Re:It's all about perception of invincibility
on
Breaking Windows
·
· Score: 3, Informative
What Russia was doing was not marketing, but pure propaganda and draconian information control.
Actually, that's a pretty good description of "marketing." Have you yet known a marketing person who didn't produce propaganda and engage in "information control" -- i.e., getting their story out ahead of all others; spin, spin, spin?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
... unless such speech or assembly is intended or may result in circumvention of a protection device or mechanism.
Why so hostile? The original report has the bug number. Other people said they have independently confirmed it. Do you own a lot of MSFT stock or something?
It's not that every 1,000 transactions are dropped. It's that, with odds of 1 in 1000, a select statement with an order by clause will not return all of the data.
A little less dramatic, but a problem nonetheless.
As mentioned in the articles, the database didn't lose any data, it just wouldn't display it.
How about SELECT INTO...
How about selects done in cursors?
How about selects that result in recirds being updated (via stored procs or application logic)?
Also, generally speaking, if you can't see it or find it, it is lost or misplaced. Just going with the regular meanings of english words here...
Or, taking and idea from those wily South Africans, install a flamethrower in your PC case!
NVidia graphics... Athlon CPU... IBM disk drives... BernzOMatic benzene...
- - - - -
Re:4. Is Alan Cox still not going to US convention
on
Adobe Backs Down
·
· Score: 3
What the fuck is everyone celebrating for? [...] I don't see anyone who is actually affected by this incident winning anything here...except maybe Adobe.
Indeed. Check out their Press Release:
"We strongly support the DMCA and the enforcement of copyright protection of digital content," said Colleen Pouliot, Senior Vice President and General Counsel for Adobe. "However, the prosecution of this individual in this particular case is not conducive to the best interests of any of the parties involved or the industry. ElcomSoft's Advanced eBook Processor software is no longer available in the United States, and from that perspective the DMCA worked. Adobe will continue to protect its copyright interests and those of its customers."
I.e., "we'll do it again, and again, just not when you're looking."
No, just like people their wealthy varies all over the map, in fact, most corporations are quite small and unheard of.
Most corporations consist of more than one person, and have more resources to draw upon than a single person. Even very small corporations have annual revenues in the millions. However, it's large corporations that are the bulk of the problem. Small business is, in general, better for the country than large business.
it is clear that you are confusing this with the limited liability that the shareholders have
No, it's not. It's clear that you're engaging in hubris and armchair psychoanalysis.
Corporations are dissolved quite often
They go bankrupt and are dissolved quite often. They go unmaintained and are dissolved quite often. But active corporations are almost never dissolved punitively. Don't cloud the issue. And point out the last few corporate dissolutions that were not the result of bankruptcy or neglect.
You totally fail to consider WHY corporations exist in the first place, or why they're founded.
There's that armchair head-shrinking again. I completely understand why they are formed, and why they exist. I happen to own a corporation. Thanks for the little "lesson," though, Professor Lugnut.
Furthermore, you are ignorant in many aspects of business law.
Are you one of those call-in radio show advice dispensers? Of course the corporate veil can be pierced. It's not easy, but it can and is done.
I'm not even talking about criminal behavior on the part of corporations! I'm talking about things that they do which are legal, but probably shouldn't be. Like owning other corporations. Lobbying. Owning patents and copyrights.
I wouldn't even say, as you did, that lowering the amount of effort required to pierce the corporate veil is a good idea. That does not diminish the power that can be wielded by corporations, it simply creates a new class of potential criminals. And the executive officers are not always in control of or aware of everything that goes on in their companies. It's a stupid idea to hold them accountable for everything, except their own personal wrongdoing.
Punishing the corporation and restricting its activities, however, gets to the root of the problem, where there is one.
No, you should interpret legal texts according to their meaning and purpose.
Bah. What good is objective, codified law if it's constantly being "interpreted" by different judges with different biases? None! In a free republic, law is to be accessible, understandable, and evenly enforced. In a tyranny, law is to be malleable and mutable to the purpose at hand.
The whole reason law is to be made public, the whole reason that law is not en force until it is codified -- made public in written form -- is so that the people will be able to know what the laws says and what it does not. We're not talking about poetry here, where the text really should be and is open to interpretation. We're talking about law, where people's rights, freedoms, lives and property are at stake.
The Rule of Law requires literal, objective law: "This is illegal."
Rule by Men requires colorable, interpretable, "flexible" law: "This might be illegal, try it and see."
