I have found the best approach is to setup squid + sslbump + privoxy. The last of which can mutilate all cookies to be session cookies. This effectively prevents lots of the trackers from functioning. I also always have my user agent molested to be a recent version of chrome on Windows 8 64 ( i have to adjust periodically). That way the user agent is dead common and they can't track individual devices behind my NAT as easily. I have a cron job that runs to release the DHCP lease from my ISP every night and gets a new address. I do get a different IP almost every day that way.
Yes and under Hillary we just won't worry about words mean so any existing law can be used however she wants and rules won't apply to herself and people she likes. That sounds so much better sign me up.
Honestly I don't understand how ANYONE can make the case the Hillary is different than Trump other than what "team" she purports to be playing for.
Look the only questions in this election are do you like the list Trump put forward for the SCOTUS candidates and do you want people like Paul Ryan to get legislation passed. If the answer is yes then vote for Trump because he isn't any worse than Hillary. The polls indicate he can actually win. If you abstain or vote for a third party you are effectively voting for Hillary that is the reality of the system.
If you like what his happen in Washington right now vote HRC, but don't think for a second that makes you a more responsible person or anything of the sort. She isn't by any measure more qualified to be president than he is. She was unaccomplished as a Senator, and her tenure as sec State was nothing other than a string of failures and scandals. Having had an important job before that you performed terribly at isn't a qualification for promotion.
No lots of laws are simply bad laws. Words mean what the mean. Some laws are ambiguously written and they should be struck by the SCOUTS for being void for vagueness.
"The spirit of the law" is a morally and intellectually bankrupt concept. What it really means in practice is "I think the rich and powerful should be free to decide the less rich are guilty of something when it inconveniences them". You should never need to apply "technically" as a adjective to legal because the law should be plain and clear, and its application should always be technical.
Nobody owes you or kids an education. If you want to educated them or be educate go do it. Which you ought to be able to afford to do since you won't be paying taxes to educate anyone else;s kids.
Some of us don't necessarily care not to offend. Freedom of speech in a civil society should mean you *can* ring the bell without fearing a violent mob. If the offended is at least as civilized as the offender they would return with a simialr stinging verbal barb, but that inst what happens much of the time.
Frankly I think anytime someone has to pair the word "technically" with legal or illegal its a strong indicator their arguments is fundamentally dishonest and intellectually incomplete.
The entire point of codified laws was so that people living in society could know what was legal and what was not and so the rules could be applied consistently and without bias. The law is by definition a technical matter. Words have specific meaning in law or they are supposed to have. No you can't entirely divorce the reading of law from its intent but one should do so to the degree its possible. If a strict constructionist read of a law isn't accomplishing the desired outcome that that law needs to be changed.
There should either a law against linking to but not hosting copyright protected content or not. Publishing links is a form of speech or press so outlawing that would probably violate the first amendment ( A higher la ) in the USA, but could probably be enacted in the EU as I understand things.
The copyright lobby arguing saying where something is located is the same as distributing it is BS. We should not stand for it. Laws having strong well understood meanings are what protect us all. Letting people weasel around them by redefine things ultimately servers nobody but those in power.
I mostly agree with you but the simplest design is NOT always the most robust. For example nobody would argue that points and a distributor are not simpler than todays electronic ignition systems on cars. Similarly nobody would argue that electronic ignition control isn't more robust and far simpler to maintain.
Sometimes new technology and with it increased complexity does result in a more robust system.
I think dispute resolution belongs with judges and juries not with politicization but whether its a question of enforcing the courts will or the stats will the correct answer is militia. The state or court can hire an army or regular citizens when required to enforce an action.
This serves as a final check on the power of states or a judge who might try to legislate from the bench. Citizens will not sign up in numbers or be willing to contribute funds for a militia if they don't support the cause. In the general case of just cause people will sign up because they should recognize that their failure to contribute now means there may not be anyone to enforce a judgement for them should they need it some time.
That is my point exactly. That isn't what I want out of a console. I want the game to look and play as advertised. Now if everyone agrees to only market the game displayed on least common denominator hardware fine; but we know that isn't what's going to happen.
Nothing was shittier as a kid than going and buying a sweet looking PC game and discovering it ran like shit on anything that was not at least twice the "system requirements".
Worse I bet we see games that run better on XBox One.2
The best thing about consoles is that you can grab a title off the shelf and expect a good experience that looks like the promo videos etc you see on Youtube and elsewhere. None of the well if you have this video card and are on the latest Windows with a down rev video driver installed BS. Consoles just work as expected.
