I don't know why you say you enjoy Las Vegas. The hotels I've seen are not luxurious, nor are they cheap. The food in the buffet is inedible - I wouldn't feed it to hogs.I did not find the shows enjoyable
All in all, I agree. Las Vegas is hot, dusty, crowded, and ridiculously expensive.
It's filled with drunken bros screaming at the top of their lungs at drunken bimbos wearing way too much make-up. Ewwwwww.
The food used to be awesome (and affordable), now it's shit. Bland, expensive shit. I used to pay $5 to $10 for a kick-ass steak dinner in Vegas, now the crappy buffet is $35 and it's dreadful.
Drinks are waaaay too expensive- $15 to $20 for a fucking G&T or a daiquiri? $9 for a beer? Used to be you could drink all night for $30, less if you were playing. Not anymore.
The shows are usually "meh", and often just yawn-worthy. Crowded venues with poor acoustics and boring performances.
The hotels are generally nice, although for what you pay they should be nice. But who the fuck goes to Vegas for the hotels? No one, that's who.
To be fair, his insisting on using a specific set of cards should have rang alarm bells, at least to have them inspected by someone from the casino, if they miss whatever and let it play that's on their head.
That's the thing that made me wonder what they were thinking...if he asks to use a specific set of cards, that should make your spidey-sense tingle all the way to your gonads.
What reason would you have to ask for a specific set of cards other than being able to use them to your advantage?
And yeah, if the casino agreed to use them and missed the potential for him to use them to his advantage, too bad for them.
Have you ever been in a casino? Every single one I've ever been in allows smoking inside (and I've been in more than a few....).
And yes, it's a poorly-kept secret that they fiddle with the air, the lighting, ambient sound, and the floor layout to keep people mesmerized and gambling.
No clocks, no windows, nothing of the immediate outside world is allowed in so as not to distract people or make them think that maybe they should leave.
Its cunts like this that propagate the myth that us open source dudes are arrogant pricks. Thanks for that
You're welcome. People like him infest the various Linux community support forums, and their first response is often something like "READ THE MANUAL, YOU FUCKING N00B!!"
Which would be great advice if the manual was only 2 pages long, or if there was a manual at all, but this brick-in-the-face response puts so many people off, and they usually end up with a "fuck Linux" attitude.
I cringe every time I see one of these pricks responding from atop his high horse, completely forgetting that at one time he too was once a "n00b" looking for a little help.
In every RDBMS I know, you can add an identity column, or a column that is filled by a sequence, or as last resort something that is calculated on save with a trigger. If you want this, you can have it in every RDBMS except the most rudimentary.
If you're referring to the rowID field, yes, this appears to be present in virtually every RDBMS that exists. Even if it's an internal ID it can be exposed and used. I'm not sure why he was asking for this since it's already a standard feature of every relational DB on the planet.
"There is no way to distinguish between a "missing" column and an empty, zero-length column. (This is perhaps a debatable feature, but I personally like it for reasons I'm still trying to articulate.)"
I have no idea why this would be a useful way to do things, but I'm willing to listen to why you might think it would be. It seems as though you'd have no way to tell if there's no value in the column or no column at all. Specifically, how is this useful or beneficial?
-
"Dynamic schema via "Create-on-Write" - Columns and tables can be created just by putting or updating data in them. No explicit schema alteration is required."
As above, what benefit is there in having no explicit schema on which to operate??
-
"Every row automatically get's a read-only auto-number "rowID" field."
I believe this is already the case in Oracle, mySQL/mariaDB, and postgres if I'm not mistaken.
" No patient, consumer, or client data was ever extracted or viewed," the company's data directory has said. "The forensic analysis proves that. The data was encrypted -- so it couldn't have been viewed -- and it was never extracted, so nobody has it and could attempt decryption."
Oh sure, I totally believe this 100%.
Like they would even know for sure if it had been extracted.
No major company (read: one who had any lawyers review the application forms) would ask that on a written application (at least today) because it's not even legally enforceable.
Really? Apply to the FBI, CIA, NSA, or other three-letter security agencies and you'll be asked this question. Apply to the DOE Security Forces and they'll ask this.
