There will always be NAT so that people can represent themselves as a single entity and protect their work flow. Think of it as a store front versus and bazaar shop. I don't think it is practical to have a large entity not have a consolidated (and NAT) representation on the internet.
That said, it's also pretty lame to think that IPv4 is good enough.
Question: I have a IPv4 ISP and a NAT home lan. Is there any generic (as in non-distro dependent) method of setting up an IPv6 internal NAT? How would you (or could you) overlay an IPv4 in the event you had internal hardware that couldn't handle IPv6?
At least this way I can stay ahead of the curve and when the ISP comes up to speed it's trivial for me. What are the class C addresses?
The author is getting nothing either way. So maybe he should be happy with someone wanting to read his works after 20 years. I have no idea what generation I'm actually from -- I wasn't drafted in Vietnam and missed Wookstock. But I liked watching Laugh-In.
I'm not sure there are really that much to say about different answers from different generations. I think there is still the question of publications and someone making money from publications.
It stands to reason that you get to make money when you publish something. Based on the example of used book sales, once you sell the book, you are done with revenue recognition. This has been the case for about 5,000 years and can be evidenced in every culture that has money.
Electronically, I should be able to purchase an electronic copy from the author and then sell/trade/give that copy to one other person in the same manner that physical books, cars, tools are exchanged. But the DMCA did a great job mucking that model up and actually trying to pass DMCA back to the physical world.
So, do whatever you want with the book. But I think the problem is that you are picking up the illegal electronic copy from the internet. This is where someone violated the first rule -- they took one copy of a book and gave it out to millions. You can't do that with a physical book/item. You can give it to one person.
With the electronic medium the fear is you can buy one electronic book from the author and redistribute it ad infinitum for free. So how do you keep from doing that? Someone will.
But since there is no manner by which to give the author any revenue there's no difference in what you do. Enjoy the book. Take it camping.
Well, there's a combination of the three that you might consider. After all, someone will take interest in it.
First, order the book used from Amazon and get the pirated copy to read for yourself.
Then send a letter to the publisher telling them that you would much prefer a book in electronic medium and as such they would be able to earn money from such an offering whereas the used book prevents that.
Contact your local congress critter and tell them about this and add to that the notion that perhaps the Library of Congress could get with the '80s and start storing books in electronic medium. And as such, it's a matter of course before the publishers will be publishing electronically anyways.
And now you have successfully done away with all concepts of used book stores or the ability to take a book camping with you (ebooks don't survive river crossings as well). You've got what you want and we've entered some phase of a futuristic SciFi novel.
Careful what you ask for. Why don't you just read the paper version and be done with it? There is enough problem trying to get software docs from 3 years ago to work with computers, I can't imagine what ebooks will be doing in a decade.
But it seems to me that MVC is confusing because we are thinking that all components should be done by one language when that's just silly.
Databases hold the data and we essentially Model around that. There are some databases that are supposed to be object databases, but there isn't much adoption today. And in some cases, the Model doesn't fit into a database at all or easily.
But where Javascript comes in is when you are building out the View. Who says that all MVC application (Rails) can't always issue XML or JSON format data and leave all of the visual rendering entirely up to the javascript engine on the browser? That would give you a great distribution of computing. All I have to do as a developer is push data to another developers arena where the content can be rendered by an AJAX guru into whatever it is he is looking for.
The biggest problem that I see today is that Javascript, as is, makes for a very bad programming language when you compare it to most anything else. It requires a lot of specialization to have a good site. You have to be really good at Javascript and really good at something else (Rails, Catalyst..)
I would disagree with your last resort conclusion here. It's a weapon of first resort in that it's filed as soon as anything is thought of, regardless of it's application or value. Patents are a defensive maneuver to stake out market space against the competition. They are not used to safeguard the development of your own product/market.
That's the change in patent practices. A company patent profile is easily 10 times greater then what they actually manufacture, sell, design. And many of these they have no intention of ever using. It's just to build a market space electric fence to stake out technological territory so others can't get close to your business. In today's environment a company would have patented everything they could around TCP/IP and electronic data transfer to ensure that no one else could use The Internet. Fortunately Bill Gates missed the internet.
