I consider it a permanent one that should never have failed. The stresses of parenthood, moving internationally twice, money troubles after the last move capped off with 8 months of my working days and pretty much raising my kid alone while she did shift work at night and slept all day. A beautiful woman with a foreign accent far from her home and friends who's trying to get her confidence back after childbirth, us never getting to spend any time together, and her working training in a call center with a culture of young single childless players that don't hold a whole lot of respect for someone elses marrige.
To top everything off, when we'd reached that point that we needed some space before we could think about starting fresh and were ready to try getting separate places and dating again, immigration requirements made that impossible, and we were forced to live together for the sake of maintaining both of our access to our kid. If we'd split for even a month, they would have deported her. So instead of taking the time to breathe and reevaluate things, we were forced to live together angery. That was the nail in the coffin... we both got mighty lonely and mighty cruel. We split the moment I got the papers finished to sponser her to stay in the country, and we really hurt each other a bit too much at the end for me to think it could ever be mended.
At least we both still have access to our kid. It could have turned out a hell of a lot worse. Forgive her, forgive myself and move on, eh?
John Milton (of Paradise Lost fame) wrote about this in the 1600s in a little essay called Areopagitica. Back then, the King of England rationalized prior restraint on the printing presses under the rationalization that without such restraint, someone might print a falsehood and god forbid the harm that might cause innocent people. Milton correctly pointed out that nobody knows what is a falsehood from a truth unless we let them "grapple" with each other in an open process.
Do you really believe that the mass media is a more suitable means for a person who is going to decide someones fate to get their information than hearing first hand accounts from both sides and all their witnesses in a courtroom?
The scientific community has also embraced this approach ala peer review of ideas. They require new ideas to be openly communicated through the process of publishing them in appropriate journals, and then subject them to criticism. Followers of the cold fusion debate can confirm my thoughts here - those who short circuit the process usually have an ulterior motive (power, money or hot chicks... your pick!).
This is an environment where everyone involved gets to publish, and gets to participate in the peer review. That does not describe the mass media and conversations around the water cooler and the family table. Not even close.
The problem with all of this isn't information security. It's not peer review. It's not informations need to be free.
The problem is that a great deal of effort will be invested in making sure the people who are going to be on the jury are the most informed ones around. They will be exposed to all the sides before they are finished the process. And they need to make an impartial decision. Having the important people in their personal lives, the people they trust like their father or their girlfriend or whoever, discussing these things and expressing opinions about the details of the case that are drawn from what others have to say on the subject is going to expose them to persuasion from people they are not equipped to resist.
While some of these people may be informed in some fashion, they are not as well informed as the jury member is going to be after everything is done. So these jury members are going to be coming into this with a preconcieved notion about the case. They can't help it, it's a subject of public discussion, they are automatically going to be forming an opinion about it and based on it. They can fight it and attempt to remain impartial, but it's neither easy nor ever achieved absolutely. And the process says that if your fate is going to be decided by the people in that jury, who are not the professional "impartial"ers that judges are, it's only fair that you don't get judged by people without an existing opinion about your case.
I sure as hell wouldn't want to go into a courtroom as a defendant and be judged by people who had already been presented with all the details of my case, with the parts that don't sell filtered out and brought to them by the best salesmen in the business. Would you?
I'm not an old man, elections are uncommon, and I've been out of the country a lot. So honestly, there haven't been that many "every time"s for me to base an answer on. I generally vote liberal, but not always. I do consider them to be the best available option right now though, and to have proven themselves.
The Liberals, under Chretiens rule, kept the country together when the PQ almost broke it apart, kept us out of Iraq, flipped off GWB and did wonders with our economy. As far as I'm concerned, the man could have been toasting marshmallows over fire pits full of tax money and I'd still be behind him. I'm not as thrilled with Martin, consider him to be more suited to the role of bean counter than leader, but he's not doing too bad a job so far, and under circumstances that don't give him a lot of security. I don't have all the details on the scandal yet, but then neither does anyone else. But I don't base my voting on such things.
At the end of the day, I look at the country before the Liberals took power, and I look at it now, and it's better. Way, way better. They turned the country around after Mulroney just about ran us into the ground. I really don't care if the PM stains every piece of clothing his secretary owns while lighting cigars with hundred dollar bills and pepper spraying protestors on his brothers golf course. He still did a brilliant job and left us all better off for it, and that is what is important.
It's also significant, for those that don't understand our political process, that we currently have a minority goverment and that this is uncommon. In Canada, the leadership goes to the party with the most votes. However, for bills to become law, they are placed on a vote in the house in which all parties representatives participate. Generally, you see a majority government where, if they remain unified in their voting, the party in power has sufficient votes to push their bills through even if every other member of parliment opposes them. However, with a minority government like we currently have, the other parties could concievably unite and defeat a bill the leading party wishes to pass.
