Both share the fact that both were born out of paranioa.
PATRIOT came from Terrosit fears.
Socialism came from the great depression.
Everyone knows both are unconsitutional. The Patriot Act will be overturned in whole or in part, eventually, if enough people care. Socialism, particilarly Social [in]Security if nothing more than socialit welfare, which has no place in the United States.
Many people think that Social Security is a a sure thing. Recently, the only good thing to come from the Bush administration is the paranoia they are causing about its collapse. Reguardless of WHEN it will collapse, it WILL collapse. 2050 by my estimate. Al Gore chamioned a "locked box", Bush is pushing for private accounts. Why are they doing this? Because your SS (FICA) funds are deposited in the federal treasury, along with all the other tax money. Only the SSA knows how much you SHOULD get. Whether or not you get it is up to congress. Every year, Congress has to authorize the allocation from the treasury for SS. If Congress ever fails to allocate those funds, say for an economic or war crisis, no one on SSI gets thier money for that year.
Social Security is theft. It is the only insurance that you pay for that you don't know if it will be there when it is your turn.
I also object to SS on moral grounds. It enslaves our kids (YOUR KIDS, I don't have any) to pay for MY retirement. Do you think that is fair. Most would call it slavery.
Don't even get me startedon govt health insurance...
But anyway bak to the topic: We need a law that says no knee-jerk laws for 1 year after a catastripic event.
Here's a fact for you. Less than 5000 people died in the TWC. 15,000 people are killed in automobiles a year, over 1/2 by drunk drivrs. But you don't see us installing breathalizers in every car.
Re:Linus Torvalds himself has blessed DRM
on
TCPA Support in Linux
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
You touched on something there that I want to bring out further.
Linux can show what user-centric trusted computing can/should do. Microfoft et. al. will be showing what Big Business trusted computing wants/can do.
Eventually there will be those that will ask why it has to work against them so much when running Billy Bob's OS, and then they'll realize that their PC is not their PC, but the industry's PC.
I don't know what is more upsetting, that you dropped the tax issue like a hot potato or your lack of understanding copyright.
Also, incase you hadn't heard the opt-out system of copyright is being challenged on constitutional grouds. So yes, the constitution is alive and well.
You are free to publish other's works, which they have secured for limited times. However they must adhere to "fair use" provisions until the work is out of copyright protection. This is how congress allowes free speech and copyright to coexist.
If you really want to understand these issues, and obtaint he mind set in which the consitution was written read up on Natural Law. Our founding fathers were learned men and philosophers and businessmen, a combination of each which is rarely found today. Our schools produce people who are soley learned men, philosphers, or businessmen without achieving a balance of all three. If such a person has such a balance, they rarely if ever end up being elected in goverment.
Today, who wins and loses a race only matters in how much buying their vote will cost you.
Anyway... I belive the original intent of copyright was short terms. 7 years were the original, and seems right. Today it should be more like 6 months because of the faster pace that technology has delivered to us. Instead businessmen (not philosphers) looking to preserve thier business have bludgeoned our copyright system.
Face it Rock and Roll, and the music and movie industries were non-existent at the time the consitution was written. Sales of sheet music we the CDs of the time. 7 years in the days of horse-drawn buggies and such is a reasonable term. But how many CDs does Brittney sell a year later? Not many. We have a 6 month product cycle. In 1776 it could take 6 months just to get it heard by a siginificant amount of people.
Bck to the subject at hand... Got a challenge on taxes?
Ok, now there is a question of whether it was ever ratified or not: http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/chaptr13.h tm http://www.taxableincome.net/articles/othertax /16t hamend.html
However, one does not need to rest his hopes on that premise alone. Here is where you DO have to dig deeper and you get to this juicy bit (Treom the taxableincome.net page: "However, shortly after the amendment was (supposedly) ratified, both the Supreme Court and the Secretary of the Treasury admitted that the 16th Amendment did not give Congress any new taxing powers. In Treasury Decision 2303, the Secretary of the Treasury directly quoted the Supreme Court (Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co. (240 U.S. 103)) in saying that "The provisions of the sixteenth amendment conferred no new power of taxation," but instead simply prohibited Congress original power to tax incomes "from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation, to which it inherently belonged, and being placed in the category of direct taxation subject to apportionment."
