Yes, it is the real world--and the rich will ALWAYS be able to circumvent these kinds of laws. You don't think George Soros has undue influence due specifically to his great wealth? Regardless of the laws passed?
You're daft if you aren't worried about an entrenched political class.
Agreed, but you must still take into account queries that have little or nothing to do with the foreign keys. SQL is flexible in that way--SQL's replacement must be flexible in the same way, and at that point, what benefit is SQL's replacement bringing?
I haven't noticed much of a right, or even center-right economic leaning in 5 or more years on Slashdot. That you think Slashdot has much of a right-leaning anything says quite a lot about you and your politics.
Man, doesn't it suck when media bias swings against you?
Kind of how it gets annoying when every article concerning Iraq begins, "The utter failure of the Bush administration in Iraq has produced a new horror today. Two people were killed in a car bomb, overshadowing the Iraqi vote for a new Constitution."
If that's the best reasoning you can come up with.. It's summed up by the phrase "we're making speech fair".
There is no provision for "fair" speech. Only "free" speech. The problem with "fair" speech is, who decides "fair"? And elected politicians deciding on what's fair, and what's not fair, will ALWAYS come down in favor of incumbents.
SELECT * FROM Order JOIN OrderItem WHERE Order.order_id = OrderItem.order_id
and not
Order JOIN OrderItem
Why do you assume Order and OrderItem will be joined on order_id? They don't have to, you know. So you have a "Order JOIN OrderItem ON order_id" format. Except, why do you assume both columns will have the same name? So you now have a "Order JOIN OrderItem ON order_id AND order_id_submitted" format.
And before long, you've got an equally baroque language for describing a query as SQL is now. SQL's point is to have something reasonably human-readable. It's amazingly flexible, and easy for beginners to pick up with simple queries. Your New and Improved query language had better be leaps and bounds ahead, not just simpler to type.
(Especially since probably 90% of queries are written only once, and stored for future use in a script or as a stored procedure. Building a query can be arduous for complex data, but it doesn't have to be typed every time you use it.)
If they were seperate tables, I'd just have a lot of joins every time the page loads, which isn't going to help performance.
That is not a SQL or database issue, it's an issue with your scripting language and Web server. This would be cached.
You certainly can have keep the table at 100 rows. But at that point, you might ask yourself why you're using a database at all. A flatfile will probably have less overhead, even with file locking issues. Especially considering the simplistic questionaire you're using as an example--a long line of 0s and 1s would do you.
Obi-Wan knew. Yoda knew. Who else? Well, we can extrapolate that just about EVERYBODY knew, except Luke, since the whole purpose of hiding Luke and Leia was so that Vader couldn't find them. But, you know, that's like data from parts IV, V, and VI--we can hardly consider those canon or anything, since they have almost zero CGI effects.
So, it's your assertion now that you were serious at the beginning, and bought the anecdote and fake news story as facts, and that it wasn't meant as sarcasm? You'll have to forgive me for being confused, I don't usually debate people who change their position from one moment to the next.
You're right, it changes my view of IV completely. For example, I keep wondering why R2 doesn't just fucking fly to Luke's crib. Also, you'd think the ungrateful little trashcan would mention once or twice that Darth Vader is his dad.
Introducing R2 and 3P0 into the prequels was stupid and unneccessary. I even question the need to put Boba Fett in there. Dumbass decisions stick with you forever, it seems.
Star Wars was lucky, but fun. Empire was good, and fun but in a sad way. Jedi was the beginning of the road to Suckland. Except for the first movie, which was lucky, the more Lucas got involved, the further down the road to Suckland the franchise went.
Good idea. Don't watch it. Certainly don't pay money or burn a Netflix queue slot for it. It's a cockslap from Lucas, and you shouldn't have to pay for that.
*sighs* Essentially the moronic end of chrisitianity protests against anything they associate with Satanism
If your current back-peddling is true and accurate, the above would be what is known as a "lie". Or perhaps your entire post was pure sarcasm? I see--just what Slashdot needs, another sarcastic post. So either you're a liar, or you're unoriginal.
