it's a balancing act between the logic you put into the database and the logic you put into the application code.
The stuff that you won't be changing is something you put into the database logic, but only where it makes sense because you need to have the integrity of a relational model. There are some errors that you can protect yourself against by placing it into the database. For example, non-null password fields and username fields would be good.
If you think it's nonsensical try doing benchmarks between C code and Python. C is faster. You can't argue with the facts. Can you cite examples of code that have the same performance for Python as C?
All that aside. I absolutely agree that the business logic should not be in the database code. However, there are certain core elements of the business logic that could and should be located in the more controlled database environment. Examples of this wouold be things that are not likely to be changed by the business rules would be: Account Numbers, Part Numbers and things like that.
The new architectural model is to encapsulate the business logic into a highly adaptive language like Python, Perl, Ruby and use the business logic element to act as a glue layer between the interface (HTTP/Web/Soap/Rest) the data store (database) and the operating system (Linux/BSD). This gives you a highly robust set of application foundations that you interface with and figure out how to run your business via the business logic or middle ware (if that's still applicable).
If you want to buy stuff from the InterWeb thingy you want to buy from the GREEN because everyone else is EVIL.
If you want to get more business sent your way, you have to purchase the certificates to go GREEN or else you lose money.
So if the businesses buy in to this green craze then it starts to feed into a cyclic frenzy of cornering the purchasing power of the consumers. And everyone pays Microsoft. And that makes it a great business model.
But we all know that Microsoft is pretty much regarded as a joke by more and more people every day. Just not enough quite yet.
One of the biggest problems I've seen with these comparisons is that MySQL and Postgres seem to have a wildly different release cycle and when one is "up" the other is "down" on it's lifecycle.
I do like Postgres 8.1 a lot. It's kickin'. I also like Postgres in general because it's got more options on how to do stuff with it's RULES, FUNCTIONS and all those goodies.
Additionally, databases generally can do this faster than the application code. I can say this because databases are written in C and optimized and debugged for years. Applications are rarely (relatively) written in C and have not been debugged for years when released.
This is something that actually really pisses me off about Ruby, Rails, and ActiveRecord. ActiveRecord is an insane violation of everything that a database has been built to do. It breaks consistency, violates keys, ignores so many rules... And it's beats the crap out of a database to do what a database is designed to do and can handle much faster.
This is regardless of the flame wars of Postgres vs MySQL.
When are you non-database types going to stop saying "Your app should be checking itself anyway."
This is an insanely inneficient method of execution. It's also highly presumptive.
Inneficient: If you are going to insert a record you have to first check to make sure it's not there. Then if it is there you have to change your INSERT to an UPDATE. This is dumb. Some databases do a INSERT OR UPDATE. but if they don't, it's faster to do an INSERT, handle failure, UPDATE. Alternatively -- UPDATE and INSERT on ZERO ROWS CHANGED. This means you have to run less than 2 queries on average. Your app should check method guarantees two SQL statements are executed every single time.
Dumb. Say you check for a record to exist. You get a "NO" answer. While you are preparing and executing your next INSERT, some other process or a thread inserts that same record into the databse. Now you have an error and you still don't know what to do. In short, you're in a pretty bad way.
Presumptive. In all my years of living I've never seen any company happy with the only interface to the data being through the application interface. Especially with a database on the back end. The business types, Marketing in partitular, love to screw with database information to try and identify trends, patterns, and correlations between the customer behaviour, product representation, and sales metrics. It is presumptive that the application can safely contain all of the business logic and you can assume that no one will ever come in the back end and change something -- thereby breaking all your business rules.
The other consideration is that the business logic contained in a database is going to run a heck of a lot faster on the database than anything you can dream up in your application, unless the application is written in C. Databases are generally written in C/C++. Applications are generally written in Java,Perl,Python,Ruby. None of these can compete with C. Add to that the fact that databases have been designed for years to do only one thing -- manage data. Do you seriously think you can out perform a decade of database optimization in a ruby script?