Furthermore, it is important to note the statutory definition is not "all that comes in" it is instead limited to specific kinds of "income" (vernacular).
You see, the Consitution cannot be in conflict with itself. In order to keep the consitution consistant, they cannot have added direct taxing of "wages" (vernacular). Now we see why I said we do not need to read past article 1. The original consitution cannot be modified to extend powers.
If you do choose to dig deeper, and I do hope you do, you will also find that "wages", "employee", "employer", "State", "income" are "Terms of Art" which are specifically defined in a limited capacity as to not subject the typical American.
We have all grown up with "income" taxes, but few of us realize we only receive "renumeration" from our "employer" (vernacular). "Income" (statutory) for most people is intrest from bonds and possibly FDIC insured bank accounts (that last one is a bit of a grey area). Surpised? I was.
It is hardly fair to point the finger at kids not understanding the first admendment when the adults seem to not read or believe Article one.. No direct taxes without being apportioned to the States. It says it loud and clear, yet millions of americans pay trillions that they do not have to every single year. Dig deeper, and you will see that there is no law that makes wages federally taxable for the typical American. As a matter of fact, anyone who lives in the 50 states, and works for private or publically owned companies do not owe 1/4 to 1/3 of their pay to the federal government. Shocking I know. But true. It is a great deception. One I invite you to examine. This is now possible thanks to the internet and the mass dissemination that it provides. Hook yourself up with Title 26 of the USC and curl up by a fire, and tell me where my wages are made federally tabable.. They aren't.
Samuel Adams, speech at the Philadelphia State House, August 1, 1776:
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."
Sure, you lived there and supported the country. You could have found an instructor here who came from China because HE wanted to be free and teach his art. Where you learn martial arts is not important. 'Who' matters more than anything. And don't tell me we don't have ang good instructors here.
You are patronizing a country that you object to. If you go to china, and work for them and contriibute to the GNP, and you do all this quite willingly, I think it is a fair trade that that you get kicked off information superhigh way.
Your move is one that is in the completely wrong direction. People are supposed to be moving OUT of China beause of the human rights violations and censorship.
As far as I am concerned you are committing treason, and you will get everything you deserve.
I think you'll realize (too late) just how good you have it here.
Imagine a terrorist organization that detonates a bomb in the fissure. It is the stuff movies are made about. (Indecentlally if you are a movie maker you can buy that idea off me) You'd nail every country you hate and then some. But the problem is it only works once, so it is not good for terrorism per se.
The solution is the same as the problem. I would fracture the land mass and incrementally slide it in to the ocean. Several planned tsunamis are better than one big unplanned one.
I do not know if it is possible, but with that death toll and desvistation, it looks like we should get some geologists down there to see if it can't be done. It is resy though, you don't want to trigger the whole thing. Perhaps, it could be divided horizontally to remove the downward stress, rather than splitting slices off vertically?
#include <rhetoric about what you don't get with linux>
#include <disproven and slanted statistics>
#include <(and here's where it gets good) a personal case about a time when one of t he men tried to contribute to an open source app. He got complaints that it broke a particular platform. He was not happy that he was asked to fix what he broke>
#include <blurb about some MS Exchange wizard where he askes how could this ever be done in sendmail and his staff laughs. [Note: they were lauging AT you, not with you]>
#include <plug more MS products>
#include <more rhetoric about mystical TCO. Notibly, include the migration costs in the Linux side, and little or no migration costs for windows side. Quickly Declare windows is cheaper in the first few years, before migration costs are recouped>// Note: I did agree with them in that nearly all migrations will require not just an admin, but probably several developers. They did correctly state that this is not what people want to do (pay developers and have to maintain something). I think this is a valid migration cost, and a good point. However, once enough migrations are done, and the developed migration tools realeased, the impact should be nil.
#include <testing 4 year old USB drivers is impossible>// An obvious lie, because it happens everyday in Linux. Fact: MS can never have the QA testing that linux has, bu virtue of their development models. It was stupid for MS to pick a fight here.
If this discussion was so open, why not invite some outside people in?
#include// Note: I did agree with them in that nearly all migrations will require not just an admin, but probably several developers. They did correctly state that this is not what people want to do (pay developers and have to maintain something). I think this is a valid migration cost, and a good point. However, once enough migrations are done, and the developed migration tools realeased, the impact should be nil.