Are you suggesting that, where the Constitution says "Congress shall make no law", it's actually open to interpretation? I.e., that Congress can, in fact, make law in the very area that the Constitution says it cannot, as long as some judge says it can?
Corporations are not some alien entities competing with us for receptive ear in Washington. They consist of millions of people like you and me working and waging war on them is like waging war on ourselves.
Corporations are legal persons and are afforded all the rights of a flesh and blood person. They just happen to also be very rich, and able to do more than one thing at a time (unlike flesh and blood persons). They also operate under a different set of law; law that sheilds them from the consequences of their actions.
So yes waging war on employers is shooting ourselves in the foot, because we need jobs to make moeny to buy food, etc.
So instead of smashing up a Starbucks like a hopped-up retard, do something positive like lobby the government to abolish corporations. Or at least take away their "human rights." The U.S. didn't always have corporations far and wide, you know. Once upon a time corporations were a very few select organizations, chartered by the government for some official purpose. Such as the Postal Service and the Internal Revenue Service. And not at all like Adobe, Microsoft, the RIAA, etc. Companies were just companies. And people were people (and small furry creatures from...)
Corporations are not the cause of America's economic greatness; they are its mummy.
Slashdot Mirror
What Russia was doing was not marketing, but pure propaganda and draconian information control.
Actually, that's a pretty good description of "marketing." Have you yet known a marketing person who didn't produce propaganda and engage in "information control" -- i.e., getting their story out ahead of all others; spin, spin, spin?
Rolls-Royce product page for the Model 250:
0 /default.htm
http://194.128.225.11/defence/products/ts/model25
Not very good, but there it is.
- - - - -
Only possible way it could be a valid law would be to predate the first ammendement
... not even then. The U.S. Constitution is the "Supreme Law of the Land" and superceded everything that came before it.
- - - - -
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
... unless such speech or assembly is intended or may result in circumvention of a protection device or mechanism.
- - - - -
Giggle.
Your story #1 is a Reuters wire piece. Moscow Times or not, that still the "Western Media." Hehe!
- - - - -
"With just one more execution, he'll be eligible for the governorship of Texas!"
Moderation Totals:Troll=1, Total=1.
This moderation brought to you by the Friends of George (FOG)
- - - - -
Great commentary on BattleBots the other night:
(introducing a returning champion)
"With just one more execution, he'll be eligible for the governorship of Texas!"
- - - - -
The "Science" link is actually to slashdot's home page...
3 /5529/468
Here's a working link...
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/29
... okay, it's not REALLY working. You have to buy access! Wasn't there a protest by scientists about this kind of thing?
- - - - -
Why so hostile? The original report has the bug number. Other people said they have independently confirmed it. Do you own a lot of MSFT stock or something?
- - - - -
It's not that every 1,000 transactions are dropped. It's that, with odds of 1 in 1000, a select statement with an order by clause will not return all of the data.
A little less dramatic, but a problem nonetheless.
- - - - -
Microsoft confirmed it, reproduced it, and assigned it a bug number. So... who's full of bullshit here?
- - - - -
Lately it's been one stale anti-MS joke after another with a +5 "Funny" moderation.
Surely you MS-haters must have a better sense of humor.
Maybe the GPL is a cancer, maybe it's not. But at least it's never misplaced plutonium.
... there. That one's even recycled.
- - - - -
As mentioned in the articles, the database didn't lose any data, it just wouldn't display it.
How about SELECT INTO...
How about selects done in cursors?
How about selects that result in recirds being updated (via stored procs or application logic)?
Also, generally speaking, if you can't see it or find it, it is lost or misplaced. Just going with the regular meanings of english words here...
- - - - -
Or, taking and idea from those wily South Africans, install a flamethrower in your PC case!
NVidia graphics... Athlon CPU... IBM disk drives... BernzOMatic benzene...
- - - - -
Indeed. Check out their Press Release:
I.e., "we'll do it again, and again, just not when you're looking."
So... we keep looking.
- - - - -
So... Palm might be supporting the Palm emulator for ARM chips after all...
- - - - -
Alternate index with smaller (~16k) scaled-down images:
. com/nyc/newindex.html
http://nc.flyingbuttmonkeys.com/mirrors/umklaydet
... it's being built as images arrive.
- - - - -
The images appear to be raw camera files -- 300k each. I'll make small versions after they all download.
- - - - -
Here's the mirrors, updating as fast as possible. Lay off the origin servers for a while and they'll mirror faster.
