I don't complain about moderation much but sometimes you can only take so much.
I would love to here from whoever moderated my post as Flamebait and have them explain some reason for that. There's nothing I said that isn't accurate and parts of it are posted all over this thread.
I guess I committed the cardinal sin of posting something that did not toe the party line. How freaking pathetic.
I like the moderation system and I like to moderate- but some times I just get pissed when some idiot who knows absolutely nothing mods someone down.
I think modding down should burn 2 points and modding someone up should burn 1. Too many people are way too free w/off topic, redundant, troll, etc.
So to the faceless, ignorant moderator of my post let me just say - You Suck.
(yeah - its friday I've got some time on my hands and I do feel better now. That's worth a little karma)
At this point I've been using PGAdmin II. It is open source written in VB (yeah - I use VB and I'll admit it). It gives you the ability to do quite a bit of what you can do in enterprise manager.
There are other tools that I have not used yet that will work on multiple platforms. The postgreSQL has great documentation and links to many of the useful tools. This is one project where it is very, very easy to find what you need to get the ball rolling.
PostgreSQL can not do everything SQL Server and Oracle can do. As of right now you cannot back up transactions. I believe it is also limited in regards to replication and some other features that the big boys handle pretty well.
But in many cases, like ours- we don't need that stuff. I just need a dependable rdbms that doesn't cost an arm and a leg and isn't a piece of crap like MS Access.
Open source databases do not have all the capability of commercial dbs.
Books like this probably target people who will go to work for some company that will be using a closed database since they need that added functionality. (and can afford it)
And learning T-SQL is a good idea if you want to work for someone who uses SQL Server. (Which is a lot of people- so more power to you)
But lets say you want to run a database for yourself or you are a smaller company. Then I would not recommend worrying too much about learning a variant of SQL tied to an expensive propietary system. (SQL Server only runs on MS NT or 2000- and so you've got server licensing, db server licensing and then seat licenses for everyone who will connect to the db)
At my small company we looked at expanding a product so we priced a new server- and then SQL Server licenses for that server and 200 users. The licensing on the software was much more expensive than the hardware we wanted to buy.
Our solution? We are going w/PostgreSQL. It has some very nice visual tools for management. It has good ODBC support. And it has most of the capability that SQL Server has. Enough to justify taking advantage of the monetary savings.
And Oracle? Forget it- more expensive than SQL Server.
Granted there are businesses out there where the cost of Oracle or SQL Server is more than justified- but those huge companies are a minority of the business world. There are many more like us- not huge but we need good RDB systems.
DeVry gets a bad wrap around here so I hesitate to mention this.
But to their credit- the program I was involved in their did not have us coding on paper. We had lap tops that we bought as part of our tuition. They provided us w/the full software for whatever we would be working on- or we would go get it (legally - JBuilder for instance).
Exams consisted of sitting at that laptop and cranking out code. Nothing that huge- you would save it on a floppy and hand it in when you finished.
Could someone cheat? Sure. We weren't allowed to hook up to the network and the teacher was there but that was about all that was 'enforced'.
But on the other hand I don't code w/out books, the internet and colleagues now that I do it professionally.
Anyways- I just thought I'd mention it as it seems that if a school is equipped to properly teach you to code then they are properly equip to test you on computers vice paper.
Plastic Fag Fighter is a term I picked up from the CO of an F-14 squadron that I was in. It is not meant to be taken literally - it is just a deragatory term for F-18s and the like.
Just a little joke I slid in there at the end for anyone who may have been involved in Naval Aviation.
It is much more stable and feasible than Boeing's version. In fact the fact that Boeing built it off the Harrier should be a dead give away that there had to be a better way.
The stealth issues are genuine but this would be the case w/any VSTOL variant. They are going to be landing in places that are not as clear of FOD as the AirForce/Navy versions. And when those Marine pilots are providing close ground support the stealth thing will not be as big an issue.
Is it perfect? No. Will it kick a lot of ass? You bet.
And getting to the main point- even the lockheed model is ugly. (all stealth anything are in my opinion)
You could argue back and forth about who had the better aircraft. I'm a bit biased to begin with - but you can't argue that aesthetics were the deciding factor.
The F-22 raptor is a new fighter built for the air force.
The F-35 will have variants for all the branches of the military as well as foreign militaries. The F-35 will use much of the technology developed in the F-22 program (started prior to the F-35) and will save the government quite a bit of money as it uses standardized components.
More than one aircraft is necessary because they can perform different jobs. Just like the navy has more than one kind of ship, and the army has more than one kind of land vehicle.
I liked the article. It seems a pretty good run down of the history of the JSF program. One of the more intelligent things to come from our military.
But this whole - 'Boeing's plane was ugly' thing is sensationalistic journalism. The author throws it out there and then goes on to show that the author alone holds that opinion. It didn't make sense to me.
