I did now know about EnterpriseDB oracle compatibility for PostgreSQL, that is interesting.
However there is still a strong Oracle feature missing here, which is called CYA. It is just like using Microsoft software: even if it does not work nobody will tell you were wrong by choosing it
There is a difference between moving across continents and planets : the invasive species find a biotope similar from one continent to the other, they do not have to adapt. The only barrier may be a predator. Moving across planets, microbes find a very different biotope to which they have to adapt.
And what did [Chavez] do [Venezuela]? Look at it. His country is basically the Saudi Arabia of South America and they're so incompetent that they're still going broke.
Actually, Chavez had some relative success, it depends at what you look at. On criminality, economic diversification, or food sovereignty, it is a disaster. On analphabetism and poverty reduction, you will need bad faith to deny success.
And if you think the US could claim diplomatic immunity in [Bolivia] territory given similar circumstances you're kidding yourself.
I am certain Bolivia would not have grounded Obama to search its plane, yes. And I am not convinced they would dare do it even now.
Would you respect a nation that regarded ritualistic cannibalism?
What nation do you think about?
Cite any right and I can come up with a context where you'll violate it.
Let us start by the beginning: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights". But I am sure you will find a way to waive that principle, since you already explained that there were irrelevant Peoples
True, but there are rational basis behind the speculation. Take earth's extremophiles that live in near boiling water. Their biological structures have evolved to stand the heat, but in a way that makes them unable to operate at room temperature. To give a broad idea, everything is so much hardened that it needs high temperature to be mobile.
Then you can imagine an extremophile will adapt to live in your guts, lungs or skin, but the fact is that it will encounter many other microbes already adapted there, and they are not likely to give away their territory easily.
Because private entities are incited to cut corners when it comes to safety. Let us imagine you are the manager of a power plant, with bonus tied to profit and safety. You can go from x chances a year to get an accident to 2x chances of year of having an accident, while increasing profit. You may assume 2x is still low and unlikely to happen while you are in charge, and choose to lower safety for profit.
Of course the regulator's job is to set up metrics (and check them) so that you cannot do that without being detected, and perhaps your own morals will prevent you from such a behavior, but not everything is controlled by the metrics, and you may even make choices that increase the profit/safety ratio without even being aware of it.
95% of all music, and movies that people might want to download are copyrighted by Americans. What is France's interest in protecting those filthy rich morons?
France signed Berne convention, it therefore has to enforce copyright. In return, it gets the same protection for stuff created by french.
US Navy's nuclear propulsion program and France's government run nuclear power program
The common point between the two is that they are not managed by private entities for which profit is more important than safety.
Well at least it had been the case for France nuclear program. Now that it was turned private for the sake of free market (an EU mantra), I am scared for the future.
have the vendors give you the IP they are coming from
create a FW rule for those IP's
That will not help if vendor gets infected. Restricting target ports helps, but the vendor probably have the ability to modify the application, which runs on a machine inside your network. Therefore that machine should probably be confined without ability to initiate communications to anywhere
I am convinced there are microbes in Mars soil, but they are adapted to a very specific biotope, and are not likely to thrive at 37C, so there is no danger IMO. We already have the case of extermophiles on earth, able to live in almost boiling water, but unable to live in a human being.
The entire European Commission seems eligible to me, but it was not the most active offender in the building of current EU crisis. All European Union governments seems also good picks. And we should not forget the European Central Bank.
The group of people known as the government are however capable of having friends and enemies. You stated that government can't have friends which is nonsense.
Okay, let us say that governments can be somehow friends. But that is quite superficial friendship, when one is ready to dump the others as soon as its interests are at stake. The primary goal of a government is to run its own country, having friends is an bonus if situation allows it. Telling others that they are friends is a good practice, though.
And despite all of that... you want to spit on our faces
I never meant to spit on your face, and please pardon me if I gave you that feeling. Obviously you feel offended by how the world see your government, and you take it for yourself, which may not be relevant as I already tried to explain : You are not your government.
May I suggest that instead of taking the heat personally, you try to understand why there are so many that do hate how the US government behaves?
The offense of the comical regime in Bolivia is meaningless in the context of what was done
I am not sure why you call it comical, and I would like to remind you that there are no irrelevant People. Almost all Latin America was badly offended by this incident. I do not feel it is meaningless.
