I'm not saying anything about the guy here, but it's more accurate to say that what's being asked here is not similar to "if a bum asks for money, buy him a sandwich", it's more accurate to "if a bum asks for money to pay for food, you give him money trusting him to use it to buy food." I don't see contact information for his landlord or something anywhere.
There is zero accounting here of where this money is going. Hell, what happens if this request is so successful that he gets enough money to pay his rent for 5 years, and he dies in 2 months? I don't want the sob story spams to start up, just hoping that someone is kind enough to be taken advantage of. I'm sick of too much of that already.
Tell you what, you provide the proof, and I'll send money. I'll need proof of:
That this fellow is indeed who he says he is.
That he is truely unable to pay his rent. (i.e. open the books up)
List of donations and amounts already received, up to date
Details on how the money is definately going to Robert Anton Wilson and no one else.
Details on any and all "administrative fees" or anything else taken out before the money is put towards the rent.
Plans for how to stop the donations when there is enough.
Details on the trustee, including legal documents stating what will happen to the money afterwards if there is some left over (though hopefully if they stop the donations there wouldn't be much for this).
Unless you're willing to open the books up and keep them open, then my donations either go to an organization I can trust, or one who IS willing to open up the books.
It's truly sad that we cannot just trust those around us, but there are far too many who take advantage of that trust every chance they get. I think we all know better than to trust everything we read on the internet...
First, you're complaining about how they haven't asked if you want to get an account. So, what are these guys supposed to do? E-mail every single e-mail address to invite people? I mean, what do you do if you want a Hotmail account, or a Yahoo account? Oh, that's right, you go and sign up. So, in your terms, you say "please, pretty please, let me use Yahoo e-mail!!!"
Secondly, even when you supposedly needed to find someone to send you an invitation, a quick Google search brought up some places that would give you one. Hell, that's how I got in, and I think it still went faster than a signup on one of the other sites, since I didn't have to enter in information about the past 16 generations.
Finally, just for my viewpoint on the invitation system, I actually like it. Since you are/were tied to someone else, if a spammer gets a hold of one and starts using it, Google may be able to track down a whole web of spammers. Or at least, so was my thinking. Maybe that's not true, or it's unreasonable, but oh well.
That's true, the insurance companies don't consider evidence. However, the courts will, and *that* is what you want the pictures for.
About 10 years ago, I was in an accident in my parent's neighborhood. The situation was such that I was going downhill and it had just rained a little bit. There was a landscaping truck parked on the opposite side of the road (really not a great place), and this lady was following her friend out of the neighborhood. Her friend passed the truck well before I got there, but I was coming to the truck about the time she got to it on her side.
Being on her side of the road, she has to stop. Instead, she guns it and rips through. I slam on my brakes, but due to the hill and the road condition, my car impacts her driver's side front wheelwell. We get the cops to come out, and the cop starts writing the accident report up, with the incorrect location for the impact on the police report (the rear wheelwell on her car). He starts writing a ticket for *me* as well, until my own mother comes by and starts asking what happened. She quickly backs him up and gets him to realize that I'm not the one needing the ticket, but he still doesn't give the lady one.
The kicker is that a couple weeks later, we get a threatening letter from this lady's insurance. Come to find out, she's the wife of some executive at a large american vehicle manufacturer who makes cars that are often joked about being "found on roadside daily". Since the company is their insurance, it's essentially our family against big company. Turns out that these bastards are claiming it is 49% my fault, so they don't need to pay for the pretty massive repairs. No matter what, pictures, letters, anything, they wouldn't budge. So we opened a case in small claims court.
Long story short(er), after a good bit of back and forth, they eventually decided that they were supposed to pay for the repairs. (I'm sure it was mere coincidence that it was right before the case date.)
The point is, you should definately have a camera in your car. We favor using the cheap disposable type you can buy for about $10 per 100. Just drop them in your glove box and use them at an accident. Use them up every time, and just get a new one. So a camera is a good thing. However, you don't need it attached to a GPS or anything for you to get some good evidence to use in a court case. Just a plain old camera will do fine.
Thanks for proving my point that the industry is rotten. So, if you know that, then why the hell would you just agree to whatever they say without reading over it. That's what you do when you sign a contract that you don't read. What, are you counting on the government to save your rear when you get screwed? Sorry, I'll tell you now that they don't do that.
My experience with legal documents is pretty broad. But I'll admit that in every case, it IS in english. Reading through them is an exercise in patience and language comprehension, but it's not some other language. Always assume that they are out for their own skin, and *not* for your benefit. So why *wouldn't* you read it?
A lot of people get in trouble for not reading a contract before they sign. Musicians are no different. The fact that the industry is rotten shouldn't be a surprise. And if it does come down to "take it or flip burgers", then at least the musician will know what they are agreeing to, or know that they don't want to be in that position.