I've watched the whole thing closely for quite a while. (My wife works for Lockheed and my sister in law for Boeing) They were both good but the article rightly states that the VSTOL variant put together by Lockheed is exceptional. It is a daring - effective design.
Don't take away anything from either party with this 'It was about looks' nonsense. If that is what is was about we would be flying nothing but F-14s and not all these little plastic fag fighters that are out there now.
Probably a little too late for a lot of people to see this. But there is a bit of misinformation in your post explained here
Carter served on a diesel sub and left the navy before working on a nuke. The article gives some good insight into the naming of Naval vessels and Carter's record as funding the Navy goes.
the House Subcommittee on International Economic Policy heard testimony from the Director of the Center for Security Policy, Frank J. Gaffney, who complained about the Clinton administration's trade policy: "The People's Republic of China received sophisticated micro-bathymetry equipment, 6,000-meter-capable video, and side-scan sonar systems from the United States.
That there were no criminal charges for the way the DNC sold this country down the river for campaign contributions is amazing. We do not take China seriously and that is an error.
In that case - when looking at the big picture, the tension between the 2 does not exist to begin with. I guess then the only one that feels the pinch are the little theaters.
To be honest, here in Phoenix I don't even know of any independant movie theaters. Everything is pretty much big chains. (except maybe like dollar theaters and drive ins- and I rarely go to those)
Either way- I don't think the movie studios are going to be able to dictate terms to the theaters at will. I think this will be a slow progression that allows both sides to continue to rake in the bucks.
There will be additional costs and you know who will ultimately bear those costs. This does not bother me a bit as movies are far from essential needs for anyone.
I would think there is some amount of labor savings as well. I'd imagine you just schedule the films to run as opposed to someone setting up the reels.
It can't be a lot. They probably pay those kids in popcorn and free movies - but it is a little piece of a bigger pie.
If the studios limited 35mm runs they would hurt their own bottom line.
The theaters have a lot of pull and they know it. There is a lot of pressure on films to make big bucks (as the initial investment is nothing to laugh at)
It seems to me (an outsider admittedly) that this is a pretty symbiotic relationship where neither side can squeeze too hard w/out hurting themselves in the long run.
But if I had to pick a stronger side I would say it is the theaters (big chains mostly AMC, Harkins, etc.) have an edge. That is where the revenue is actually generated on the outset.
No biggie. For what it's worth. After I replied to you about it this morning someone came along and modded it down as over rated. So you aren't alone in your opinion. (or maybe it was what I said)
There is a real strong tendency for people who take a real different view on certain issues to get modded down. Same w/if they are real critical about certain/. issues.
. My goal is to develop a set of resources that can be used in an introductory course that teaches students programming starting with conceptual models, as opposed to starting with syntax.
Since this is in his original post I consider it to be part of the question and worthy of comment. So I would'nt go as far as off topic.
A 5? Well that's a good question and it did catch me off gaurd a bit that it was modded up so high - but the other day I got stomped on for what was a pretty good post (I thought). So you just can't get too worked up about moderation.
You are right. It is good to read any kind of code - good or bad.
Good code gives you ideas and lets you see better ways to do things. Bad code shows you what a nightmare someone can leave behind and (at least I feel this way) motivates you to leave behind maintainable code.
the scientific method is not synonymous w/logic. There is evidence for God - but that evidence and all the arguments that exist around it do not fit the scientific model of investigating repeatable, measurable phenomenon.
I take it you do not believe in love as it is not measured. You also default to the position that Abraham Lincoln never existed as we have nothing more than heresay.
I'm getting a little annoyed but the clue stick thing bugs me a bit.
If from the start you create a 'rule' that God cannot exist so any explanation that rests upon God is invalid then you are not looking at all your options.
The theist accepts the burden of proof but the atheist/agnostic does not accept this 'proof' as it does not fit their definitions. And therein lies the road block. (They are easy to find if you look around- this is old stuff)
God by definition (and this was my point) does not fit the model of those who exclude Him from the start. Their position does not allow for them to be wrong.
Well I could go on but these arguments are age old and I see little value in getting to hyped up but once again the clue stick thing reveals your vanity.
Slashdot Mirror
.. Not that they haven't been nominated, but that this made the front page.
I laughed, then I cried. Now I'm laughing and crying at the same time.
.
The title of the book tells you that it is about not only SQL 92 but the variants out there in commercial systems.
That the book comes w/a commercial database bundled in backs this up. The original post asked why sybase?
I was answering him. Got modded down for giving the guy a little info. YES! I'm a little bitter right now.
.
I don't complain about moderation much but sometimes you can only take so much.
I would love to here from whoever moderated my post as Flamebait and have them explain some reason for that. There's nothing I said that isn't accurate and parts of it are posted all over this thread.