You've also never had a Secret or Top-Secret clearance, because they usually ask you this question for those as well. At least they did when I was applying for mine. Granted it's been a while but I'd be surprised if that question (or one with the same intent) isn't still asked.
In fact, in this very case it's entirely possible that the defendant didn't think he was breaking the law - many/. users here are arguing (probably incorrectly) that he in fact did not.
Sure, but that's not the point of the question; the point is to ask if you have knowingly broken the law, and most people know whether they have or not. That's what the question is designed to get at.
For example, you robbed a liquor store when you were 20 but you were never caught. Fifteen years later you're applying for a TSC or above, and they ask you the question, usually while hooked to a polygraph. You know damn well you broke the law, so this isn't a test of legal theory. This is designed to give them something else to prosecute you on if ever comes to light later.
"qbsolv is a metaheuristic or partitioning solver that solves a potentially large QUBO problem by splitting it into pieces that are solved either on a D-Wave system or via a classical tabu solver"
I know some of those words but all I can really tell is that it apparently does things to stuff, or does stuff to things.
How is that all that different from web sites that monitor every mouse movement, key stroke, and web site that you visit?
Presumably because they can't monitor your mouse movements and key strokes when you're on another site that isn't theirs.
Yahoo is welcome to monitor your mouse movements and key strokes when you're on Yahoo, but If Yahoo could monitor your mouse movements and key strokes when you were on CNN or Google, then there would be a problem, no?
I think what's really interesting here is that the keylogger is described as an "illegal product" in a United States Attorney's Office press release. Those guys are lawyers, and they know the product itself is NOT illegal.
Well....not to put too fine a point on it, but lawyers have been known to lie and/or misstate the truth, especially when it furthers their case.
Legally he wasn't a "crook", since he hadn't been convicted of anything at that time.
It would seem that he was a crook who just hadn't been caught or convicted yet.
Under your view, if you murder a person but but aren't convicted of doing it, you're somehow not a murderer?
And for the record, I don't even buy the "legally" qualifier. You are what you are, whether a court confirms it or not.
If I murder someone but I'm not convicted of it, I'm still a murderer. A legal ruling (or lack of one) in the eyes of the law doesn't change the reality of what I did.
The reason why no editing is gaming the system. Early on people were writing bait posts, to get people to respond and than alter the post to make the responders look foolish and targeted them with a response.
Then just quote the parent post in your reply, problem solved. Or put in a 2-minute "grace" period when a post can be edited and then lock it.
Literally millions of other forums and comment sections do this and the world is still spinning...there's no legitimate reason that slashdot couldn't do it as well.
Oh believe me, lots of people including myself have suggested this innovative yet impossible-to-implement feature on slashdot.
Apparently this remarkable "edit-after-posting" feature has been attempted by software engineers for decades but alas, no one has ever managed to get it working.
Slashdot Mirror
Getting Linux to run under Windows is like paying a call girl to hold the Fleshlight for you.
I don't know why you say you enjoy Las Vegas. The hotels I've seen are not luxurious, nor are they cheap. The food in the buffet is inedible - I wouldn't feed it to hogs.I did not find the shows enjoyable
All in all, I agree. Las Vegas is hot, dusty, crowded, and ridiculously expensive.
It's filled with drunken bros screaming at the top of their lungs at drunken bimbos wearing way too much make-up. Ewwwwww.
The food used to be awesome (and affordable), now it's shit. Bland, expensive shit. I used to pay $5 to $10 for a kick-ass steak dinner in Vegas, now the crappy buffet is $35 and it's dreadful.
Drinks are waaaay too expensive- $15 to $20 for a fucking G&T or a daiquiri? $9 for a beer? Used to be you could drink all night for $30, less if you were playing. Not anymore.
The shows are usually "meh", and often just yawn-worthy. Crowded venues with poor acoustics and boring performances.
The hotels are generally nice, although for what you pay they should be nice. But who the fuck goes to Vegas for the hotels? No one, that's who.
Vegas used to be cool, now it just sucks.