If this happens with a significant bill like the budget that the parent was referring to, it demonstrates an inability to rule and generally leads to an immediate election. The reason why this did not occur at this point is probably because the general population of Canada is behind this budget, and if the opposition parties had chosen to force an election now, they couldn't be confident of winning, and might cause the liberals to get a majority government and wipe out what political power they currently have.
Historically, it seems to have been very good for the country. Some of our most valued legislation was passed during times of minority goverments, such as old age pensions, universal healthcare and student loans programs. It's amazing how much more the parties seem to heed the will of the people when their security is taken away.
seriously. If somebody unplugs the cable, youre dead.
What a pitty.
Whatever you say. Did you read my post? I don't do ALL my socializing on the internet. I don't say "hmm... it's friday night and the little one is at her moms... ah hell fuck the bar I'm just going to hang in a chat room". I just picked up a new phone number and a date for next week with a cute little redhead while returning movies to the video store an hour ago. If you're painting a picture in your head of some pasty-faced introverted hermit, you're way the fuck off base.
For a lot of people, particularly single parents like myself, there are a lot more hours in the week that they spend sitting at home choosing between tv, book and computer for how to spend the later part of their evening than there are hours spent hanging out in stereotypical social settings.
And the boundary between the two doesn't really exist. It's a fiction. Chat with someone in a local chat room and meet them for coffee half an hour later. Pick up a girl on the bus, find out she's engaged, chat with her when you're sick of working, meet someone else through her, take them out on Friday. Its a way of expanding your social envrionment, not a replacement.
Sounds to me like you're the one that needs to get a life instead of passing judgements on other peoples.
I think you yankee types are have fallen for the British sense of humour. Toothing was a wind up from the beginning. If you think about it toothing pretty much amounts to going up to a stranger and saying 'wanna fuck'.
I take it from your post that no one has ever done this to you? Hell, that's happened to me at the supermarket.
Although, truth be told, I brushed her off, so I suppose that makes me supporting evidence:P
I don't agree. If you're using FOSS to provide services, sure. Contributing to Linux or Apache is in your interest.
But not in this example. In the game business, it's all about differentiating yourself from the next game over on the shelf. Contributing back to the engine may make your game better, but it's also making their game better, so there's no slant towards people giving you their money instead of the other guy. If your goal is to make a good game, sure, contribute back. But if your primary goal is to make a profitable business, spending money that doesn't result in an improvement in your product RELATIVE TO ITS COMPETITION is money wasted. You may as well spend it on corporate art for the boardroom for all the difference it will make in your profitability.
I'm not saying that I think FOSS has no place in the game development, and I'm not saying it won't make better games. All I'm saying is, with the "sell the game that loads into the engine" business model, there is strong financial incentive NOT to expend resources contributing back any more than is absolutely necessary.
The only circumstance I can see where there might be an incentive to contribute back would be if there were other competitors, using a different game engine, that were a greater risk in the market to your business than the competitor that wrote the game engine you're using. In that circumstance, it might be financially justifiable to contribute back until you defeat those other competitors in the marketplace, and then return to the original strategy.
I met my ex wife of 5 years asking ASL in an IRC chat.
Oooh.. good example!
Ha ha. Funny funny. Your wit astounds me.
We were together for years, moved across the globe together twice and have a child together. Yeah, it ended, but it was the longest relationship of either of our lives. What you want, a written guarantee? In modern western society, I'd call 5 years a success story. How many relationships have you had that lasted longer?
And finding partners for sex using bluetooth mobile is as productive as asking a/s/l on IRC channels, or Mrs Gump's box of chocolate.
I met my ex wife of 5 years asking ASL in an IRC chat. She is also the mother of my child.
I also meet most of my dates and yes sexual partners in chat rooms. Not because I don't go out, I do, but there are more nights at home than nights at the bar, and chatting and flirting are more fun and more social than watching television.
No matter how horny you are, you wouldn't just jump into bed with anybody, would you?
Which would you prefer, to jump into bed with a hunk you met at the bar and had some chemistry with, only to find out later that he's a selfish, obsessive, jealous boar who doesn't like to go down, or to jump into bed with someone who is compatible with you in their values and interests and quirks, who shares your likes and dislikes where sex and relationships are concerned, but is on the attractive side of plain. Because when people meet through chatting, when they actually meet face to face they can see pretty quickly if the person is a no-go in the physical department and call it off at the eleventh hour, while the bar-goer generally probably won't find out until it's too late.
Looking back, I had more fun with the plain jane lookalikes who caught my attention because they were my kind of lighthearted kinky in the bedroom that with the look-at-me gorgeous women I've brought home from the bar only to find out that they were plain boring in bed.