One means of easy reform would be to set the rules as:
Patent anything you want.
Unrealized patents expire in 3 years. If you can't make a product in 3 years you have a design process problem in house or it's too complicated and you need help in terms of opening the patent to a collaborative development with other companies.
Patents that are in actual routine use expire in 10 years. With few exceptions, this is sufficient time to either make it work or see it die. With the business model of VC funding and the Start Up company, good ideas launch faster than that.
The next big challenge will by how to correct copyright law. That's even crazier.
Open source is a race to almost zero. Someone has to support it. While the software itself might be free, there are still companies that are going to pay people for the administration and set-up of these application platforms.
The other model is to provide pre-packaged solutions based on the open source products so that the customer can purchase a Black Box to do 80% of their business in one step. It stabilizes the software economy.
As a software supplier you are moved into role of getting paid for supporting the product that supports the company. There will be different models in the future: some companies will be buying software from the cheapest supplier (probably some house in India that runs everything through a call center) and others will be purchasing support from local houses that can be on site and personal.
That's the maintenance side. There's also the initiative development side. This is where it is going to be a continuously moving target. But there is always the option to fall back into the maintenance roll on a few core applications. People won't move to free in every case because they will still have to pay someone to maintain it. And you have time for making new stuff.
I wouldn't say it's a race to a dead end. Rather a race to an environment where you can actually create software based on intrinsic value and not value manufactured by marketing.
OK, we have more pirates thanks to Somalia. But I don't think it's helping global warming as much as we had anticipated.
And now this...
It's pretty clear that the policies and practices that are being implemented around the world are totally insufficient to deal with the return or rise of the anarchists that have been around since Robin Hood, Blackbeard, and Ali Baba.
I hate to mention this but I'm thinking that some of these won't be solved by saying, "Please stop". We are reaching a tipping point between the notion of preemptive military strikes and politically based solutions.
Russia is not proving itself a very effective government and actually a festering zone for illegal activities. Can't we just launch a DDOS against.ru and be done with it? I'm pretty sure the rest of the world outnumbers those jerks.
Of course the governments can claim no involvement of this activity but extend a willingness to discuss how to resolve a DDOS on.ru in a peaceful manner.
Similarly, this political/legal gamesmanship around Somalia is a joke. I see no reason why a nation cannot exercise any means necessary to protect their own shipping, or others with there permission.
It's a joke. And the mob, gangstas, and terrorists will take all of this to their fullest advantage.
So how hard would it really be to DDOS a nation if brought on in a multi-national deployment?
I was waiting for someone to arrive at the salient point. NFS is NFS, good for many but not perfect for everything. I'm sure any network file system is going to show cracks under heavy enough load. But NFS is well understood by many. So why don't the developers use NFS?
Because they aren't Sys Admins.
Developers use what ever is on the box and have little interest or knowledge in diving into the details of the OS unless it is directly related to the project at hand. This sounds like a sweeping generalization, but I base this on some experiences working with a variety of developers and my own experiences.
I often meet up with developers who have a solid in-depth knowledge of their development platform (eg: Rails) and it's cousins (html, css, javascript) but have limited knowledge related to the database: mysql/postgresql, triggers, functions, integrity constraints, cascading, disk stripping. The focus is on product.
It makes sense to me. I have insufficient headroom in my life to handle all the aspects of security, topology, administration and then become expert at Javascript/AJAX, HTML/CSS, Ruby, and SQL all at the same time. Oh, and add to that a day job that has nothing in common with this.
There are two developing markets for computers: cheap low power home users and high performance hobbyist, research, business. This second one used to belong to a formal server environment. This is being replaced by heavy workstations.
Similarly, many server environments are being replaced by the pizza boxes and blade servers, making low power very important here.