If you are going to base an application on data it would be useful to know how to capitalize on the features of a database rather than trying to repeat it. At the very least, you are less likely to introduce bugs.
News to me. Did they know that when the designed the website? Or is this something like 0.001% of the total user base use Opera on their portable devices (again removing the website from a responsibility).
I would submit that if the pages are written to be W3C Compliant and use standardized Javascript notations.... (ie: according to the specifications that govern the media) then any problems thereafter are the responsibility of the end user.
This works both ways -- IE cannot use some of the IE specific exploits and everyone suffers from a variety of bugs. But unless the browser bugs are brought to the end users face there won't be much need to fix them. Especially in the commercial browsers.
The only exception to this is going to be the areas where there are not standards as yet -- AJAX for example. But they could make some effort to resolve the issue. But if the end user browser has a bug then I think it's the responsibility of the web site to direct the end user to the browser home page and suggest that he take up his case there.
I've always been told in the books that you are supposed to make pages that are compliant for everything. From lynx to MSIE12 and support for the blind, deaf, and even the insanely stupid. But I don't think that's entirely practicaly anymore. I don't know how you can create a pure AJAX site to be perfectly lync compatable or if it's even worth it. Lynx is useful but I'm not sure it's valid to consider it a primary browser.
We have to be careful that the minority doesn't govern the majority. 0.6% market share doesn't necessitate that the web site be redesigned. I do think that a web page should be compatible per OS. Windows uses at least MSIE. Mac uses at least Safari, Linux uses at least Firefox. If you are compatible to these three then you aren't really blocking anyone from service. But if you insist on lynx compatiblity on an ARM64 OS you might be justifiably SOL.
You would find that cellular carriers have really crappy service.
Unfortunately you won't find any of that information confirmable unless you have about 4 million cell phones distributed around the country and can start gathering data on all 4 million phones and the successful connectivity rates between the phones and yourself.
Unfortunately there aren't too many people who have that kind of cellular coverage and data.
Now I don't have to spend any time trying to compose a written letter which has to convey both the objective and subjective meanings. I can just blast out whatever comes out first and then cover my ass with an emotiflag so I don't really sound like an asshole. I wonder if it's binding?
Instead of trying to be like dpkg, aptitude, and.deb, why don't they just adopt that package system for their own so that we can get back to having one install base for binary distribution (like we had once with RPM) only something that actually works over the long run and provides a simple management interface.
RPM can be a nightmare. DEB can too. But DEB's are easier to install as a "user" because they take better care of their packaging status.
plastic money?
it's going to be hard to find any coin material that can cost less then the face value, be durable, and still large enough to find.
maybe they can use slag.
When you make something that works. You start to play with it to make it do more. It's complex. Then it fails. Then you make it simple.
These are opposing forces to make it complex to better address the niche market potential and improve the customer experience. All the general marketing and sales initiatives to make things better and new and improved.
Contrary to this is the force to simplify things in order for you to concentrate on other issues. This is not a force that is recognized or embraced by the marketing and sales thinking in business.
If you make something that is basic and effecive. Say a round ball. Then marketing will start asking people why they didn't purchase a round ball. Based on the feedback they start applying modifiers and options to the round ball. Before you know it you have colors, textures, handles, AM/FM radio... Some of which is useful (colors and textures) and some of which is a detraction from the original design (AM/FM radio balls break when you treat them as a ball).
All of this is also the pressure of product convergence. First there was the cell phone and now it's a cell phone, gamestation, television, ipod, PIM and more more more every week.
I've been playing with Postgres 8.1 and doing some reading online and I think the differences between MySQL and Postgres come down to this
They are both ACID compliant
Postgres offers more features than MySQL
In addition to this there are a variety of curves that are fairly consistent over different versions, hardware, and database sizes... If you have few users then MySQL does well. As you increase the number of users MySQL will start to decline severly. Postgres does not do this. It's flat or nearly flat.