#include// An obvious lie, because it happens everyday in Linux. Fact: MS can never have the QA testing that linux has, bu virtue of their development models. It was stupid for MS to pick a fight here.
If this discussion was so open, why not invite some outside people in?
Humans are too stupid to really do anything about it. We'll trash the environment and deplete our follil fuels. Only then will we really start looking for alterative sources.
Any inelligent being should see Nuclear power is obvious. It is cheap and clean. Do not listen to what they nay-sayers say. We not not _EVER_ have to store radioative waste. What we need is a cheap and safe mecanism for getting nuclear waste into orbit. Once there, you can toss it roughtly at the sun, and eventually it'll get sucked in and never pose a threat again.
Nuclear fission power in cars is dumb, but we can use neclear to generate the hydrogen fuel for cars.
However if we get to nuclear FUSION, we are in the clear.
Even if we stopped burning fossil fuels, we still have to LUBRICATE every oving part under the sun. That is no small amount of oil. That's what oil should be doing. Not burning, but lubricating.
But we won't do anythin unless it is forced upon us. Eventually enough people will die of heat exhaustion (too poor to afford cooling) or starve (because farm land is under water) that the poluation will plumit, and so will our usage, and Mother earth will keep turning, and working on resoring balance.
I realize that my tiraid may not have been completely explained. We have no problem installing our required DBMS on whatever server or OS (customer's or provided by us), but so many times they will not install our DBMS on their production servers, so we end up with our own app server.
This is not my fault, this is theirs. They want to take no risks with disrupting other things, so the price of that is another server. They bring it on themselves.
My angst is directoed towards the ones who will not install our seotware on their servers, won't provide an app server, and demand that I MUST port it to their DB. It works for selling to large companies, but when you're talking hundreds or thousands of new isntallations a year, I just cannot port to every DBMS under the sun.
So your spp server problem is one that you can point the finger back at yourself for. You seem to know more than the company who wrote the software from the ground up. After all, we know nothing about databases, and we picked the wrong one from the start....
Let me qualify explain that statement. I support a small web-based application. It'll win on Unix or Windows (under Apache & PHP) I don't care about that stuff. But what does piss me off is when we have to port the app to every DB MS under the sun. Our support costs go through the roof just because the customer wants it their app DB.
Well, try explaining to IT (not a smart bunch, after all they dropped out of CS (or never even tried)) that their DB du jour is not up to the task of our RDBMS. True 90% SQL compliance is a good start, but there it is impossible to create a full-featured app and still be completely agnostic.
Examples: MySQL is the worst. The last insert ID is a horrible concept that is not portible. Try finding it in Informix, it is impossible to find, but exists. Thent here is the MySQL timestamp 'feature' - the first timestanp field (and only the first) when UPDATEd is updated to NOW() regardless of whether or not you include it in the updated feilds.
The only reason why they want the DB changed is because they have lazy IT departments that want to do nothing. Their IT staff does not understand the complexities of SQL DBs to them it is just an DB, and "thay're all compabible through SQL" yeah, right. "What about ODBC?" ODBC is fine for basic record operations, but the moment you try to do anyhing advanced, you're out of luck.
I used MySQL as an example, but I've worked with several other Databases, and there is no Holy Grail of DB abstraction. There's much more to databases than inserting updating, deleting and selecting rows, depsite what IT thinks.
The issue is that these are LAB and QA machines. Each is under tight configutation control or have very special dignostic apps installed (win32) so we cannot modify them. We need to be able to let 'real work' be done on them. Having them for distCC will only cut our compile times down for the kernel & kde.
At work we have about 20 machines, 10 QA and 10 lab machines that all sit at an idle windows screensaver. Is there some live CD that I can pop in and configure our central server to use those machines as nodes on a dist cc cluster?
It needs to be able to handle any node going off line (rebooting into windows for 'actual work') gracefully.
I'm sure our own government will decide that we should outsource NASA to india because it's cheaper. Forget american jobs and pride, this is the all mighty dollar.
So Rockefeller, having establised a monopoly should be able to use his money to invent (patent) all kinds of things (after he is a monopoly) and create an oil/coal industry that heavily relies on those patents? Because that is exactly what Microsoft is doing.