Many are starting to move into an architecture of modest home/desktop performance machines with some really impressive hardware supporting back end operations. In a fashion, we are moving back into the thinner client, fatter server model of days gone by. This makes sense because the client is not thin, but thinner. And the computer today that is considered thinner has more than enough power to surf, email, quicken, powerpoint, excel whilc pushing database and modeling into a backend processor.
I suppose this entire thread could be killed by an analogy to World War Two and Hitler.
If it wore not for Hitler we would have no nuclear energy or computers today because those where products of that war. Does this give WWII or the Nazis a Good Light? I hope not.
These things would have come about on their own. As would the concept of Safe Harber, if Fair Use was proven insufficient. But there is more damage from DMCA that remains. The concept of Fair Use, which was quite suitable for centuries has been obliterated in less than a generation. The benefactors? Mostly the legal profession. Everyone else is paralyzed with the notion that anything they do might become a legal issue.
DMCA is preventing creativity from being developed and expressed because no one can afford legal costs in free software.
Actually, it used to be that you could carry on all your most valuable items and be able to travel with some degree of personal property security because you were personally in charge of it.
Today the less you carry on, the less hassle you get. Problem now is that everything you check is likely to be rummaged. I've lost diving gear without recourse. Kind of a pain.
I have little interest in traveling by air anymore for just this reason. The less you carry, the better chance of you arriving. I don't think there is any real security considering. For $200,000 from one person, I wonder just how many travelors are victims of robbery there are since HSA versus the number of travelors turned victims from terrorists.
It would be interesting to see what other people have as their top three list of unpleasant cars.
Mine is clearly a different breed: Dodge Ram and full size pickups (Dodge, GMC, Ford F-series) top the list. After this comes the SUV's starting with the Cadillac and Lincoln models. After this comes the more aggressive mid-size cars: Mustang, Charger
It's part of the mentality that people drive very aggressively. Hard to do in a cute car.
New keep one thing in mind. Of the people who drive/own vehicles, this population consisted only of those with the time and interest in rating the emotional appeal of their vehicles. For the rest of us who don't care... Maybe that is a small part of why the Prius, Beetle, etc are selling better than the H3, Mustang, Cherokee, etc. I think people who take importance in their vehicle tend to be more aggressive drivers and are therefore willing to pay the price at the pump for their personal lifestyle.
So, with this, and other comments already provided I think all they have confirmed is that dicks, on the road and off, are always trying to f#@K you. And the nice thing is that now it is so much easier to identify who the dicks are. A license plate frame might help too.
The math I utilize to do my investments is vastly different than the math that is being explained today regarding the stock market.
And ironically, I am familiar with the idea of the the imaginary number but I have never seen it in this context.
I don't think it's the mathematics at fault. When someone has a debt of a million dollars and they try to sell that as an asset to someone else or leverage it as an asset then it's not math, it's a lie.
They would have been increased as long as no one got hurt.
I think there is going to be a very long lesson here. We have lost much faith in the Stock Market and our financial overlords. In order to keep this nation, and most nations, from coming politically unglued it will become necessary for the governments to assume a heavy hand over the Markets to either limit, validate, or guarantee the financial overlords.
I live in a society where it is extremely difficult to obtain a 1:1 leverage. It's possible to explain a 2:1 leverage to most people. But trying to explain how you can roll this out to 20+:1 leveraging merely results in a torches & pitchforks response. Anyone in their right mind knows this is too much.
Or rather, I should say, anyone who is not trained in the ways of financial genius will simply not comprehend this idea the first time around.
Leveraging is a must. But somewhere there has to be a real limit that upholds under the simplest scrutiny. If I can't show you a dollar in my hand, then I do not have a dollar. That's the point of reference that we are (almost) at today.
Next we'll be issuing CUI (Computing Under the Influence) tickets against drunken internet users. Why not? Information Highway sounds like a road to me. And it's a great source of revenue.
So who's going to be the first to install breathalizers on notebooks?
I've been looking for you... I'm a fan of Postgres and use Oracle at work all the time.
We have recently migrated to Oracle 10g because we generally don't update our software until we are required to because the vendor no longer supports the current version. Last year we migrated to Windows 2000.
