You must be too young to remember that you could get 8-track blanks and recorders. No, they weren't as popular, but if you do some hunting around (antique stores mainly), you will find them (shocked me when I first saw them, too)...
Actually, the last movie I watched was "A Scanner Darkly" - while I can't say it didn't influence any of my views, I do know that I have held these views for a very long time.
I don't watch a lot of movies, nor do I get my opinions from them. What I do, mostly, is read, as well as interact in the outside world. I also think about how today's world mirrors historical precedents. I know for a fact what governments can and do to people, and how they can instantly change on a whim sometimes (from bad to good to bad again).
If you don't think a bad government can happen to you in this complacent and apathetic world, you just haven't been paying attention to world events.
Back around 1994 I worked for a company here in Phoenix that did software development of a large-scale warehouse management and accounting system geared toward food distribution. One of the guys I worked with mentioned he had done some MUMPS coding, and I was curious, so I asked him to show me some code. He had an old listing with him (I thought that was odd, but he was odd, so it worked out, I guess), printed on fading greenbar (nothing odd about that) - I saw the code, asked him what it did, and then (figuratively) made the sign of the cross and backed away.
It looked both worse and better than assembler (for any architecture), but I was told it was wickedly fast for an interpreted language. I suppose that would be because you coded using the tokens directly, instead of the interpreter parsing the tokens out. I had never seen anything like it (CoreWars "assembler" was easier to read), but it left an impression on me. It wasn't until I first found out about Brainfuck that I saw an even more difficult to code in language (with, of course, Whitespace beating them both)...
Steve Ciarcia did a system back in the '80s in Byte magazine that I remember primarily...then realized the possible problems that could stem from power supply failure or getting RS-232 voltages on to the probe side of the board
This can't be stressed enough, which is why you will often see "not for medical use" disclaimers on the el-cheapo (comparitively) EEG devices out there. I have a copy of that article (somewhere - maybe one day I will stick it up on my website), and from what I remember, it was nothing more than a special very high gain op-amp. It was originally designed for medical grade devices (which is why it was so expensive even then), and had its own internal isolation. Steve added further isolation external to the device for further protection.
Think about it: you are putting probes on your body with low-resistivity conductive gel, generally on the head or on other areas to read neurologically-based voltage signals. What can flow one way can flow the other, and if your isolation is wrong in any way, you can easily electrocute, and kill or maim yourself. Properly designed and used, these devices can be relatively safe, but always be aware of just what it is you are doing.
Also, be aware that you likely can't just cascade a bunch of op-amps together with their gain signal left open (thus, "infinite" gain) - what you are fighting against (and you hint at) is noise, and el-cheapo op-amps are going to have a ton of it, which was another reason why Steve used a commercial graded medical op-amp, to keep the noise from the electronics down. However, even then you will be left with a signal that is very noisy, and requires a ton of filtering to get anything useful out of it...
I can't begin to list the number of books on all manner of subjects that my wife and I have in our library. Let it suffice to say that we own well north of 1000 volumes, and it is an eclectic mixture of fiction and fact. I can, however, reccommend a few general things that may interest you, as well as upon the proper way to build up a good library:
Let me first start off with library building. Purchasing books new is sometimes necessary - new books are released every day, and sometimes you just have to have that latest volume for your collection. However, purchasing new books, as I am sure you know, can be a very expensive task, depending on the title and type of book. For this reason, make sure that the new books you purchase are worth the money. Also, have a feeling for what the general public buys: that new book may hit the bargin shelf in a month faster than you may think is possible (I have one book I love for the imagery, entitled "100 Suns", a large, pictorial photo-essay book on the development of nuclear weapons from the vantage point of DOD photographers - it originally sold for $80.00+ over Christmas, but after the holidays it dropped to the bargain rack for $25.00 - in this case, the general public won't buy books on nuclear weapons over the holidays - fancy that!). Many books of a scientific or technical nature fall into this kind of status. So, check the bargain rack carefully. Also, the bargain rack is a great place to obtain nicely bound classics, which make any library look great when faced on the shelf properly (and the stories are excellent, as well).
However, the best book values are to be found online and in used book stores. Check in your area as well for used book sales which benefit your library system. Here in Phoenix, Arizona, we have an organization called the "Friends of the Phoenix Library", which runs annual book sales to benefit the local library system. Most books sale for $1.00 or less. There are also video tapes, dvds, and cds for sale as well. Foreign language books, complete encyclopedia sets and magazines can be had as well. There is also a book sale that runs every year called the "VNSA Book Sale" (Visiting Nurses or something like that). Then there are the myriad numbers of used book stores and antique stores you can scrounge in. Online, places like Abe Books and others, as well as eBay, can help you find that one book you need to complete your collection. I should note that you should try to always buy good condition, first-edition hardbound printings if you can. While they take up more space, they will last longer, and conceivably may appreciate more in the future (depending on volume and rarity over time, of course). They also look nicer than a bunch of paperbacks. However, note that there are many old and good paperbacks out there that would look great on a shelf, and/or provide great information - so don't shun them entirely.
As far as books that may interest you, I strongly suggest you should have a complete set (hard to find, though) of the Popular Mechanics Do-It-Yourself encyclopedias from the late 1950's, early 1960's. It is an excellent idea and knowledge resource on a wide variety of topics, from car maintenance to home repair. If you own a home, you owe yourself to have a copy of it. Another great set of books is Kurt Saxon's "The Survivor" compilation. I must caution that througout these books (there are four volumes), Mr. Saxon intersperses his own little gems of essays. At first, these essays seem like the ramblings of a former old KKK member, but if you persevere and read carefully, you soon find out that Mr. Saxon hates anybody who is lazy and frivolous with their money, regardless of who they are otherwise - when you realize that (or just ignore the essays), you will come to see these volumes to be the tomes of collected wisdom they are (I can't even begin to ennumerate everything that is in these books). If you have an interest in "DIY" the old-school way (ie - Want to learn how to turn the rear diff of a Model-T into a water pumping windmil
You, and many others, have been suckered into a trap, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is "because it is the American Way!". This trap, though, is a lie, one that is perpetuated and handed down through the generations from parent to child, with little questioning done by either side as to whether it is right and helpful, or wrong and harmful, to the individuals practicing it. It is foisted on the American public by large institutions out to get our dollars at every turn, and in return, these same institutions promise us minor "blessings".
I bet you are now thinking "is he yammering on about religion?"...
No, but both religion and this trap utilize much of the same marketing, dogma, and cult-like branding, coupled with generational institutionalization, that have made each successful and entrenched within the American citizen's conciousness - and in many ways, to the detriment of progress, both physically and "spiritually". The trap is known as "credit", and is one that each and every one of us should steer clear of, as much as possible.
For now, you need to do everything you can to break the cycle, starting with getting your SSN disassociated amongst the various databases. Be glad in the knowledge that the dimwits behind these systems couldn't normalize themselves out of a paper bag, thus, over time, your old data can become obfuscated amongst the new, as long as you sever the link soon. Do so, first, by marking all forms in the future not having to do with credit with "PLEASE ASSIGN" in the SSN field. Next time your medical insurance is up for renewal, do this. It isn't perfect, but it will help.
