shortfalls.
Global warming is the hot new thing these days, all the cool kids (I mean scientists) are doing it. It reeks of a bandwagon to me.
.NET or J2EE anyone? :)
Rate this one WAY up. Par excellent!!!
Here is a very interesting idea fishing site. Go fish. :)
Ellison's big pronouncements ususally turn out to be wrong, so we should expect the opposite to occur; that is, Microsoft will find new businesses to replace the ones that are becoming commoditized.
What really burns me up about Ellison is that he acts so high and mighty for a man who runs a company that produces worst-of-breed software development tools (with the exception of the RDBMS). Forms, JDeveloper... need I say more?
Big corporate databases on big computers, however, tend to be Oracle, because it will handle the complex queries and large data sets effectively.
I wonder how many of these "complex queries" and "large data sets" could be redesigned to be much less complex and therefore not require the "big iron" of Oracle... In six years of experience with DBMS's, I've seen so much needless complexity in data stores developed by hacks that I just have to wonder.
But state of the art isn't what's important with OSS. OSS is about the commodity market and relational databases *are* a commodity now.
Agreed. Further, the so-called "state of the art" advanced by the development tools industry hasn't exactly been in step with the development of best practices in software development. And this applies especially to DBMS's. I understand many by-rote programmers cannot see this, but Oracle has led them down a path of ridiculous design by their encouraging the _dumping_ of so much business logic into the database when what's really called for is middleware of some sort. Business objects that gather their data from just about any source and organize it around business rules are an incredible innovation in computer science. Of course, Oracle wants us to pull these objects into their servers to keep their business going, but is it sound design? I say NO.
I came onto the DBMS scene, as it were, around six years ago (after developing with desktop db's), and I've discovered pretty much the same thing.
Most of the snazzy features in high-end databases are really not needed. And that even goes for stored procedures. Don't get me wrong--stored procedures have their place, but too often, lazy programmers write these procedures by rote choice rather than looking at all the design alternatives beforehand.
Dwelling too much on stored procedures not only makes it difficult to switch to another db vendor (admittedly, not something that's often faced). The real problem is a) [often spaghetti-like] procedural code that b) implements business logic that belongs design-wise in a middle-tier.
In most cases, a DBMS should be used simply as an efficient, indexed, relational data store... nothing else. Packing on "all this other crap" really hasn't done much for the advancement of best practices in computer science.
Straw. Camel's back.
Perhaps we'll see an article soon about the short attention span of development managers... like when they keep pushing for the impossible silver bullet of getting all projects completed using a single platform, when they should be really looking at the long-term and realizing that it's far more effective to figure out ways to manage the inevitable heterogeneity of IDEs, languages, etc. The practical strategy of choosing the best tool for a specific project seems to evade the short-fused consciousness of most managers.