I'm going with "liar" for now, since you used the derogatory "moron" three times, which is a prime number, and obviously a subconcious indicator of prevarication. (<-- that's sarcasm too, but has the advantage of being humorous, which you are not)
Also, I'm not from Texas. But good job failing to be even trivially correct. You got the hat trick: wrong, unfunny, and a bullshitter.
Also moronic is taking at face value an unattributed "news story" and an anecdote laced with outrageous stereotyping. The James Dobson comes without a by-line, and doesn't name the show where he was interviewed on Fox. Linda's foray into Texas redneckery is long on reflexive bigotry and intolerance, but seems to miss that the stereotypical Texan is also instinctively polite towards womenfolk. Not only would they not mention her shirt, they'd hold the door open for her and ask about her family.
And here I always thought Slashdotters prided themselves on their "skepticism". I guess skepticism takes a back-seat when you get a juicy opportunity to wave your prejudices about.
Had WMDs/would get them as soon as allowed. Again, a distinction without a difference. I find it funny that people like you want to label Bush as a warmonger, but then later accuse him of inconsistency because he doesn't invade every shithole on Earth. Make up your fucking minds, please. Your arguments are those of a child.
The three reasons given were WMDs, links to terrorist organizations, and human rights violations. WMDs seemed to be an easier sell, and also the lever to use against the UN. You probably have forgotten--if you ever knew at all--that pretty much every intelligence agency agreed that Saddam had WMDs. The call was for the continuing inspections to work their magic to eliminate the WMDs he had. What we've found out since is that Saddam planned to reinstitute his programs as soon as the inspections had worked their magic. So... where does that leave you? Playing mouthpiece for one of the most brutal dictators in the Middle East. Good job!
No, there is NO SCIENTIFIC DEBATE ON THIS TOPIC WHATSOEVER. There are no reputable, peer-reviewed scientific journals publishing article on "Intelligent Design."
Like I said, it's not allowed to take place. No scientific journal would touch ID because of the reactions from people like you--both shrill and overly defensive. You also misstate the aim of ID, which is not creationism. Here's a structure: evolutionary theory does not sufficiently explain how it could occur; it shows indications of design. That's it. It goes no further than that. Creationists certainly do latch on to the idea, but that's got nothing to do with the theory itself.
Some child should not be put at a further educational disadvantage just because they happened to have been unfortunate enough to be born in Kansas, Mississippi, or Alabama. Educational standards should be set at the national level.
So you advocate government indoctrination? Interesting.
If the President is so in favor of local school boards controlling the curriculum, please explain the "No Child Left Behind" crap that he's been spewing.
Read the fucking bill, if you want:
(b) LOCAL CONTROL- Nothing in this section shall be construed to --
(1) authorize an officer or employee of the Federal Government to mandate, direct, review, or control a State, local educational agency, or school's instructional content, curriculum, and related activities;
I'm framing the argument entirely accurately. You haven't made one point thus far that isn't wildly speculative or biased.
A National Guard official said on Thursday, September 1, that as many as 60,000 people had gathered at the Superdome for evacuation.
Like I said, the places where relief was found wanting were in places run by Democrats for decades. That New Orleans was a clusterfuck rests primarily on the heads of Nagin and Blanco.
They get no-bid contracts for doing things that others also have experience in.
This is such a stupid statement, I'm not sure where to start. Halliburton has vastly more experience than most companies. That's why they get no-bid contracts--it cuts through red tape, getting help to where it's needed faster. Remember when you were complaining about untimely relief earlier? I do.
Yes, it is, to those of us who have ethics.
It is not ethical to assume that a corporation is fraudulent simply because it has ties to the administration. Are you sure you want to bring ethics into the argument?
In any event, these gas charges have already been explained. They bought gas in Turkey: it was cheap. They bought gas in Kuwait: it was expensive. They did both due to logistics reasons: Turkey is to the north, Kuwait is to the south. Transporting gasoline across the length of Iraq is expensive and dangerous to the contractors. The DoD says that nothing nefarious occurred. Done and done.
I imagine your other examples have similar stories. After all, Hall
Assuming Google isn't stupid, GoogleSearch is continuing. GoogleBase is a new branch, which will tie in to the truck that is GoogleSearch, as GoogleMail does.