Then, work on getting out of debt: First and foremost, stop charging things on those credit cards, and start paying them off. You need to first plan and religiously stick with a budget. Know what you (and/or your SO) bring in, know where it needs to go (fixed bills, minimum payments on the credit cards, gas, food, rent, utilities), then figure what you have left over as "discretionary spending dollars". Hopefully, the chunk will be pretty huge. If it isn't, you are living at the edge and need to back off to something more realistic if you can. If you can't, you will need to get a second job (or earn money some other way). If the chunk is zero or negative, you are living beyond your means (idiot)! Back off immediately. Once you have some known discretionary income worked out on your budget sheet, apply a large portion to paying off the credit card with the lowest balance. Once that is done, increase the payment amount by a small percentage (1-5%), and apply that payment to the next highest balance card. Keep doing this until you have all of your cards paid off, and they are all cut up and not used. When you have them all paid off, start putting that last amount into a savings account or IRA (or some other savings instrument). Build up your savings, and the rest of the time, live off what your make (within your budget). Shun credit (with the exception of a mortgage - because while a mortgage is still credit, provided that the mortgage is fixed-rate and has a low APR, your property value should increase faster over the long term - 30 years - than the interest on the mortgage - you might also double up on payments with some of the extra money after paying off the credit cards, and reduce the principle on the loan to knock the interest back even more). Make your cars last a long time - drive them into the ground, then once they are dead, purchase a used car with cash.
Know this: when you owe money to somebody else, you are a debt slave, ultimately. If you can drop these shackles, you will have less worry and more time. Hopefully, at some point, you can use this newfound freedom and knowledge of you money to move you and your family into a more comfortable setting, and rent out the house you may have (make the property work for you, not against you) to cover it's mortgage (you can almost always rent a property for more than the mortgage payment - another reason why, if you are renting
The way to do this on forms you are given when there is no instruction otherwise (such as calling somebody to explain the situation) is to write on the form where it asks for the SSN the words "PLEASE ASSIGN" - in some manner (depending on the process), this will flag the form, and the number will be assigned by the system ("system" here meaning the people handling the document and computer processing systems involved).
Do this anywhere on forms you know don't need an SSN - typically anything not being used for money handling (thus, you need to give your SSN to credit lending institutions, and your employer - but not employer-provided insurance, excepting life insurance, of course).
So, AC, are you saying we should wait until that time? I believe we should question it TODAY, before it reaches the point where we have no way to turn the clock back, nor anyone to help us (in the case of a world government, which we aren't socially or politically ready for - such a world government would likely become a totalitarian dictatorship in short order, likely under 100 years)...
Laws don't operate retrospectively, at least in the UK.
Neither do they do so here in the US...
However, you are assumming here that this hypothetical future government cares one whit about what things were in the past with the former benign government. Such governments have risen in the past, and subjugated people to torture and imprisonment based on views they held under a previous, more open government.
Lastly, while a camcorder can do the same, unless the owner of the camcorder has the power of a standing army with guns (be that a police or military force) to use such public recordings against me and submit to his will, such videotaping means nothing. Unfortunately for you and I, the government does have that power (although, fortunately for me, and maybe for you, too, I still have the possibility of responding with arms of my own, however futile it might be, should such turn of events occur).
You say my view is a "luddite fear of the new" - I say my fear is based upon my understanding of history and might, and how such power, in whatever form, is always turned against the common man, lest he become powerful himself and attempt to use that power to turn those who think themselves his better into his equals. I have no fear of the cameras, I have no fear of the databases, I have no fear of the computers. I do, however, fear the mindset of other humans who think of themselves as better than me, simply because they have more money, power, or weapons at their disposal. Such people are animals, and are a scourge upon the world.
AC - have you ever heard the phrase "those who take on the most risk get the greatest share of the reward"? Typically, it is applied to investors (stock, VCs, etc). However, it also applies to species equally well.
Yes, such a rocket could "explode and pollute our atmosphere", however, it isn't as if we as a species are doing much better here on the ground. Furthermore, I tend to doubt that the global rate of death (or even cancer) would increase that much even if it did happen - we probably increase such rates (for both cancer and death) quicker with our species continued industrial expansion. More likely, such a rocket would probably work just fine, and the engines wouldn't be fully powered up until well after getting out of Earth orbit (just like ocean-going vessels don't go full bore out of a harbor). This ramp-up phase would likely be where such possible accidents could happen, but it would probably be a rare thing.
Once we start doing real industrial work in space (and for all of its problems, the IIS is showing the way toward that future), things will start to be routine and less error-prone - it is simply following a similar track as the aerospace industry. However, we won't be able to move the really heavy equipment (not to mention the number/amount) we would need on the moon without the heavy-lift capability of nuclear-powered rockets. Chemical rockets just will not do the job, no matter how much we would like to pretend they would. The energy in the chemical bonds just isn't there.
Let's also forget about interplanetary missions on anything approaching a feasible commercial scale - mining of the asteroids and other bodies in the solar system is certainly feasible, but not without the capabilities inherent in nuclear rockets. The power they bring to the table directly translates into increased hauling capacity as well as speed (there and back). The speed and hauling capacity are both needed to make such ventures practical and commercially viable.
We can wring our hands all we want about possibilities which might happen, but if you are so concerned about that, why are you not also concerned about the numerous possibilities of a global natural catastrophe (supervolcano, asteroid, etc) wiping out our species as well? Certainly, getting off this rock and establishing colonies elsewhere should be important to mitigate this future scenario, right? Well, if so, we aren't going to do it with current chemical rocket technology...
Have you thought about the fact that a camera can record, and that recording can last forever? Whereas with a person watching you, they soon after forget or misremember? Couple that with the fact that these recording can be put into a database, and the fact that a database can be altered (purposefully or by accident/error) without leaving traces of that alteration...
You basically end up with recordings residing in a error-prone computer system, which, even when there aren't any problems, keeps a record of your public business for life. Sure, today it might mean nothing (relatively) to the controllers that you dropped your spent ciggarette or gum on the sidewalk (compared to making sure they get a good record of that mugging - because, you know, a record will set everything right, right?) - but the memory is still there, waiting - waiting for the day when it retroactively becomes a felony for which they can lock you up for at a later date (or a later government) - or worse, use it as a coercion method to get you to talk or act about something else (tell us who he is or we'll throw you in the slammer for this little thing you did 10 years ago - by the way, we'll check in on you next week again, too!).
If you think these cameras and related systems somehow do something to stop or prevent crime, and furthermore if you think they (and their records) can't or won't be misused in the future by a future "corrupt" system - you have blinders on, my friend...
..."nuclear", we would just send a nuclear-powered rocket (an Orion-like ship might be overkill, but there are other designs as well) to the moon, carrying bulldozers and other heavy equipment (adapted to work in an oxygen-free environment, of course, and assembled from components ferried up from earth), and just tunnel/bury the settlement.
Why the hell do we keep looking for the whiz-bang expensive solution, when there is an easy and standard solution already available and working? I'll tell you why:
I don't know if I was one of those people, but I do know that Java not being open has always been a sore point with me. I have been burnt by less, so I didn't want to get invested in a language that I didn't know would be there on my platform of choice in the future. I was also miffed that Java3D wasn't available on Linux, so I looked at other avenues (I have found that Python, coupled with PyOpenGL/SDL is pretty nice for my 3D needs). I was pretty certain that Sun wouldn't go GPL with it, simply because the server market wasn't as hot as before (in the 80-90's), and IRIX was falling by the wayside as well. Java seemed to exist for the licensing revenue.