That said, we have a rather limited feature set of Oracle that we actually use, but we hammer out 90 Million transactions a day. Is this outside of Postgres capability? The software residual tax is so severe on our application that we haven't make any database centric changes since 2000 so I really don't know that the feature set of Oracle, as we use it, can be much of a deviation from Postgres.
But I'm curious if we are just spending our money on a shiny button since we aren't capitalizing on Oracles full capability. I suppose we could always take 25% of our database budget and give it to the top 10 Postgres developers to work full time.
I won't disagree with the first paragraph, but the rest are a little biased against stupid people. Remember, half the people you meet on the street have below average intelligence.
But the problem today it's long term ROI. It's immediate cash flow. If you don't have a $20 in your pocket you don't have $20 worth of assets. It's getting that simple.
Almost. The problem is IT and most companies are already past that stage where they can look at the long term ROI of open source. They have to look at the immediate cash flow.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
That is the mantra that is blocking software sales right now. And migrating to OpenSource won't fare any better in today's climate. The only way OpenSource can be of any benefit is to introduce it along with a radically different software management style (eg: classic SDLC to Agile) in order to realize any real benefit.
I think most people who really live with these problems have the same general approach to the solution. Change the cost structure of email.
Today I can emit email ad infinitum and it is all delivered to someone else and therefore becomes someone elses problem. So the fix is to keep the ownership of the problem at the source. Something like RSS.
Essentially the problem becomes one wherein if I want to deliver email to someone I have to queue up delivery of that email on my system and send them a notification that there is email for them. This notification key is used to pull email messages from my server to your client/server environment.
Now I have to arrange for storing all my spam and images and malware and you have to store... essentially nothing. The amount of content retained versus delivered has a ratio of 100:1 so a million emails is more my problem then yours. And if I don't want to collect that email -- you still have to retain it on your system until you want to expire it as undeliverable.
But how long is a spammer going to actually store their own content? They can't do it on p0wned machines. Wherever they store it, they leave a signature.
The only down side to this is that this will make privacy a joke. Marketing should love this idea as every email becomes embedded with web bugs to let the Marketing department know exactly who and when email is received by the customer.
This has been mentioned by quite a number of people out there. I'm not sure how they would solve the problem of initial delivery. My only thought is to continue using email as a deliver mechanism, but to only deliver the URL indicating the message location on the internet for you to receive. Once received, you can store it on your local mail server as if it was really email.
At least that's a cut-over. Long term something new needs to be designed. And I hope the answer isn't MySpace.
I am still of the opinion that this is dumb... You would think that the IOC would have some idea of how this would be perceived.
Personally, I gave up watching the Olympics entirely. Originally not so much because of the IOC but because of the commercials and extremely poor coverage. But this demonstrates that the Olympics continue to marginalize themselves from the original ideal.
This is an excellent book that is not based on fad or fiction but takes programs that have an established history of working and examines why and how they work so well. From this, many advanced applications can be developed such that they are easy to maintain, debug, write, enhance.
I think this is often overlooked as a Great Book in the software community. It's very insightful at a level that any shop or practice will benefit. It makes you a better programmer.
My other fav is The Design of Everyday Things. It might be out of print, but it's worth finding. Very valuable if you are building any kind of GUI.
What I like most about these books is that they are not the typical software developers books so they don't come with a prerequisite that you know everything about the one language they use as an example. These apply to very common concepts that the authors are (re)introducing into the software development world. They are about programming/design philosophy rather than development methodologies.
It's a better alternative, but I think 80% is a bit much.
The bigger question is, how does a student get into a grade and then perform at 20% during the review semester from the previous year? If someone actually ensured they were held accountable for learning something before moving to the next grade we wouldn't have to enact such embarrassing policies.
Without a stronger emphasis on really accomplishing education in this country we are quickly slipping in status and will soon, if not already, find out nation comprised of mediocracy at best.
Slashdot Mirror
There will always be NAT so that people can represent themselves as a single entity and protect their work flow. Think of it as a store front versus and bazaar shop. I don't think it is practical to have a large entity not have a consolidated (and NAT) representation on the internet.