If you want to make money with Open Source, build your low level stuff completely open, gpl'd and all of that...then sell your higher level version with all the bells and whistles, and tech support. Example, video games... you make your graphics engine, physics engine and whatnot all completely open source and public, but you keep your characters, story, levels, music and graphics proprietary...
That doesn't sound like a very good business plan. You go ahead and do that... I'll compete with you and win. My business plan? Download your game engine and sink the money I saved on building my own into characters, story, levels, music and graphics. Then clean house in the marketplace because my game shits all over yours.
Not dissing open source, mind you. But if you're going to try to sell the FOSS way to people, you're going to have to come up with an idea that doesn't have a hole in it large enough for a bear to spend the winter in.
I hear a lot of bullshit coming from people out there about how this "publication ban" is a suppression of freedom of speech and how "hypocritical" we are up here in Canada.
But not too many seem to have clued in to the fact that, contrary to the catcalls of censorship, all of the testimony was made available to the press which is why we are reading it. The "publication ban" is a temporary measure intended to ensure a fair and impartial jury trial. Providing a fair and impartial jury trial requires either withholding the testimony from the public until the jury has reached a verdict, or disclosing it but keeping it from publication.
You all seem to think that this guy is some sort of "hero" for publishing this stuff. But all he's done is present one portion of the facts and testimony in isolation from the others. Far from informing, this is just leading those who aren't mentally disciplined enough to withhold judgement until getting all the facts to a knee jerk reaction that will be discussed around the water cooler until it has taken on the authority of repetition. It's basically taking us further and further away from any possibility of justice and towards a witch hunt.
Whoever this "secret source" is, I for one am totally disgusted with his or her demonstrated lack of integrity, and am hoping that they go to jail for this and never hold a position of trust again for the rest of their life.
I hope the courts will learn from this, and start preventing the press from being present for these sorts of testimonies at all. They have demonstrated that they can neither be trusted nor compelled not skew the trial, so they just shouldn't be there. They should recieve and report on the complete facts of the case when the court documents are released. Aside from being in the interests of justice, that would be responsible journalism, which this clearly is not.
Never noticed that myself. My experience has been "we'd rather you take the time to learn it than hire someone else because we trust you" Doesn't get me free school I don't want, but getting pay, money for the technical library and a longer schedule is better than an education in my book.
Don't see as much of it now, but now I build the cost of my training into my fees... still not going to classes, but I've got a nice library shaping up and free time to expand my skillset.
Course, I've always steered clear of large businesses. When you're a faceless gear you don't get as much opportunity to differentiate yourself to those holding the reins. If you haven't built any value in anyones minds beyond your skill set, don't expect them to value you when they no longer have a use for that skill set.
Researchers have recently released a study demonsrating that free ingredients make baking cakes cheaper.
Conflicting studies from think tanks sponsored by flour industry leaders MakesitSoft are disputing the conclusions, but are not really taken seriously.
um... I must be missing something. Shouldn't a developer be smart enough to CHECK THE DATABASE STRUCTURE before writing data into it?
I mean, I understand your argument, but I've never been affected by it, as I always know what I'm writing to. And while the things you mention *should* return errors, it's not like they're show stoppers. To be honest, if this thing came back to bite me, I'd be knocking myself for not planning for it in the first place.
You are missing something. MySQL ignores the structure you define for it. Generally, "planning for it in the first place" means laying down rules for your data. Current release versions of MySQL will happily consume all the SQL keywords when you lay things out without chucking any "not supported" errors, then proceed to completely ignore them. As far as I'm concerned, that's worse than nto supporting them in the first place, and is a key barrier to my adopting it for anything non-trivial.
To be fair, they've apparently finally added some data integrity checks into this new release, but it's still not out of beta, so the problem, after all this time, is only close to being solved. It may be soon be proven suitable for important data, which would be nice. Not because I want to use MySQL more than what I currently use particularly, but because it's generally the database on offer when you pick up inexpensive hosting from just about anybody these days. It would be nice if that standard offering was actually you could trust your data in.
I really hate cleaning up after people like you. I'm doing so right now. Everything is perfect, orphaned records are no big deal, who needs integrity, when i use the user interface it works.
Until you want to use that business data, which is usually worth more than the code that accesses it, in some way outside the parameters you laid for it when you set up your rinky-dink little app. Then all you have is a bunch of garbage that has to be gone through by hand... or reports that pick up orphaned crap and you spend a week trying to figure out why they're off when it was because the code you trusted to keep things in order was a balancing act of bugs that kept the garbage hidden where no one could see it.
And it's not a "utopian geek world" thing. Its part of Databases 101 and is something every other database vendor has supported for a long long time. Even Access and Base have these basic features that are only now being introduced into MySQL, and are still not in any stable release.