Without that, I wonder what markets Sun is expecting to get into? Also, note how the full GPL release (March 2007) coincides with the timeframe for their "Project BlackBox" (server "datacenter modules" built into a shipping container), which is also slated for delivery in 2007 - something tells me this isn't a coincidence, however, what the overall plan is, I don't know. Maybe they will be revamping/re-releasing their Java-based workstation network appliances for cheap to the masses? Maybe these, coupled with a suite for tools (OpenOffice - or SunOffice, or whatever they call it) for the average user, coupled via broadband to these BlackBox modules dispersed throughout North America and/or the world? Maybe in concert with a "secret deal" with Google (too farfetched?)...? Remember the stories of Google supposedly parking these large shipping containers around and plugging into dark fibre that we saw here on/. not too long ago (maybe 8-12 months ago) - then the recent "release" from Sun about BlackBox, and now this...
Alright - I realize this isn't a glove interface, but what is it with geeks, "virtual" environments (including those in the head), and air guitar? Arguably, from everything I have read about the history of VPL, the DataGlove's first raison-d'etra (probably munged that!) was so that Jaron Lanier (and a buddy?) could play "air guitar" using their Atari ST and MIDI (google around on "VPL" and "DataGlove" if you don't believe me). Since that time, tons of people, companies, and bands have experimented in one form or another to bring the "air guitar" to life.
I don't play the guitar, nor do I know how, and I won't say I have strummed a bit in the air, too - everyone has, I think. However, I know that if I really wanted to play guitar, no amount of movements "in air" will ever be able to recreate what happens with a real guitar. At best, I will get an approximation of (likely) samples of somebody else's real performance.
Finally, I must admit I haven't read the article - but I would be willing to bet that there are 50/50 odds that the article mentions how the technology could be used to "read" sign language by monitoring the movements of the arms (yet another thing the DataGlove was touted as a useful thing to do with it, and yet another that gets hauled out year-after-year).
I guess what I am tired of is all of this rehash of stuff we already know how to do - let's quit playing and demonstrating dead-end uses for VR (and AR) technology, and let's start using it for real world tasks!
Currently they sit there, out-of-sight, out-of-mind. Then some bright lad decides to make a fuss, and they are brought in the limelight. Bright lad thinks he may get them - instead, at best, they get "recycled" (ie, indirectly ship 'em to China to let them deal with the mess), or worse, dumped in the garbage.
You see, beureacracies have this problem, called CYA, er, "cover yer a**" - ie, fear of liability. When they wing it, these entities will do whatever they can, damn the consequences as-long-as-they-don't-get-caught. That is their attitude, and how they work. They don't do things for the common good. They won't just give you stuff. They might not even sell it to you (unless you are willing to pay a lot of money, or you at least look like someone they can transfer that liability to - ie, an electronics recycling company). Most of the time, they'll just pat you on the head, say thank you for bringing it up, and then dump the crap as quickly (and hopefully) as clandestinely as possible. It wouldn't matter if it was a pallet of today's latest Dells or a pallet of "boxed up" bag-kit'o'parts for brand new Altairs - they don't care about the worth or rarity, they just care about liability.
So - sometimes, depending on the item(s) in question - sometimes it is better just to "leave well enough alone", and let it sit. Keep an eye on it, and maybe somebody will come along with a change of heart (rare, but it happens). Or, maybe they will "find" them, and decide to give them away, or maybe they will pitch them in the end. Regardless, if you stir things up now, you likely will cause them to be pitched, never to be seen again.
Now, in the case of these Vectras, probably "big deal" - but I once caused the destruction of something potentially more valuable simply by trying to buy it. I once went to a local equipment recycler here in Phoenix, and offerred to purchase two cases worth of 5.25 inch Apple IIe floppies - I am pretty certain there was a complete copy of Eamon (including expansions) in there, among other great pieces. I had the intention of transferring all of that over to disk images for emulation usage (and releasing on the internet what I could that was legal to do so). Unfortunately, when I took the items to the office to be priced, they informed me that they could not legally sell any software without the manufacturer's permission, and that they had to take those floppies and destroy them (they wouldn't let me buy them for any price, and they wouldn't let me put them back - once found, they had to destroy them). I was pretty angry, but there wasn't much I could do. I also quickly realized that a lot of their equipment had to be worthless (at least from a hobbyist perspective) as well (much of it was electronics manufacturing and industrial equipment) - since much of it relied on computers controlled by software to operate - software they probably had to erase or destroy before selling.
Since that time I have been very reluctant about such things when I find them, especially software or data, especially when it is very old and likely nobody cares about. Unfortunately, this is way the computer industry is - forever recycling its history, to hell with the ultimate consequences...
Really it would not surprise me if in say, 50 years, there is an entire industry of waste reclamation, where a company bids on and BUYS a landfill, and sends in machines to process the garbage and make a proffit off what's reclaimed.
Unfortunately, many such landfills tend to become "other things" after the landfill is closed - most commonly tract homes, golfcourses, and industrial/business complexes. Many people would be surprised to find out that they live, work, or play on top of a former dump. How these developments would impact any future material reclamation mining is unknown (I suppose it would depend upon the longevity of the new site use in question). There is also the issue of whether there exist accurate maps of former landfills in city records. I would imagine that over time, older landfill zoning maps are either lost or discarded after ownership and use changes hands...
Even so, you are right: there is likely a fortune to be made from old dump sites (just in metal reclamation alone - think about copper and alluminum, for example)...
I mean, if I set up a web server on port 80 (assuming it isn't blocked), or other port - and they find out, they can shut my service down according to the TOS with Cox (probably the same with other providers, Speakeasy excluded).
Now - that is a web server, something fairly innocuous which I SHOULD be able to run if I want to.
Meanwhile, we have SPAM zombie Windows boxen spewing tons of crap out their ports, acting exactly like outbound mail servers, sending junk nobody wants, and the user doesn't know...
I would think the broadband companies would shut that down very quickly, if nothing else than to lower their bandwidth costs (or avoid overages on peering agreements, if that). I bet that if I set up a secure mail server and used that instead of the one they provide for sending and recieving email, they would have me shut down fairly quick.
Something is fishy here - are the BB companies in bed with the guys sending SPAM? On a side note - is it possible to appear as a SPAM zombie without sending SPAM, and instead be a webserver (ok, I am not serious here - I just think this two-faced hypocrisy is a load of crap - either give me open ports or enforce your damn TOS across the board).
I guess I'm not quite sure how this hurts my argument. How does this show that pedophelia is productive/useful for society? All your argument showed is that sometimes society thinks killing may be useful. But even then, you seem to disagree with the societal benefit of this killing. So...then you do think killing doesn't benefit society...in which case you agree with its comparison to pedophelia.... I'm not quite catching you here I guess. Anyway, my point was with regard to murder in general anyway, not to all possible types of killing. Your so-called counter argument would be more rightly called a tangent, I believe.