Postgres has a tool called pgbench available that I was using for some testing. I have a PentiumII machine that I wanted to see if it was worth running as a database. I put in a pair of disks as a RAID0 configuration and started testing. Here is what I found.
On a small database (5 million rows?)
10 users run about 120 transactions per second.
100 users run about 85 transactions per second.
On a large database (~15GB, maybe 250 million rows)
10 users run about 115 transactions per second.
100 users run about 80 transactions per second.
Which for says that the database performance over size and user concurrency is fairly flat. I didn't benchmark this against MySQL as I'm not interested in doing that. But it's valuable to me to know that this database will performan consistently regardless of the number of users (slashdot) or the eventual size of the database.
Too often I see people get a database application (MS Access anyone) that works great the first day. But as soon as they get a million rows in a table it starts to flag. The last thing I want to do is put in a database that becomes my worse nightmare in six months.
On the "strictyly my opinion" side of things I think postgres is absolutely better and am glad to see this new release. I think they have advantages because they have only one database engine to work with. I read that to mean they have lower risk of bugs. I love the ssl support and use it religiously. They have always focused on being a database before focusing on being popular in pop-culture. And the eventual licensing of MySQL will make them unfavorable in time. I already found it very difficult to find any documentation on their website because of the marketing influence.
But, I'm not going to tell you to use Postgres or that MySQL sucks. It's probably great. Use whatever the hell you want.
You're forgetting about the climate changes from global warming.
After you build it in Arizona, New Mexico and Texas you will realize that these states are now in a constant overcast and rain and that the correct location would have been Seattle Washington. But since it's always overcast there no one would have thought of it.
You have a point though. It wouldn't be that difficult to cover the national and possible world needs of electricity if people used solar cells instead of asphalt for their roofing material.
It's political only if you let it become so. Which is kind of assinine when you think about it.
Without getting into the details, I don't believe there is any political guarantee that you cannot say something about someone's savior and have it protected by the government. In that light, I can also create images of mohammed and the government can't do anything about it. My free speech is protected. Bullshit. No one dared to post anything of the sort from a US owned company or website.
But we should have been able to under our own laws.
As for Bongs. I'll pass on the whole argument that we should legalize drugs. Have you ever seen what they can do to a person and family? If you legalize them you also have to [welfare] pay for the repairs when things go wrong. And you won't have a better society for it. You'll have a large stock price for Doritos that that's about it.
I think it would be more worthwhile for RedHat, IBM, EFF, the EU, Sun, Apple to pool their resources together and buy out Microsoft. And then post all of the code they own on the front page of microsoft.com and walk away.
It would remove a lot of questions about the security of the code, the future fud of licenses, and the future of open source software.
Do they have enough money? I don't know. But would it be worth it in the long run, absolutely.
It would also be the single greatest even in business history since the assembly line or steam power.
I don't think there is an issue with Freedom of Speech here.
He did break the school policy and that's allowed to go beyond the Constitution. You do not have a right to bear arms in a high school. You do not have the right to congregate freely in school because you are expected to be in class and not blocking the halls. You are also not an adult when you are in school unless you are over 18 years of age. Therefore, schools should be permitted to make extensions to many of the federal and state laws in order to preserve the society that they wish to promote to the children.
You also cannot yell "Fire" in a theater.
BONG HITS 4 JESUS isn't something that can be protected under the constitution because it isn't a political or ideolical belief. However, it should make this kid #1 on the drug screening list and possibly consistituted sufficient cause for a search of the home for contraband. But those are both likely outcomes of any free speech one might choose to make.
The kids an asshole. So are the parents. I would like to thank them for doing stupid shit and spoiling it for the rest of us.
Rather than going through all this debate (de-bait?)...
I like the point of Past Performance and the special interests that Microsoft has in telling you the other software is "bad"
BTW -
Apple is based on Open Source.
SUN Solaris 10 is Open Source (mostly?)