That said, it's also pretty lame to think that IPv4 is good enough.
Question: I have a IPv4 ISP and a NAT home lan. Is there any generic (as in non-distro dependent) method of setting up an IPv6 internal NAT? How would you (or could you) overlay an IPv4 in the event you had internal hardware that couldn't handle IPv6?
At least this way I can stay ahead of the curve and when the ISP comes up to speed it's trivial for me. What are the class C addresses?
The author is getting nothing either way. So maybe he should be happy with someone wanting to read his works after 20 years. I have no idea what generation I'm actually from -- I wasn't drafted in Vietnam and missed Wookstock. But I liked watching Laugh-In.
I'm not sure there are really that much to say about different answers from different generations. I think there is still the question of publications and someone making money from publications.
It stands to reason that you get to make money when you publish something. Based on the example of used book sales, once you sell the book, you are done with revenue recognition. This has been the case for about 5,000 years and can be evidenced in every culture that has money.
Electronically, I should be able to purchase an electronic copy from the author and then sell/trade/give that copy to one other person in the same manner that physical books, cars, tools are exchanged. But the DMCA did a great job mucking that model up and actually trying to pass DMCA back to the physical world.
So, do whatever you want with the book. But I think the problem is that you are picking up the illegal electronic copy from the internet. This is where someone violated the first rule -- they took one copy of a book and gave it out to millions. You can't do that with a physical book/item. You can give it to one person.
With the electronic medium the fear is you can buy one electronic book from the author and redistribute it ad infinitum for free. So how do you keep from doing that? Someone will.
But since there is no manner by which to give the author any revenue there's no difference in what you do. Enjoy the book. Take it camping.
Well, there's a combination of the three that you might consider. After all, someone will take interest in it.
First, order the book used from Amazon and get the pirated copy to read for yourself.
Then send a letter to the publisher telling them that you would much prefer a book in electronic medium and as such they would be able to earn money from such an offering whereas the used book prevents that.
Contact your local congress critter and tell them about this and add to that the notion that perhaps the Library of Congress could get with the '80s and start storing books in electronic medium. And as such, it's a matter of course before the publishers will be publishing electronically anyways.
And now you have successfully done away with all concepts of used book stores or the ability to take a book camping with you (ebooks don't survive river crossings as well). You've got what you want and we've entered some phase of a futuristic SciFi novel.
Careful what you ask for. Why don't you just read the paper version and be done with it? There is enough problem trying to get software docs from 3 years ago to work with computers, I can't imagine what ebooks will be doing in a decade.
Eventually this will get sorted out.
But it seems to me that MVC is confusing because we are thinking that all components should be done by one language when that's just silly.
Databases hold the data and we essentially Model around that. There are some databases that are supposed to be object databases, but there isn't much adoption today. And in some cases, the Model doesn't fit into a database at all or easily.
But where Javascript comes in is when you are building out the View. Who says that all MVC application (Rails) can't always issue XML or JSON format data and leave all of the visual rendering entirely up to the javascript engine on the browser? That would give you a great distribution of computing. All I have to do as a developer is push data to another developers arena where the content can be rendered by an AJAX guru into whatever it is he is looking for.
The biggest problem that I see today is that Javascript, as is, makes for a very bad programming language when you compare it to most anything else. It requires a lot of specialization to have a good site. You have to be really good at Javascript and really good at something else (Rails, Catalyst..)
On the contrary, doesn't Douglas Adams get credit for Bistromath and hence the splitting of the bill is not a patentable business process?
Wait. Isn't this just a business process and as such may not be patentable?
I'm still trying to get the couch off the landing, thanks to Dirk Gentry.
I would disagree with your last resort conclusion here. It's a weapon of first resort in that it's filed as soon as anything is thought of, regardless of it's application or value. Patents are a defensive maneuver to stake out market space against the competition. They are not used to safeguard the development of your own product/market.