I've heard from a lot of people who have signed a contract without reading it, then come back later and whined about how they were taken for a fool. That's rediculous. You have to know what you're getting into.
Now, what if you had to do that every time your company wants you to start a new project at work? Every. Single. Time.
If I worked for a company that required me to sign a contract for every project, believe me when I tell you I would work the time to read the contract into my project plans. Hell, I work the time that it takes to read the requirements docs and do followup into my project plan time. Then, as usual, I at least double it.
As far as these being more difficult contracts, I don't buy that. I've had to go through contracts that were plain and simple (I will forever be praising that particular lawyer), and to the point, being a whole 6 or 7 pages, and I've had contracts that could have only originated in somebody's version of hell. You know what? There's always an option for you to back out. Don't give me that BS about 10 days to get the job done. If you don't have enough time to look over a contract, assume that someone's trying to cheat you and don't sign it. Demand the time you need to research it. So what if the recording contract withdraws it's offer? Go somewhere else and find someone who *will* give you the time.
As far as not being able to understand it, that's BS too. It's not in freaking pig latin. Yes, they make them large to hide things. Then you just tell them it's going to take you more time to look through it. When they complain, feel free to whine about the length and complexity of the contract. I bet you would be surprised about how often they'll back off.
Like I said in my previous post, I have been burned before. I had let myself be pressured into signing before reading through sufficiently. Never again!
Read your contracts before you sign. If you can't read, or your reading comprehension skills are not good enough, get a friend or family member who can read to go over it with you.
Even a successful musician is unlikely to be able to afford more than one lawyer and one accountant. The labels on the other hand have vast teams of people insuring that they squeeze every cent out of their talent and customers.
Why does this always become an explanation? I don't get it. I'm not a lawyer, but when I signed an employment contract, I read it over first, line by line. When I signed a loan contract, I read it over first. When I have *any* contract in front of me, I take the appropriate amount of time to read it over, mark *anything* I don't understand, and then research it. It takes a ton of my time up, and people even get pissed at me taking too long sometimes. But you know what? I know what I sign, and I agree with what I sign. If I don't, at the end of the process, I won't freaking sign it.
Do the damn research before you sign a contract. I have no pity for anyone who's signed into a bad contract. I've done it once, because I was in a hurry, but my one rule is that the contract is either limited, or there's an acceptable way out.
So you're one on the..what 25% left? Nope. I didn't say I *approve* of what the idiot has done, but I would still vote for him if I had to choose between Bush or Kerry. For me, it's the choice of two evils.
Wow. So you really think freedom is a dead concept and fascist theocracy is the only way to go? Right. So now that you understand exactly what I believe based on the fact that I would vote for him over a person who *tells* me his policies are completely against what I believe. Right.
No, I think freedom is something we need to get back, from both of these idiotic parties. I don't believe that the government is fascist, though we are starting to head that way, which is a concern. And we're not at a theocracy, though again, we get pretty close sometimes. Fortunately for us, these sort of changes happen over a lot longer period than just a couple years. But I guess that doesn't matter since you think Republicans have been doing this ever since Reagan though.
Can you come up with a actual reasonable mechanism by which this would even have been possible? Kerry would have been under constant attack by the media with an extremely hostile congress that would have not allowed him to do anything.
Not particularly. I obviously don't see Bush in quite the same light as you, so anything I would be concerned with about Kerry would not be as serious as you believe Bush's transgressions. I had a choice between two evils. One evil was pretty plain about what he wanted to do, and thus could hopefully be countered. The other one "had a plan", but never seemed to tell you anything else about that plan, and acted in such a way to make me believe his plan was against what I would *ever* want. Both of them believed and went with almost the exact same ideas on virtually everything, just had pretty talk one way or the other.
I *do* however take exception to your idea that Kerry would have been under attack by the media considering that the media is generally very liberal. My wife and several others that I know that work in the media confirm this to be true, even in a wildly conservative area.
As far as Congress, it's not exactly overwhelmed by conservatives. According to the party divisions in the Senate (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item _and_teasers/partydiv.htm), we've had both parties at 5 or less above or below 50 since the democrat Senate of 97. The house of representatives is even closer (percentage-wise). According to http://clerk.house.gov/histHigh/Congressional_Hist ory/partyDiv.html the biggest difference is the most recent house, at 53.33% Republicans and 46.4% Democrat. That's not exactly overwhelming either. We've had the minority pass things easier with smaller minority numbers.
