Oracle is a true relational database management system. As is DB/2, Postgress, SQL Server, mySQL....
Access is... words fail me. The last developer here that suggested using Access was summarily shot, hung, drawn and quartered, and his head posted on a spike at the door to the computer room as a warning to others.
"MySQL is the best alternative to Oracle" - that's a pretty bold statement. You don't want to add some context? What about large, high transaction databases - DB/2 would probably be the best alternative to Oracle. What about Postgress? What about SQL Server?
Because you were in Australia in the final days of that laid back Australia.
1994 - the conservative ("Liberal") political party took over as the federal government. The Prime Minister - John (G.W. Bush's "Deputy Sheriff" in the region) was as reactionary and divisive as any political leader in living memory.
Remember, we were selected by the best judges in England...
The difference between the USA and Australia - first, England rounded up all of it's religious fanatics, and sent them to the American colonies, then they rounded up all of these criminals, and send those to the Australian colonies....
Tell the consultant that sensitive information like that cannot be sent outside of the organization. Get them to set things up inside your organization.
We have been asked to do a similar thing here - and said emphatically NO.
Umm, when have you ever heard of the government being held appropriately accountable for anything?
Same country, several months ago. There was a federal election, and the previous government was trounced. The leader of that government lost his own seat (electorate / district). That's the ultimate in accountability - the public rejected what the government had done, didn't agree with them, and booted them out.
Then what they should have said was words like "Just as free to air broadcasting standards are open, public standards, set by the ITU (and others), so should internet broadcasting be based on standards that are also open and public."
I had a lot of trouble with the comment the equivalent of current BBC broadcasts only being watchable on, say, a Sony television.. There are standards specifying how broadcast television signals are transmitted; how the sound signal is encoded, the offset from vision to sound signals, line and frame rates, and all of that. These standards are open, anyone can design and build a television receiver to those standards, and if their design and manufacturing skills are good enough, then their TV will satisfactorily receive the signal.
A potentially good article was spoiled by a crap metaphor.
The most important part of any electoral system is that the general public must have confidence that the system is transparent and fair. That is, that everyone who votes has their vote recorded exactly as they cast it, and that there are built in checks and balances that make sure any attempt to defraud or corrupt the system are caught before the process is altered.
If people have no faith in the validity of the process - then the legitimacy of the results are shrouded in doubt - and then the basis of the democratic system starts to fall apart.
So by using technology the way the US is - no method to independently verify counts, no unalterable audit trail, lack of confidence in the integrity of the system - has not just hampered the process, but is severely damaging it
Now, why should a private company, whose main responsibility is to make profits for their shareholders, voluntarily upgrade their technology, particularly when they enjoy a monopoly in their service area? And you assume that a local government, whose main responsibility and accountability is to their citizens (who can vote them out every few years) would not be responsive to changes in technology?
Are you sure you aren't automatically assuming government = bad, private industry = good?
I suspect that's why the country is in such a shambles now. Only the dedicated - the extremists - vote, and the bulk of the country, the middle of the road people politically (well, middile of the US road, which is still to the right of roads in the rest of the world) don't have their moderating effect.
I hope you are three times as frightened at the idea of the government taking over health care (I mean even more than it already is).
Yes - that is something to be very afraid of - just think, all of those in the health care "business" might no longer make their robber baron profits. And the country's health care quality and affordability for everyone (not just the fortunate few that can afford if) may improve towards that which people in most other developed countries enjoy.
Well, let me giev an example where the US Supreme Court may very well look at international law and social perspectives.
The Constution forbits "cruel and unusual punishment". But what is exactly "cruel and unusual"? When those words were framed, executing criminals for a wide variety of offences was viewed by many people - in many countries, too - as not being cruel nor unusual. But now, the US is one of the few (or the only?) western countries that has, and regularly uses, the death penalty. So what is now "cruel and unusual" covers punusments considered acceptable and normal two hundred and thirty years ago.
So, in determining whether a particular punishment is "cruel and unusual", I one would hope they look beyond just the US.
If we get a call from a number we don't recognise, or is blocked from giving the caller id, we let the answering machine take it. If the person starts to leave a message, and we want to talk to them, we pick up. But telemarketers hang up as soon as the hear a machine.
Now, is there a single convincing reason why the simplest, most secure and easily verifiable system - paper ballots - aren't used? Why all the machines? Lever, butterfly ballots, electronic... What problem is it that these systems are meant to solve?
I suspect it is a combination of "We want some result in an hour or two - we are too impatient to wait for it to be counted properly" and "We want a system that we can manipulate without any audit trails."
Slashdot Mirror
So, IT Departments aren't meant to be proactive and show initiative, and make the company more profitable?