I mean, can anyone think of someone so stupid and/or crooked that they lost money owning a casino?
Donald Trump *cough*
He substituted the cards before the game started, by conning the casino in using that specific (flawed) brand of cards.
How did he "con" them? He asked to use that brand and they agreed. He never touched the cards nor did he alter them in any way.
To be fair, his insisting on using a specific set of cards should have rang alarm bells, at least to have them inspected by someone from the casino, if they miss whatever and let it play that's on their head.
That's the thing that made me wonder what they were thinking...if he asks to use a specific set of cards, that should make your spidey-sense tingle all the way to your gonads.
What reason would you have to ask for a specific set of cards other than being able to use them to your advantage?
And yeah, if the casino agreed to use them and missed the potential for him to use them to his advantage, too bad for them.
assuming people were allowed to smoke indoors.
Have you ever been in a casino? Every single one I've ever been in allows smoking inside (and I've been in more than a few....).
And yes, it's a poorly-kept secret that they fiddle with the air, the lighting, ambient sound, and the floor layout to keep people mesmerized and gambling.
No clocks, no windows, nothing of the immediate outside world is allowed in so as not to distract people or make them think that maybe they should leave.
If you are entertained by playing games of chance, the small percentage the house takes is your bill for the night's entertainment.
Lol, "small percentage" = "all your money".
But it's true- casinos are opulent because they win and you lose, that's how it works.
With the way I see so many people driving, this is good news for the makers of bandages and burn units.
Seriously, take a short trip down the freeway and watch people drive...then ask yourself, "Would I want these people flying a car near me??"
Its cunts like this that propagate the myth that us open source dudes are arrogant pricks. Thanks for that
You're welcome. People like him infest the various Linux community support forums, and their first response is often something like "READ THE MANUAL, YOU FUCKING N00B!!"
Which would be great advice if the manual was only 2 pages long, or if there was a manual at all, but this brick-in-the-face response puts so many people off, and they usually end up with a "fuck Linux" attitude.
I cringe every time I see one of these pricks responding from atop his high horse, completely forgetting that at one time he too was once a "n00b" looking for a little help.
Did you where I said COMPANY?
did you see where I said WRITTEN APPLICATION?
Your CAPITAL LETTERS are very IMPRESSIVE.
In every RDBMS I know, you can add an identity column, or a column that is filled by a sequence, or as last resort something that is calculated on save with a trigger. If you want this, you can have it in every RDBMS except the most rudimentary.
If you're referring to the rowID field, yes, this appears to be present in virtually every RDBMS that exists. Even if it's an internal ID it can be exposed and used. I'm not sure why he was asking for this since it's already a standard feature of every relational DB on the planet.
(BTW, what is the language which we're supposed to be happy with?)
Probably either Brainfuck or Visual Basic.
Errrrrrrrrr...........from the "feature list":
"There is no way to distinguish between a "missing" column and an empty, zero-length column. (This is perhaps a debatable feature, but I personally like it for reasons I'm still trying to articulate.)"
I have no idea why this would be a useful way to do things, but I'm willing to listen to why you might think it would be. It seems as though you'd have no way to tell if there's no value in the column or no column at all. Specifically, how is this useful or beneficial?
-
"Dynamic schema via "Create-on-Write" - Columns and tables can be created just by putting or updating data in them. No explicit schema alteration is required."
As above, what benefit is there in having no explicit schema on which to operate??
-
"Every row automatically get's a read-only auto-number "rowID" field."
I believe this is already the case in Oracle, mySQL/mariaDB, and postgres if I'm not mistaken.
No, people won't build shit for you.
Tell your friend to get off his ass and build it himself.
Classic rude answer by a stuck-up asshole.
Sorry, but asking "Where exactly does one go to ask for a new open source software?" doesn't warrant this kind of "cram-it-up-your-ass" response.
There are probably a thousand ways to respond but you had to go and pick the worst, most graceless way to do so. Bravo, asshole!
" No patient, consumer, or client data was ever extracted or viewed," the company's data directory has said. "The forensic analysis proves that. The data was encrypted -- so it couldn't have been viewed -- and it was never extracted, so nobody has it and could attempt decryption."
