The Associated Press, or AP, is an American news agency. The AP is a cooperative owned by its contributing newspapers, radio and television stations in the United States, which both contribute stories to the AP and use material written by its staffers. Many newspapers and broadcasters outside the United States are AP subscribers, paying a fee to use AP material without being contributive members of the cooperative.
Not that I agree with the APs stance ( looks like fair use to me ) but if the Washington Post has a large number of staff writers, and they don't need the AP, then it would seem this stance is less about a moral stance and more about reducing the impact of the competition.
That's a complete troll, but I'm bored so I'll play.
If an individual in the US had the money and technical ability to make an atomic bomb, I'd be OK with him / her owning one.
Hell, we let organizations run their own nuclear reactors (one is down the road from me now as I write this, run by a local university ) right now, so I don't see how this would be any different.
Seems like what we'll end up with then is no government paid for health care system. Given demographics, we just may not be able to afford it.
We could also see something like what the NHS is trying in the UK, preventing people with "bad lifestyles" from receiving treatment.
Seems like that would be self defeating. It would create a class of people who are forced, via taxes, to pay into a system that doesn't benefit them. That doesn't bode well for long term stability or viability.
You miss the point. The point is that when making everyday decisions about lifestyle, people get to externalize some of the cost. If we make them bear the cost, they will be less likely to make decisions that are more expensive for society as a whole.
and mine
The idea the economics of health care must trump individual rights leads to complete regulation and control of everyone's lives as a "cost saving measure". It's totalitarianism.
We seem to agree that the phenomenon exists, although we seem to disagree that the phenomenon is desirable.
For a centralized monitoring of the citizenry as a health cost savings measure to be effective, those doing the monitoring and enforcing must be always right and free from personal bias.
I know of no humans who are always right and always free from personal bias.
Therefore, I view the idea of monitoring and punishing the citizenry for what they eat, how much they do or do not exercise, et. al. with a healthy dose of skepticism.
More plausibly, how about someone in government thinks that lifestyle X is bad for you, and starts handing out tax penalties and rebates accordingly -- but he's wrong.
I think you nailed the problem with totalitarianism.
For an example, take the bureaucrat working for an elected official. The bureaucrat comes out with some boneheaded rule about each citizen must not eat meat as it's very unhealthy.
Once symptoms of B12 deficiency start showing up, there's at least a chance the elected official will respond to public outcry, lest the next election not go so well.
On the other hand, if there are no elections then whatever inane policy is out there can be maintained forever. Obviously it's not that the policy is wrong ( since that would require the government to admit it made a mistake ) but that the people aren't implementing it correctly. Like collectivism in the former soviet union:
Despite the expectations, collectivization led to a catastrophic drop in farming productivity, which did not regain the NEP level until 1940. The upheaval associated with collectivization was particularly severe in Ukraine, and the heavily Ukrainian adjoining Volga regions, a fact which has led many Ukrainian scholars to argue that there was a deliberate policy of starving the Ukrainians (see Holodomor for more information). The number of people who died in the famines is estimated at between three and ten million in Ukraine alone, not counting the adjoining regions. The best estimate is that in the whole USSR there were 5â"6 million excess deaths.
What's next? Only approved food may be sold? Perhaps any non-vegan food is subject to confiscation and the owners subject to arrest?
Maybe we can ban alcohol nationally, since that worked so well last time.
Oh, I know. Mandatory exercise. Not running fast enough? Well, attack dogs are cheaper that what you're costing medicare, so enough with your rights.
The idea the economics of health care must trump individual rights leads to complete regulation and control of everyone's lives as a "cost saving measure". It's totalitarianism.
But I suspect you know that, since your sig line seems to indicate you're trolling.. if so, well done.
From his description, he's ending up with a.zip file which contains encrypted files. Any mail system which blocks attachments by file name and blocks.zip files would remove the attachment and / or block the mail.
When I tested it, I ended up with a.zip.gpg file. That made it through fine.
True enough. Anyone on the ocean needs to think about such things as fires, fresh water, food stuffs, sewage... all those messy details which don't make it into manifestos.
For the vortex of suck, get stuck with an antivirus package set up to scan everything at launch ( no exceptions... thanks, corporate ), then fire up some Java. Bonus points for utilizing a.jar file.
Now the truly scary part is when they want WRITE access to their database.
I've had customers like that as well. Honestly, since they're paying and it's their data I can see where they're coming from.
On the other hand, I usually have someone sign off on a MOU that they understand writing to their database outside of the application is inherently risky, and that they understand there will be additional charges for recovery work.
WHEN a customer mangles their data we get to test our recovery processes. So far, so good.
Also good to have multiple backups using multiple methods. I've had customers mangle multiple tables, so a full database restore with point in time recovery was best while other customers munged up one table, so a restore from export worked out better.