Personally I don't fear this because Google can offer a nice database for regular things, but it will never compare to the value-add that Amazon or Netflix provide. However, it may create a standard from which data modelling can build from. Google uses it's 900lb status to say "these are the appropriate fields for this item"--we just have to conform, and extend as required. Kind of like LDAP.
The WMD charge is but one part of a number of reasons to go into Iraq. In addition, there is ample evidence that Saddam intended to have WMDs. Whether he had them prior to the invasion, or whether he would have them soon after we dropped sanctions and normalized relations is a distiction without a difference. This is old information, and hardly news, but you've repeated your slogans for so long you've convinced yourself that they're facts.
The president thinks that ID should be taught alongside evolution. There is a scientific debate on this issue--at least there is wherever a debate is even allowed to take place. But more importantly, the president supports local school boards to control the curriculum of the schools, not an all-powerful central government authority. Which would seem to me to be a good thing. You are not even describing the argument accurately, yet I'm supposed to take you seriously?
There are not tens of thousands of hurricane victims suffering needlessly. This is hysterical nonsense at its worst. I should inform you that I am very well acquiainted with actual hurricane victims, not one-sided portrayals in the network news or left-wing nutbag Web sites, so I think you might want to take my word on this. Where hurricane relief is the most mishandled is where Democrats have maintained control for decades. This is more sloganeering.
Who gives a shit what Haliburton does? I know you think that levying the "Haliburton" charge sounds really awful, like "klaatu barata niktu" or something, but it's not that big a deal to people who do not jizz all over Fahrenheit 9/11. It's a company that has extensive experience in doing some things. They get contracts for doing what they have experience in. If Haliburton was getting contracts for doing emergency fashion design for Target, you might have a point. But they're getting contracts for their core competencies. This is hardly a crime. It's not even interesting.
You have such an extreme case of Bush Derangement Syndrome that it makes your "THEOCRACY!" charge regarding Intelligent Design look particularly hypocritic.
Yes, because you see, right now they're dedicated ALL their efforts into trouncing the Onion for using the Presidential Seal.
But I wanted to congratulate you for managing to put a good running summary of all the vacuous charges leveled against this administration. Do you at any time get tired of repeating yourself? I'm just curious.
Laying fiber is: actually digging the ground, laying it, and providing neverending support for it when some yokel with a backhoe cuts your wire. Also there's securing the right-of-way and sometimes paying for it.
It's not that it's neccessarily expensive, but that it flat out doesn't pay for itself.
Oh, and the NE is better connected than the rural areas. I remember being in NYC back in 199-*mumble* and seeing flyers for T1 lines for $800/mo. This was when a T1 was a major infrastructure purchase for a business or university, and ran anywhere from $2000-4000/mo with SLAs. What you see as "crammed with wires and pipes", a telecom company sees as "existing infrastructure we can lease rather than build".
I know it's fashionable to blame corporations for everything. Nevermind that saying "corporations are the cause" is like saying "wills and deeds are the cause". Although a corporation is just a legal structure, it sure is easy to lay the blame for everything at their doorstep.
There's a big difference between France (about the size of Colorado and Kansas put together) and the United States. You could wire up Colorado and Kansas pretty easily, especially when you have twice California's population living there. But in order to run a wire from New York to Dallas, you've got to have a load of cash. The two situations aren't comparable.
Canada is closer, but even Canada has high population density compared to the US. Also it only has 25 million people. We've got 300 million.
Finally I notice they don't explain anything about France's Internet system. From this I gather that France's broadband boom comes from unmaking some of FT's monopoly. FT is also subsidizing low-income people's Internet access. Which is a noble goal, but harder to do in the US when rural poor are an order of magnitude more expensive to serve.
It used to be that dividends were the norm. Then came the awful idea that "if the company doesn't know what to do with its profits, there must be something wrong with them". This was the idea that fueled stock options and an incessant drumbeat to keep those quarterly reports positive and upbeat.
When a company pays out profits to shareholders, then the stock is acting in a "classical" stock sense. The company is then working for its shareholders. When a company doesn't pay dividends, and the whole value of the company to the shareholder is whether the stock will rise in value, then you get into dangerous territory where stock manipulation is a key skill, rather than business acumen and "knowing thy customer".