Killing is killing, regarless of whether the State does it, or a Citizen of the State does it at the State's behest. Since, in many State's, the power of the State comes from the People (all of whom are Citizens), and the State says killing is wrong if an individual Citizen does it against another Citizen, but it is ok if the Citizen is told by the State to do it (whether in an execution of another Citizen of the State, as in death penalty cases, or in War). How is it that the State (which is composed of Citizens) can OK killing at its behest, but individual Citizens of that State can't wield the same power, and that is defined as "wrong"? Logically and rationally, it make no sense at all.
This argument is odd given that I know that you know the real reason why young murderers are tried as adults, and you know that I know the reason as well. Do you really believe the legislature thought to themselves, "murderers that are younger than 18 may be tried as adults because, at that point, we know the person is capable of consent"? Where is consent involved in a child becoming a murderer?
I could argue "Why is it that a child can't consent to kill, but an adult can"? One of the things about murder (note I am talking about simple murderers here - like "kid is in gang and is told to kill somebody") is "preconceived intent", which would mean thought about actions prior to the crime, and having some form of intent of the crime to commit it. This is where consent comes in. If a child can make this form of consent, why can't a child consent to other things that currently only adults can?
Anyway--the real reason we try young murderers as adults is because we don't want them released onto the streets the day they turn 18! If we try a 17 year old murderer as a minor, then the kid leaves jail when he's 18. What the legislature knows is that past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. Rather than trying the antisocial minor as a minor, letting him out when he's 18 and then jailing him for life next time he kills someone; we can just try the kid as an adult now and save the life of his next victim!
You make a point, but it still smacks of "pre-crime" - why even have separate distinctions of age for criminals then, period. I mean, if the child robs a store, maybe he'll rob it again after he turns 18, right?
Still, you realize, a minor tried as an adult doesn't get as much time as an adult tried as an adult. The kid does get a chance to reform. [now you might argue; why should we jail a person for this. Antisocial personality disorder is an "immutable characteristic" of people who have it (ask any psychologist--there's no "curing" a person of antisocial personality disorder). We shouldn't even call it a disorder. That person's natural biology is naturally inclined to kill people, and society should bend to find approval of it (and change its name). It's a matter of equal rights!]
Now, your points on antisocial personality disorder are relevant to the discussion at hand, and I honestly don't know what to do with these kinds of "people" when we find them - regardless of whether they are adults or children. They do exist, and I recognize this, and seeing a child who is like this - cold and calculating, without a hint of remorse - is both a sad, and chilling, experience. It is like seeing an animal
Something I wonder if I will ever understand...
on
Rumsfeld Stepping Down
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
So, Rumsfeld was the "architect" of this, and now he is stepping down. Good. Glad to see him go. However, will the guy taking his place be any better?
Let's tell a little story here: Soldier Adam (an firefighter in civilian life), who lives in Oceania, has been "sent by his country" to Eastasia to liberate it. Soldier Chen (a dockworker in civilian life), who lives in Eastasia, has been "ordered by his country" to defend against the invasion. Each of them, along with the buddies in their unit, are in a firefight - bombs are raining down, machine gun fire is everywhere, maybe an RPG or two is launched. Some of Soldier Adam's buddies are dead or severely wounded - maybe Adam himself. On the other side, some of Soldier Chen's buddies are hurt or dead themselves. The battle is heated, but things slow down, and one side or both has retreated to re-group (let's pretend a standoff of some sort here). As they re-group, they have time to cool off, and perhaps think about things (briefly - tension is high). Soldier Adam thinks about his fiance and new son back home, wondering if he will get back to the firehouse. Soldier Chen wonders about his wife and sister, who live with them - do they have enough to eat? - and will he get back to work on the dock (is the dock still there?). Neither one wants to be there, they both want to be back home (wherever it is), they both want the same thing: peace, stability, a roof over their head, food, water, and some work to do.
So how the hell are they here, seeing each other as the Other - as a non-entity to be killed or bypassed in some brutal manner? Of course, they are doing the jobs they were told to do (and hopefully not obeying illegal orders - though that might be more difficult to do than you think for either). Even so, didn't either of them, Adam or Chen, have this thought processs about war, and what it means for people on both sides, before they signed up (ignoring drafting here - but still) to kill each other?
What the hell is it about humanity's inability to put itself in other's shoes - to see each other as humans, with human wants and needs? Why do they obey a leader or a country to fight and kill each other, when each knows (whether through logic and reason, or by decree of religion) that killing is wrong? Why is it OK if the State tells you to kill (or the State kills itself, as in the death penalty), but if an individual citizen of the State does so without the State's approval, it suddenly becomes wrong? If the State is really composed of "we the people" - then shouldn't all killing, regardless of context, be wrong equally (or right equally, if you want to take that stance)? Admittedly, Soldier Chen is on a better footing than Soldier Adam, even though he was drafted by his State - simply because his State was invaded, not Adam's. Even so, why can't each look, and see, and understand and know, after all these thousands of years of human history, that more and bigger weapons DO NOT LEAD TO PEACE, and the killing each other is NOT A LONG TERM SOLUTION?
Every new and more powerful weapon is hailed as the device that will bring peace to the planet - from Nobel's discovery of dynamite, to the machine gun, to the nuclear bomb, to...? What is next? An anti-matter weapon to cleanse planets ala "Chronicles of Riddick"? Will the destruction of the planet bring peace? Will there only be piece when there is only one man-monkey sitting in the ashes of a scorched Earth (admittedly, maybe there will be - at least until he kills himself - and then peace will be acheived, I suppose)?
In short, what is it ultimately going to take for humanity to stop killing each other, and instead work together to go beyond...everything? Or, is it an impossible dream, and humanity is destined to die (or worse, spread throughout the Universe bring hate, distrust, anger, and vengence whereever it sets foot)? Finally, why is it that I can see this absurdity, and project it forward (and thus, not be stupid enough to join a killing machine) - yet others can't, and either do join the
I am going to post this here, and while it may seem off-topic, it really isn't, and I don't think it would be accepted as an "Ask Slashdot":
I work for a company developing thier website. Our website is currently based around old-school ASP, and while I would love to change this platform to something more up-to-date, it isn't going to happen any time soon (ie, I am one programmer and there are well over 100KLOC of ASP involved, not too mention tons of MSSQL-specific SQL that would need to be converted, mainly for date handling reasons). I am stuck on this platform for the time being. I did not choose this platform, that was done for me a long time ago.
We have more than enought processing power to handle our site, but we have an issue with long page load times - from the front site to deeper pages. I have isolated the problem to our heavy use of a function which essentially does a singleton query (ie, given a table, field, and record ID, it returns the data value in that field - ie; SELECT field FROM table WHERE id = ???).
This form of query/function (which is actually done in a database wrapper function - so only the function call is used everywhere - if I can speed it up, the entire site benefits) was implemented due to another issue, which, when I first got here and saw what was happenning, made me say "Wha?" and try to do it the proper way, only to get stung by the problem that this solution was to fix. What this problem was is as follows: If you try to issue a SQL select on our system to return multiple fields from a table (ie, SELECT field1, field2, field3 FROM table WHERE...) - sometimes, the data returned could be accessed (ie, var1 = Recordset("field1"), var2 = Recordset("field2"), etc) just fine, but at other times (seemingly, maddeningly - at "random" intervals), only the first field would have data in it, and all the other fields would return empty string or null values! We don't know what causes this or why (I suspect some form of field ordering in the SELECT vs. the order of the fields in the MSSQL table - but I am not sure), but by using singleton selects, this problem is avoided (because there is *always* data in the first field), at the expense of speed. Unfortunately, at this point, even if I found out how to keep the problem from arising and could use the proper SQL queries, there are simply way too many places to change for it to be practical (it would still be a HUGE job to perform to mod that much ASP code).