IBM has chosen to grant much of it's invested IP to Open Source
If that doesn't convince them even a little bit then you might just consider one of your two remaining options:
Quote how much is would cost in new servers, software for converting to 100% Windows. And you should probably budget all the security software and patches along with the article about how even Balmer can clean a desktop computer.
Are two great activities to take up when you are on vacation.
My boss doesn't want me taking my cell phone with me to 100 feet deptsh.
But seriously, work still has an expectation that I will be magically available in the event that something should go wrong. This can be considered a good thing in that I'm recognized as something they probably don't want to fire at the next right-sizing cycle. However, I do have a tendency of going places there no phone has gone before. In part, that's what I enjoy as a vacation but I'm fullly aware of just how remote I really am from work -- and I don't mind that either!
How do I type in a character for a domain name that isn't supported on my keyboard?
No matter what you do, I'm still limited to the keys on my keyboard. I think that's ~104 by last count. But I certainly don't use that many characters.
I admit that there are some people who are going to bitch about the internet being english. But does that give me a right to bitch about classical music being defined in French and Italian terms like a fugue, sonata, adiago, allegro... I think not. In the past 400 years we've all managed very nicely to adopt to these terms in order to converse with each other an a common basis.
Perhaps there are some terms that these anglicans can adopt from the middle east besides Jihad?
This is great!!! Where I work they use all Java all the time.
And every time I try to propose using something useful like samba, perl, apache or anything else that is GPL they simply cite the doctrine that open source or GPL software is not permitting in the environment.
I wonder how they will deal with this one?
Probably ignore it. But I'm going to have fun throwing it in their face.
Slashdot Mirror
it's a balancing act between the logic you put into the database and the logic you put into the application code.
The stuff that you won't be changing is something you put into the database logic, but only where it makes sense because you need to have the integrity of a relational model. There are some errors that you can protect yourself against by placing it into the database. For example, non-null password fields and username fields would be good.
If you think it's nonsensical try doing benchmarks between C code and Python. C is faster. You can't argue with the facts. Can you cite examples of code that have the same performance for Python as C?
All that aside. I absolutely agree that the business logic should not be in the database code. However, there are certain core elements of the business logic that could and should be located in the more controlled database environment. Examples of this wouold be things that are not likely to be changed by the business rules would be: Account Numbers, Part Numbers and things like that.
The new architectural model is to encapsulate the business logic into a highly adaptive language like Python, Perl, Ruby and use the business logic element to act as a glue layer between the interface (HTTP/Web/Soap/Rest) the data store (database) and the operating system (Linux/BSD). This gives you a highly robust set of application foundations that you interface with and figure out how to run your business via the business logic or middle ware (if that's still applicable).
I think you complete misssed the point.
It's a great business model.
If you want to buy stuff from the InterWeb thingy you want to buy from the GREEN because everyone else is EVIL.
If you want to get more business sent your way, you have to purchase the certificates to go GREEN or else you lose money.
So if the businesses buy in to this green craze then it starts to feed into a cyclic frenzy of cornering the purchasing power of the consumers. And everyone pays Microsoft. And that makes it a great business model.
But we all know that Microsoft is pretty much regarded as a joke by more and more people every day. Just not enough quite yet.
Too bad it's old.
One of the biggest problems I've seen with these comparisons is that MySQL and Postgres seem to have a wildly different release cycle and when one is "up" the other is "down" on it's lifecycle.
I do like Postgres 8.1 a lot. It's kickin'. I also like Postgres in general because it's got more options on how to do stuff with it's RULES, FUNCTIONS and all those goodies.
Additionally, databases generally can do this faster than the application code. I can say this because databases are written in C and optimized and debugged for years. Applications are rarely (relatively) written in C and have not been debugged for years when released.
This is something that actually really pisses me off about Ruby, Rails, and ActiveRecord. ActiveRecord is an insane violation of everything that a database has been built to do. It breaks consistency, violates keys, ignores so many rules... And it's beats the crap out of a database to do what a database is designed to do and can handle much faster.