Seriously, come up with a possible way he could have been worse. the fact is that he couldn't possibly have been worse no matter how much he tried even if being worse was his sole goal to which he directed mammoth effort. He would have been checked *hard* by the congress. Bush has not been subject to any oversight whatsoever since the Republicans are loyal only to their party. They do whatever he tells them where they wouldn't have done shit that Kerry asked merely due to the fact that he's in a different party. Umm... Right. Maybe you can cite a few examples on this. I certainly don't believe so, since there's plenty of bickering and dealing by both parties in every case that I know of. The only time it seems to be "whatever the President wants, no questions asked", is in the case of war powers. It's stupid, but politicians seem to be hesitant to "not support our troops" or whatever. Maybe some day a politician will grow a backbone. Unfortunately, we're stuck with the guys we got in there for the moment.
I voted Republican the last two elections. Knowing what I know now, I still would vote the same way. Either that, or take up arms and get some new idiots in office. Every single one of the yahoos that make it into the main election sucks. Bush really does suck as a president. However, I still believe that Kerry would have been worse. So what was my other viable choice? I didn't want either one of them in office, but I have to choose the lesser of two evils, at least as the way I saw it (I realize not everyone's going to see Bush as the lesser of the two evils). If I don't choose the lesser of two evils, then the worse one gets into office. Yay for the country. Put someone up that's worth a damn next time and we'll talk. Hint: Hitlery is not the one I'll be voting for, unless the choice is someone even worse.
BTW, these specific actions that you have in mind, not all of them may hold the same significance to the people you talk to. I'm sorry if that offends you. He's done a lot of things that I find offensive, but I somehow get the idea that I don't find all of the same things offensive that you take that way.
Anyway, just to put something in on-topic, I'm personally a bit surprised (and pleased) that he admits to some fault or error. You generally don't want that in a top position when you're worried about stock prices. Perhaps he knows he'll get enough empathy to offset it though.
I don't mean to be a language snob, not by any means, and I do truly think that any language has it's place in a proper and completely open-minded environment. We use a pretty wide variety of languages here, and encourage usage of new tools and languages, as the project comes up that can use these tools.
However, I wasn't talking about a resume when I said that perceptions can raise or lower a language's value. I was talking about the value to the business.
When we look for programmers, we look for good people. Experience with multiple languages is a plus, to the point of looking for people who feel that languages are just languages, that one language is virtually the same as any other, and they can learn a new language in a very short period of time.
However, depending on what you put up, you can get different types of people. Any good programmer should recognize that no matter what language a company puts up, they can handle it. But bad programmers get stuck with a single one and don't think they can handle the others.
I probably didn't say it very well, but hopefully you get my point. We're looking for good people, not people who cannot handle whatever is thrown at them.
Partly because of the perception of folks that VB developers ARE lower, many of the better tools just don't exist for VB
That was actually along the lines of the reason a company I know of decided to head for C#. Though it was more on the resume line rather than tools.
But overall, we found that most of our programmers preferred to use C# rather than VB due to the image they might get when leaving the company and going elsewhere.
Every language does have it's place, but there are perceptions that can raise and lower a language's value...
I don't think people here are coming out against the little guy, they're more coming out against obvious misuse of the IP laws. The difference here is that this time it's the little guy trying to misuse the IP laws. That doesn't make it a legitimate use.
If people were just wanting to be mean, they'd be talking about how stupid he looks or something else just as pointless.
Instead, we have most people pointing out that what this guy claims IP is completely bogus. He shouldn't have even started out with the idea that he had some valuable IP. The worst thing I can say about this guy is that he wasted his time. I sorta feel sorry for him, but that still doesn't give him the right to claim he came up with the idea.
Since you disagree (strongly), you're saying that you've been one of the top students, finishing a project first, and have actually handed your project materials over to the others, to help them get theirs done? This is to the detriment of your own project, taking resources, if not your actual project, and giving it away. THEN you have to start over, or re-make much of your project (perhaps gathering new resources, etc).
I've been in a position to help other students and have even given away resources if it was going to take me some mostly trivial amount of time to rebuild it, but I do not cripple my project for the sake of theirs.
Now, is that a valid comparison to sharing research information on this sort of thing? Perhaps not, though it's not bad to keep in mind that collaboration takes resources, and those resources might be better spent on the actual project. Researchers are not doing this research for the fun of it, and the materials they are using are not free. Anything they use their resources on takes away from other possible uses.
I'm sick and disgusted of this money-worshipping materialistic attitude.
Sorry, but unfortunately, the entire world works this way. You have to trade money for resources. How else are you going to get the metal to build the engine with? How about fuel? It's not money-worship, it's that we can't use materials if we can't pay for them.
Sure, they'd get along just fine, until Thompson started railing on evils that Barbie dolls teach children or whatever. At that point, he'd disappear in an alley or something, never to be heard from again.
Censorship is one thing, but cash flow is cash flow.
You don't want to give these people any MORE ideas, do you?!
Hell yes! I would love for Thompson to try to go after Barbie. And they have the backing of quite a bit of the population. Computer games aren't understood by the majority, but *everyone* knows about Barbie.