From what I have googled and researched on the interweb, singleton queries using ADO recordsets should never be done - they are very slow. I have heard that using an ADO command object, either coupled to the SQL select with parameter fields, or by using a stored procedure, is a better and faster method than using a heavy recordset. However, I have not been able to get either of these methods to work properly - I either get no data back (empty strings), or errors. I am not absolutely sure if it is my stored procedure or what (although, it seems to return data OK if I run it under Query Analyzer). What is interesting, even though it fails and doesn't return data, I seem to get the same performance (timing-wise) as the regular singleton query (ie, using an ADO command object with a stored procedure seems as slow as using an ADO recordset object and a query). I am not sure if this is because of the failure of returning data, or if I did get it working, if it would run faster.
Seriously - I wish I could convert everything over to Linux, Apache, PHP (or Python), and MySQL or PostgreSQL - but that isn't happenning - we don't have manpower or resources to throw at such a project (plus, considering new development and fixes on the current codebase, it would be a constant game of catchup and patching, even if we have another developer handy to take up this issue alone).
Does anyone here have any reasonable ideas or solutions I could possibly try? Does anybody know why we experience the random data droppage when not using singleton selects? Does anybody have any ideas on how I could speed this beast up? Or, am I simply bailing water out of a sinking ship?
I would suppose it might depend on whether you have had any past experience with using a double accounting/entry system, which is how most businesses operate. However, this form of account activity tracking is completely alien to most people, who have only been exposed to "check register accounting" (or whatever it is called). I would suspect that most of the "learning curve" comes from learning to use this new system, and how it works, compares, and differs from the standard system most people are familiar with from day-to-day life.
Slashdot Mirror
You must be too young to remember that you could get 8-track blanks and recorders. No, they weren't as popular, but if you do some hunting around (antique stores mainly), you will find them (shocked me when I first saw them, too)...
I don't watch a lot of movies, nor do I get my opinions from them. What I do, mostly, is read, as well as interact in the outside world. I also think about how today's world mirrors historical precedents. I know for a fact what governments can and do to people, and how they can instantly change on a whim sometimes (from bad to good to bad again).
If you don't think a bad government can happen to you in this complacent and apathetic world, you just haven't been paying attention to world events.
It looked both worse and better than assembler (for any architecture), but I was told it was wickedly fast for an interpreted language. I suppose that would be because you coded using the tokens directly, instead of the interpreter parsing the tokens out. I had never seen anything like it (CoreWars "assembler" was easier to read), but it left an impression on me. It wasn't until I first found out about Brainfuck that I saw an even more difficult to code in language (with, of course, Whitespace beating them both)...
You know, it would have been nice if you had posted SPOILER WARNING to that - some of us haven't seen it, yet (damn).
This can't be stressed enough, which is why you will often see "not for medical use" disclaimers on the el-cheapo (comparitively) EEG devices out there. I have a copy of that article (somewhere - maybe one day I will stick it up on my website), and from what I remember, it was nothing more than a special very high gain op-amp. It was originally designed for medical grade devices (which is why it was so expensive even then), and had its own internal isolation. Steve added further isolation external to the device for further protection.
Think about it: you are putting probes on your body with low-resistivity conductive gel, generally on the head or on other areas to read neurologically-based voltage signals. What can flow one way can flow the other, and if your isolation is wrong in any way, you can easily electrocute, and kill or maim yourself. Properly designed and used, these devices can be relatively safe, but always be aware of just what it is you are doing.
Also, be aware that you likely can't just cascade a bunch of op-amps together with their gain signal left open (thus, "infinite" gain) - what you are fighting against (and you hint at) is noise, and el-cheapo op-amps are going to have a ton of it, which was another reason why Steve used a commercial graded medical op-amp, to keep the noise from the electronics down. However, even then you will be left with a signal that is very noisy, and requires a ton of filtering to get anything useful out of it...
Let me first start off with library building. Purchasing books new is sometimes necessary - new books are released every day, and sometimes you just have to have that latest volume for your collection. However, purchasing new books, as I am sure you know, can be a very expensive task, depending on the title and type of book. For this reason, make sure that the new books you purchase are worth the money. Also, have a feeling for what the general public buys: that new book may hit the bargin shelf in a month faster than you may think is possible (I have one book I love for the imagery, entitled "100 Suns", a large, pictorial photo-essay book on the development of nuclear weapons from the vantage point of DOD photographers - it originally sold for $80.00+ over Christmas, but after the holidays it dropped to the bargain rack for $25.00 - in this case, the general public won't buy books on nuclear weapons over the holidays - fancy that!). Many books of a scientific or technical nature fall into this kind of status. So, check the bargain rack carefully. Also, the bargain rack is a great place to obtain nicely bound classics, which make any library look great when faced on the shelf properly (and the stories are excellent, as well).
However, the best book values are to be found online and in used book stores. Check in your area as well for used book sales which benefit your library system. Here in Phoenix, Arizona, we have an organization called the "Friends of the Phoenix Library", which runs annual book sales to benefit the local library system. Most books sale for $1.00 or less. There are also video tapes, dvds, and cds for sale as well. Foreign language books, complete encyclopedia sets and magazines can be had as well. There is also a book sale that runs every year called the "VNSA Book Sale" (Visiting Nurses or something like that). Then there are the myriad numbers of used book stores and antique stores you can scrounge in. Online, places like Abe Books and others, as well as eBay, can help you find that one book you need to complete your collection. I should note that you should try to always buy good condition, first-edition hardbound printings if you can. While they take up more space, they will last longer, and conceivably may appreciate more in the future (depending on volume and rarity over time, of course). They also look nicer than a bunch of paperbacks. However, note that there are many old and good paperbacks out there that would look great on a shelf, and/or provide great information - so don't shun them entirely.
As far as books that may interest you, I strongly suggest you should have a complete set (hard to find, though) of the Popular Mechanics Do-It-Yourself encyclopedias from the late 1950's, early 1960's. It is an excellent idea and knowledge resource on a wide variety of topics, from car maintenance to home repair. If you own a home, you owe yourself to have a copy of it. Another great set of books is Kurt Saxon's "The Survivor" compilation. I must caution that througout these books (there are four volumes), Mr. Saxon intersperses his own little gems of essays. At first, these essays seem like the ramblings of a former old KKK member, but if you persevere and read carefully, you soon find out that Mr. Saxon hates anybody who is lazy and frivolous with their money, regardless of who they are otherwise - when you realize that (or just ignore the essays), you will come to see these volumes to be the tomes of collected wisdom they are (I can't even begin to ennumerate everything that is in these books). If you have an interest in "DIY" the old-school way (ie - Want to learn how to turn the rear diff of a Model-T into a water pumping windmil
I bet you are now thinking "is he yammering on about religion?"...