Learning how to develop databases using MySQL while you're hacking PHP is teaching you how to do it wrong. Instead of arguing with everyone, try grabbing some books on database design and moving to the next level in your skills, hey?
Well, I usually build the database and do the complicated code for my clients and have their staff do the simple bitch work of the app so they can be familiar with it. And the thing will be maintained and altered in the stupid trivial ways that businesses like to play with things by network admins and human resource managers between times they get someone like me to look at it because thats business.
So generally I pull my head out of my ass, recognize these characteristics in my clients and design my work accordingly, and establish things so that dummys can't easily wreck it with the access that they're given. Postgres, Oracle, SQL Server, all of these give you the control you need to do that. MySQL does not.
If I built my applications in the environments I work in using MySQL, they would wreck their data all the time, be really pissed off, and never hire me again, either because they're smart enough to know better or because they aren't and they went out of business.
And if you're looking for high performance in your own controlled environment, forget MySQL. There are much better tools available
Thats a pretty harsh comment.I think MySQL is useful in a lot of situations. Heck it's even used by Yahoo
Yahoo surely employs "database professionals"?
Yeah, you got it bud. I'm an HTML programmer, and I see this all the time from elietist guys that say HTML isn't a programming language.
Yahoo employs lots of programmers. They use HTML. So surely HTML is a programming language too! Up yours elietist guys!
Of course we're trolls. We don't have any points over here in our camp, just a bunch of hooting and hollaring.
Some of us actually hold the database they use to higher standards, and aren't interested in using middleware hacks to do things that should be the domain of the database engine. If you want to call that a troll, go ahead. There are probably some very complex systems out there using XML files as their data source. But that doesn't mean XML is a good database either.
A good database should refuse to let you fill it with junk. Full stop. It should hold it's data integrity and force the application to break before allowing it to be corrupted. MySQL doesn't do this.
Some examples?
NOT NULL perhaps:
CREATE TABLE null_1 ( id INT NOT NULL, text1 VARCHAR(32) NOT NULL, text2 VARCHAR(32) NOT NULL DEFAULT 'foo' );
INSERT INTO null_1 (id) VALUES(1); INSERT INTO null_1 (text1) VALUES('test');
mysql> SELECT * FROM null_1; | id | text1 | text2 | | 1 | | foo | | 0 | test | foo |
2 rows in set (0.00 sec)
If a column has been flagged not null, that generally means you shouldn't allow an insertion without a value for that column unless a default value has been expressly declared for the column. Of course, MySQL just sticks in some junk and keeps right on trucking.
Or maybe some data truncation... try this guy:
mysql> CREATE TABLE bounds_test ( id INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT PRIMARY KEY, price NUMERIC(4,2), code VARCHAR(8), numbers_only INT ); Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.06 sec)
mysql> INSERT INTO bounds_test VALUES ( 99999999999999, 21474.83, 'ABCDEFGHIJK', 'A quick brown dolphin...' ); Query OK, 1 row affected (0.03 sec)
Say you don't think what's happening is a problem if you wish, say it's a problem but that the solution is worse than the disease if you wish, but don't try to pretend that what she's talking about isn't real. Just makes you come off blind, stupid and willfully ignorant.
Ahh, insult anyone that doesn't agree with your opinion. That's exactly how it works - I don't agree with you, I must be blind, stupid... blah. You, sir, or ma'am, or whatever, are an ass.
Media changes people, and its influence is powerful. Without knowing you and specifically what they are, right now there are at least half a dozen different things I could say to you that would make an advertising jingle run through your head. There are half a dozen different things that I could say to you that would cause you to respond with a line you picked up in a movie you liked, and you've used those lines in social circumstances with other people.
And these are things that are real. If you're not capable of recognizing the difference between my describing a real thing and my having an opinion, or of taking the time to investigate my very simple statements, then I don't have a whole lot of use for your opinion. You calling me an ass is somewhere on the level of the monkeys that throw shit at the glass at the zoo as far as I'm concerned.:D
Thing about google that really pisses me off is that for a lot of the things i search on, it pops lots of sites that require pay registration and doesn't make it clear. I'm not going to pay for these sites when there are so many free resources available to find my answers, but I have to waste my time visiting them over and over. Experts-exchange in particular really pisses me off. I don't know if there's something better out there, but I'm actively looking for one, because using google just wastes too much of my time.
I know everyone loves google, and I use it too, but I find that where it used to be an efficient way to find information, it's becoming less and less so as time goes on because of this sort of crap. As far as I'm concerned, if I need to pay to access the information, google should not be indexing that information and putting up links to the sign up page for me to waste my time with when the answer is already freely available elsewhere and that freely available source is in their index. If I wanted to use pay sites to provide my answers, I wouldn't be using google in the first place, would I?