Even without that, do you have any idea what Mattel would *do* to the guy?
Thanks, that sounds a little more like it. $0.035 per mile is a little more in my price range.
Still though, I hope they keep all this in mind. I'm excited about an electric car, but most people aren't going to jump ship unless they know it's better, and they'll likely look for much better.
We'll get there eventually though.. It'd even fit in with my battery powered mower, battery powered weed wacker, battery (solar) powered sidewalk lights, etc....
Go to yahoo and search for "slashdot poneys". This will bring up a bunch of results, all approximately 1 month old.
Now do the same search on google. Notice how many of the results from yahoo do not appear in the google results at all.
Google has such a big backlog that they don't get around to spidering new sites for several months. While google does give priority to certain high-profile sites like slashdot and visits those frequently, most other sites do not get indexed for several months.
Since when does 44900 results on Yahoo mean that they have more than 92100 results on Google? As far as what's appearing, I was able to find most every one I saw on Yahoo on the first 2 or so pages of Google's results. I also see more results on Google that look like they'll show me more of what I'm looking for (since I am probably looking for the April 1st joke, screenshots especially).
Works alright for me. Looks like I don't have a reason to switch again yet.
I know that I certainly look at the list of bugfixes in the patches and note that we usually don't need them.
We'll schedule a time to apply patches, but the stuff they've got all these "shocking" bugs in are the non-essential stuff.
Oh no! You can crash my application! Or you can crash my listener! At least you can't get to my credit card information, transaction logs, or anything sensitive.
Hell, lock the machines down the way you're supposed to do it, and 70% of the bugs are irrelevant anyway.
Practice good security and use good programming practices on your side, and you won't even sniff at the holes people bring up. I mean, who the hell grants the ability to look at the DBA_USERS table to everyone anyway?
The GP is right. You may actually not really need to patch.
While looking at AC Propulsion's website (through the Wikipedia article), I was looking at the FAQ, and it reminded me of something.
One of the questions on the FAQ (http://www.acpropulsion.com/tzero_pages/tzero_FAQ s.htm) was: How long does the battery pack last? What does it cost to replace? Pack life is on the order of two to three years, or 15,000 to 20,000 miles. At current prices, a set of new batteries costs about $3,000 from Optima.
Okay, so taking replacing the batteries for $3000 every 20,000 miles gives you a cost of $0.15 per mile. I filled up this morning and had gotten about 400 miles off of the tank (estimates only, the receipt is in the car). The cost ended up being about $0.10 per mile.
So even ignoring the cost of electricity, it would still be more expensive for me to have a car that I have to replace the batteries on every 20,000 miles. There are other costs involved with maintenance and such, but I doubt that the battery replacement is the only cost as well.
I really, really want an electric car for commuting to work, but I can't go there until it comes a bit closer.
Yes, but notice "Lucasfilm Ltd. and Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment will release".
Lucas complained that he wasn't going to put the millions in, but Fox determined that if you put a few millions in, you can get quite a few more millions back on this one. So then Fox sends Greedo over, and Lucas knows what a twitchy finger Greedo has... And Lucas doesn't want to have to repaint...
From what it sounds like, most of these complaints about the installer are from the 8i and early 9i versions (or before).
The installers (or really any GUI that Oracle made) really were horrendous back then. It was more reliable to do a create database script by hand than use the installer. We ended up doing that for quite a while here. We even had a guy from Oracle come out to help us install our 9i RAC system years ago, and it still took 3 days of fiddling to figure it out. And to top it off, we're still finding things that were done wrong and we're having to fix.
However, nowadays the installer is a hell of a lot better. As you say, if you can follow the instructions, you can get a working system up and going pretty quickly, and it works pretty well too. However, you *have* to read *all* of the instructions. Post-installation and patching notes included.
a) Not quite. You can direct the gui to another machine (our office uses windows with Cygwin as the target for the display). Oracle suggests it in their docs, and it's the best way for us to keep our servers clean.
b) Granted, so we need a server version and workstation version, then. Or even better, a big server version, for the serious servers (like a production business system), and another for small play databases like your earlier post was talking about. Go ahead and run a little DB (like XE or something), but don't do anything too serious with it. GUI stuff is fine for that, yes. But keep it off my servers, thanks.
c) Homework? Not sure what you mean. I only wish we went into the stuff I use now back in school...
I kinda like it showing up as a different color. As far as I'm concerned, it's merged enough already, just that since it's static, it keeps it separated a little bit.
Re:Am I the only one scared of this?
on
Google Calendar
·
· Score: 1
Google Credit History
Oh, yeah, because the current holders of my credit history are really trustworthy. They don't sell my data, and they're so helpful when they screw something up!
On an actually related note, I logged in and tried it out, and I really, really like it. The interface is extremely easy to use and everything flows very well. I didn't have a problem with responsiveness when I tried, either. I especially love the quick add function. It handles multi-day events just fine (Vacation X through Y).