Moreover parents and other relatives just have to know the kid has an XBONE and can pick a title and expect they will be able to enjoy the gift.
Microsoft is going to ruin that. Once we have to figure out well its XBONE software but it runs all choppy and you don't really want it unless you have XBONE.2, consoles will suck for all the reasons PC gaming sucks and offer none of the benefits the PC platform does.
No I would not the thought would not even occur to me to try an hold anyone responsible other than the F*ing hijackers and the people they work for.
I might very well be on the steps of the capital trying to talk congressmen into talking military action against the terror groups. If its a domestic actor I might be writing my prosecutor encouraging him or her to seek the death penalty.
The correct response to terror is swift brutal retaliation. Where by we effect the opposite result of what they terrorist seek. What we SHOULD have done after 9/11 is invaded Saudi Arabia, replaced their government with a military governor of our own and banned the practice of Sharia Law. Then you start handing drivers licenses and firearms to the women. Next you put the entire place under our law code and aggressively prosecute anyone found to be doing something like trying to harassing women who don't want to wear the hijab, charge them with assault and send them to slam for the nice long mandatory minimum.
If we should the darn terrorist that provoking us actually result in the opposite of their aims and under took a policy of systematically undermining their culture to supplant it with our own whenever attacked we could win this thing. Its not politically correct to say so but American Hegemony resulted in a better world for almost everyone in the late 20th century. We should be seeking to preserve and expand that. multiculturalism has been and will always be a failure. Our culture is superior and it should replace inferior cultures like Islamic monarchies.
Wait hold on. Airport screening used to be done by private contractors, you know back when it was sane. TSA Officers are federal employees! They belong to a federal employee union and work for a federal agency.
Before you suggest private contracted screening allowed 9/11 consider the attackers used box cutters which were not considered contraband at the time. You or I could have placed on in the little try next to the metal detector and picked it up after we passed through without anyone batting an eye. Everyone was terrified to fly after 9/11 so the bush admin nationalized everything to make it look like someone was doing something. The TSA like the private screeners before it continues to routinely miss contraband almost as often as its tested.
The sensible approach to the TSA is shut its doors and go back to private screening with metal detectors sans the nudity scanners and pat downs. This is sufficient to deprive morons of thing they are likely to hurt themselves or others with, but would never stop a planed attack by a determined adversary. The TSA is not sufficient either as has been repeatedly shown but its is comparatively expensive and intrusive. We should rely on the real security offered by secure cockpit doors locked during flight. Stronger procedures around personnel screening and air marshals.
What if in your view the status quot is sacrificing the lives of the innocent? Don't you at some point have to stand up and fight injustice. If violence and risk to the innocent can't any vicious dictator presently in power simple say "Well I am going to have start executing radomly selected school children if you don't stop protesting" and end your fight right there?
I disagree I think there are levels of injustice that can in turn justify actions that are likely to result in the killing and maiming of the guilty and innocent a like. Most fights involve collateral damage, we have a moral obligation to minimize it but if none was ever acceptable we would have no choice but to simply abide the worst abuses and evils.
What I think is missing from modern just war theory is the requirement you play to win! In my view once you have decided a situation is so unacceptable that you are willing to kill and maim to see it change, you owe it to everyone killed and maimed to realize that change. Imagine what kind of monsters we would have been if we had told the Germans retreat to your original boarders and the Nazi's can stay in charge and you can murder whatever Jewish population you still have? The only acceptable terms were total surrender. The only just way to fight the war was to win it, even when that required attacking what might nominally be consider civilian assets in order to cripple the German states ability to make war.
This is what is largely wrong with the wars in the middle east today. We are so unwilling to harm any civilians we never succeed in actually routing the leadership of these extremist sects we are fighting. Israel has the same problem with the West Bank. Either stop fighting each other or actually fight to win. To do anything else just continues what is needles carnage. Translation Go big or go home.
Right but where ecosystems are concerned its really all about the size of the pie slice.
If the ecosystem is highly fractured and you are a developer you will want to write the most cross platform-least-common-denominator thing you can so that you have a broad enough customer base to make it worth the time.
When the ecosystem gets a down to a few players you start doing a version for each. When one of the "big three" is only a percentage or so, well you have enough revenue for the next big two that your probably just ignore that part of the market. Its a death spiral situation, from there on out. Application developers stop supplying for the also ran people quite buying them, the market segment gets smaller still, more devs end support/supply....