Slashdot Mirror
Today must be Australia Day.
Either that, or all the Australian news is aired during the night after all the important prime-time news is finished.
Australia is on the other side of the world. When it's evening in North America it's the following morning there.
Welcome to Planet Earth.
I consider it a permanent one that should never have failed. The stresses of parenthood, moving internationally twice, money troubles after the last move capped off with 8 months of my working days and pretty much raising my kid alone while she did shift work at night and slept all day. A beautiful woman with a foreign accent far from her home and friends who's trying to get her confidence back after childbirth, us never getting to spend any time together, and her working training in a call center with a culture of young single childless players that don't hold a whole lot of respect for someone elses marrige.
To top everything off, when we'd reached that point that we needed some space before we could think about starting fresh and were ready to try getting separate places and dating again, immigration requirements made that impossible, and we were forced to live together for the sake of maintaining both of our access to our kid. If we'd split for even a month, they would have deported her. So instead of taking the time to breathe and reevaluate things, we were forced to live together angery. That was the nail in the coffin... we both got mighty lonely and mighty cruel. We split the moment I got the papers finished to sponser her to stay in the country, and we really hurt each other a bit too much at the end for me to think it could ever be mended.
At least we both still have access to our kid. It could have turned out a hell of a lot worse. Forgive her, forgive myself and move on, eh?
So I'm guessing that the answer is precisely one then?
John Milton (of Paradise Lost fame) wrote about this in the 1600s in a little essay called Areopagitica. Back then, the King of England rationalized prior restraint on the printing presses under the rationalization that without such restraint, someone might print a falsehood and god forbid the harm that might cause innocent people. Milton correctly pointed out that nobody knows what is a falsehood from a truth unless we let them "grapple" with each other in an open process.
Do you really believe that the mass media is a more suitable means for a person who is going to decide someones fate to get their information than hearing first hand accounts from both sides and all their witnesses in a courtroom?
The scientific community has also embraced this approach ala peer review of ideas. They require new ideas to be openly communicated through the process of publishing them in appropriate journals, and then subject them to criticism. Followers of the cold fusion debate can confirm my thoughts here - those who short circuit the process usually have an ulterior motive (power, money or hot chicks... your pick!).
This is an environment where everyone involved gets to publish, and gets to participate in the peer review. That does not describe the mass media and conversations around the water cooler and the family table. Not even close.
The problem with all of this isn't information security. It's not peer review. It's not informations need to be free.
The problem is that a great deal of effort will be invested in making sure the people who are going to be on the jury are the most informed ones around. They will be exposed to all the sides before they are finished the process. And they need to make an impartial decision. Having the important people in their personal lives, the people they trust like their father or their girlfriend or whoever, discussing these things and expressing opinions about the details of the case that are drawn from what others have to say on the subject is going to expose them to persuasion from people they are not equipped to resist.
While some of these people may be informed in some fashion, they are not as well informed as the jury member is going to be after everything is done. So these jury members are going to be coming into this with a preconcieved notion about the case. They can't help it, it's a subject of public discussion, they are automatically going to be forming an opinion about it and based on it. They can fight it and attempt to remain impartial, but it's neither easy nor ever achieved absolutely. And the process says that if your fate is going to be decided by the people in that jury, who are not the professional "impartial"ers that judges are, it's only fair that you don't get judged by people without an existing opinion about your case.
I sure as hell wouldn't want to go into a courtroom as a defendant and be judged by people who had already been presented with all the details of my case, with the parts that don't sell filtered out and brought to them by the best salesmen in the business. Would you?
I'm not an old man, elections are uncommon, and I've been out of the country a lot. So honestly, there haven't been that many "every time"s for me to base an answer on. I generally vote liberal, but not always. I do consider them to be the best available option right now though, and to have proven themselves.
The Liberals, under Chretiens rule, kept the country together when the PQ almost broke it apart, kept us out of Iraq, flipped off GWB and did wonders with our economy. As far as I'm concerned, the man could have been toasting marshmallows over fire pits full of tax money and I'd still be behind him. I'm not as thrilled with Martin, consider him to be more suited to the role of bean counter than leader, but he's not doing too bad a job so far, and under circumstances that don't give him a lot of security. I don't have all the details on the scandal yet, but then neither does anyone else. But I don't base my voting on such things.
At the end of the day, I look at the country before the Liberals took power, and I look at it now, and it's better. Way, way better. They turned the country around after Mulroney just about ran us into the ground. I really don't care if the PM stains every piece of clothing his secretary owns while lighting cigars with hundred dollar bills and pepper spraying protestors on his brothers golf course. He still did a brilliant job and left us all better off for it, and that is what is important.