As for taxing dividends, IIRC, the nasty Republicans want to cut the dividends tax to zero. That encourages companies to offer dividends. That encourages investors to look at companies that pay dividends. All of the above encourages business practices that are less stock market oriented and more investor oriented. That is, it's a Good Thing. Now you're investing in a company because it produces a product that sells well, instead of investing in a company because you think you can fool somebody else into buying from you at a higher price.
There's room for the latter in a modern market, but the former is much less fraught with criminal or unethical doings.
Your Onion re-design makes me have to scroll horizontally in Safari now! Not much, but my browser's about 1024x768. I'm not sure we should be listening to shit-all this guy has to say. Multi-column layouts just OWN for online newspapers. No, really, it works SO WELL to toss out 15 years of Web development and say, "You know, NEWSPAPERS ARE THE NEW BLACK!"
Anyway, regarding TFA, that was the biggest load of "Web Designer" horse crap ever shoveled into HTML. Slashdot has been ASS UGLY since 1997. Yet, it's been hugely successful. Why is this? Gosh, it COULDN'T be because of the CONTENT--could it? Not only has Slashdot continued to provide what it's here to provide, it's remained remarkably stable, UI-wise.
"Rethinking" the architecture is daft. Slashdot has a codebase built to encourage good comments and hide bad ones, but to accept everything that's not scripted spam. That's the architecture. "Rethinking" that is like "rethinking" the design of the nuclear reactor in a submarine while crusing at 20 knots 800 feet down.
Please keep your Web Designer hands off Slashdot, thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
You're daft if you aren't worried about an entrenched political class.
That's some strange SQL you've got there.
Agreed, but you must still take into account queries that have little or nothing to do with the foreign keys. SQL is flexible in that way--SQL's replacement must be flexible in the same way, and at that point, what benefit is SQL's replacement bringing?
I haven't noticed much of a right, or even center-right economic leaning in 5 or more years on Slashdot. That you think Slashdot has much of a right-leaning anything says quite a lot about you and your politics.
Kind of how it gets annoying when every article concerning Iraq begins, "The utter failure of the Bush administration in Iraq has produced a new horror today. Two people were killed in a car bomb, overshadowing the Iraqi vote for a new Constitution."
There is no provision for "fair" speech. Only "free" speech. The problem with "fair" speech is, who decides "fair"? And elected politicians deciding on what's fair, and what's not fair, will ALWAYS come down in favor of incumbents.
Why do you assume Order and OrderItem will be joined on order_id? They don't have to, you know. So you have a "Order JOIN OrderItem ON order_id" format. Except, why do you assume both columns will have the same name? So you now have a "Order JOIN OrderItem ON order_id AND order_id_submitted" format.
And before long, you've got an equally baroque language for describing a query as SQL is now. SQL's point is to have something reasonably human-readable. It's amazingly flexible, and easy for beginners to pick up with simple queries. Your New and Improved query language had better be leaps and bounds ahead, not just simpler to type.
(Especially since probably 90% of queries are written only once, and stored for future use in a script or as a stored procedure. Building a query can be arduous for complex data, but it doesn't have to be typed every time you use it.)
That is not a SQL or database issue, it's an issue with your scripting language and Web server. This would be cached.
You certainly can have keep the table at 100 rows. But at that point, you might ask yourself why you're using a database at all. A flatfile will probably have less overhead, even with file locking issues. Especially considering the simplistic questionaire you're using as an example--a long line of 0s and 1s would do you.
Obi-Wan knew. Yoda knew. Who else? Well, we can extrapolate that just about EVERYBODY knew, except Luke, since the whole purpose of hiding Luke and Leia was so that Vader couldn't find them. But, you know, that's like data from parts IV, V, and VI--we can hardly consider those canon or anything, since they have almost zero CGI effects.
So, it's your assertion now that you were serious at the beginning, and bought the anecdote and fake news story as facts, and that it wasn't meant as sarcasm? You'll have to forgive me for being confused, I don't usually debate people who change their position from one moment to the next.
Introducing R2 and 3P0 into the prequels was stupid and unneccessary. I even question the need to put Boba Fett in there. Dumbass decisions stick with you forever, it seems.