No, but both religion and this trap utilize much of the same marketing, dogma, and cult-like branding, coupled with generational institutionalization, that have made each successful and entrenched within the American citizen's conciousness - and in many ways, to the detriment of progress, both physically and "spiritually". The trap is known as "credit", and is one that each and every one of us should steer clear of, as much as possible.
For now, you need to do everything you can to break the cycle, starting with getting your SSN disassociated amongst the various databases. Be glad in the knowledge that the dimwits behind these systems couldn't normalize themselves out of a paper bag, thus, over time, your old data can become obfuscated amongst the new, as long as you sever the link soon. Do so, first, by marking all forms in the future not having to do with credit with "PLEASE ASSIGN" in the SSN field. Next time your medical insurance is up for renewal, do this. It isn't perfect, but it will help.
Then, work on getting out of debt: First and foremost, stop charging things on those credit cards, and start paying them off. You need to first plan and religiously stick with a budget. Know what you (and/or your SO) bring in, know where it needs to go (fixed bills, minimum payments on the credit cards, gas, food, rent, utilities), then figure what you have left over as "discretionary spending dollars". Hopefully, the chunk will be pretty huge. If it isn't, you are living at the edge and need to back off to something more realistic if you can. If you can't, you will need to get a second job (or earn money some other way). If the chunk is zero or negative, you are living beyond your means (idiot)! Back off immediately. Once you have some known discretionary income worked out on your budget sheet, apply a large portion to paying off the credit card with the lowest balance. Once that is done, increase the payment amount by a small percentage (1-5%), and apply that payment to the next highest balance card. Keep doing this until you have all of your cards paid off, and they are all cut up and not used. When you have them all paid off, start putting that last amount into a savings account or IRA (or some other savings instrument). Build up your savings, and the rest of the time, live off what your make (within your budget). Shun credit (with the exception of a mortgage - because while a mortgage is still credit, provided that the mortgage is fixed-rate and has a low APR, your property value should increase faster over the long term - 30 years - than the interest on the mortgage - you might also double up on payments with some of the extra money after paying off the credit cards, and reduce the principle on the loan to knock the interest back even more). Make your cars last a long time - drive them into the ground, then once they are dead, purchase a used car with cash.
Know this: when you owe money to somebody else, you are a debt slave, ultimately. If you can drop these shackles, you will have less worry and more time. Hopefully, at some point, you can use this newfound freedom and knowledge of you money to move you and your family into a more comfortable setting, and rent out the house you may have (make the property work for you, not against you) to cover it's mortgage (you can almost always rent a property for more than the mortgage payment - another reason why, if you are renting
Do this anywhere on forms you know don't need an SSN - typically anything not being used for money handling (thus, you need to give your SSN to credit lending institutions, and your employer - but not employer-provided insurance, excepting life insurance, of course).
So, AC, are you saying we should wait until that time? I believe we should question it TODAY, before it reaches the point where we have no way to turn the clock back, nor anyone to help us (in the case of a world government, which we aren't socially or politically ready for - such a world government would likely become a totalitarian dictatorship in short order, likely under 100 years)...
Neither do they do so here in the US...
However, you are assumming here that this hypothetical future government cares one whit about what things were in the past with the former benign government. Such governments have risen in the past, and subjugated people to torture and imprisonment based on views they held under a previous, more open government.
Lastly, while a camcorder can do the same, unless the owner of the camcorder has the power of a standing army with guns (be that a police or military force) to use such public recordings against me and submit to his will, such videotaping means nothing. Unfortunately for you and I, the government does have that power (although, fortunately for me, and maybe for you, too, I still have the possibility of responding with arms of my own, however futile it might be, should such turn of events occur).
You say my view is a "luddite fear of the new" - I say my fear is based upon my understanding of history and might, and how such power, in whatever form, is always turned against the common man, lest he become powerful himself and attempt to use that power to turn those who think themselves his better into his equals. I have no fear of the cameras, I have no fear of the databases, I have no fear of the computers. I do, however, fear the mindset of other humans who think of themselves as better than me, simply because they have more money, power, or weapons at their disposal. Such people are animals, and are a scourge upon the world.
Yes, such a rocket could "explode and pollute our atmosphere", however, it isn't as if we as a species are doing much better here on the ground. Furthermore, I tend to doubt that the global rate of death (or even cancer) would increase that much even if it did happen - we probably increase such rates (for both cancer and death) quicker with our species continued industrial expansion. More likely, such a rocket would probably work just fine, and the engines wouldn't be fully powered up until well after getting out of Earth orbit (just like ocean-going vessels don't go full bore out of a harbor). This ramp-up phase would likely be where such possible accidents could happen, but it would probably be a rare thing.
Once we start doing real industrial work in space (and for all of its problems, the IIS is showing the way toward that future), things will start to be routine and less error-prone - it is simply following a similar track as the aerospace industry. However, we won't be able to move the really heavy equipment (not to mention the number/amount) we would need on the moon without the heavy-lift capability of nuclear-powered rockets. Chemical rockets just will not do the job, no matter how much we would like to pretend they would. The energy in the chemical bonds just isn't there.
Let's also forget about interplanetary missions on anything approaching a feasible commercial scale - mining of the asteroids and other bodies in the solar system is certainly feasible, but not without the capabilities inherent in nuclear rockets. The power they bring to the table directly translates into increased hauling capacity as well as speed (there and back). The speed and hauling capacity are both needed to make such ventures practical and commercially viable.
We can wring our hands all we want about possibilities which might happen, but if you are so concerned about that, why are you not also concerned about the numerous possibilities of a global natural catastrophe (supervolcano, asteroid, etc) wiping out our species as well? Certainly, getting off this rock and establishing colonies elsewhere should be important to mitigate this future scenario, right? Well, if so, we aren't going to do it with current chemical rocket technology...
...cut the flappy chin off of former ExxonMobil CEO Lee R. Raymond - we could've powered America for a long time!
You basically end up with recordings residing in a error-prone computer system, which, even when there aren't any problems, keeps a record of your public business for life. Sure, today it might mean nothing (relatively) to the controllers that you dropped your spent ciggarette or gum on the sidewalk (compared to making sure they get a good record of that mugging - because, you know, a record will set everything right, right?) - but the memory is still there, waiting - waiting for the day when it retroactively becomes a felony for which they can lock you up for at a later date (or a later government) - or worse, use it as a coercion method to get you to talk or act about something else (tell us who he is or we'll throw you in the slammer for this little thing you did 10 years ago - by the way, we'll check in on you next week again, too!).
If you think these cameras and related systems somehow do something to stop or prevent crime, and furthermore if you think they (and their records) can't or won't be misused in the future by a future "corrupt" system - you have blinders on, my friend...
Why the hell do we keep looking for the whiz-bang expensive solution, when there is an easy and standard solution already available and working? I'll tell you why:
We are afraid to succeed.
I meant Solaris, not IRIX (although, that would be something, wouldn't it?)...