Slashdot Mirror
There is zero accounting here of where this money is going. Hell, what happens if this request is so successful that he gets enough money to pay his rent for 5 years, and he dies in 2 months? I don't want the sob story spams to start up, just hoping that someone is kind enough to be taken advantage of. I'm sick of too much of that already.
Tell you what, you provide the proof, and I'll send money. I'll need proof of:
Unless you're willing to open the books up and keep them open, then my donations either go to an organization I can trust, or one who IS willing to open up the books.
It's truly sad that we cannot just trust those around us, but there are far too many who take advantage of that trust every chance they get. I think we all know better than to trust everything we read on the internet...
I hate to point out that it's not a Google product here, it's a third party who uses Google Maps, and it is in beta.
Okay, two things bug me about this one.
First, you're complaining about how they haven't asked if you want to get an account. So, what are these guys supposed to do? E-mail every single e-mail address to invite people? I mean, what do you do if you want a Hotmail account, or a Yahoo account? Oh, that's right, you go and sign up. So, in your terms, you say "please, pretty please, let me use Yahoo e-mail!!!"
Secondly, even when you supposedly needed to find someone to send you an invitation, a quick Google search brought up some places that would give you one. Hell, that's how I got in, and I think it still went faster than a signup on one of the other sites, since I didn't have to enter in information about the past 16 generations.
Finally, just for my viewpoint on the invitation system, I actually like it. Since you are/were tied to someone else, if a spammer gets a hold of one and starts using it, Google may be able to track down a whole web of spammers. Or at least, so was my thinking. Maybe that's not true, or it's unreasonable, but oh well.
That's true, the insurance companies don't consider evidence. However, the courts will, and *that* is what you want the pictures for.
About 10 years ago, I was in an accident in my parent's neighborhood. The situation was such that I was going downhill and it had just rained a little bit. There was a landscaping truck parked on the opposite side of the road (really not a great place), and this lady was following her friend out of the neighborhood. Her friend passed the truck well before I got there, but I was coming to the truck about the time she got to it on her side.
Being on her side of the road, she has to stop. Instead, she guns it and rips through. I slam on my brakes, but due to the hill and the road condition, my car impacts her driver's side front wheelwell. We get the cops to come out, and the cop starts writing the accident report up, with the incorrect location for the impact on the police report (the rear wheelwell on her car). He starts writing a ticket for *me* as well, until my own mother comes by and starts asking what happened. She quickly backs him up and gets him to realize that I'm not the one needing the ticket, but he still doesn't give the lady one.
The kicker is that a couple weeks later, we get a threatening letter from this lady's insurance. Come to find out, she's the wife of some executive at a large american vehicle manufacturer who makes cars that are often joked about being "found on roadside daily". Since the company is their insurance, it's essentially our family against big company. Turns out that these bastards are claiming it is 49% my fault, so they don't need to pay for the pretty massive repairs. No matter what, pictures, letters, anything, they wouldn't budge. So we opened a case in small claims court.
Long story short(er), after a good bit of back and forth, they eventually decided that they were supposed to pay for the repairs. (I'm sure it was mere coincidence that it was right before the case date.)
The point is, you should definately have a camera in your car. We favor using the cheap disposable type you can buy for about $10 per 100. Just drop them in your glove box and use them at an accident. Use them up every time, and just get a new one. So a camera is a good thing. However, you don't need it attached to a GPS or anything for you to get some good evidence to use in a court case. Just a plain old camera will do fine.
Thanks for proving my point that the industry is rotten. So, if you know that, then why the hell would you just agree to whatever they say without reading over it. That's what you do when you sign a contract that you don't read. What, are you counting on the government to save your rear when you get screwed? Sorry, I'll tell you now that they don't do that.
My experience with legal documents is pretty broad. But I'll admit that in every case, it IS in english. Reading through them is an exercise in patience and language comprehension, but it's not some other language. Always assume that they are out for their own skin, and *not* for your benefit. So why *wouldn't* you read it?
A lot of people get in trouble for not reading a contract before they sign. Musicians are no different. The fact that the industry is rotten shouldn't be a surprise. And if it does come down to "take it or flip burgers", then at least the musician will know what they are agreeing to, or know that they don't want to be in that position.
I've heard from a lot of people who have signed a contract without reading it, then come back later and whined about how they were taken for a fool. That's rediculous. You have to know what you're getting into.
I'll admit, I found it funny as hell. The trick was to pay attention to that last line: "How's that?"
Otherwise, it looked a bit like some other posts I see around here.
Nice one, I hope you can get a chuckle out of the people that are coming here and over-reacting back...
Now, what if you had to do that every time your company wants you to start a new project at work? Every. Single. Time.