Oh sure, I totally believe this 100%.
Like they would even know for sure if it had been extracted.
No major company (read: one who had any lawyers review the application forms) would ask that on a written application (at least today) because it's not even legally enforceable.
Really? Apply to the FBI, CIA, NSA, or other three-letter security agencies and you'll be asked this question. Apply to the DOE Security Forces and they'll ask this.
You've also never had a Secret or Top-Secret clearance, because they usually ask you this question for those as well. At least they did when I was applying for mine. Granted it's been a while but I'd be surprised if that question (or one with the same intent) isn't still asked.
In fact, in this very case it's entirely possible that the defendant didn't think he was breaking the law - many /. users here are arguing (probably incorrectly) that he in fact did not.
Sure, but that's not the point of the question; the point is to ask if you have knowingly broken the law, and most people know whether they have or not. That's what the question is designed to get at.
For example, you robbed a liquor store when you were 20 but you were never caught. Fifteen years later you're applying for a TSC or above, and they ask you the question, usually while hooked to a polygraph. You know damn well you broke the law, so this isn't a test of legal theory. This is designed to give them something else to prosecute you on if ever comes to light later.
Have we abandoned the idea of "presumed innocent"?
I'm not talking whether or not you've been convicted, I'm talking about the reality of one's actions.
If you murder someone then you are, in fact, a murderer whether or not you're taken to court and found guilty.
Have you ever applied for a job? They ask "have you ever been convicted of a felony?" not "will you ever be convicted of a felony?"
Yes, and for some jobs they ask things like, "Have you ever committed a crime for which you haven't been caught?"
The point is to find out if you engage in criminal activity, not just if you've been convicted.
"qbsolv is a metaheuristic or partitioning solver that solves a potentially large QUBO problem by splitting it into pieces that are solved either on a D-Wave system or via a classical tabu solver"
I know some of those words but all I can really tell is that it apparently does things to stuff, or does stuff to things.
How is that all that different from web sites that monitor every mouse movement, key stroke, and web site that you visit?
Presumably because they can't monitor your mouse movements and key strokes when you're on another site that isn't theirs.
Yahoo is welcome to monitor your mouse movements and key strokes when you're on Yahoo, but If Yahoo could monitor your mouse movements and key strokes when you were on CNN or Google, then there would be a problem, no?
I think what's really interesting here is that the keylogger is described as an "illegal product" in a United States Attorney's Office press release. Those guys are lawyers, and they know the product itself is NOT illegal.
Well....not to put too fine a point on it, but lawyers have been known to lie and/or misstate the truth, especially when it furthers their case.
Shocking, I know, but there ya have it.
Legally he wasn't a "crook", since he hadn't been convicted of anything at that time.
It would seem that he was a crook who just hadn't been caught or convicted yet.
Under your view, if you murder a person but but aren't convicted of doing it, you're somehow not a murderer?
And for the record, I don't even buy the "legally" qualifier. You are what you are, whether a court confirms it or not.
If I murder someone but I'm not convicted of it, I'm still a murderer. A legal ruling (or lack of one) in the eyes of the law doesn't change the reality of what I did.
You're right. The original submission had Apple Inc. mentioned. I removed the Inc like always but missed the period. Thanks for pointing it out.
No biggie; as editorial mistakes go, that's about as small as they get. :)
If I had a dollar for every editing mistake I've ever made, I'd be writing this response from my private jet on the way to Hooker Island.
The reason why no editing is gaming the system. Early on people were writing bait posts, to get people to respond and than alter the post to make the responders look foolish and targeted them with a response.
Then just quote the parent post in your reply, problem solved. Or put in a 2-minute "grace" period when a post can be edited and then lock it.
Literally millions of other forums and comment sections do this and the world is still spinning...there's no legitimate reason that slashdot couldn't do it as well.
Don't you wish you could go back and edit that?
Oh believe me, lots of people including myself have suggested this innovative yet impossible-to-implement feature on slashdot.
Apparently this remarkable "edit-after-posting" feature has been attempted by software engineers for decades but alas, no one has ever managed to get it working.