Oracle is a true relational database management system. As is DB/2, Postgress, SQL Server, mySQL....
Access is ... words fail me. The last developer here that suggested using Access was summarily shot, hung, drawn and quartered, and his head posted on a spike at the door to the computer room as a warning to others.
"MySQL is the best alternative to Oracle" - that's a pretty bold statement. You don't want to add some context? What about large, high transaction databases - DB/2 would probably be the best alternative to Oracle. What about Postgress? What about SQL Server?
Because you were in Australia in the final days of that laid back Australia.
1994 - the conservative ("Liberal") political party took over as the federal government. The Prime Minister - John (G.W. Bush's "Deputy Sheriff" in the region) was as reactionary and divisive as any political leader in living memory.
The delay from when you press the shutter to when the image is actually captured is still a big issue to many professional photographers.
All of the auto focus / anti shake / color balance / et al features require so much processing....
Perl would be Voodoo - An incomprehensible series of arcane incantations that involve the blood of goats and permanently corrupt your soul.
Actually, the incantations involve the blood of camels.
.....
Remember, we were selected by the best judges in England...
The difference between the USA and Australia - first, England rounded up all of it's religious fanatics, and sent them to the American colonies, then they rounded up all of these criminals, and send those to the Australian colonies....
Tell the consultant that sensitive information like that cannot be sent outside of the organization. Get them to set things up inside your organization.
We have been asked to do a similar thing here - and said emphatically NO.
And you can get USB attached CD/ DVD read/write drives.
Same country, several months ago. There was a federal election, and the previous government was trounced. The leader of that government lost his own seat (electorate / district). That's the ultimate in accountability - the public rejected what the government had done, didn't agree with them, and booted them out.
You want the old style pen and paper experience - look at the old style text based MUDs.
Then what they should have said was words like "Just as free to air broadcasting standards are open, public standards, set by the ITU (and others), so should internet broadcasting be based on standards that are also open and public."
A potentially good article was spoiled by a crap metaphor.
I believe the correct terminology is the "imperial" system. And of course, the British haven't had an empire for far longer than 20 years.
Well, you know what Bush thinks of the constitution:
"Its just a goddam piece of paper!"
If people have no faith in the validity of the process - then the legitimacy of the results are shrouded in doubt - and then the basis of the democratic system starts to fall apart.
So by using technology the way the US is - no method to independently verify counts, no unalterable audit trail, lack of confidence in the integrity of the system - has not just hampered the process, but is severely damaging it
Sorry, I have to call BS on your premise.
Now, why should a private company, whose main responsibility is to make profits for their shareholders, voluntarily upgrade their technology, particularly when they enjoy a monopoly in their service area? And you assume that a local government, whose main responsibility and accountability is to their citizens (who can vote them out every few years) would not be responsive to changes in technology?
Are you sure you aren't automatically assuming government = bad, private industry = good?
I suspect that's why the country is in such a shambles now. Only the dedicated - the extremists - vote, and the bulk of the country, the middle of the road people politically (well, middile of the US road, which is still to the right of roads in the rest of the world) don't have their moderating effect.
I don't see any reference to that distinction in the Constitution.....
Yes - that is something to be very afraid of - just think, all of those in the health care "business" might no longer make their robber baron profits. And the country's health care quality and affordability for everyone (not just the fortunate few that can afford if) may improve towards that which people in most other developed countries enjoy.
>organised gambling isn't nearly as widespread and deeply rooted in Western culture as consuming alcohol is.
You wanna bet?
Well, let me giev an example where the US Supreme Court may very well look at international law and social perspectives.
The Constution forbits "cruel and unusual punishment". But what is exactly "cruel and unusual"? When those words were framed, executing criminals for a wide variety of offences was viewed by many people - in many countries, too - as not being cruel nor unusual. But now, the US is one of the few (or the only?) western countries that has, and regularly uses, the death penalty. So what is now "cruel and unusual" covers punusments considered acceptable and normal two hundred and thirty years ago.
So, in determining whether a particular punishment is "cruel and unusual", I one would hope they look beyond just the US.
If we get a call from a number we don't recognise, or is blocked from giving the caller id, we let the answering machine take it. If the person starts to leave a message, and we want to talk to them, we pick up. But telemarketers hang up as soon as the hear a machine.
Now, is there a single convincing reason why the simplest, most secure and easily verifiable system - paper ballots - aren't used? Why all the machines? Lever, butterfly ballots, electronic... What problem is it that these systems are meant to solve?
I suspect it is a combination of "We want some result in an hour or two - we are too impatient to wait for it to be counted properly" and "We want a system that we can manipulate without any audit trails."