That's the change in patent practices. A company patent profile is easily 10 times greater then what they actually manufacture, sell, design. And many of these they have no intention of ever using. It's just to build a market space electric fence to stake out technological territory so others can't get close to your business. In today's environment a company would have patented everything they could around TCP/IP and electronic data transfer to ensure that no one else could use The Internet. Fortunately Bill Gates missed the internet.
One means of easy reform would be to set the rules as:
The next big challenge will by how to correct copyright law. That's even crazier.
Open source is a race to almost zero. Someone has to support it. While the software itself might be free, there are still companies that are going to pay people for the administration and set-up of these application platforms.
The other model is to provide pre-packaged solutions based on the open source products so that the customer can purchase a Black Box to do 80% of their business in one step. It stabilizes the software economy.
As a software supplier you are moved into role of getting paid for supporting the product that supports the company. There will be different models in the future: some companies will be buying software from the cheapest supplier (probably some house in India that runs everything through a call center) and others will be purchasing support from local houses that can be on site and personal.
That's the maintenance side. There's also the initiative development side. This is where it is going to be a continuously moving target. But there is always the option to fall back into the maintenance roll on a few core applications. People won't move to free in every case because they will still have to pay someone to maintain it. And you have time for making new stuff.
I wouldn't say it's a race to a dead end. Rather a race to an environment where you can actually create software based on intrinsic value and not value manufactured by marketing.
OK, we have more pirates thanks to Somalia. But I don't think it's helping global warming as much as we had anticipated.
And now this...
It's pretty clear that the policies and practices that are being implemented around the world are totally insufficient to deal with the return or rise of the anarchists that have been around since Robin Hood, Blackbeard, and Ali Baba.
I hate to mention this but I'm thinking that some of these won't be solved by saying, "Please stop". We are reaching a tipping point between the notion of preemptive military strikes and politically based solutions.
Russia is not proving itself a very effective government and actually a festering zone for illegal activities. Can't we just launch a DDOS against .ru and be done with it? I'm pretty sure the rest of the world outnumbers those jerks.
Of course the governments can claim no involvement of this activity but extend a willingness to discuss how to resolve a DDOS on .ru in a peaceful manner.
Similarly, this political/legal gamesmanship around Somalia is a joke. I see no reason why a nation cannot exercise any means necessary to protect their own shipping, or others with there permission.
It's a joke. And the mob, gangstas, and terrorists will take all of this to their fullest advantage.
So how hard would it really be to DDOS a nation if brought on in a multi-national deployment?
I was waiting for someone to arrive at the salient point. NFS is NFS, good for many but not perfect for everything. I'm sure any network file system is going to show cracks under heavy enough load. But NFS is well understood by many. So why don't the developers use NFS?
Because they aren't Sys Admins.
Developers use what ever is on the box and have little interest or knowledge in diving into the details of the OS unless it is directly related to the project at hand. This sounds like a sweeping generalization, but I base this on some experiences working with a variety of developers and my own experiences.
I often meet up with developers who have a solid in-depth knowledge of their development platform (eg: Rails) and it's cousins (html, css, javascript) but have limited knowledge related to the database: mysql/postgresql, triggers, functions, integrity constraints, cascading, disk stripping. The focus is on product.
It makes sense to me. I have insufficient headroom in my life to handle all the aspects of security, topology, administration and then become expert at Javascript/AJAX, HTML/CSS, Ruby, and SQL all at the same time. Oh, and add to that a day job that has nothing in common with this.
I think you are half right.
There are two developing markets for computers: cheap low power home users and high performance hobbyist, research, business. This second one used to belong to a formal server environment. This is being replaced by heavy workstations.
Similarly, many server environments are being replaced by the pizza boxes and blade servers, making low power very important here.
Many are starting to move into an architecture of modest home/desktop performance machines with some really impressive hardware supporting back end operations. In a fashion, we are moving back into the thinner client, fatter server model of days gone by. This makes sense because the client is not thin, but thinner. And the computer today that is considered thinner has more than enough power to surf, email, quicken, powerpoint, excel whilc pushing database and modeling into a backend processor.