Look at the countries that are welcoming Snowden and tell me how many of those governments you actually respect
I respect all nations (and I assume you meant nation here instead of country: the country is the territory, the nation is the People). I may have no respect for some governments, but not thoses ones.
I would quote Eric Schmidt: "If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place"
I understand Edward Snowden was hired as a sysadmin. In my opinion it is worthless trying to set up technical measures against someone whose job is to maintain your systems. The good defenses are paying people enough so that they are not tempted by a financial gain (and if you are betrayed, you can still sue and recover your loss), and not do illegal or immoral things (here is where Eric Schmidt's citation is relevant).
If there is no singular will then you can't identify the government as a discrete identity.
I never said there is no singular will (that seems like pure nonsense to me). I will try to make it simplier: the group of humans known as government does not have the same will than the group of humans known as the People (that is: all citizen).
However, you cannot say the government is not made up of people.
Never said that.
[Evo Morales] plane was stopped because rules were being broken
What are you talking about? What rules were been broken?
I believe I did not use that words. General and singular are not synonyms.
The US government has gone out of its way to help europe.
But the snarky attitude makes us think we're not appreciated.
Here again you confuse government and people. I have nothing against american people, except perhaps that they do not look enough after what their government is doing.
As to diplomatic immunity [link to article on Hong-Kong] It doesn't work the way you think it works.
I do not know why you tell me about foreign diplomat's offences in Hong Kong, while I tell you about grounding a presidential flight. How is this article relevant?
Remember, you are not trying to identify the elements involved so as to faithfully reproduce them..
But do we know all receptors involved in smell, and are we able to reproduce them on a chip? And in what extent small receptors differ from an individual to another?
Except if one protein required for the scent is the one that triggers the reaction. Not likely, but we do not know how specific the device can be. Is it able to report from a set of predefined molecules (which could include allergic ones), or is it able to detect specific molecular functions, which would be a smaller sequence of proteins with less odds of producing an allergy.
Governments are made up of people. You can't abstract away the human element. It always exists.
Government's general will is a particular will, which will always diverge more or less from the People general will. For instance my government denied Evo Morales the authorization to fly over our territory, but I can tell you that it is difficult to find anyone that backs this action in the People.
As to aid turning EU members into pets... it isn't in the EU's interest to undermine a powerful ally or weaken their own governments by providing aid and comfort to a leaker that could have just as easily come from their own governments.
Imagine if Snowden were French or German or English... and fled to the US.
This was a presidential flight, subject to diplomatic immunity. Do you expect your friends to break the law and insult their other friends to defend your interests?
Diplomatic immunity is there for a reason, which is reciprocity. Imagine if your president was grounded with local police claiming they should search the plane. Would you care if it was to search a fugitive which was not there at the end of the story?
Many nations have constitutional provisions to temporarily suspend laws when there is a threat like a war.
Even a philosopher like Jean-Jacques Rousseau recognized the need for such temporary measure, which are legitimate because they in line with the general will of the People, who do not want the nation to be destroyed because of its own laws.
But the key word is temporary: that should be short and to solve an identified problem.Todays US surveillance state is another beast. The war against a given terrorist group may end. The war against terrorism will not.
We are not your slaves and you are not our masters.
Once again I feel like you confuse government and people. Anyway, this is a rather paranoid point of view, in my opinion. It is US help that turns EU government's into US abiding pets, not the other way around. How do you explain France, Italy, Portugal, and Spain's governments covered us with shame by stopping a Bolivian diplomatic flight, just because Edward Snowden might have been aboard?
This. I can predict that nothing will happen because of that resolution.
Since the EU parliament does not have the power to propose EU directives, it keeps itself busy with non binding resolutions. EU institutions are a democracy masquerade, and it sometimes get ridiculous, when that its so called parliament vote non binding resolutions to criticize the lack of democracy everywhere in the world.
Slashdot Mirror
I did now know about EnterpriseDB oracle compatibility for PostgreSQL, that is interesting.
However there is still a strong Oracle feature missing here, which is called CYA. It is just like using Microsoft software: even if it does not work nobody will tell you were wrong by choosing it
There is a difference between moving across continents and planets : the invasive species find a biotope similar from one continent to the other, they do not have to adapt. The only barrier may be a predator. Moving across planets, microbes find a very different biotope to which they have to adapt.