If I worked for a company that required me to sign a contract for every project, believe me when I tell you I would work the time to read the contract into my project plans. Hell, I work the time that it takes to read the requirements docs and do followup into my project plan time. Then, as usual, I at least double it.
As far as these being more difficult contracts, I don't buy that. I've had to go through contracts that were plain and simple (I will forever be praising that particular lawyer), and to the point, being a whole 6 or 7 pages, and I've had contracts that could have only originated in somebody's version of hell. You know what? There's always an option for you to back out. Don't give me that BS about 10 days to get the job done. If you don't have enough time to look over a contract, assume that someone's trying to cheat you and don't sign it. Demand the time you need to research it. So what if the recording contract withdraws it's offer? Go somewhere else and find someone who *will* give you the time.
As far as not being able to understand it, that's BS too. It's not in freaking pig latin. Yes, they make them large to hide things. Then you just tell them it's going to take you more time to look through it. When they complain, feel free to whine about the length and complexity of the contract. I bet you would be surprised about how often they'll back off.
Like I said in my previous post, I have been burned before. I had let myself be pressured into signing before reading through sufficiently. Never again!
Read your contracts before you sign. If you can't read, or your reading comprehension skills are not good enough, get a friend or family member who can read to go over it with you.
Even a successful musician is unlikely to be able to afford more than one lawyer and one accountant. The labels on the other hand have vast teams of people insuring that they squeeze every cent out of their talent and customers.
Why does this always become an explanation? I don't get it. I'm not a lawyer, but when I signed an employment contract, I read it over first, line by line. When I signed a loan contract, I read it over first. When I have *any* contract in front of me, I take the appropriate amount of time to read it over, mark *anything* I don't understand, and then research it. It takes a ton of my time up, and people even get pissed at me taking too long sometimes. But you know what? I know what I sign, and I agree with what I sign. If I don't, at the end of the process, I won't freaking sign it.
Do the damn research before you sign a contract. I have no pity for anyone who's signed into a bad contract. I've done it once, because I was in a hurry, but my one rule is that the contract is either limited, or there's an acceptable way out.
So you're one on the..what 25% left?
Nope. I didn't say I *approve* of what the idiot has done, but I would still vote for him if I had to choose between Bush or Kerry. For me, it's the choice of two evils.
Wow. So you really think freedom is a dead concept and fascist theocracy is the only way to go?
Right. So now that you understand exactly what I believe based on the fact that I would vote for him over a person who *tells* me his policies are completely against what I believe. Right.
No, I think freedom is something we need to get back, from both of these idiotic parties. I don't believe that the government is fascist, though we are starting to head that way, which is a concern. And we're not at a theocracy, though again, we get pretty close sometimes. Fortunately for us, these sort of changes happen over a lot longer period than just a couple years. But I guess that doesn't matter since you think Republicans have been doing this ever since Reagan though.
Can you come up with a actual reasonable mechanism by which this would even have been possible?
Kerry would have been under constant attack by the media with an extremely hostile congress that would have not allowed him to do anything.
Not particularly. I obviously don't see Bush in quite the same light as you, so anything I would be concerned with about Kerry would not be as serious as you believe Bush's transgressions. I had a choice between two evils. One evil was pretty plain about what he wanted to do, and thus could hopefully be countered. The other one "had a plan", but never seemed to tell you anything else about that plan, and acted in such a way to make me believe his plan was against what I would *ever* want. Both of them believed and went with almost the exact same ideas on virtually everything, just had pretty talk one way or the other.
I *do* however take exception to your idea that Kerry would have been under attack by the media considering that the media is generally very liberal. My wife and several others that I know that work in the media confirm this to be true, even in a wildly conservative area.
As far as Congress, it's not exactly overwhelmed by conservatives. According to the party divisions in the Senate (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item _and_teasers/partydiv.htm), we've had both parties at 5 or less above or below 50 since the democrat Senate of 97. The house of representatives is even closer (percentage-wise). According to http://clerk.house.gov/histHigh/Congressional_Hist ory/partyDiv.html the biggest difference is the most recent house, at 53.33% Republicans and 46.4% Democrat. That's not exactly overwhelming either. We've had the minority pass things easier with smaller minority numbers.
Seriously, come up with a possible way he could have been worse.
the fact is that he couldn't possibly have been worse no matter how much he tried even if being worse was his sole goal to which he directed mammoth effort. He would have been checked *hard* by the congress.
Bush has not been subject to any oversight whatsoever since the Republicans are loyal only to their party. They do whatever he tells them where they wouldn't have done shit that Kerry asked merely due to the fact that he's in a different party.
Umm... Right. Maybe you can cite a few examples on this. I certainly don't believe so, since there's plenty of bickering and dealing by both parties in every case that I know of. The only time it seems to be "whatever the President wants, no questions asked", is in the case of war powers. It's stupid, but politicians seem to be hesitant to "not support our troops" or whatever. Maybe some day a politician will grow a backbone. Unfortunately, we're stuck with the guys we got in there for the moment.