I guess I committed the cardinal sin of posting something that did not toe the party line. How freaking pathetic.
I like the moderation system and I like to moderate- but some times I just get pissed when some idiot who knows absolutely nothing mods someone down.
I think modding down should burn 2 points and modding someone up should burn 1. Too many people are way too free w/off topic, redundant, troll, etc.
So to the faceless, ignorant moderator of my post let me just say - You Suck.
(yeah - its friday I've got some time on my hands and I do feel better now. That's worth a little karma)
.
I'm just getting into this myself.
At this point I've been using PGAdmin II. It is open source written in VB (yeah - I use VB and I'll admit it). It gives you the ability to do quite a bit of what you can do in enterprise manager.
There are other tools that I have not used yet that will work on multiple platforms. The postgreSQL has great documentation and links to many of the useful tools. This is one project where it is very, very easy to find what you need to get the ball rolling.
PostgreSQL can not do everything SQL Server and Oracle can do. As of right now you cannot back up transactions. I believe it is also limited in regards to replication and some other features that the big boys handle pretty well.
But in many cases, like ours- we don't need that stuff. I just need a dependable rdbms that doesn't cost an arm and a leg and isn't a piece of crap like MS Access.
.
Open source databases do not have all the capability of commercial dbs.
Books like this probably target people who will go to work for some company that will be using a closed database since they need that added functionality. (and can afford it)
That would answer your rhetorical question.
.
And learning T-SQL is a good idea if you want to work for someone who uses SQL Server. (Which is a lot of people- so more power to you)
But lets say you want to run a database for yourself or you are a smaller company. Then I would not recommend worrying too much about learning a variant of SQL tied to an expensive propietary system. (SQL Server only runs on MS NT or 2000- and so you've got server licensing, db server licensing and then seat licenses for everyone who will connect to the db)
At my small company we looked at expanding a product so we priced a new server- and then SQL Server licenses for that server and 200 users. The licensing on the software was much more expensive than the hardware we wanted to buy.
Our solution? We are going w/PostgreSQL. It has some very nice visual tools for management. It has good ODBC support. And it has most of the capability that SQL Server has. Enough to justify taking advantage of the monetary savings.
And Oracle? Forget it- more expensive than SQL Server.
Granted there are businesses out there where the cost of Oracle or SQL Server is more than justified- but those huge companies are a minority of the business world. There are many more like us- not huge but we need good RDB systems.
.
I would have a section on relational database management systems and some good general/specific books to go w/each.
Depending on interest you could lean towards administration/development/programming/etc.
.
DeVry gets a bad wrap around here so I hesitate to mention this.
But to their credit- the program I was involved in their did not have us coding on paper. We had lap tops that we bought as part of our tuition. They provided us w/the full software for whatever we would be working on- or we would go get it (legally - JBuilder for instance).
Exams consisted of sitting at that laptop and cranking out code. Nothing that huge- you would save it on a floppy and hand it in when you finished.
Could someone cheat? Sure. We weren't allowed to hook up to the network and the teacher was there but that was about all that was 'enforced'.
But on the other hand I don't code w/out books, the internet and colleagues now that I do it professionally.
Anyways- I just thought I'd mention it as it seems that if a school is equipped to properly teach you to code then they are properly equip to test you on computers vice paper.
.
Plastic Fag Fighter is a term I picked up from the CO of an F-14 squadron that I was in. It is not meant to be taken literally - it is just a deragatory term for F-18s and the like.
Just a little joke I slid in there at the end for anyone who may have been involved in Naval Aviation.
.
in Goodyear AZ.
Sounds like exciting stuff!
Put in for a transfer to TX so I can have your job.
Really.
.
It is much more stable and feasible than Boeing's version. In fact the fact that Boeing built it off the Harrier should be a dead give away that there had to be a better way.
The stealth issues are genuine but this would be the case w/any VSTOL variant. They are going to be landing in places that are not as clear of FOD as the AirForce/Navy versions. And when those Marine pilots are providing close ground support the stealth thing will not be as big an issue.
Is it perfect? No. Will it kick a lot of ass? You bet.
And getting to the main point- even the lockheed model is ugly. (all stealth anything are in my opinion)
You could argue back and forth about who had the better aircraft. I'm a bit biased to begin with - but you can't argue that aesthetics were the deciding factor.
.
The F-22 raptor is a new fighter built for the air force.
The F-35 will have variants for all the branches of the military as well as foreign militaries. The F-35 will use much of the technology developed in the F-22 program (started prior to the F-35) and will save the government quite a bit of money as it uses standardized components.
More than one aircraft is necessary because they can perform different jobs. Just like the navy has more than one kind of ship, and the army has more than one kind of land vehicle.
.
I liked the article. It seems a pretty good run down of the history of the JSF program. One of the more intelligent things to come from our military.