This is regardless of the flame wars of Postgres vs MySQL.
When are you non-database types going to stop saying "Your app should be checking itself anyway."
This is an insanely inneficient method of execution. It's also highly presumptive.
Inneficient: If you are going to insert a record you have to first check to make sure it's not there. Then if it is there you have to change your INSERT to an UPDATE. This is dumb. Some databases do a INSERT OR UPDATE. but if they don't, it's faster to do an INSERT, handle failure, UPDATE. Alternatively -- UPDATE and INSERT on ZERO ROWS CHANGED. This means you have to run less than 2 queries on average. Your app should check method guarantees two SQL statements are executed every single time.
Dumb. Say you check for a record to exist. You get a "NO" answer. While you are preparing and executing your next INSERT, some other process or a thread inserts that same record into the databse. Now you have an error and you still don't know what to do. In short, you're in a pretty bad way.
Presumptive. In all my years of living I've never seen any company happy with the only interface to the data being through the application interface. Especially with a database on the back end. The business types, Marketing in partitular, love to screw with database information to try and identify trends, patterns, and correlations between the customer behaviour, product representation, and sales metrics. It is presumptive that the application can safely contain all of the business logic and you can assume that no one will ever come in the back end and change something -- thereby breaking all your business rules.
The other consideration is that the business logic contained in a database is going to run a heck of a lot faster on the database than anything you can dream up in your application, unless the application is written in C. Databases are generally written in C/C++. Applications are generally written in Java,Perl,Python,Ruby. None of these can compete with C. Add to that the fact that databases have been designed for years to do only one thing -- manage data. Do you seriously think you can out perform a decade of database optimization in a ruby script?
If you are going to base an application on data it would be useful to know how to capitalize on the features of a database rather than trying to repeat it. At the very least, you are less likely to introduce bugs.
News to me. Did they know that when the designed the website? Or is this something like 0.001% of the total user base use Opera on their portable devices (again removing the website from a responsibility).
I would submit that if the pages are written to be W3C Compliant and use standardized Javascript notations.... (ie: according to the specifications that govern the media) then any problems thereafter are the responsibility of the end user.
This works both ways -- IE cannot use some of the IE specific exploits and everyone suffers from a variety of bugs. But unless the browser bugs are brought to the end users face there won't be much need to fix them. Especially in the commercial browsers.
The only exception to this is going to be the areas where there are not standards as yet -- AJAX for example. But they could make some effort to resolve the issue. But if the end user browser has a bug then I think it's the responsibility of the web site to direct the end user to the browser home page and suggest that he take up his case there.
I've always been told in the books that you are supposed to make pages that are compliant for everything. From lynx to MSIE12 and support for the blind, deaf, and even the insanely stupid. But I don't think that's entirely practicaly anymore. I don't know how you can create a pure AJAX site to be perfectly lync compatable or if it's even worth it. Lynx is useful but I'm not sure it's valid to consider it a primary browser.
We have to be careful that the minority doesn't govern the majority. 0.6% market share doesn't necessitate that the web site be redesigned. I do think that a web page should be compatible per OS. Windows uses at least MSIE. Mac uses at least Safari, Linux uses at least Firefox. If you are compatible to these three then you aren't really blocking anyone from service. But if you insist on lynx compatiblity on an ARM64 OS you might be justifiably SOL.
You would find that cellular carriers have really crappy service.
Unfortunately you won't find any of that information confirmable unless you have about 4 million cell phones distributed around the country and can start gathering data on all 4 million phones and the successful connectivity rates between the phones and yourself.
Unfortunately there aren't too many people who have that kind of cellular coverage and data.
Unless you are OnStar.
Now I don't have to spend any time trying to compose a written letter which has to convey both the objective and subjective meanings. I can just blast out whatever comes out first and then cover my ass with an emotiflag so I don't really sound like an asshole. I wonder if it's binding?