It's also significant, for those that don't understand our political process, that we currently have a minority goverment and that this is uncommon. In Canada, the leadership goes to the party with the most votes. However, for bills to become law, they are placed on a vote in the house in which all parties representatives participate. Generally, you see a majority government where, if they remain unified in their voting, the party in power has sufficient votes to push their bills through even if every other member of parliment opposes them. However, with a minority government like we currently have, the other parties could concievably unite and defeat a bill the leading party wishes to pass.
If this happens with a significant bill like the budget that the parent was referring to, it demonstrates an inability to rule and generally leads to an immediate election. The reason why this did not occur at this point is probably because the general population of Canada is behind this budget, and if the opposition parties had chosen to force an election now, they couldn't be confident of winning, and might cause the liberals to get a majority government and wipe out what political power they currently have.
Historically, it seems to have been very good for the country. Some of our most valued legislation was passed during times of minority goverments, such as old age pensions, universal healthcare and student loans programs. It's amazing how much more the parties seem to heed the will of the people when their security is taken away.
seriously. If somebody unplugs the cable, youre dead.
What a pitty.
Whatever you say. Did you read my post? I don't do ALL my socializing on the internet. I don't say "hmm... it's friday night and the little one is at her moms... ah hell fuck the bar I'm just going to hang in a chat room". I just picked up a new phone number and a date for next week with a cute little redhead while returning movies to the video store an hour ago. If you're painting a picture in your head of some pasty-faced introverted hermit, you're way the fuck off base.
For a lot of people, particularly single parents like myself, there are a lot more hours in the week that they spend sitting at home choosing between tv, book and computer for how to spend the later part of their evening than there are hours spent hanging out in stereotypical social settings.
And the boundary between the two doesn't really exist. It's a fiction. Chat with someone in a local chat room and meet them for coffee half an hour later. Pick up a girl on the bus, find out she's engaged, chat with her when you're sick of working, meet someone else through her, take them out on Friday. Its a way of expanding your social envrionment, not a replacement.
Sounds to me like you're the one that needs to get a life instead of passing judgements on other peoples.
I think you yankee types are have fallen for the British sense of humour. Toothing was a wind up from the beginning. If you think about it toothing pretty much amounts to going up to a stranger and saying 'wanna fuck'.
:P
I take it from your post that no one has ever done this to you? Hell, that's happened to me at the supermarket.
Although, truth be told, I brushed her off, so I suppose that makes me supporting evidence
I don't agree. If you're using FOSS to provide services, sure. Contributing to Linux or Apache is in your interest.
But not in this example. In the game business, it's all about differentiating yourself from the next game over on the shelf. Contributing back to the engine may make your game better, but it's also making their game better, so there's no slant towards people giving you their money instead of the other guy. If your goal is to make a good game, sure, contribute back. But if your primary goal is to make a profitable business, spending money that doesn't result in an improvement in your product RELATIVE TO ITS COMPETITION is money wasted. You may as well spend it on corporate art for the boardroom for all the difference it will make in your profitability.
I'm not saying that I think FOSS has no place in the game development, and I'm not saying it won't make better games. All I'm saying is, with the "sell the game that loads into the engine" business model, there is strong financial incentive NOT to expend resources contributing back any more than is absolutely necessary.
The only circumstance I can see where there might be an incentive to contribute back would be if there were other competitors, using a different game engine, that were a greater risk in the market to your business than the competitor that wrote the game engine you're using. In that circumstance, it might be financially justifiable to contribute back until you defeat those other competitors in the marketplace, and then return to the original strategy.
I met my ex wife of 5 years asking ASL in an IRC chat.
Oooh.. good example!
Ha ha. Funny funny. Your wit astounds me.
We were together for years, moved across the globe together twice and have a child together. Yeah, it ended, but it was the longest relationship of either of our lives. What you want, a written guarantee? In modern western society, I'd call 5 years a success story. How many relationships have you had that lasted longer?
And finding partners for sex using bluetooth mobile is as productive as asking a/s/l on IRC channels, or Mrs Gump's box of chocolate.
I met my ex wife of 5 years asking ASL in an IRC chat. She is also the mother of my child.
I also meet most of my dates and yes sexual partners in chat rooms. Not because I don't go out, I do, but there are more nights at home than nights at the bar, and chatting and flirting are more fun and more social than watching television.
No matter how horny you are, you wouldn't just jump into bed with anybody, would you?
Which would you prefer, to jump into bed with a hunk you met at the bar and had some chemistry with, only to find out later that he's a selfish, obsessive, jealous boar who doesn't like to go down, or to jump into bed with someone who is compatible with you in their values and interests and quirks, who shares your likes and dislikes where sex and relationships are concerned, but is on the attractive side of plain. Because when people meet through chatting, when they actually meet face to face they can see pretty quickly if the person is a no-go in the physical department and call it off at the eleventh hour, while the bar-goer generally probably won't find out until it's too late.