And what did [Chavez] do [Venezuela]? Look at it. His country is basically the Saudi Arabia of South America and they're so incompetent that they're still going broke.
Actually, Chavez had some relative success, it depends at what you look at. On criminality, economic diversification, or food sovereignty, it is a disaster. On analphabetism and poverty reduction, you will need bad faith to deny success.
And if you think the US could claim diplomatic immunity in [Bolivia] territory given similar circumstances you're kidding yourself.
I am certain Bolivia would not have grounded Obama to search its plane, yes. And I am not convinced they would dare do it even now.
Would you respect a nation that regarded ritualistic cannibalism?
What nation do you think about?
Cite any right and I can come up with a context where you'll violate it.
Let us start by the beginning: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights". But I am sure you will find a way to waive that principle, since you already explained that there were irrelevant Peoples
True, but there are rational basis behind the speculation. Take earth's extremophiles that live in near boiling water. Their biological structures have evolved to stand the heat, but in a way that makes them unable to operate at room temperature. To give a broad idea, everything is so much hardened that it needs high temperature to be mobile.
Then you can imagine an extremophile will adapt to live in your guts, lungs or skin, but the fact is that it will encounter many other microbes already adapted there, and they are not likely to give away their territory easily.
Because private entities are incited to cut corners when it comes to safety. Let us imagine you are the manager of a power plant, with bonus tied to profit and safety. You can go from x chances a year to get an accident to 2x chances of year of having an accident, while increasing profit. You may assume 2x is still low and unlikely to happen while you are in charge, and choose to lower safety for profit.
Of course the regulator's job is to set up metrics (and check them) so that you cannot do that without being detected, and perhaps your own morals will prevent you from such a behavior, but not everything is controlled by the metrics, and you may even make choices that increase the profit/safety ratio without even being aware of it.
95% of all music, and movies that people might want to download are copyrighted by Americans. What is France's interest in protecting those filthy rich morons?
France signed Berne convention, it therefore has to enforce copyright. In return, it gets the same protection for stuff created by french.
US Navy's nuclear propulsion program and France's government run nuclear power program
The common point between the two is that they are not managed by private entities for which profit is more important than safety.
Well at least it had been the case for France nuclear program. Now that it was turned private for the sake of free market (an EU mantra), I am scared for the future.
For the same mass, ice uses more volume that liquid water.
Just melt and iceberg and you get a small sea rise.
Melt a huge area of ice and you get 3.3 meters rise.
Melt all antartica, and IIRC you get a 70 meters rise.
have the vendors give you the IP they are coming from create a FW rule for those IP's
That will not help if vendor gets infected. Restricting target ports helps, but the vendor probably have the ability to modify the application, which runs on a machine inside your network. Therefore that machine should probably be confined without ability to initiate communications to anywhere
I am convinced there are microbes in Mars soil, but they are adapted to a very specific biotope, and are not likely to thrive at 37C, so there is no danger IMO. We already have the case of extermophiles on earth, able to live in almost boiling water, but unable to live in a human being.
The entire European Commission seems eligible to me, but it was not the most active offender in the building of current EU crisis. All European Union governments seems also good picks. And we should not forget the European Central Bank.
Does that nullify the "App store" trade mark? Is any random project allowed to use it now?
Next step is to send them drones, first for surveillance, then with weapons. Once accepted, target other groups.
The group of people known as the government are however capable of having friends and enemies. You stated that government can't have friends which is nonsense.
Okay, let us say that governments can be somehow friends. But that is quite superficial friendship, when one is ready to dump the others as soon as its interests are at stake. The primary goal of a government is to run its own country, having friends is an bonus if situation allows it. Telling others that they are friends is a good practice, though.
Chavez for example called Bush the devil
It may have something to do with US supporting a coup against him, don't you think?
And despite all of that... you want to spit on our faces
I never meant to spit on your face, and please pardon me if I gave you that feeling. Obviously you feel offended by how the world see your government, and you take it for yourself, which may not be relevant as I already tried to explain : You are not your government.
May I suggest that instead of taking the heat personally, you try to understand why there are so many that do hate how the US government behaves?