But this whole - 'Boeing's plane was ugly' thing is sensationalistic journalism. The author throws it out there and then goes on to show that the author alone holds that opinion. It didn't make sense to me.
I've watched the whole thing closely for quite a while. (My wife works for Lockheed and my sister in law for Boeing) They were both good but the article rightly states that the VSTOL variant put together by Lockheed is exceptional. It is a daring - effective design.
Don't take away anything from either party with this 'It was about looks' nonsense. If that is what is was about we would be flying nothing but F-14s and not all these little plastic fag fighters that are out there now.
.
I keep putting them in my wallet and they snap in half when I sit down.
DOH!
.
Probably a little too late for a lot of people to see this. But there is a bit of misinformation in your post explained here
Carter served on a diesel sub and left the navy before working on a nuke. The article gives some good insight into the naming of Naval vessels and Carter's record as funding the Navy goes.
the House Subcommittee on International Economic Policy heard testimony from the Director of the Center for Security Policy, Frank J. Gaffney, who complained about the Clinton administration's trade policy: "The People's Republic of China received sophisticated micro-bathymetry equipment, 6,000-meter-capable video, and side-scan sonar systems from the United States.
That there were no criminal charges for the way the DNC sold this country down the river for campaign contributions is amazing. We do not take China seriously and that is an error.
This doesn't make sense. They are constantly building newer, larger theaters where I live. Last time I checked construction involved costs.
And what does this have to do w/dot coms?
You sir are an idiot.
.
In that case - when looking at the big picture, the tension between the 2 does not exist to begin with. I guess then the only one that feels the pinch are the little theaters.
To be honest, here in Phoenix I don't even know of any independant movie theaters. Everything is pretty much big chains. (except maybe like dollar theaters and drive ins- and I rarely go to those)
Either way- I don't think the movie studios are going to be able to dictate terms to the theaters at will. I think this will be a slow progression that allows both sides to continue to rake in the bucks.
There will be additional costs and you know who will ultimately bear those costs. This does not bother me a bit as movies are far from essential needs for anyone.
.
I would think there is some amount of labor savings as well. I'd imagine you just schedule the films to run as opposed to someone setting up the reels.
It can't be a lot. They probably pay those kids in popcorn and free movies - but it is a little piece of a bigger pie.
.
If the studios limited 35mm runs they would hurt their own bottom line.
The theaters have a lot of pull and they know it. There is a lot of pressure on films to make big bucks (as the initial investment is nothing to laugh at)
It seems to me (an outsider admittedly) that this is a pretty symbiotic relationship where neither side can squeeze too hard w/out hurting themselves in the long run.
But if I had to pick a stronger side I would say it is the theaters (big chains mostly AMC, Harkins, etc.) have an edge. That is where the revenue is actually generated on the outset.
.
No biggie. For what it's worth. After I replied to you about it this morning someone came along and modded it down as over rated. So you aren't alone in your opinion. (or maybe it was what I said)
/. issues.
There is a real strong tendency for people who take a real different view on certain issues to get modded down. Same w/if they are real critical about certain
No big deal to me but interesting to watch.
.
Can you say airspace and national waters?
I knew you could.
.
Here's what I was responding to.
. My goal is to develop a set of resources that can be used in an introductory course that teaches students programming starting with conceptual models, as opposed to starting with syntax.
Since this is in his original post I consider it to be part of the question and worthy of comment. So I would'nt go as far as off topic.
A 5? Well that's a good question and it did catch me off gaurd a bit that it was modded up so high - but the other day I got stomped on for what was a pretty good post (I thought). So you just can't get too worked up about moderation.
You are right. It is good to read any kind of code - good or bad.
Good code gives you ideas and lets you see better ways to do things. Bad code shows you what a nightmare someone can leave behind and (at least I feel this way) motivates you to leave behind maintainable code.
.
Hubris plain and simple.
the scientific method is not synonymous w/logic. There is evidence for God - but that evidence and all the arguments that exist around it do not fit the scientific model of investigating repeatable, measurable phenomenon.
I take it you do not believe in love as it is not measured. You also default to the position that Abraham Lincoln never existed as we have nothing more than heresay.
I'm getting a little annoyed but the clue stick thing bugs me a bit.
If from the start you create a 'rule' that God cannot exist so any explanation that rests upon God is invalid then you are not looking at all your options.
The theist accepts the burden of proof but the atheist/agnostic does not accept this 'proof' as it does not fit their definitions. And therein lies the road block. (They are easy to find if you look around- this is old stuff)
God by definition (and this was my point) does not fit the model of those who exclude Him from the start. Their position does not allow for them to be wrong.
Well I could go on but these arguments are age old and I see little value in getting to hyped up but once again the clue stick thing reveals your vanity.
.