Looking back, I had more fun with the plain jane lookalikes who caught my attention because they were my kind of lighthearted kinky in the bedroom that with the look-at-me gorgeous women I've brought home from the bar only to find out that they were plain boring in bed.
If you want to make money with Open Source, build your low level stuff completely open, gpl'd and all of that...then sell your higher level version with all the bells and whistles, and tech support. Example, video games... you make your graphics engine, physics engine and whatnot all completely open source and public, but you keep your characters, story, levels, music and graphics proprietary...
That doesn't sound like a very good business plan. You go ahead and do that... I'll compete with you and win. My business plan? Download your game engine and sink the money I saved on building my own into characters, story, levels, music and graphics. Then clean house in the marketplace because my game shits all over yours.
Not dissing open source, mind you. But if you're going to try to sell the FOSS way to people, you're going to have to come up with an idea that doesn't have a hole in it large enough for a bear to spend the winter in.
I hear a lot of bullshit coming from people out there about how this "publication ban" is a suppression of freedom of speech and how "hypocritical" we are up here in Canada.
But not too many seem to have clued in to the fact that, contrary to the catcalls of censorship, all of the testimony was made available to the press which is why we are reading it. The "publication ban" is a temporary measure intended to ensure a fair and impartial jury trial. Providing a fair and impartial jury trial requires either withholding the testimony from the public until the jury has reached a verdict, or disclosing it but keeping it from publication.
You all seem to think that this guy is some sort of "hero" for publishing this stuff. But all he's done is present one portion of the facts and testimony in isolation from the others. Far from informing, this is just leading those who aren't mentally disciplined enough to withhold judgement until getting all the facts to a knee jerk reaction that will be discussed around the water cooler until it has taken on the authority of repetition. It's basically taking us further and further away from any possibility of justice and towards a witch hunt.
Whoever this "secret source" is, I for one am totally disgusted with his or her demonstrated lack of integrity, and am hoping that they go to jail for this and never hold a position of trust again for the rest of their life.
I hope the courts will learn from this, and start preventing the press from being present for these sorts of testimonies at all. They have demonstrated that they can neither be trusted nor compelled not skew the trial, so they just shouldn't be there. They should recieve and report on the complete facts of the case when the court documents are released. Aside from being in the interests of justice, that would be responsible journalism, which this clearly is not.
Never noticed that myself. My experience has been "we'd rather you take the time to learn it than hire someone else because we trust you" Doesn't get me free school I don't want, but getting pay, money for the technical library and a longer schedule is better than an education in my book.
Don't see as much of it now, but now I build the cost of my training into my fees... still not going to classes, but I've got a nice library shaping up and free time to expand my skillset.
Course, I've always steered clear of large businesses. When you're a faceless gear you don't get as much opportunity to differentiate yourself to those holding the reins. If you haven't built any value in anyones minds beyond your skill set, don't expect them to value you when they no longer have a use for that skill set.
Researchers have recently released a study demonsrating that free ingredients make baking cakes cheaper.
Conflicting studies from think tanks sponsored by flour industry leaders MakesitSoft are disputing the conclusions, but are not really taken seriously.
um... I must be missing something. Shouldn't a developer be smart enough to CHECK THE DATABASE STRUCTURE before writing data into it?
I mean, I understand your argument, but I've never been affected by it, as I always know what I'm writing to. And while the things you mention *should* return errors, it's not like they're show stoppers. To be honest, if this thing came back to bite me, I'd be knocking myself for not planning for it in the first place.
You are missing something. MySQL ignores the structure you define for it. Generally, "planning for it in the first place" means laying down rules for your data. Current release versions of MySQL will happily consume all the SQL keywords when you lay things out without chucking any "not supported" errors, then proceed to completely ignore them. As far as I'm concerned, that's worse than nto supporting them in the first place, and is a key barrier to my adopting it for anything non-trivial.
To be fair, they've apparently finally added some data integrity checks into this new release, but it's still not out of beta, so the problem, after all this time, is only close to being solved. It may be soon be proven suitable for important data, which would be nice. Not because I want to use MySQL more than what I currently use particularly, but because it's generally the database on offer when you pick up inexpensive hosting from just about anybody these days. It would be nice if that standard offering was actually you could trust your data in.
I really hate cleaning up after people like you. I'm doing so right now. Everything is perfect, orphaned records are no big deal, who needs integrity, when i use the user interface it works.
Until you want to use that business data, which is usually worth more than the code that accesses it, in some way outside the parameters you laid for it when you set up your rinky-dink little app. Then all you have is a bunch of garbage that has to be gone through by hand... or reports that pick up orphaned crap and you spend a week trying to figure out why they're off when it was because the code you trusted to keep things in order was a balancing act of bugs that kept the garbage hidden where no one could see it.