The offense of the comical regime in Bolivia is meaningless in the context of what was done
I am not sure why you call it comical, and I would like to remind you that there are no irrelevant People. Almost all Latin America was badly offended by this incident. I do not feel it is meaningless.
Look at the countries that are welcoming Snowden and tell me how many of those governments you actually respect
I respect all nations (and I assume you meant nation here instead of country: the country is the territory, the nation is the People). I may have no respect for some governments, but not thoses ones.
I would quote Eric Schmidt: "If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place"
I understand Edward Snowden was hired as a sysadmin. In my opinion it is worthless trying to set up technical measures against someone whose job is to maintain your systems. The good defenses are paying people enough so that they are not tempted by a financial gain (and if you are betrayed, you can still sue and recover your loss), and not do illegal or immoral things (here is where Eric Schmidt's citation is relevant).
If there is no singular will then you can't identify the government as a discrete identity.
I never said there is no singular will (that seems like pure nonsense to me). I will try to make it simplier: the group of humans known as government does not have the same will than the group of humans known as the People (that is: all citizen).
However, you cannot say the government is not made up of people.
Never said that.
[Evo Morales] plane was stopped because rules were being broken
What are you talking about? What rules were been broken?
There is no singular public will.
I believe I did not use that words. General and singular are not synonyms.
The US government has gone out of its way to help europe.
But the snarky attitude makes us think we're not appreciated.
Here again you confuse government and people. I have nothing against american people, except perhaps that they do not look enough after what their government is doing.
As to diplomatic immunity [link to article on Hong-Kong] It doesn't work the way you think it works.
I do not know why you tell me about foreign diplomat's offences in Hong Kong, while I tell you about grounding a presidential flight. How is this article relevant?
Remember, you are not trying to identify the elements involved so as to faithfully reproduce them. .
But do we know all receptors involved in smell, and are we able to reproduce them on a chip? And in what extent small receptors differ from an individual to another?
Except if one protein required for the scent is the one that triggers the reaction. Not likely, but we do not know how specific the device can be. Is it able to report from a set of predefined molecules (which could include allergic ones), or is it able to detect specific molecular functions, which would be a smaller sequence of proteins with less odds of producing an allergy.
Governments are made up of people. You can't abstract away the human element. It always exists.
Government's general will is a particular will, which will always diverge more or less from the People general will. For instance my government denied Evo Morales the authorization to fly over our territory, but I can tell you that it is difficult to find anyone that backs this action in the People.
As to aid turning EU members into pets... it isn't in the EU's interest to undermine a powerful ally or weaken their own governments by providing aid and comfort to a leaker that could have just as easily come from their own governments.
Imagine if Snowden were French or German or English... and fled to the US.
This was a presidential flight, subject to diplomatic immunity. Do you expect your friends to break the law and insult their other friends to defend your interests?
Diplomatic immunity is there for a reason, which is reciprocity. Imagine if your president was grounded with local police claiming they should search the plane. Would you care if it was to search a fugitive which was not there at the end of the story?
If you want a challenge, the K2 is smaller than the Everest, but it kills much more people
Many nations have constitutional provisions to temporarily suspend laws when there is a threat like a war.
Even a philosopher like Jean-Jacques Rousseau recognized the need for such temporary measure, which are legitimate because they in line with the general will of the People, who do not want the nation to be destroyed because of its own laws.
But the key word is temporary: that should be short and to solve an identified problem.Todays US surveillance state is another beast. The war against a given terrorist group may end. The war against terrorism will not.
We are not your slaves and you are not our masters.
Once again I feel like you confuse government and people. Anyway, this is a rather paranoid point of view, in my opinion. It is US help that turns EU government's into US abiding pets, not the other way around. How do you explain France, Italy, Portugal, and Spain's governments covered us with shame by stopping a Bolivian diplomatic flight, just because Edward Snowden might have been aboard?
This. I can predict that nothing will happen because of that resolution.
Since the EU parliament does not have the power to propose EU directives, it keeps itself busy with non binding resolutions. EU institutions are a democracy masquerade, and it sometimes get ridiculous, when that its so called parliament vote non binding resolutions to criticize the lack of democracy everywhere in the world.
At some point, someone will have session cookie for its job's intranet sent into the mixer...