Microsoft has critical mass, look at.Net. If they just suggest something then people will just go along with it, wether it is a smart idea or not. Who actually uses the features of.Net? Very few. But they all use the C/C++ compiler from Dev Studio.Net So.Net is not required for 1/2 the jobs out there.
So Rockefeller with his monopoly money comes up with a new way to refine coal. He patents it, and because it works well, others use it too. Then he files for a dozen other patents on the transportation of coal. All smart ideas. But eventually the competition is denied entry into the monopoly because the monopoly was there and ate up all the rights to processing coal, thanks to the patent office. We then have a monopoly that the goverment doesn't want, but is serving to maintain through the patent office.
You just can't have IP aquisition during monopoly correction period. They are mutually exclusive.
It doesn't mean that it won't get invented. They are free to patent it after some period when competition has been restored. (As determined by a judge)
What it does get is: Other companies and persons get to beef up their ptients portfolios & invent new technologies. Thereby reclaiming ground from the monopolist.
After all, those patents are paid for by monies from the illegal monopoly. Should that be permitted to?
SQL: Select name from patients where name is not null
It could be argued that the name object (variable) is being tested for equivilence to a global null object. (Where reference counts are used, like Pythons single None object)
Oh, hey there is another lanuage that uses is not.
It would be up to the patent owner (the individual) to sue for infractions, not the monopolistic company. The implocation is huge. MS does not then have a patent portfolio to attack Linux or anything else with.
You could finally tax MS. Here's how. Sell them exclusinve use, but don't enforce for whatever you belive in. Now technically you're supposed to enforce, but how much and with what vigor is up in the air. If you don't belive that Linux is infringing, then don't bring a lawsuit. You probaly won't care because MS would have bankrolled you for life.
Also, if you pass on, you can will (ot trust) it to someone in your stead.
Slashdot Mirror
Both share the fact that both were born out of paranioa.
PATRIOT came from Terrosit fears.
Socialism came from the great depression.
Everyone knows both are unconsitutional. The Patriot Act will be overturned in whole or in part, eventually, if enough people care. Socialism, particilarly Social [in]Security if nothing more than socialit welfare, which has no place in the United States.
Many people think that Social Security is a a sure thing. Recently, the only good thing to come from the Bush administration is the paranoia they are causing about its collapse. Reguardless of WHEN it will collapse, it WILL collapse. 2050 by my estimate. Al Gore chamioned a "locked box", Bush is pushing for private accounts. Why are they doing this? Because your SS (FICA) funds are deposited in the federal treasury, along with all the other tax money. Only the SSA knows how much you SHOULD get. Whether or not you get it is up to congress. Every year, Congress has to authorize the allocation from the treasury for SS. If Congress ever fails to allocate those funds, say for an economic or war crisis, no one on SSI gets thier money for that year.
Social Security is theft. It is the only insurance that you pay for that you don't know if it will be there when it is your turn.
I also object to SS on moral grounds. It enslaves our kids (YOUR KIDS, I don't have any) to pay for MY retirement. Do you think that is fair. Most would call it slavery.
Don't even get me startedon govt health insurance...
But anyway bak to the topic: We need a law that says no knee-jerk laws for 1 year after a catastripic event.
Here's a fact for you. Less than 5000 people died in the TWC. 15,000 people are killed in automobiles a year, over 1/2 by drunk drivrs. But you don't see us installing breathalizers in every car.
You touched on something there that I want to bring out further.
Linux can show what user-centric trusted computing can/should do. Microfoft et. al. will be showing what Big Business trusted computing wants/can do.
Eventually there will be those that will ask why it has to work against them so much when running Billy Bob's OS, and then they'll realize that their PC is not their PC, but the industry's PC.
I don't know what is more upsetting, that you dropped the tax issue like a hot potato or your lack of understanding copyright.
Also, incase you hadn't heard the opt-out system of copyright is being challenged on constitutional grouds. So yes, the constitution is alive and well.
You are free to publish other's works, which they have secured for limited times. However they must adhere to "fair use" provisions until the work is out of copyright protection. This is how congress allowes free speech and copyright to coexist.