I think you dead wrong. There is no place as hectic as crowded filling station. Everyone lined up trying to get to a pump without their car hanging out into the street, etc. People are not going to pay more for a charge than they do a tank of gas, probably less until they can really go as far on a charge as on a tank of gas in terms of miles.
Gas stations are a volume business, the margins are tiny, they make money because a largish number of customers visit the pumps each day. If every car has to sit for hours to charge, that is failure right there. Existing stations don't have the foot print to have more than 10 or so vehicles charging/filing at any given time. So in addition to loosing on the volume proposition they certainly are not going to be able to build your fancy remote work site / entertainment complex.
Look at where the chargers are now they are all in places like municipal parking lots, large commercial garages etc. You are right people are not going to stay with their car while it charges for hours. They certainly do want to do something else. It won't be the gas station owners that are able to adapt and take advantage though it will be the parking lot / parking garage owners.
In more rural settings people will just charge at home. I don't see people wanting to sit and watch the soybeans grow while their car charges.
I think safety plays a factor too. You producing hydrogen at home is easy, even when you want to use solar as the energy source.
Your next problem is storage that is hard, hydrogen is pretty reactive, and h2 as molecules go is very small so you have to worry about leaks. Not such a problem dealing small amounts produced experimentally under the fume hood in your HS Chemistry class but could be a serious issue in quantities need to power an automobile. Next you have to start pumping it into some kind of pressure vessel which again without being special engineered for h2 will be even more leaky. If you have this indoors it might go boom.
Its the kinda thing your crazy uncle who got himself an mechanical engineering degree from Lehigh before deciding to get into abstract art and controlled substances might be able to pull off successfully in his garage. The problem is every yokel on the internet will try and copy it, and that's when it goes boom.
if you factor in the cost of rewriting every 15 years to keep up with the Joneses
I am not so sure about this. Most business change enough over the course of 15 years that there are probably efficiencies to had with a new solution that would improve the bottom line over continuing to bolt onto their initial investment.
I have tons of small SMBs for example with a situation like this. They have some seriously downlevel ERP system running on a dusty AS/400 in the corner. Non of their IT staff touches except with great reluctance when the have to. The internet happened. So they hired some guys to build a fancy website with.Net MVC/razor and biztalk behind it. They want to get the site live as a fast as possible, the.Net guys do all the public facing parts and the stuff they actually know how to do first. Someone that last step of getting the orders into the ERP system never happens. A stop gap of e-mail the orders to the same CSRs who would keying fax orders back in 1992 is employed.
Now if someone would just upgrade that ERP (painful as that might be) it would be possible to integrate stuff like the website and all those webservices the suppliers are exposing to re-order and what not quickly. They could probably automate more take on more clients or cut staffing costs considerable. Someone just needs to be willing to sign that 200k check and get some new technology in the door.
Nonsense, I can build a quick CRUD application in Ruby/RAILS just as a fast as anything could ever be built in VB5/6. It would be just as usable too.
With additional advantages of you don't need to figure out how to when you are going to update it on the desktops of the 20 users at that SMB where they certainly don't have any kind of standard image or patch/deployment management for the desktops. Nope much much easier to run one instance on some little department server they already have.
Second Advantage, single application interacting with the database rather than multiple clients each with their own connection. A perfectly average programmer will be able to manage concurrency and multiple changes in a shared environment that way. There was a lot of opportunity to get it wrong or do it badly with multiple fat clients all talking to the same DB.
Not really, its more when you insist on not reprocessing fuel because of irrational fears about proliferation. The only reason we have a problem with waste is the first place is that Jimmy Carter should stayed on the peanut farm.
Lynch and Holder have run the most overtly corrupt (and therefore like most corrupt) DOJ in history.
I don't care much for Trump but I sure as hell hope he wins at this point because we need someone with the stones to actually look into and prosecute members of the former administration for their misdeeds. I can understand why that isn't a precedent most politicians want to see set, but its the only way we are going to get things cleaned up.
A small fire in the cabin is something that will almost certainly be smelt or spotted in time for someone to beat it out with a coat, towel, or hit with a fire extinguisher long before its likely able to threaten the plane. A fire in tightly packed cargo hold on the other hand will likely be quite a lot larger before a smoke detector is triggered and very much more difficult to get near enough to do anything about. It very well could threaten the plane. There may be enough air trapped in the luggage to permit combustion even while fire suppression methods are being deployed for quite some time time.