Instead of trying to be like dpkg, aptitude, and .deb, why don't they just adopt that package system for their own so that we can get back to having one install base for binary distribution (like we had once with RPM) only something that actually works over the long run and provides a simple management interface.
RPM can be a nightmare. DEB can too. But DEB's are easier to install as a "user" because they take better care of their packaging status.
plastic money?
it's going to be hard to find any coin material that can cost less then the face value, be durable, and still large enough to find.
maybe they can use slag.
It's cyclic?
When you make something that works. You start to play with it to make it do more. It's complex. Then it fails. Then you make it simple.
These are opposing forces to make it complex to better address the niche market potential and improve the customer experience. All the general marketing and sales initiatives to make things better and new and improved.
Contrary to this is the force to simplify things in order for you to concentrate on other issues. This is not a force that is recognized or embraced by the marketing and sales thinking in business.
If you make something that is basic and effecive. Say a round ball. Then marketing will start asking people why they didn't purchase a round ball. Based on the feedback they start applying modifiers and options to the round ball. Before you know it you have colors, textures, handles, AM/FM radio... Some of which is useful (colors and textures) and some of which is a detraction from the original design (AM/FM radio balls break when you treat them as a ball).
All of this is also the pressure of product convergence. First there was the cell phone and now it's a cell phone, gamestation, television, ipod, PIM and more more more every week.
I've been playing with Postgres 8.1 and doing some reading online and I think the differences between MySQL and Postgres come down to this
In addition to this there are a variety of curves that are fairly consistent over different versions, hardware, and database sizes... If you have few users then MySQL does well. As you increase the number of users MySQL will start to decline severly. Postgres does not do this. It's flat or nearly flat.
Postgres has a tool called pgbench available that I was using for some testing. I have a PentiumII machine that I wanted to see if it was worth running as a database. I put in a pair of disks as a RAID0 configuration and started testing. Here is what I found.
Which for says that the database performance over size and user concurrency is fairly flat. I didn't benchmark this against MySQL as I'm not interested in doing that. But it's valuable to me to know that this database will performan consistently regardless of the number of users (slashdot) or the eventual size of the database.
Too often I see people get a database application (MS Access anyone) that works great the first day. But as soon as they get a million rows in a table it starts to flag. The last thing I want to do is put in a database that becomes my worse nightmare in six months.
On the "strictyly my opinion" side of things I think postgres is absolutely better and am glad to see this new release. I think they have advantages because they have only one database engine to work with. I read that to mean they have lower risk of bugs. I love the ssl support and use it religiously. They have always focused on being a database before focusing on being popular in pop-culture. And the eventual licensing of MySQL will make them unfavorable in time. I already found it very difficult to find any documentation on their website because of the marketing influence.
But, I'm not going to tell you to use Postgres or that MySQL sucks. It's probably great. Use whatever the hell you want.
You're forgetting about the climate changes from global warming.
After you build it in Arizona, New Mexico and Texas you will realize that these states are now in a constant overcast and rain and that the correct location would have been Seattle Washington. But since it's always overcast there no one would have thought of it.
You have a point though. It wouldn't be that difficult to cover the national and possible world needs of electricity if people used solar cells instead of asphalt for their roofing material.
Can you vote for jesus?
It's political only if you let it become so. Which is kind of assinine when you think about it.
Without getting into the details, I don't believe there is any political guarantee that you cannot say something about someone's savior and have it protected by the government. In that light, I can also create images of mohammed and the government can't do anything about it. My free speech is protected. Bullshit. No one dared to post anything of the sort from a US owned company or website.
But we should have been able to under our own laws.
As for Bongs. I'll pass on the whole argument that we should legalize drugs. Have you ever seen what they can do to a person and family? If you legalize them you also have to [welfare] pay for the repairs when things go wrong. And you won't have a better society for it. You'll have a large stock price for Doritos that that's about it.