I suppose this entire thread could be killed by an analogy to World War Two and Hitler.
If it wore not for Hitler we would have no nuclear energy or computers today because those where products of that war. Does this give WWII or the Nazis a Good Light? I hope not.
These things would have come about on their own. As would the concept of Safe Harber, if Fair Use was proven insufficient. But there is more damage from DMCA that remains. The concept of Fair Use, which was quite suitable for centuries has been obliterated in less than a generation. The benefactors? Mostly the legal profession. Everyone else is paralyzed with the notion that anything they do might become a legal issue.
DMCA is preventing creativity from being developed and expressed because no one can afford legal costs in free software.
Actually, it used to be that you could carry on all your most valuable items and be able to travel with some degree of personal property security because you were personally in charge of it.
Today the less you carry on, the less hassle you get. Problem now is that everything you check is likely to be rummaged. I've lost diving gear without recourse. Kind of a pain.
I have little interest in traveling by air anymore for just this reason. The less you carry, the better chance of you arriving. I don't think there is any real security considering. For $200,000 from one person, I wonder just how many travelors are victims of robbery there are since HSA versus the number of travelors turned victims from terrorists.
Version 1.0: Expect some bugs. Be more forgiving of those bugs.
Version >5.0: many versions have come and gone, removing all the major bugs. Be very unforgiving of any bugs.
Playing with fire.
It would be interesting to see what other people have as their top three list of unpleasant cars.
Mine is clearly a different breed: Dodge Ram and full size pickups (Dodge, GMC, Ford F-series) top the list. After this comes the SUV's starting with the Cadillac and Lincoln models. After this comes the more aggressive mid-size cars: Mustang, Charger
Mad Max
It's part of the mentality that people drive very aggressively. Hard to do in a cute car.
New keep one thing in mind. Of the people who drive/own vehicles, this population consisted only of those with the time and interest in rating the emotional appeal of their vehicles. For the rest of us who don't care... Maybe that is a small part of why the Prius, Beetle, etc are selling better than the H3, Mustang, Cherokee, etc. I think people who take importance in their vehicle tend to be more aggressive drivers and are therefore willing to pay the price at the pump for their personal lifestyle.
So, with this, and other comments already provided I think all they have confirmed is that dicks, on the road and off, are always trying to f#@K you. And the nice thing is that now it is so much easier to identify who the dicks are. A license plate frame might help too.
I don't think it's as simple as that.
The math I utilize to do my investments is vastly different than the math that is being explained today regarding the stock market.
And ironically, I am familiar with the idea of the the imaginary number but I have never seen it in this context.
I don't think it's the mathematics at fault. When someone has a debt of a million dollars and they try to sell that as an asset to someone else or leverage it as an asset then it's not math, it's a lie.
They would have been increased as long as no one got hurt.
I think there is going to be a very long lesson here. We have lost much faith in the Stock Market and our financial overlords. In order to keep this nation, and most nations, from coming politically unglued it will become necessary for the governments to assume a heavy hand over the Markets to either limit, validate, or guarantee the financial overlords.
I live in a society where it is extremely difficult to obtain a 1:1 leverage. It's possible to explain a 2:1 leverage to most people. But trying to explain how you can roll this out to 20+:1 leveraging merely results in a torches & pitchforks response. Anyone in their right mind knows this is too much.
Or rather, I should say, anyone who is not trained in the ways of financial genius will simply not comprehend this idea the first time around.
Leveraging is a must. But somewhere there has to be a real limit that upholds under the simplest scrutiny. If I can't show you a dollar in my hand, then I do not have a dollar. That's the point of reference that we are (almost) at today.
This is kind of sad really.
Next we'll be issuing CUI (Computing Under the Influence) tickets against drunken internet users. Why not? Information Highway sounds like a road to me. And it's a great source of revenue.
So who's going to be the first to install breathalizers on notebooks?
I've been looking for you... I'm a fan of Postgres and use Oracle at work all the time.