Without that, I wonder what markets Sun is expecting to get into? Also, note how the full GPL release (March 2007) coincides with the timeframe for their "Project BlackBox" (server "datacenter modules" built into a shipping container), which is also slated for delivery in 2007 - something tells me this isn't a coincidence, however, what the overall plan is, I don't know. Maybe they will be revamping/re-releasing their Java-based workstation network appliances for cheap to the masses? Maybe these, coupled with a suite for tools (OpenOffice - or SunOffice, or whatever they call it) for the average user, coupled via broadband to these BlackBox modules dispersed throughout North America and/or the world? Maybe in concert with a "secret deal" with Google (too farfetched?)...? Remember the stories of Google supposedly parking these large shipping containers around and plugging into dark fibre that we saw here on
Interesting times, interesting times...
Alright - I realize this isn't a glove interface, but what is it with geeks, "virtual" environments (including those in the head), and air guitar? Arguably, from everything I have read about the history of VPL, the DataGlove's first raison-d'etra (probably munged that!) was so that Jaron Lanier (and a buddy?) could play "air guitar" using their Atari ST and MIDI (google around on "VPL" and "DataGlove" if you don't believe me). Since that time, tons of people, companies, and bands have experimented in one form or another to bring the "air guitar" to life.
I don't play the guitar, nor do I know how, and I won't say I have strummed a bit in the air, too - everyone has, I think. However, I know that if I really wanted to play guitar, no amount of movements "in air" will ever be able to recreate what happens with a real guitar. At best, I will get an approximation of (likely) samples of somebody else's real performance.
Finally, I must admit I haven't read the article - but I would be willing to bet that there are 50/50 odds that the article mentions how the technology could be used to "read" sign language by monitoring the movements of the arms (yet another thing the DataGlove was touted as a useful thing to do with it, and yet another that gets hauled out year-after-year).
I guess what I am tired of is all of this rehash of stuff we already know how to do - let's quit playing and demonstrating dead-end uses for VR (and AR) technology, and let's start using it for real world tasks!
You see, beureacracies have this problem, called CYA, er, "cover yer a**" - ie, fear of liability. When they wing it, these entities will do whatever they can, damn the consequences as-long-as-they-don't-get-caught. That is their attitude, and how they work. They don't do things for the common good. They won't just give you stuff. They might not even sell it to you (unless you are willing to pay a lot of money, or you at least look like someone they can transfer that liability to - ie, an electronics recycling company). Most of the time, they'll just pat you on the head, say thank you for bringing it up, and then dump the crap as quickly (and hopefully) as clandestinely as possible. It wouldn't matter if it was a pallet of today's latest Dells or a pallet of "boxed up" bag-kit'o'parts for brand new Altairs - they don't care about the worth or rarity, they just care about liability.
So - sometimes, depending on the item(s) in question - sometimes it is better just to "leave well enough alone", and let it sit. Keep an eye on it, and maybe somebody will come along with a change of heart (rare, but it happens). Or, maybe they will "find" them, and decide to give them away, or maybe they will pitch them in the end. Regardless, if you stir things up now, you likely will cause them to be pitched, never to be seen again.
Now, in the case of these Vectras, probably "big deal" - but I once caused the destruction of something potentially more valuable simply by trying to buy it. I once went to a local equipment recycler here in Phoenix, and offerred to purchase two cases worth of 5.25 inch Apple IIe floppies - I am pretty certain there was a complete copy of Eamon (including expansions) in there, among other great pieces. I had the intention of transferring all of that over to disk images for emulation usage (and releasing on the internet what I could that was legal to do so). Unfortunately, when I took the items to the office to be priced, they informed me that they could not legally sell any software without the manufacturer's permission, and that they had to take those floppies and destroy them (they wouldn't let me buy them for any price, and they wouldn't let me put them back - once found, they had to destroy them). I was pretty angry, but there wasn't much I could do. I also quickly realized that a lot of their equipment had to be worthless (at least from a hobbyist perspective) as well (much of it was electronics manufacturing and industrial equipment) - since much of it relied on computers controlled by software to operate - software they probably had to erase or destroy before selling.
Since that time I have been very reluctant about such things when I find them, especially software or data, especially when it is very old and likely nobody cares about. Unfortunately, this is way the computer industry is - forever recycling its history, to hell with the ultimate consequences...
Unfortunately, many such landfills tend to become "other things" after the landfill is closed - most commonly tract homes, golfcourses, and industrial/business complexes. Many people would be surprised to find out that they live, work, or play on top of a former dump. How these developments would impact any future material reclamation mining is unknown (I suppose it would depend upon the longevity of the new site use in question). There is also the issue of whether there exist accurate maps of former landfills in city records. I would imagine that over time, older landfill zoning maps are either lost or discarded after ownership and use changes hands...
Even so, you are right: there is likely a fortune to be made from old dump sites (just in metal reclamation alone - think about copper and alluminum, for example)...
Now - that is a web server, something fairly innocuous which I SHOULD be able to run if I want to.
Meanwhile, we have SPAM zombie Windows boxen spewing tons of crap out their ports, acting exactly like outbound mail servers, sending junk nobody wants, and the user doesn't know...
I would think the broadband companies would shut that down very quickly, if nothing else than to lower their bandwidth costs (or avoid overages on peering agreements, if that). I bet that if I set up a secure mail server and used that instead of the one they provide for sending and recieving email, they would have me shut down fairly quick.
Something is fishy here - are the BB companies in bed with the guys sending SPAM? On a side note - is it possible to appear as a SPAM zombie without sending SPAM, and instead be a webserver (ok, I am not serious here - I just think this two-faced hypocrisy is a load of crap - either give me open ports or enforce your damn TOS across the board).
Why can't I (or, it seems - anybody?) reply to threads? Worked yesterday...
Killing is killing, regarless of whether the State does it, or a Citizen of the State does it at the State's behest. Since, in many State's, the power of the State comes from the People (all of whom are Citizens), and the State says killing is wrong if an individual Citizen does it against another Citizen, but it is ok if the Citizen is told by the State to do it (whether in an execution of another Citizen of the State, as in death penalty cases, or in War). How is it that the State (which is composed of Citizens) can OK killing at its behest, but individual Citizens of that State can't wield the same power, and that is defined as "wrong"? Logically and rationally, it make no sense at all.
This argument is odd given that I know that you know the real reason why young murderers are tried as adults, and you know that I know the reason as well. Do you really believe the legislature thought to themselves, "murderers that are younger than 18 may be tried as adults because, at that point, we know the person is capable of consent"? Where is consent involved in a child becoming a murderer?
I could argue "Why is it that a child can't consent to kill, but an adult can"? One of the things about murder (note I am talking about simple murderers here - like "kid is in gang and is told to kill somebody") is "preconceived intent", which would mean thought about actions prior to the crime, and having some form of intent of the crime to commit it. This is where consent comes in. If a child can make this form of consent, why can't a child consent to other things that currently only adults can?
Anyway--the real reason we try young murderers as adults is because we don't want them released onto the streets the day they turn 18! If we try a 17 year old murderer as a minor, then the kid leaves jail when he's 18. What the legislature knows is that past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. Rather than trying the antisocial minor as a minor, letting him out when he's 18 and then jailing him for life next time he kills someone; we can just try the kid as an adult now and save the life of his next victim!
You make a point, but it still smacks of "pre-crime" - why even have separate distinctions of age for criminals then, period. I mean, if the child robs a store, maybe he'll rob it again after he turns 18, right?