I think it would be more worthwhile for RedHat, IBM, EFF, the EU, Sun, Apple to pool their resources together and buy out Microsoft. And then post all of the code they own on the front page of microsoft.com and walk away.
It would remove a lot of questions about the security of the code, the future fud of licenses, and the future of open source software.
Do they have enough money? I don't know. But would it be worth it in the long run, absolutely.
It would also be the single greatest even in business history since the assembly line or steam power.
I don't think there is an issue with Freedom of Speech here.
He did break the school policy and that's allowed to go beyond the Constitution. You do not have a right to bear arms in a high school. You do not have the right to congregate freely in school because you are expected to be in class and not blocking the halls. You are also not an adult when you are in school unless you are over 18 years of age. Therefore, schools should be permitted to make extensions to many of the federal and state laws in order to preserve the society that they wish to promote to the children.
You also cannot yell "Fire" in a theater.
BONG HITS 4 JESUS isn't something that can be protected under the constitution because it isn't a political or ideolical belief. However, it should make this kid #1 on the drug screening list and possibly consistituted sufficient cause for a search of the home for contraband. But those are both likely outcomes of any free speech one might choose to make.
The kids an asshole. So are the parents. I would like to thank them for doing stupid shit and spoiling it for the rest of us.
Rather than going through all this debate (de-bait?)...
I like the point of Past Performance and the special interests that Microsoft has in telling you the other software is "bad"
BTW -
Apple is based on Open Source.
SUN Solaris 10 is Open Source (mostly?)
IBM has chosen to grant much of it's invested IP to Open Source
If that doesn't convince them even a little bit then you might just consider one of your two remaining options:
Quote how much is would cost in new servers, software for converting to 100% Windows. And you should probably budget all the security software and patches along with the article about how even Balmer can clean a desktop computer.
Punch them in the head and call them stupid.
But try the last one after everything else fails.
This isn't any surprise that Windows sucks.
What I'm more concerned about is, "How much of this problem extends to Mac/Linux?"
Phishing obviously does and can be avoided with sufficient electrical shock treatment.
But what about the bots and such? I have a lot of hardware sitting online 24x7.
If the French actually make the switch...
Microsoft will begin lobbying the US government based on new information that:
- the French have weapons of mass destruction.
- the French have contrarian opinions of international politics then the US Republicans.
- the French are now starting a project to bypass the capitalistic economy of US software industry, taking on a socialistic slant to their ideologies.
making France a ripe target for mass invasion by the USA.Oh wait... Never mind. This is all old news. We already invaded them once, they already have weapons of mass destruction, and they don't like us.
"de Gaulle" be praised!
Are two great activities to take up when you are on vacation.
My boss doesn't want me taking my cell phone with me to 100 feet deptsh.
But seriously, work still has an expectation that I will be magically available in the event that something should go wrong. This can be considered a good thing in that I'm recognized as something they probably don't want to fire at the next right-sizing cycle. However, I do have a tendency of going places there no phone has gone before. In part, that's what I enjoy as a vacation but I'm fullly aware of just how remote I really am from work -- and I don't mind that either!
How do I type in a character for a domain name that isn't supported on my keyboard?
No matter what you do, I'm still limited to the keys on my keyboard. I think that's ~104 by last count. But I certainly don't use that many characters.
I admit that there are some people who are going to bitch about the internet being english. But does that give me a right to bitch about classical music being defined in French and Italian terms like a fugue, sonata, adiago, allegro... I think not. In the past 400 years we've all managed very nicely to adopt to these terms in order to converse with each other an a common basis.
Perhaps there are some terms that these anglicans can adopt from the middle east besides Jihad?
I'll bet the Department of Homeland Security is giving him his fifteen minutes...
This is great!!! Where I work they use all Java all the time.
And every time I try to propose using something useful like samba, perl, apache or anything else that is GPL they simply cite the doctrine that open source or GPL software is not permitting in the environment.
I wonder how they will deal with this one?
Probably ignore it. But I'm going to have fun throwing it in their face.