And it's not a "utopian geek world" thing. Its part of Databases 101 and is something every other database vendor has supported for a long long time. Even Access and Base have these basic features that are only now being introduced into MySQL, and are still not in any stable release.
Learning how to develop databases using MySQL while you're hacking PHP is teaching you how to do it wrong. Instead of arguing with everyone, try grabbing some books on database design and moving to the next level in your skills, hey?
Giving examples instead of just spouting off is karma whoring?
What world do you live in? In the world I live in, that's called backing up your argument.
Well, I usually build the database and do the complicated code for my clients and have their staff do the simple bitch work of the app so they can be familiar with it. And the thing will be maintained and altered in the stupid trivial ways that businesses like to play with things by network admins and human resource managers between times they get someone like me to look at it because thats business.
So generally I pull my head out of my ass, recognize these characteristics in my clients and design my work accordingly, and establish things so that dummys can't easily wreck it with the access that they're given. Postgres, Oracle, SQL Server, all of these give you the control you need to do that. MySQL does not.
If I built my applications in the environments I work in using MySQL, they would wreck their data all the time, be really pissed off, and never hire me again, either because they're smart enough to know better or because they aren't and they went out of business.
And if you're looking for high performance in your own controlled environment, forget MySQL. There are much better tools available
The best thing you got out of the class was to be talked into something that you won't need by your classmates?
See, they have this thing... it's called sarcasm...
Thats a pretty harsh comment.I think MySQL is useful in a lot of situations. Heck it's even used by Yahoo
Yahoo surely employs "database professionals"?
Yeah, you got it bud. I'm an HTML programmer, and I see this all the time from elietist guys that say HTML isn't a programming language.
Yahoo employs lots of programmers. They use HTML. So surely HTML is a programming language too! Up yours elietist guys!
Some of us actually hold the database they use to higher standards, and aren't interested in using middleware hacks to do things that should be the domain of the database engine. If you want to call that a troll, go ahead. There are probably some very complex systems out there using XML files as their data source. But that doesn't mean XML is a good database either.
A good database should refuse to let you fill it with junk. Full stop. It should hold it's data integrity and force the application to break before allowing it to be corrupted. MySQL doesn't do this.
Some examples?
NOT NULL perhaps:If a column has been flagged not null, that generally means you shouldn't allow an insertion without a value for that column unless a default value has been expressly declared for the column. Of course, MySQL just sticks in some junk and keeps right on trucking.
Or maybe some data truncation... try this guy:Wow, MySQL must be psychic... that was exactly what I wanted inserted in that table!
Yeah, I'm really going to trust something more sophisticated than a forum to this database...
Am I the only one sharing a chuckle at the thought of a bunch of typically skilled MySQL users with triggers at their disposal?
I can hear the hard drives grinding now
Say you don't think what's happening is a problem if you wish, say it's a problem but that the solution is worse than the disease if you wish, but don't try to pretend that what she's talking about isn't real. Just makes you come off blind, stupid and willfully ignorant.
:D
Ahh, insult anyone that doesn't agree with your opinion. That's exactly how it works - I don't agree with you, I must be blind, stupid... blah. You, sir, or ma'am, or whatever, are an ass.
Media changes people, and its influence is powerful. Without knowing you and specifically what they are, right now there are at least half a dozen different things I could say to you that would make an advertising jingle run through your head. There are half a dozen different things that I could say to you that would cause you to respond with a line you picked up in a movie you liked, and you've used those lines in social circumstances with other people.
And these are things that are real. If you're not capable of recognizing the difference between my describing a real thing and my having an opinion, or of taking the time to investigate my very simple statements, then I don't have a whole lot of use for your opinion. You calling me an ass is somewhere on the level of the monkeys that throw shit at the glass at the zoo as far as I'm concerned.
Thing about google that really pisses me off is that for a lot of the things i search on, it pops lots of sites that require pay registration and doesn't make it clear. I'm not going to pay for these sites when there are so many free resources available to find my answers, but I have to waste my time visiting them over and over. Experts-exchange in particular really pisses me off. I don't know if there's something better out there, but I'm actively looking for one, because using google just wastes too much of my time.
I know everyone loves google, and I use it too, but I find that where it used to be an efficient way to find information, it's becoming less and less so as time goes on because of this sort of crap. As far as I'm concerned, if I need to pay to access the information, google should not be indexing that information and putting up links to the sign up page for me to waste my time with when the answer is already freely available elsewhere and that freely available source is in their index. If I wanted to use pay sites to provide my answers, I wouldn't be using google in the first place, would I?