W
Okay, I'll bite.
I'll say it now.
I voted Republican the last two elections. Knowing what I know now, I still would vote the same way. Either that, or take up arms and get some new idiots in office. Every single one of the yahoos that make it into the main election sucks. Bush really does suck as a president. However, I still believe that Kerry would have been worse. So what was my other viable choice? I didn't want either one of them in office, but I have to choose the lesser of two evils, at least as the way I saw it (I realize not everyone's going to see Bush as the lesser of the two evils). If I don't choose the lesser of two evils, then the worse one gets into office. Yay for the country. Put someone up that's worth a damn next time and we'll talk. Hint: Hitlery is not the one I'll be voting for, unless the choice is someone even worse.
BTW, these specific actions that you have in mind, not all of them may hold the same significance to the people you talk to. I'm sorry if that offends you. He's done a lot of things that I find offensive, but I somehow get the idea that I don't find all of the same things offensive that you take that way.
Anyway, just to put something in on-topic, I'm personally a bit surprised (and pleased) that he admits to some fault or error. You generally don't want that in a top position when you're worried about stock prices. Perhaps he knows he'll get enough empathy to offset it though.
I don't mean to be a language snob, not by any means, and I do truly think that any language has it's place in a proper and completely open-minded environment. We use a pretty wide variety of languages here, and encourage usage of new tools and languages, as the project comes up that can use these tools.
However, I wasn't talking about a resume when I said that perceptions can raise or lower a language's value. I was talking about the value to the business.
When we look for programmers, we look for good people. Experience with multiple languages is a plus, to the point of looking for people who feel that languages are just languages, that one language is virtually the same as any other, and they can learn a new language in a very short period of time.
However, depending on what you put up, you can get different types of people. Any good programmer should recognize that no matter what language a company puts up, they can handle it. But bad programmers get stuck with a single one and don't think they can handle the others.
I probably didn't say it very well, but hopefully you get my point. We're looking for good people, not people who cannot handle whatever is thrown at them.
Partly because of the perception of folks that VB developers ARE lower, many of the better tools just don't exist for VB
That was actually along the lines of the reason a company I know of decided to head for C#. Though it was more on the resume line rather than tools.
But overall, we found that most of our programmers preferred to use C# rather than VB due to the image they might get when leaving the company and going elsewhere.
Every language does have it's place, but there are perceptions that can raise and lower a language's value...
I don't think people here are coming out against the little guy, they're more coming out against obvious misuse of the IP laws. The difference here is that this time it's the little guy trying to misuse the IP laws. That doesn't make it a legitimate use.
If people were just wanting to be mean, they'd be talking about how stupid he looks or something else just as pointless.
Instead, we have most people pointing out that what this guy claims IP is completely bogus. He shouldn't have even started out with the idea that he had some valuable IP. The worst thing I can say about this guy is that he wasted his time. I sorta feel sorry for him, but that still doesn't give him the right to claim he came up with the idea.
I'd say you misread that a bit.
Since you disagree (strongly), you're saying that you've been one of the top students, finishing a project first, and have actually handed your project materials over to the others, to help them get theirs done? This is to the detriment of your own project, taking resources, if not your actual project, and giving it away. THEN you have to start over, or re-make much of your project (perhaps gathering new resources, etc).
I've been in a position to help other students and have even given away resources if it was going to take me some mostly trivial amount of time to rebuild it, but I do not cripple my project for the sake of theirs.
Now, is that a valid comparison to sharing research information on this sort of thing? Perhaps not, though it's not bad to keep in mind that collaboration takes resources, and those resources might be better spent on the actual project. Researchers are not doing this research for the fun of it, and the materials they are using are not free. Anything they use their resources on takes away from other possible uses.
I'm sick and disgusted of this money-worshipping materialistic attitude.
Sorry, but unfortunately, the entire world works this way. You have to trade money for resources. How else are you going to get the metal to build the engine with? How about fuel? It's not money-worship, it's that we can't use materials if we can't pay for them.
Sure, they'd get along just fine, until Thompson started railing on evils that Barbie dolls teach children or whatever. At that point, he'd disappear in an alley or something, never to be heard from again.
Censorship is one thing, but cash flow is cash flow.
You don't want to give these people any MORE ideas, do you?!
Hell yes! I would love for Thompson to try to go after Barbie. And they have the backing of quite a bit of the population. Computer games aren't understood by the majority, but *everyone* knows about Barbie.
Even without that, do you have any idea what Mattel would *do* to the guy?
Thanks, that sounds a little more like it. $0.035 per mile is a little more in my price range.