Star Wars was lucky, but fun. Empire was good, and fun but in a sad way. Jedi was the beginning of the road to Suckland. Except for the first movie, which was lucky, the more Lucas got involved, the further down the road to Suckland the franchise went.
Good idea. Don't watch it. Certainly don't pay money or burn a Netflix queue slot for it. It's a cockslap from Lucas, and you shouldn't have to pay for that.
*sighs* Essentially the moronic end of chrisitianity protests against anything they associate with Satanism
If your current back-peddling is true and accurate, the above would be what is known as a "lie". Or perhaps your entire post was pure sarcasm? I see--just what Slashdot needs, another sarcastic post. So either you're a liar, or you're unoriginal.
I'm going with "liar" for now, since you used the derogatory "moron" three times, which is a prime number, and obviously a subconcious indicator of prevarication. (<-- that's sarcasm too, but has the advantage of being humorous, which you are not)
Also, I'm not from Texas. But good job failing to be even trivially correct. You got the hat trick: wrong, unfunny, and a bullshitter.
And here I always thought Slashdotters prided themselves on their "skepticism". I guess skepticism takes a back-seat when you get a juicy opportunity to wave your prejudices about.
The three reasons given were WMDs, links to terrorist organizations, and human rights violations. WMDs seemed to be an easier sell, and also the lever to use against the UN. You probably have forgotten--if you ever knew at all--that pretty much every intelligence agency agreed that Saddam had WMDs. The call was for the continuing inspections to work their magic to eliminate the WMDs he had. What we've found out since is that Saddam planned to reinstitute his programs as soon as the inspections had worked their magic. So... where does that leave you? Playing mouthpiece for one of the most brutal dictators in the Middle East. Good job!
No, there is NO SCIENTIFIC DEBATE ON THIS TOPIC WHATSOEVER. There are no reputable, peer-reviewed scientific journals publishing article on "Intelligent Design."
Like I said, it's not allowed to take place. No scientific journal would touch ID because of the reactions from people like you--both shrill and overly defensive. You also misstate the aim of ID, which is not creationism. Here's a structure: evolutionary theory does not sufficiently explain how it could occur; it shows indications of design. That's it. It goes no further than that. Creationists certainly do latch on to the idea, but that's got nothing to do with the theory itself.
Some child should not be put at a further educational disadvantage just because they happened to have been unfortunate enough to be born in Kansas, Mississippi, or Alabama. Educational standards should be set at the national level.
So you advocate government indoctrination? Interesting.
If the President is so in favor of local school boards controlling the curriculum, please explain the "No Child Left Behind" crap that he's been spewing.
Read the fucking bill, if you want:
I'm framing the argument entirely accurately. You haven't made one point thus far that isn't wildly speculative or biased.
A National Guard official said on Thursday, September 1, that as many as 60,000 people had gathered at the Superdome for evacuation.
Like I said, the places where relief was found wanting were in places run by Democrats for decades. That New Orleans was a clusterfuck rests primarily on the heads of Nagin and Blanco.
They get no-bid contracts for doing things that others also have experience in.
This is such a stupid statement, I'm not sure where to start. Halliburton has vastly more experience than most companies. That's why they get no-bid contracts--it cuts through red tape, getting help to where it's needed faster. Remember when you were complaining about untimely relief earlier? I do.
Yes, it is, to those of us who have ethics.
It is not ethical to assume that a corporation is fraudulent simply because it has ties to the administration. Are you sure you want to bring ethics into the argument?
In any event, these gas charges have already been explained. They bought gas in Turkey: it was cheap. They bought gas in Kuwait: it was expensive. They did both due to logistics reasons: Turkey is to the north, Kuwait is to the south. Transporting gasoline across the length of Iraq is expensive and dangerous to the contractors. The DoD says that nothing nefarious occurred. Done and done.
I imagine your other examples have similar stories. After all, Hall
Personally I don't fear this because Google can offer a nice database for regular things, but it will never compare to the value-add that Amazon or Netflix provide. However, it may create a standard from which data modelling can build from. Google uses it's 900lb status to say "these are the appropriate fields for this item"--we just have to conform, and extend as required. Kind of like LDAP.