Since you're using Oracle, there some ways to prevent access to other parts of the schema and prevent run-on queries from going nuts.
Create a user for them, specifically for these ad-hoc queries. This user should have no disk quotas on any tablespace, since they're not writing any data. This user should only have the 'Create session' privilege.
Second, if your customer data is all in big_honkin_schema, create some views for them. Create the views in another schema and grant them select only.
Third, if you're REALLY worried about them "touching your precious tables"[1] then create them materialized views instead. Might have to adjust disk quotas of course.
You can also set up user profiles to limit resource consumption ( number of sessions, maximum CPU time, et. al. ).
First off, thanks for the bookfinder.com link. Used them to find a book I'd been looking for, but didn't want to pay the inflated prices I saw on Amazon.
Which is the only gripe I've got with some of the out of print / hard to find books out there.
Some titles have quite a range in price, from tens of dollars to hundreds of dollars even from sellers in the same geographic area ( so shipping costs and currency conversion don't seem major factors ) and apparently the same condition / edition.
Well, as far as "true positives" go, I wonder if that's after the fact rigging the results.
However, in thinking about their hit rate ( in other words, the "positives", false or not ) with this method, this is what I'm thinking:
If there's 80 "hits" out of 100,000 that's a.0008% hit rate. Not saying those 80 are all terrorists/drug dealers/whatever, but that 80 people have to be investigated.
Now, applied to the population of NYC[1] of 8,250,567, that's roughly 6,600 people who need to be investigated. Possibly doable, but that's a lot of resources to devote.
Applying that same hit rate to, say, the traffic of LaGuardia airport[2] of 25.3 million people you've got 20240 people who have to be investigated and there's a time constraint ( unless you're ok with holding them while you investigate, possibly/likely preventing them from making their flight ).
Even presuming their numbers are correct and their demos aren't rigged, that's a lot of manhours / resources to devote to background checks.
Anyone know of a system with an effectively low false positive rate? When dealing with millions of "possibles", it seems even a 1% or 2% false positive rate generates far too many false positives for the system to be effective.
This system seems to generate a number of false positives even in hindsight.
Slashdot Mirror
Not that I agree with the APs stance ( looks like fair use to me ) but if the Washington Post has a large number of staff writers, and they don't need the AP, then it would seem this stance is less about a moral stance and more about reducing the impact of the competition.
Country folk have to be very good at looking out for their neighbors.
When emergency services response time is over 20 minutes, it's not like you've got a lot of choices.
Sadly, that kind of response time isn't just in the country.
That's a complete troll, but I'm bored so I'll play.
If an individual in the US had the money and technical ability to make an atomic bomb, I'd be OK with him / her owning one.
Hell, we let organizations run their own nuclear reactors (one is down the road from me now as I write this, run by a local university ) right now, so I don't see how this would be any different.
Seems like what we'll end up with then is no government paid for health care system. Given demographics, we just may not be able to afford it.
We could also see something like what the NHS is trying in the UK, preventing people with "bad lifestyles" from receiving treatment.
Seems like that would be self defeating. It would create a class of people who are forced, via taxes, to pay into a system that doesn't benefit them. That doesn't bode well for long term stability or viability.
and mine
We seem to agree that the phenomenon exists, although we seem to disagree that the phenomenon is desirable.
For a centralized monitoring of the citizenry as a health cost savings measure to be effective, those doing the monitoring and enforcing must be always right and free from personal bias.
I know of no humans who are always right and always free from personal bias.
Therefore, I view the idea of monitoring and punishing the citizenry for what they eat, how much they do or do not exercise, et. al. with a healthy dose of skepticism.
I think you nailed the problem with totalitarianism.
For an example, take the bureaucrat working for an elected official. The bureaucrat comes out with some boneheaded rule about each citizen must not eat meat as it's very unhealthy.
Once symptoms of B12 deficiency start showing up, there's at least a chance the elected official will respond to public outcry, lest the next election not go so well.
On the other hand, if there are no elections then whatever inane policy is out there can be maintained forever. Obviously it's not that the policy is wrong ( since that would require the government to admit it made a mistake ) but that the people aren't implementing it correctly. Like collectivism in the former soviet union:
What's next? Only approved food may be sold? Perhaps any non-vegan food is subject to confiscation and the owners subject to arrest?
Maybe we can ban alcohol nationally, since that worked so well last time.
Oh, I know. Mandatory exercise. Not running fast enough? Well, attack dogs are cheaper that what you're costing medicare, so enough with your rights.
The idea the economics of health care must trump individual rights leads to complete regulation and control of everyone's lives as a "cost saving measure". It's totalitarianism.
But I suspect you know that, since your sig line seems to indicate you're trolling.. if so, well done.
Finally, a use for the marketing department! They can power the LAMP application!