If you really want to understand these issues, and obtaint he mind set in which the consitution was written read up on Natural Law. Our founding fathers were learned men and philosophers and businessmen, a combination of each which is rarely found today. Our schools produce people who are soley learned men, philosphers, or businessmen without achieving a balance of all three. If such a person has such a balance, they rarely if ever end up being elected in goverment.
Today, who wins and loses a race only matters in how much buying their vote will cost you.
Anyway... I belive the original intent of copyright was short terms. 7 years were the original, and seems right. Today it should be more like 6 months because of the faster pace that technology has delivered to us. Instead businessmen (not philosphers) looking to preserve thier business have bludgeoned our copyright system.
Face it Rock and Roll, and the music and movie industries were non-existent at the time the consitution was written. Sales of sheet music we the CDs of the time. 7 years in the days of horse-drawn buggies and such is a reasonable term. But how many CDs does Brittney sell a year later? Not many. We have a 6 month product cycle. In 1776 it could take 6 months just to get it heard by a siginificant amount of people.
Bck to the subject at hand...
Got a challenge on taxes?
Ah, a somewhat inelligent reader.
h tmx /16t hamend.html
Ok, now there is a question of whether it was ever ratified or not: http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/chaptr13.
http://www.taxableincome.net/articles/otherta
However, one does not need to rest his hopes on that premise alone. Here is where you DO have to dig deeper and you get to this juicy bit (Treom the taxableincome.net page:
"However, shortly after the amendment was (supposedly) ratified, both the Supreme Court and the Secretary of the Treasury admitted that the 16th Amendment did not give Congress any new taxing powers. In Treasury Decision 2303, the Secretary of the Treasury directly quoted the Supreme Court (Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co. (240 U.S. 103)) in saying that "The provisions of the sixteenth amendment conferred no new power of taxation," but instead simply prohibited Congress original power to tax incomes "from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation, to which it inherently belonged, and being placed in the category of direct taxation subject to apportionment."
Furthermore, it is important to note the statutory definition is not "all that comes in" it is instead limited to specific kinds of "income" (vernacular).
You see, the Consitution cannot be in conflict with itself. In order to keep the consitution consistant, they cannot have added direct taxing of "wages" (vernacular). Now we see why I said we do not need to read past article 1. The original consitution cannot be modified to extend powers.
If you do choose to dig deeper, and I do hope you do, you will also find that "wages", "employee", "employer", "State", "income" are "Terms of Art" which are specifically defined in a limited capacity as to not subject the typical American.
We have all grown up with "income" taxes, but few of us realize we only receive "renumeration" from our "employer" (vernacular). "Income" (statutory) for most people is intrest from bonds and possibly FDIC insured bank accounts (that last one is a bit of a grey area). Surpised? I was.
It is hardly fair to point the finger at kids not understanding the first admendment when the adults seem to not read or believe Article one.. No direct taxes without being apportioned to the States. It says it loud and clear, yet millions of americans pay trillions that they do not have to every single year. Dig deeper, and you will see that there is no law that makes wages federally taxable for the typical American. As a matter of fact, anyone who lives in the 50 states, and works for private or publically owned companies do not owe 1/4 to 1/3 of their pay to the federal government. Shocking I know. But true. It is a great deception. One I invite you to examine. This is now possible thanks to the internet and the mass dissemination that it provides. Hook yourself up with Title 26 of the USC and curl up by a fire, and tell me where my wages are made federally tabable.. They aren't.
Chew on that a while.
Samuel Adams, speech at the Philadelphia State House, August 1, 1776:
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."
Sure, you lived there and supported the country. You could have found an instructor here who came from China because HE wanted to be free and teach his art. Where you learn martial arts is not important. 'Who' matters more than anything. And don't tell me we don't have ang good instructors here.
You are patronizing a country that you object to. If you go to china, and work for them and contriibute to the GNP, and you do all this quite willingly, I think it is a fair trade that that you get kicked off information superhigh way.
Your move is one that is in the completely wrong direction. People are supposed to be moving OUT of China beause of the human rights violations and censorship.
As far as I am concerned you are committing treason, and you will get everything you deserve.
I think you'll realize (too late) just how good you have it here.
Even though they do not need to pay it.
See sig for more info.
