Yahoo is not "changing the terms whenever they like". They are anouncing that change for 3 months already, and it will only take effect in another 3 months. They sent messages to every user saying they'll change the TOS, and that they'll scan the emails in a quite visible and easy to comprehend way. The message ends with a calling to accept the new TOS or stop using the services, followed by instructions on how you could stop using the services.
As distressing as it may be, they have no obligation of serving free email to people. They can stop their services at any time they want.
Well, your source didn't include jellyfish on that list...
Some of them are probably hurt by ocean acidification, some of them are not (as all planktonic organisms also aren't). Evolution is quite fast in making the second population the important one. It's the same thing that already happened to spiders, ants, cockroaches, mouses, flys, and several other species, but now we are domesticating the entire ocean.
And what function exactly are you proposing for the MBAs? You just enumerated accountants and marketers. MBAs are a bad fit for both tasks. In fact, MBAs are a bad fit for the tasks they are "prepared" to fit what makes their course at best a nice extension for people that already know something.
"Give the top jobs to engineers..."
An egineering or production company should be administrated by an engineer, and accounting company should be administrated by an accountant, a marketing company... You probably meant that very same thing, so I'm probably not disagreeing.
The security model is different because it was created to plug* into the OS (unix) security model. I think that was a bad idea, and it seems most of the world agrees with me on that... But it is not less functional, it will just take longer for installing the DBMS at the first time.
The hight availability is cripped because it was made to plug* into the Linux HA and similar projects. That I think is a good idea, but the judge is still out and you may quite well disagree. Anyway, when implementing a HA solution with postgres, just use Linux HA or some similar environment.
* You'll see there is a theme repeating here. Postgres is based on plugins, and for some people it is a quite valuable form of organization. That is what makes postgres easy to customize.
Change squatters into zombies, and you can justify quite a bit of violence! But now I disgress wasn't that already made? Like a two or three hundred times?
Every thing you have on your mind is a set of axioms. Next you'll complain that both are written in books.
Physics is a set of axioms that work (if they don't you are expected to throw it away), while religion is a set of axioms somebody told you are true (if they aren't you are expected to belive on it anyway).
No SAP is very reliable. Before contracting them you'd expect your project to be budgeted a lot of time and money, and for it to actualy costs several times the initial budget. And, after you contract them, they never fail that prediction. They are that reliable.
Why people do busines with them, for me it's a mistery. But you can't go calling them unreliable.
Some DBMS use a completely incompatible language instead of the standard. MySQL and Oracle are the most important guilty here.
Also, all DBMS implement extensions to the standard SQL, if you use those you'll have a hard time porting your software (but it will probably be cheaper to implement and run faster).
I'll second h4rr4r. Use Postgres. Until you are very big, a DBMS will only make any difference if you choose one of those that trade reliability and compatibility for speed (like MySQL). Your best strategy at the beginning is to start with a cheap one, and there is none cheaper than 0.
When you get big enough that the DBMS will make any difference, you'll discover it is cheaper to add hardware than going with a proprietary one anyway. The best strategy here is to go with a cheap one, and there is none cheaper than 0.
Once you are so big that adding hardware won't help, you'll discover that your only chance is to customuze your data layer. No out of the box DBMS will be usefull here, but if you are on Postgres you'll discover that it is easy to customize, and there are some companies that will even do that for you. The best strategy here is to go with a free (speech) DBMS, and the worst one is to go with an imcompatible propretary one (like Oracle).
So, going with Postgres you'll save some bucks at the short term at the cost of saving a few more bucks at the middle and long term.
Cutting fiberglass PCB is a common task, there is plenty of detailed information on the web on how to do it. In a short way, you must keep the board wet (by continualy throwing water at it), and should use a respiratory filter.
You shouldn't care too much about what kind of saw you'll use, unless you don't want to destroy it in the process.
Software becomes more and more complex when you go from design to implementation to behaviour. That is why people try very hard to catch the errors at the earlier phases.
Yes, that couples very badly with economical behaviour. We try very hard to pull costs backward on time expecting it to pay at the long run, but those pulled costs may make the long run simply not exist (as in e.g. bankrupting a company). That is one of the reasons managers seem to always be in conflict with developers.
Anybody promissing to go from idea to widespread maket in less than 14 years in computing technology (by that I mean hardware manufacturing) is a liar.
There are plenty of serious scientists studing AGW and getting to serious conclusions. The problem is, they didn't take part on that "conversation" you report, because they are studing AWG, not doing PR.
On a related problem, how do we hear the people that don't want to talk to us?
"they are aware of the Western Linux and Opensource thing. They just have no interest in it. They do not understand the point of it; to them, it is simply based on an alien value system."
In that they are no different from nearly everybody at the west.
"Government, (regardless of what communists like circletimessquare tell you), are the evil incarnate intrinsically. But since the vacuum will not stay vacuum forever, the government must be created and maintained in extremely limited capacity, so it cannot hurt the society (as it always does) by growing and destroying the economy and creating poverty in the process."
I've never read such a clear and realist description. Can I use that in "anarchists x communists" debates?
Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo is not "changing the terms whenever they like". They are anouncing that change for 3 months already, and it will only take effect in another 3 months. They sent messages to every user saying they'll change the TOS, and that they'll scan the emails in a quite visible and easy to comprehend way. The message ends with a calling to accept the new TOS or stop using the services, followed by instructions on how you could stop using the services.
As distressing as it may be, they have no obligation of serving free email to people. They can stop their services at any time they want.
All planktonic organisms are not affected. Some (maybe even most) are. Again, evolution will turn the affected into a minority quite fast.
Well, your source didn't include jellyfish on that list...
Some of them are probably hurt by ocean acidification, some of them are not (as all planktonic organisms also aren't). Evolution is quite fast in making the second population the important one. It's the same thing that already happened to spiders, ants, cockroaches, mouses, flys, and several other species, but now we are domesticating the entire ocean.
And what function exactly are you proposing for the MBAs? You just enumerated accountants and marketers. MBAs are a bad fit for both tasks. In fact, MBAs are a bad fit for the tasks they are "prepared" to fit what makes their course at best a nice extension for people that already know something.
An egineering or production company should be administrated by an engineer, and accounting company should be administrated by an accountant, a marketing company... You probably meant that very same thing, so I'm probably not disagreeing.
The security model is different because it was created to plug* into the OS (unix) security model. I think that was a bad idea, and it seems most of the world agrees with me on that... But it is not less functional, it will just take longer for installing the DBMS at the first time.
The hight availability is cripped because it was made to plug* into the Linux HA and similar projects. That I think is a good idea, but the judge is still out and you may quite well disagree. Anyway, when implementing a HA solution with postgres, just use Linux HA or some similar environment.
* You'll see there is a theme repeating here. Postgres is based on plugins, and for some people it is a quite valuable form of organization. That is what makes postgres easy to customize.
Change squatters into zombies, and you can justify quite a bit of violence! But now I disgress wasn't that already made? Like a two or three hundred times?
They are into adoration of Money.
Intelectual Property is just a means.
Of course, they can work. They just need a different species to try them.
Every thing you have on your mind is a set of axioms. Next you'll complain that both are written in books.
Physics is a set of axioms that work (if they don't you are expected to throw it away), while religion is a set of axioms somebody told you are true (if they aren't you are expected to belive on it anyway).
They are making a killing right now. They are killing several business everywhere.
No SAP is very reliable. Before contracting them you'd expect your project to be budgeted a lot of time and money, and for it to actualy costs several times the initial budget. And, after you contract them, they never fail that prediction. They are that reliable.
Why people do busines with them, for me it's a mistery. But you can't go calling them unreliable.
Some DBMS use a completely incompatible language instead of the standard. MySQL and Oracle are the most important guilty here.
Also, all DBMS implement extensions to the standard SQL, if you use those you'll have a hard time porting your software (but it will probably be cheaper to implement and run faster).
I'll second h4rr4r. Use Postgres. Until you are very big, a DBMS will only make any difference if you choose one of those that trade reliability and compatibility for speed (like MySQL). Your best strategy at the beginning is to start with a cheap one, and there is none cheaper than 0.
When you get big enough that the DBMS will make any difference, you'll discover it is cheaper to add hardware than going with a proprietary one anyway. The best strategy here is to go with a cheap one, and there is none cheaper than 0.
Once you are so big that adding hardware won't help, you'll discover that your only chance is to customuze your data layer. No out of the box DBMS will be usefull here, but if you are on Postgres you'll discover that it is easy to customize, and there are some companies that will even do that for you. The best strategy here is to go with a free (speech) DBMS, and the worst one is to go with an imcompatible propretary one (like Oracle).
So, going with Postgres you'll save some bucks at the short term at the cost of saving a few more bucks at the middle and long term.
Cutting fiberglass PCB is a common task, there is plenty of detailed information on the web on how to do it. In a short way, you must keep the board wet (by continualy throwing water at it), and should use a respiratory filter.
You shouldn't care too much about what kind of saw you'll use, unless you don't want to destroy it in the process.
No, that's fine. Everybody cries at their first breath.
Software becomes more and more complex when you go from design to implementation to behaviour. That is why people try very hard to catch the errors at the earlier phases.
Yes, that couples very badly with economical behaviour. We try very hard to pull costs backward on time expecting it to pay at the long run, but those pulled costs may make the long run simply not exist (as in e.g. bankrupting a company). That is one of the reasons managers seem to always be in conflict with developers.
That is why you write some scripts to test the automated tests.
Anybody promissing to go from idea to widespread maket in less than 14 years in computing technology (by that I mean hardware manufacturing) is a liar.
That looks like a good thing. If you are right, tose crimes are determined correctly.
Sorry, I missed the cinism. Without reading the orginal post, your later one sound kind badly.
There are plenty of serious scientists studing AGW and getting to serious conclusions. The problem is, they didn't take part on that "conversation" you report, because they are studing AWG, not doing PR.
On a related problem, how do we hear the people that don't want to talk to us?
How nice, a chemist that doesn't know about absorption spectra and molecular energy! From what kind of flawed education system did you come?
In that they are no different from nearly everybody at the west.
I just hope they wait for long enough to me to reach some popcorn.
Now, in a serious note, MS has no power against China. Not even them are that evil.
I've never read such a clear and realist description. Can I use that in "anarchists x communists" debates?