At least until PETA complains it's cruel to the application...
[badum-ching]
Seriously.
What, everyone gets bingo too fast on their Web 2.0 bingo cards so the next version of bingo cards needs new entries and thus is Web 3.0?
And with such an, erm, easy to remember password you post it to /. so we can all help you remember it?
*sigh*
I yearn for the good old days when password storage involved a sticky note and a monitor...
[badum-ching]
Oh great.
44 minutes of teabaging.
Maybe tivo can skip the show and just show the 16 minutes of commercials?
Think you're right.
.zip file which contains encrypted files. Any mail system which blocks attachments by file name and blocks .zip files would remove the attachment and / or block the mail.
.zip.gpg file. That made it through fine.
From his description, he's ending up with a
When I tested it, I ended up with a
Ok, I just did the following:
.zip.gpg file to an email and mailed it to one of my gmail accounts.
.zip files.
.zip files to gmail.
1) created a zip file.
2) encrypted said zip file with GPG.
3) attached that
Worked fine.
Perhaps it's not so much a matter of gmail not liking encrypted attachments as it is gmail not liking
At least others seem to have problems sending
Even if they're unable to create their own nation, they might be able to operate under a flag of convenience to achieve the same or similar effect.
True enough. Anyone on the ocean needs to think about such things as fires, fresh water, food stuffs, sewage... all those messy details which don't make it into manifestos.
For the vortex of suck, get stuck with an antivirus package set up to scan everything at launch ( no exceptions... thanks, corporate ), then fire up some Java. Bonus points for utilizing a .jar file.
Ok, so the proof of concept is done.
;-)
Now, how do we build this into cell phones?
caller: Like OMG! Theres PONIEZ!!
device: *BZZZT*
caller: Like OMG! Theres PONIEZ!!
Ok, so in some cases drooling and twitching occur naturally...
So, what you're saying is controlling access to food and medical care can be considered a weapon.
Like in Somalia, where UNICEF is prevented from providing aid to some of the "conflict affected areas".
I've had customers like that as well. Honestly, since they're paying and it's their data I can see where they're coming from.
On the other hand, I usually have someone sign off on a MOU that they understand writing to their database outside of the application is inherently risky, and that they understand there will be additional charges for recovery work.
WHEN a customer mangles their data we get to test our recovery processes. So far, so good.
Also good to have multiple backups using multiple methods. I've had customers mangle multiple tables, so a full database restore with point in time recovery was best while other customers munged up one table, so a restore from export worked out better.
Since you're using Oracle, there some ways to prevent access to other parts of the schema and prevent run-on queries from going nuts.
;-)
Create a user for them, specifically for these ad-hoc queries. This user should have no disk quotas on any tablespace, since they're not writing any data. This user should only have the 'Create session' privilege.
Second, if your customer data is all in big_honkin_schema, create some views for them. Create the views in another schema and grant them select only.
Third, if you're REALLY worried about them "touching your precious tables"[1] then create them materialized views instead. Might have to adjust disk quotas of course.
You can also set up user profiles to limit resource consumption ( number of sessions, maximum CPU time, et. al. ).
[1] Since when did Gollum become a DBA?
First off, thanks for the bookfinder.com link. Used them to find a book I'd been looking for, but didn't want to pay the inflated prices I saw on Amazon.
Which is the only gripe I've got with some of the out of print / hard to find books out there.
Some titles have quite a range in price, from tens of dollars to hundreds of dollars even from sellers in the same geographic area ( so shipping costs and currency conversion don't seem major factors ) and apparently the same condition / edition.
Wiley Coyote, is that you?
So, um, you guys hiring?
Well, as far as "true positives" go, I wonder if that's after the fact rigging the results.
.0008% hit rate. Not saying those 80 are all terrorists/drug dealers/whatever, but that 80 people have to be investigated.
However, in thinking about their hit rate ( in other words, the "positives", false or not ) with this method, this is what I'm thinking:
If there's 80 "hits" out of 100,000 that's a
Now, applied to the population of NYC[1] of 8,250,567, that's roughly 6,600 people who need to be investigated. Possibly doable, but that's a lot of resources to devote.
Applying that same hit rate to, say, the traffic of LaGuardia airport[2] of 25.3 million people you've got 20240 people who have to be investigated and there's a time constraint ( unless you're ok with holding them while you investigate, possibly/likely preventing them from making their flight ).
Even presuming their numbers are correct and their demos aren't rigged, that's a lot of manhours / resources to devote to background checks.
[1] http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/census/popcur.shtml
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaGuardia_Airport
It's the "80 others" which caught my eye.
Anyone know of a system with an effectively low false positive rate? When dealing with millions of "possibles", it seems even a 1% or 2% false positive rate generates far too many false positives for the system to be effective.
This system seems to generate a number of false positives even in hindsight.