Still, you realize, a minor tried as an adult doesn't get as much time as an adult tried as an adult. The kid does get a chance to reform. [now you might argue; why should we jail a person for this. Antisocial personality disorder is an "immutable characteristic" of people who have it (ask any psychologist--there's no "curing" a person of antisocial personality disorder). We shouldn't even call it a disorder. That person's natural biology is naturally inclined to kill people, and society should bend to find approval of it (and change its name). It's a matter of equal rights!]
Now, your points on antisocial personality disorder are relevant to the discussion at hand, and I honestly don't know what to do with these kinds of "people" when we find them - regardless of whether they are adults or children. They do exist, and I recognize this, and seeing a child who is like this - cold and calculating, without a hint of remorse - is both a sad, and chilling, experience. It is like seeing an animal
Let's tell a little story here: Soldier Adam (an firefighter in civilian life), who lives in Oceania, has been "sent by his country" to Eastasia to liberate it. Soldier Chen (a dockworker in civilian life), who lives in Eastasia, has been "ordered by his country" to defend against the invasion. Each of them, along with the buddies in their unit, are in a firefight - bombs are raining down, machine gun fire is everywhere, maybe an RPG or two is launched. Some of Soldier Adam's buddies are dead or severely wounded - maybe Adam himself. On the other side, some of Soldier Chen's buddies are hurt or dead themselves. The battle is heated, but things slow down, and one side or both has retreated to re-group (let's pretend a standoff of some sort here). As they re-group, they have time to cool off, and perhaps think about things (briefly - tension is high). Soldier Adam thinks about his fiance and new son back home, wondering if he will get back to the firehouse. Soldier Chen wonders about his wife and sister, who live with them - do they have enough to eat? - and will he get back to work on the dock (is the dock still there?). Neither one wants to be there, they both want to be back home (wherever it is), they both want the same thing: peace, stability, a roof over their head, food, water, and some work to do.
So how the hell are they here, seeing each other as the Other - as a non-entity to be killed or bypassed in some brutal manner? Of course, they are doing the jobs they were told to do (and hopefully not obeying illegal orders - though that might be more difficult to do than you think for either). Even so, didn't either of them, Adam or Chen, have this thought processs about war, and what it means for people on both sides, before they signed up (ignoring drafting here - but still) to kill each other?
What the hell is it about humanity's inability to put itself in other's shoes - to see each other as humans, with human wants and needs? Why do they obey a leader or a country to fight and kill each other, when each knows (whether through logic and reason, or by decree of religion) that killing is wrong? Why is it OK if the State tells you to kill (or the State kills itself, as in the death penalty), but if an individual citizen of the State does so without the State's approval, it suddenly becomes wrong? If the State is really composed of "we the people" - then shouldn't all killing, regardless of context, be wrong equally (or right equally, if you want to take that stance)? Admittedly, Soldier Chen is on a better footing than Soldier Adam, even though he was drafted by his State - simply because his State was invaded, not Adam's. Even so, why can't each look, and see, and understand and know, after all these thousands of years of human history, that more and bigger weapons DO NOT LEAD TO PEACE, and the killing each other is NOT A LONG TERM SOLUTION?
Every new and more powerful weapon is hailed as the device that will bring peace to the planet - from Nobel's discovery of dynamite, to the machine gun, to the nuclear bomb, to...? What is next? An anti-matter weapon to cleanse planets ala "Chronicles of Riddick"? Will the destruction of the planet bring peace? Will there only be piece when there is only one man-monkey sitting in the ashes of a scorched Earth (admittedly, maybe there will be - at least until he kills himself - and then peace will be acheived, I suppose)?
In short, what is it ultimately going to take for humanity to stop killing each other, and instead work together to go beyond...everything? Or, is it an impossible dream, and humanity is destined to die (or worse, spread throughout the Universe bring hate, distrust, anger, and vengence whereever it sets foot)? Finally, why is it that I can see this absurdity, and project it forward (and thus, not be stupid enough to join a killing machine) - yet others can't, and either do join the
I work for a company developing thier website. Our website is currently based around old-school ASP, and while I would love to change this platform to something more up-to-date, it isn't going to happen any time soon (ie, I am one programmer and there are well over 100KLOC of ASP involved, not too mention tons of MSSQL-specific SQL that would need to be converted, mainly for date handling reasons). I am stuck on this platform for the time being. I did not choose this platform, that was done for me a long time ago.
We have more than enought processing power to handle our site, but we have an issue with long page load times - from the front site to deeper pages. I have isolated the problem to our heavy use of a function which essentially does a singleton query (ie, given a table, field, and record ID, it returns the data value in that field - ie; SELECT field FROM table WHERE id = ???).
This form of query/function (which is actually done in a database wrapper function - so only the function call is used everywhere - if I can speed it up, the entire site benefits) was implemented due to another issue, which, when I first got here and saw what was happenning, made me say "Wha?" and try to do it the proper way, only to get stung by the problem that this solution was to fix. What this problem was is as follows: If you try to issue a SQL select on our system to return multiple fields from a table (ie, SELECT field1, field2, field3 FROM table WHERE ...) - sometimes, the data returned could be accessed (ie, var1 = Recordset("field1"), var2 = Recordset("field2"), etc) just fine, but at other times (seemingly, maddeningly - at "random" intervals), only the first field would have data in it, and all the other fields would return empty string or null values! We don't know what causes this or why (I suspect some form of field ordering in the SELECT vs. the order of the fields in the MSSQL table - but I am not sure), but by using singleton selects, this problem is avoided (because there is *always* data in the first field), at the expense of speed. Unfortunately, at this point, even if I found out how to keep the problem from arising and could use the proper SQL queries, there are simply way too many places to change for it to be practical (it would still be a HUGE job to perform to mod that much ASP code).
From what I have googled and researched on the interweb, singleton queries using ADO recordsets should never be done - they are very slow. I have heard that using an ADO command object, either coupled to the SQL select with parameter fields, or by using a stored procedure, is a better and faster method than using a heavy recordset. However, I have not been able to get either of these methods to work properly - I either get no data back (empty strings), or errors. I am not absolutely sure if it is my stored procedure or what (although, it seems to return data OK if I run it under Query Analyzer). What is interesting, even though it fails and doesn't return data, I seem to get the same performance (timing-wise) as the regular singleton query (ie, using an ADO command object with a stored procedure seems as slow as using an ADO recordset object and a query). I am not sure if this is because of the failure of returning data, or if I did get it working, if it would run faster.
Seriously - I wish I could convert everything over to Linux, Apache, PHP (or Python), and MySQL or PostgreSQL - but that isn't happenning - we don't have manpower or resources to throw at such a project (plus, considering new development and fixes on the current codebase, it would be a constant game of catchup and patching, even if we have another developer handy to take up this issue alone).
Does anyone here have any reasonable ideas or solutions I could possibly try? Does anybody know why we experience the random data droppage when not using singleton selects? Does anybody have any ideas on how I could speed this beast up? Or, am I simply bailing water out of a sinking ship?
I would suppose it might depend on whether you have had any past experience with using a double accounting/entry system, which is how most businesses operate. However, this form of account activity tracking is completely alien to most people, who have only been exposed to "check register accounting" (or whatever it is called). I would suspect that most of the "learning curve" comes from learning to use this new system, and how it works, compares, and differs from the standard system most people are familiar with from day-to-day life.