We have recently migrated to Oracle 10g because we generally don't update our software until we are required to because the vendor no longer supports the current version. Last year we migrated to Windows 2000.
That said, we have a rather limited feature set of Oracle that we actually use, but we hammer out 90 Million transactions a day. Is this outside of Postgres capability? The software residual tax is so severe on our application that we haven't make any database centric changes since 2000 so I really don't know that the feature set of Oracle, as we use it, can be much of a deviation from Postgres.
But I'm curious if we are just spending our money on a shiny button since we aren't capitalizing on Oracles full capability. I suppose we could always take 25% of our database budget and give it to the top 10 Postgres developers to work full time.
I won't disagree with the first paragraph, but the rest are a little biased against stupid people. Remember, half the people you meet on the street have below average intelligence.
But the problem today it's long term ROI. It's immediate cash flow. If you don't have a $20 in your pocket you don't have $20 worth of assets. It's getting that simple.
Almost. The problem is IT and most companies are already past that stage where they can look at the long term ROI of open source. They have to look at the immediate cash flow.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
That is the mantra that is blocking software sales right now. And migrating to OpenSource won't fare any better in today's climate. The only way OpenSource can be of any benefit is to introduce it along with a radically different software management style (eg: classic SDLC to Agile) in order to realize any real benefit.
I think most people who really live with these problems have the same general approach to the solution. Change the cost structure of email.
Today I can emit email ad infinitum and it is all delivered to someone else and therefore becomes someone elses problem. So the fix is to keep the ownership of the problem at the source. Something like RSS.
Essentially the problem becomes one wherein if I want to deliver email to someone I have to queue up delivery of that email on my system and send them a notification that there is email for them. This notification key is used to pull email messages from my server to your client/server environment.
Now I have to arrange for storing all my spam and images and malware and you have to store... essentially nothing. The amount of content retained versus delivered has a ratio of 100:1 so a million emails is more my problem then yours. And if I don't want to collect that email -- you still have to retain it on your system until you want to expire it as undeliverable.
But how long is a spammer going to actually store their own content? They can't do it on p0wned machines. Wherever they store it, they leave a signature.
The only down side to this is that this will make privacy a joke. Marketing should love this idea as every email becomes embedded with web bugs to let the Marketing department know exactly who and when email is received by the customer.
This has been mentioned by quite a number of people out there. I'm not sure how they would solve the problem of initial delivery. My only thought is to continue using email as a deliver mechanism, but to only deliver the URL indicating the message location on the internet for you to receive. Once received, you can store it on your local mail server as if it was really email.
At least that's a cut-over. Long term something new needs to be designed. And I hope the answer isn't MySpace.
Thank you for a little practical insight.
I am still of the opinion that this is dumb... You would think that the IOC would have some idea of how this would be perceived.
Personally, I gave up watching the Olympics entirely. Originally not so much because of the IOC but because of the commercials and extremely poor coverage. But this demonstrates that the Olympics continue to marginalize themselves from the original ideal.
The Art of Unix Programming.
This is an excellent book that is not based on fad or fiction but takes programs that have an established history of working and examines why and how they work so well. From this, many advanced applications can be developed such that they are easy to maintain, debug, write, enhance.
I think this is often overlooked as a Great Book in the software community. It's very insightful at a level that any shop or practice will benefit. It makes you a better programmer.
My other fav is The Design of Everyday Things. It might be out of print, but it's worth finding. Very valuable if you are building any kind of GUI.
What I like most about these books is that they are not the typical software developers books so they don't come with a prerequisite that you know everything about the one language they use as an example. These apply to very common concepts that the authors are (re)introducing into the software development world. They are about programming/design philosophy rather than development methodologies.
It's a better alternative, but I think 80% is a bit much.
The bigger question is, how does a student get into a grade and then perform at 20% during the review semester from the previous year? If someone actually ensured they were held accountable for learning something before moving to the next grade we wouldn't have to enact such embarrassing policies.
Without a stronger emphasis on really accomplishing education in this country we are quickly slipping in status and will soon, if not already, find out nation comprised of mediocracy at best.