Still though, I hope they keep all this in mind. I'm excited about an electric car, but most people aren't going to jump ship unless they know it's better, and they'll likely look for much better.
We'll get there eventually though.. It'd even fit in with my battery powered mower, battery powered weed wacker, battery (solar) powered sidewalk lights, etc....
Try this...
i es
Go to yahoo and search for "slashdot poneys". This will bring up a bunch of results, all approximately 1 month old.
Now do the same search on google. Notice how many of the results from yahoo do not appear in the google results at all.
Google has such a big backlog that they don't get around to spidering new sites for several months. While google does give priority to certain high-profile sites like slashdot and visits those frequently, most other sites do not get indexed for several months.
Okay, so I tried this, just for kicks. You can verify, by a single click:
Yahoo: http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=slashdot+ponies
Google: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=slashdot+pon
Since when does 44900 results on Yahoo mean that they have more than 92100 results on Google? As far as what's appearing, I was able to find most every one I saw on Yahoo on the first 2 or so pages of Google's results. I also see more results on Google that look like they'll show me more of what I'm looking for (since I am probably looking for the April 1st joke, screenshots especially).
Works alright for me. Looks like I don't have a reason to switch again yet.
I know that I certainly look at the list of bugfixes in the patches and note that we usually don't need them.
We'll schedule a time to apply patches, but the stuff they've got all these "shocking" bugs in are the non-essential stuff.
Oh no! You can crash my application! Or you can crash my listener! At least you can't get to my credit card information, transaction logs, or anything sensitive.
Hell, lock the machines down the way you're supposed to do it, and 70% of the bugs are irrelevant anyway.
Practice good security and use good programming practices on your side, and you won't even sniff at the holes people bring up. I mean, who the hell grants the ability to look at the DBA_USERS table to everyone anyway?
The GP is right. You may actually not really need to patch.
While looking at AC Propulsion's website (through the Wikipedia article), I was looking at the FAQ, and it reminded me of something.
Q s.htm) was:
One of the questions on the FAQ (http://www.acpropulsion.com/tzero_pages/tzero_FA
How long does the battery pack last? What does it cost to replace?
Pack life is on the order of two to three years, or 15,000 to 20,000 miles. At current prices, a set of new batteries costs about $3,000 from Optima.
Okay, so taking replacing the batteries for $3000 every 20,000 miles gives you a cost of $0.15 per mile. I filled up this morning and had gotten about 400 miles off of the tank (estimates only, the receipt is in the car). The cost ended up being about $0.10 per mile.
So even ignoring the cost of electricity, it would still be more expensive for me to have a car that I have to replace the batteries on every 20,000 miles. There are other costs involved with maintenance and such, but I doubt that the battery replacement is the only cost as well.
I really, really want an electric car for commuting to work, but I can't go there until it comes a bit closer.
Yes, but notice "Lucasfilm Ltd. and Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment will release".
Lucas complained that he wasn't going to put the millions in, but Fox determined that if you put a few millions in, you can get quite a few more millions back on this one. So then Fox sends Greedo over, and Lucas knows what a twitchy finger Greedo has... And Lucas doesn't want to have to repaint...
From what it sounds like, most of these complaints about the installer are from the 8i and early 9i versions (or before).
The installers (or really any GUI that Oracle made) really were horrendous back then. It was more reliable to do a create database script by hand than use the installer. We ended up doing that for quite a while here. We even had a guy from Oracle come out to help us install our 9i RAC system years ago, and it still took 3 days of fiddling to figure it out. And to top it off, we're still finding things that were done wrong and we're having to fix.
However, nowadays the installer is a hell of a lot better. As you say, if you can follow the instructions, you can get a working system up and going pretty quickly, and it works pretty well too. However, you *have* to read *all* of the instructions. Post-installation and patching notes included.
a) Not quite. You can direct the gui to another machine (our office uses windows with Cygwin as the target for the display). Oracle suggests it in their docs, and it's the best way for us to keep our servers clean.
b) Granted, so we need a server version and workstation version, then.
Or even better, a big server version, for the serious servers (like a production business system), and another for small play databases like your earlier post was talking about. Go ahead and run a little DB (like XE or something), but don't do anything too serious with it. GUI stuff is fine for that, yes. But keep it off my servers, thanks.
c) Homework? Not sure what you mean. I only wish we went into the stuff I use now back in school...
I kinda like it showing up as a different color. As far as I'm concerned, it's merged enough already, just that since it's static, it keeps it separated a little bit.
Google Credit History
Oh, yeah, because the current holders of my credit history are really trustworthy. They don't sell my data, and they're so helpful when they screw something up!
On an actually related note, I logged in and tried it out, and I really, really like it. The interface is extremely easy to use and everything flows very well. I didn't have a problem with responsiveness when I tried, either. I especially love the quick add function. It handles multi-day events just fine (Vacation X through Y).