Slashdot Mirror
I have found the best approach is to setup squid + sslbump + privoxy. The last of which can mutilate all cookies to be session cookies. This effectively prevents lots of the trackers from functioning. I also always have my user agent molested to be a recent version of chrome on Windows 8 64 ( i have to adjust periodically). That way the user agent is dead common and they can't track individual devices behind my NAT as easily. I have a cron job that runs to release the DHCP lease from my ISP every night and gets a new address. I do get a different IP almost every day that way.
Yes and under Hillary we just won't worry about words mean so any existing law can be used however she wants and rules won't apply to herself and people she likes. That sounds so much better sign me up.
Honestly I don't understand how ANYONE can make the case the Hillary is different than Trump other than what "team" she purports to be playing for.
Hillary contradicting herself for 13min on just about every current issue:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Look the only questions in this election are do you like the list Trump put forward for the SCOTUS candidates and do you want people like Paul Ryan to get legislation passed. If the answer is yes then vote for Trump because he isn't any worse than Hillary. The polls indicate he can actually win. If you abstain or vote for a third party you are effectively voting for Hillary that is the reality of the system.
If you like what his happen in Washington right now vote HRC, but don't think for a second that makes you a more responsible person or anything of the sort. She isn't by any measure more qualified to be president than he is. She was unaccomplished as a Senator, and her tenure as sec State was nothing other than a string of failures and scandals. Having had an important job before that you performed terribly at isn't a qualification for promotion.
No lots of laws are simply bad laws. Words mean what the mean. Some laws are ambiguously written and they should be struck by the SCOUTS for being void for vagueness.
"The spirit of the law" is a morally and intellectually bankrupt concept. What it really means in practice is "I think the rich and powerful should be free to decide the less rich are guilty of something when it inconveniences them". You should never need to apply "technically" as a adjective to legal because the law should be plain and clear, and its application should always be technical.
Yes, absolutely
Nobody owes you or kids an education. If you want to educated them or be educate go do it. Which you ought to be able to afford to do since you won't be paying taxes to educate anyone else;s kids.
Some of us don't necessarily care not to offend. Freedom of speech in a civil society should mean you *can* ring the bell without fearing a violent mob. If the offended is at least as civilized as the offender they would return with a simialr stinging verbal barb, but that inst what happens much of the time.
Frankly I think anytime someone has to pair the word "technically" with legal or illegal its a strong indicator their arguments is fundamentally dishonest and intellectually incomplete.
The entire point of codified laws was so that people living in society could know what was legal and what was not and so the rules could be applied consistently and without bias. The law is by definition a technical matter. Words have specific meaning in law or they are supposed to have. No you can't entirely divorce the reading of law from its intent but one should do so to the degree its possible. If a strict constructionist read of a law isn't accomplishing the desired outcome that that law needs to be changed.
There should either a law against linking to but not hosting copyright protected content or not. Publishing links is a form of speech or press so outlawing that would probably violate the first amendment ( A higher la ) in the USA, but could probably be enacted in the EU as I understand things.
The copyright lobby arguing saying where something is located is the same as distributing it is BS. We should not stand for it. Laws having strong well understood meanings are what protect us all. Letting people weasel around them by redefine things ultimately servers nobody but those in power.
No because in a libertarian society public schools are not a thing.
I mostly agree with you but the simplest design is NOT always the most robust. For example nobody would argue that points and a distributor are not simpler than todays electronic ignition systems on cars. Similarly nobody would argue that electronic ignition control isn't more robust and far simpler to maintain.
Sometimes new technology and with it increased complexity does result in a more robust system.
I think dispute resolution belongs with judges and juries not with politicization but whether its a question of enforcing the courts will or the stats will the correct answer is militia. The state or court can hire an army or regular citizens when required to enforce an action.
This serves as a final check on the power of states or a judge who might try to legislate from the bench. Citizens will not sign up in numbers or be willing to contribute funds for a militia if they don't support the cause. In the general case of just cause people will sign up because they should recognize that their failure to contribute now means there may not be anyone to enforce a judgement for them should they need it some time.
That is my point exactly. That isn't what I want out of a console. I want the game to look and play as advertised. Now if everyone agrees to only market the game displayed on least common denominator hardware fine; but we know that isn't what's going to happen.
Nothing was shittier as a kid than going and buying a sweet looking PC game and discovering it ran like shit on anything that was not at least twice the "system requirements".
Worse I bet we see games that run better on XBox One.2
The best thing about consoles is that you can grab a title off the shelf and expect a good experience that looks like the promo videos etc you see on Youtube and elsewhere. None of the well if you have this video card and are on the latest Windows with a down rev video driver installed BS. Consoles just work as expected.