. com/nyc/
w helm.org/freedima/
http://nc.flyingbuttmonkeys.com/mirrors/umklaydet
and
http://nc.flyingbuttmonkeys.com/mirrors/www.under
The mirrors are hosted off of two T3s, should be fast enough...
- - - - -
It'll be interesting when viruses that delete or corrupt the WPA database start showing up...
- - - - -
Becoming incorporated does not magically make a business big, successful, or evil.
No, it doesn't. My tiny corporation, for instance, is hardly a threat to either the republic or my personal debt.
But I fail to see what that has to so with the subject -- which is large, rich and politically active corporations.
- - - - -
No, just like people their wealthy varies all over the map, in fact, most corporations are quite small and unheard of.
Most corporations consist of more than one person, and have more resources to draw upon than a single person. Even very small corporations have annual revenues in the millions. However, it's large corporations that are the bulk of the problem. Small business is, in general, better for the country than large business.
it is clear that you are confusing this with the limited liability that the shareholders have
No, it's not. It's clear that you're engaging in hubris and armchair psychoanalysis.
Corporations are dissolved quite often
They go bankrupt and are dissolved quite often. They go unmaintained and are dissolved quite often. But active corporations are almost never dissolved punitively. Don't cloud the issue. And point out the last few corporate dissolutions that were not the result of bankruptcy or neglect.
You totally fail to consider WHY corporations exist in the first place, or why they're founded.
There's that armchair head-shrinking again. I completely understand why they are formed, and why they exist. I happen to own a corporation. Thanks for the little "lesson," though, Professor Lugnut.
Furthermore, you are ignorant in many aspects of business law.
Are you one of those call-in radio show advice dispensers? Of course the corporate veil can be pierced. It's not easy, but it can and is done.
I'm not even talking about criminal behavior on the part of corporations! I'm talking about things that they do which are legal, but probably shouldn't be. Like owning other corporations. Lobbying. Owning patents and copyrights.
I wouldn't even say, as you did, that lowering the amount of effort required to pierce the corporate veil is a good idea. That does not diminish the power that can be wielded by corporations, it simply creates a new class of potential criminals. And the executive officers are not always in control of or aware of everything that goes on in their companies. It's a stupid idea to hold them accountable for everything, except their own personal wrongdoing.
Punishing the corporation and restricting its activities, however, gets to the root of the problem, where there is one.
(*hubris n : overbearing pride or presumption)
- - - - -
China not a Free Nation!
"I'm shocked," sayz W.
Film at 11!
- - - - -
No, you should interpret legal texts according to their meaning and purpose.
Bah. What good is objective, codified law if it's constantly being "interpreted" by different judges with different biases? None! In a free republic, law is to be accessible, understandable, and evenly enforced. In a tyranny, law is to be malleable and mutable to the purpose at hand.
The whole reason law is to be made public, the whole reason that law is not en force until it is codified -- made public in written form -- is so that the people will be able to know what the laws says and what it does not. We're not talking about poetry here, where the text really should be and is open to interpretation. We're talking about law, where people's rights, freedoms, lives and property are at stake.
The Rule of Law requires literal, objective law: "This is illegal."
Rule by Men requires colorable, interpretable, "flexible" law: "This might be illegal, try it and see."
Are you suggesting that, where the Constitution says "Congress shall make no law", it's actually open to interpretation? I.e., that Congress can, in fact, make law in the very area that the Constitution says it cannot, as long as some judge says it can?
I disagree.
- - - - -
Corporations are not some alien entities competing with us for receptive ear in Washington. They consist of millions of people like you and me working and waging war on them is like waging war on ourselves.
Corporations are legal persons and are afforded all the rights of a flesh and blood person. They just happen to also be very rich, and able to do more than one thing at a time (unlike flesh and blood persons). They also operate under a different set of law; law that sheilds them from the consequences of their actions.
So yes waging war on employers is shooting ourselves in the foot, because we need jobs to make moeny to buy food, etc.
So instead of smashing up a Starbucks like a hopped-up retard, do something positive like lobby the government to abolish corporations. Or at least take away their "human rights." The U.S. didn't always have corporations far and wide, you know. Once upon a time corporations were a very few select organizations, chartered by the government for some official purpose. Such as the Postal Service and the Internal Revenue Service. And not at all like Adobe, Microsoft, the RIAA, etc. Companies were just companies. And people were people (and small furry creatures from...)
Corporations are not the cause of America's economic greatness; they are its mummy.
- - - - -