Of a *picture* of an OLED display, if you're only going to be viewing the picture on a *LCD or CRT*? I mean, how can can you ever appreciate it???
test 2
Imagine a terrorist organization that detonates a bomb in the fissure. It is the stuff movies are made about. (Indecentlally if you are a movie maker you can buy that idea off me) You'd nail every country you hate and then some. But the problem is it only works once, so it is not good for terrorism per se.
The solution is the same as the problem. I would fracture the land mass and incrementally slide it in to the ocean. Several planned tsunamis are better than one big unplanned one.
I do not know if it is possible, but with that death toll and desvistation, it looks like we should get some geologists down there to see if it can't be done. It is resy though, you don't want to trigger the whole thing. Perhaps, it could be divided horizontally to remove the downward stress, rather than splitting slices off vertically?
#include //indemnification, etc
// Note: I did agree with them in that nearly all migrations will require not just an admin, but probably several developers. They did correctly state that this is not what people want to do (pay developers and have to maintain something). I think this is a valid migration cost, and a good point. However, once enough migrations are done, and the developed migration tools realeased, the impact should be nil.
// An obvious lie, because it happens everyday in Linux. Fact: MS can never have the QA testing that linux has, bu virtue of their development models. It was stupid for MS to pick a fight here.
#include <rhetoric about what you don't get with linux>
#include <disproven and slanted statistics>
#include <(and here's where it gets good) a personal case about a time when one of t he men tried to contribute to an open source app. He got complaints that it broke a particular platform. He was not happy that he was asked to fix what he broke>
#include <blurb about some MS Exchange wizard where he askes how could this ever be done in sendmail and his staff laughs. [Note: they were lauging AT you, not with you]>
#include <plug more MS products>
#include <more rhetoric about mystical TCO. Notibly, include the migration costs in the Linux side, and little or no migration costs for windows side. Quickly Declare windows is cheaper in the first few years, before migration costs are recouped>
#include <testing 4 year old USB drivers is impossible>
If this discussion was so open, why not invite some outside people in?
#include //indemnification, etc
// Note: I did agree with them in that nearly all migrations will require not just an admin, but probably several developers. They did correctly state that this is not what people want to do (pay developers and have to maintain something). I think this is a valid migration cost, and a good point. However, once enough migrations are done, and the developed migration tools realeased, the impact should be nil.
// An obvious lie, because it happens everyday in Linux. Fact: MS can never have the QA testing that linux has, bu virtue of their development models. It was stupid for MS to pick a fight here.
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
If this discussion was so open, why not invite some outside people in?
You'd need a LOT of hydrogen to start with, and if you did have that much on hand, you wouldn't need a reactor in the first place. :-)
Humans are too stupid to really do anything about it. We'll trash the environment and deplete our follil fuels. Only then will we really start looking for alterative sources.
Any inelligent being should see Nuclear power is obvious. It is cheap and clean. Do not listen to what they nay-sayers say. We not not _EVER_ have to store radioative waste. What we need is a cheap and safe mecanism for getting nuclear waste into orbit. Once there, you can toss it roughtly at the sun, and eventually it'll get sucked in and never pose a threat again.
Nuclear fission power in cars is dumb, but we can use neclear to generate the hydrogen fuel for cars.
However if we get to nuclear FUSION, we are in the clear.
Even if we stopped burning fossil fuels, we still have to LUBRICATE every oving part under the sun. That is no small amount of oil. That's what oil should be doing. Not burning, but lubricating.
But we won't do anythin unless it is forced upon us. Eventually enough people will die of heat exhaustion (too poor to afford cooling) or starve (because farm land is under water) that the poluation will plumit, and so will our usage, and Mother earth will keep turning, and working on resoring balance.
I realize that my tiraid may not have been completely explained. We have no problem installing our required DBMS on whatever server or OS (customer's or provided by us), but so many times they will not install our DBMS on their production servers, so we end up with our own app server.
This is not my fault, this is theirs. They want to take no risks with disrupting other things, so the price of that is another server. They bring it on themselves.
My angst is directoed towards the ones who will not install our seotware on their servers, won't provide an app server, and demand that I MUST port it to their DB. It works for selling to large companies, but when you're talking hundreds or thousands of new isntallations a year, I just cannot port to every DBMS under the sun.