The president thinks that ID should be taught alongside evolution. There is a scientific debate on this issue--at least there is wherever a debate is even allowed to take place. But more importantly, the president supports local school boards to control the curriculum of the schools, not an all-powerful central government authority. Which would seem to me to be a good thing. You are not even describing the argument accurately, yet I'm supposed to take you seriously?
There are not tens of thousands of hurricane victims suffering needlessly. This is hysterical nonsense at its worst. I should inform you that I am very well acquiainted with actual hurricane victims, not one-sided portrayals in the network news or left-wing nutbag Web sites, so I think you might want to take my word on this. Where hurricane relief is the most mishandled is where Democrats have maintained control for decades. This is more sloganeering.
Who gives a shit what Haliburton does? I know you think that levying the "Haliburton" charge sounds really awful, like "klaatu barata niktu" or something, but it's not that big a deal to people who do not jizz all over Fahrenheit 9/11. It's a company that has extensive experience in doing some things. They get contracts for doing what they have experience in. If Haliburton was getting contracts for doing emergency fashion design for Target, you might have a point. But they're getting contracts for their core competencies. This is hardly a crime. It's not even interesting.
You have such an extreme case of Bush Derangement Syndrome that it makes your "THEOCRACY!" charge regarding Intelligent Design look particularly hypocritic.
But I wanted to congratulate you for managing to put a good running summary of all the vacuous charges leveled against this administration. Do you at any time get tired of repeating yourself? I'm just curious.
So which is it? Are Americans smart? Or suckers? I can't keep up.
The number of gimps who replied to this because they didn't get the version numbering joke is astounding. Really, really astounding.
It's not that it's neccessarily expensive, but that it flat out doesn't pay for itself.
Oh, and the NE is better connected than the rural areas. I remember being in NYC back in 199-*mumble* and seeing flyers for T1 lines for $800/mo. This was when a T1 was a major infrastructure purchase for a business or university, and ran anywhere from $2000-4000/mo with SLAs. What you see as "crammed with wires and pipes", a telecom company sees as "existing infrastructure we can lease rather than build".
There's a big difference between France (about the size of Colorado and Kansas put together) and the United States. You could wire up Colorado and Kansas pretty easily, especially when you have twice California's population living there. But in order to run a wire from New York to Dallas, you've got to have a load of cash. The two situations aren't comparable.
Canada is closer, but even Canada has high population density compared to the US. Also it only has 25 million people. We've got 300 million.
Finally I notice they don't explain anything about France's Internet system. From this I gather that France's broadband boom comes from unmaking some of FT's monopoly. FT is also subsidizing low-income people's Internet access. Which is a noble goal, but harder to do in the US when rural poor are an order of magnitude more expensive to serve.
When a company pays out profits to shareholders, then the stock is acting in a "classical" stock sense. The company is then working for its shareholders. When a company doesn't pay dividends, and the whole value of the company to the shareholder is whether the stock will rise in value, then you get into dangerous territory where stock manipulation is a key skill, rather than business acumen and "knowing thy customer".
As for taxing dividends, IIRC, the nasty Republicans want to cut the dividends tax to zero. That encourages companies to offer dividends. That encourages investors to look at companies that pay dividends. All of the above encourages business practices that are less stock market oriented and more investor oriented. That is, it's a Good Thing. Now you're investing in a company because it produces a product that sells well, instead of investing in a company because you think you can fool somebody else into buying from you at a higher price.
There's room for the latter in a modern market, but the former is much less fraught with criminal or unethical doings.
Anyway, regarding TFA, that was the biggest load of "Web Designer" horse crap ever shoveled into HTML. Slashdot has been ASS UGLY since 1997. Yet, it's been hugely successful. Why is this? Gosh, it COULDN'T be because of the CONTENT--could it? Not only has Slashdot continued to provide what it's here to provide, it's remained remarkably stable, UI-wise.
"Rethinking" the architecture is daft. Slashdot has a codebase built to encourage good comments and hide bad ones, but to accept everything that's not scripted spam. That's the architecture. "Rethinking" that is like "rethinking" the design of the nuclear reactor in a submarine while crusing at 20 knots 800 feet down.
Please keep your Web Designer hands off Slashdot, thanks.