So your spp server problem is one that you can point the finger back at yourself for. You seem to know more than the company who wrote the software from the ground up. After all, we know nothing about databases, and we picked the wrong one from the start....
Let me qualify explain that statement. I support a small web-based application. It'll win on Unix or Windows (under Apache & PHP) I don't care about that stuff. But what does piss me off is when we have to port the app to every DB MS under the sun. Our support costs go through the roof just because the customer wants it their app DB.
Well, try explaining to IT (not a smart bunch, after all they dropped out of CS (or never even tried)) that their DB du jour is not up to the task of our RDBMS. True 90% SQL compliance is a good start, but there it is impossible to create a full-featured app and still be completely agnostic.
Examples: MySQL is the worst. The last insert ID is a horrible concept that is not portible. Try finding it in Informix, it is impossible to find, but exists. Thent here is the MySQL timestamp 'feature' - the first timestanp field (and only the first) when UPDATEd is updated to NOW() regardless of whether or not you include it in the updated feilds.
The only reason why they want the DB changed is because they have lazy IT departments that want to do nothing. Their IT staff does not understand the complexities of SQL DBs to them it is just an DB, and "thay're all compabible through SQL" yeah, right. "What about ODBC?" ODBC is fine for basic record operations, but the moment you try to do anyhing advanced, you're out of luck.
I used MySQL as an example, but I've worked with several other Databases, and there is no Holy Grail of DB abstraction. There's much more to databases than inserting updating, deleting and selecting rows, depsite what IT thinks.
The issue is that these are LAB and QA machines. Each is under tight configutation control or have very special dignostic apps installed (win32) so we cannot modify them. We need to be able to let 'real work' be done on them. Having them for distCC will only cut our compile times down for the kernel & kde.
At work we have about 20 machines, 10 QA and 10 lab machines that all sit at an idle windows screensaver. Is there some live CD that I can pop in and configure our central server to use those machines as nodes on a dist cc cluster?
It needs to be able to handle any node going off line (rebooting into windows for 'actual work') gracefully.
I'm sure our own government will decide that we should outsource NASA to india because it's cheaper. Forget american jobs and pride, this is the all mighty dollar.
I vote that we outsource the government to India.
So Rockefeller, having establised a monopoly should be able to use his money to invent (patent) all kinds of things (after he is a monopoly) and create an oil/coal industry that heavily relies on those patents? Because that is exactly what Microsoft is doing.
.Net. If they just suggest something then people will just go along with it, wether it is a smart idea or not. Who actually uses the features of .Net? Very few. But they all use the C/C++ compiler from Dev Studio .Net So .Net is not required for 1/2 the jobs out there.
Microsoft has critical mass, look at
So Rockefeller with his monopoly money comes up with a new way to refine coal. He patents it, and because it works well, others use it too. Then he files for a dozen other patents on the transportation of coal. All smart ideas. But eventually the competition is denied entry into the monopoly because the monopoly was there and ate up all the rights to processing coal, thanks to the patent office. We then have a monopoly that the goverment doesn't want, but is serving to maintain through the patent office.
You just can't have IP aquisition during monopoly correction period. They are mutually exclusive.
It doesn't mean that it won't get invented. They are free to patent it after some period when competition has been restored. (As determined by a judge)
What it does get is: Other companies and persons get to beef up their ptients portfolios & invent new technologies. Thereby reclaiming ground from the monopolist.
After all, those patents are paid for by monies from the illegal monopoly. Should that be permitted to?
SQL:
Select name from patients where name is not null
It could be argued that the name object (variable) is being tested for equivilence to a global null object. (Where reference counts are used, like Pythons single None object)
Oh, hey there is another lanuage that uses is not.
That is not the same. Subtlties are HUGE.
It would be up to the patent owner (the individual) to sue for infractions, not the monopolistic company. The implocation is huge. MS does not then have a patent portfolio to attack Linux or anything else with.
You could finally tax MS. Here's how. Sell them exclusinve use, but don't enforce for whatever you belive in. Now technically you're supposed to enforce, but how much and with what vigor is up in the air. If you don't belive that Linux is infringing, then don't bring a lawsuit. You probaly won't care because MS would have bankrolled you for life.
Also, if you pass on, you can will (ot trust) it to someone in your stead.