Moreover parents and other relatives just have to know the kid has an XBONE and can pick a title and expect they will be able to enjoy the gift.
Microsoft is going to ruin that. Once we have to figure out well its XBONE software but it runs all choppy and you don't really want it unless you have XBONE.2, consoles will suck for all the reasons PC gaming sucks and offer none of the benefits the PC platform does.
No Thanks
No I would not the thought would not even occur to me to try an hold anyone responsible other than the F*ing hijackers and the people they work for.
I might very well be on the steps of the capital trying to talk congressmen into talking military action against the terror groups. If its a domestic actor I might be writing my prosecutor encouraging him or her to seek the death penalty.
The correct response to terror is swift brutal retaliation. Where by we effect the opposite result of what they terrorist seek. What we SHOULD have done after 9/11 is invaded Saudi Arabia, replaced their government with a military governor of our own and banned the practice of Sharia Law. Then you start handing drivers licenses and firearms to the women. Next you put the entire place under our law code and aggressively prosecute anyone found to be doing something like trying to harassing women who don't want to wear the hijab, charge them with assault and send them to slam for the nice long mandatory minimum.
If we should the darn terrorist that provoking us actually result in the opposite of their aims and under took a policy of systematically undermining their culture to supplant it with our own whenever attacked we could win this thing. Its not politically correct to say so but American Hegemony resulted in a better world for almost everyone in the late 20th century. We should be seeking to preserve and expand that. multiculturalism has been and will always be a failure. Our culture is superior and it should replace inferior cultures like Islamic monarchies.
Wait hold on. Airport screening used to be done by private contractors, you know back when it was sane. TSA Officers are federal employees! They belong to a federal employee union and work for a federal agency.
Before you suggest private contracted screening allowed 9/11 consider the attackers used box cutters which were not considered contraband at the time. You or I could have placed on in the little try next to the metal detector and picked it up after we passed through without anyone batting an eye. Everyone was terrified to fly after 9/11 so the bush admin nationalized everything to make it look like someone was doing something. The TSA like the private screeners before it continues to routinely miss contraband almost as often as its tested.
The sensible approach to the TSA is shut its doors and go back to private screening with metal detectors sans the nudity scanners and pat downs. This is sufficient to deprive morons of thing they are likely to hurt themselves or others with, but would never stop a planed attack by a determined adversary. The TSA is not sufficient either as has been repeatedly shown but its is comparatively expensive and intrusive. We should rely on the real security offered by secure cockpit doors locked during flight. Stronger procedures around personnel screening and air marshals.
are you sure, what happens if you have a \n character embed in the paste text. bash sure executes it in my terminal emulator.
Basically they have just admitted their policy is meaningless. They will bend and twist the language as needed when political pressure is applied.
They are essentially giving up the curating and running of their own site, its mob rules now.
What if in your view the status quot is sacrificing the lives of the innocent? Don't you at some point have to stand up and fight injustice. If violence and risk to the innocent can't any vicious dictator presently in power simple say "Well I am going to have start executing radomly selected school children if you don't stop protesting" and end your fight right there?
I disagree I think there are levels of injustice that can in turn justify actions that are likely to result in the killing and maiming of the guilty and innocent a like. Most fights involve collateral damage, we have a moral obligation to minimize it but if none was ever acceptable we would have no choice but to simply abide the worst abuses and evils.
What I think is missing from modern just war theory is the requirement you play to win! In my view once you have decided a situation is so unacceptable that you are willing to kill and maim to see it change, you owe it to everyone killed and maimed to realize that change. Imagine what kind of monsters we would have been if we had told the Germans retreat to your original boarders and the Nazi's can stay in charge and you can murder whatever Jewish population you still have? The only acceptable terms were total surrender. The only just way to fight the war was to win it, even when that required attacking what might nominally be consider civilian assets in order to cripple the German states ability to make war.
This is what is largely wrong with the wars in the middle east today. We are so unwilling to harm any civilians we never succeed in actually routing the leadership of these extremist sects we are fighting. Israel has the same problem with the West Bank. Either stop fighting each other or actually fight to win. To do anything else just continues what is needles carnage. Translation Go big or go home.
Right but where ecosystems are concerned its really all about the size of the pie slice.
If the ecosystem is highly fractured and you are a developer you will want to write the most cross platform-least-common-denominator thing you can so that you have a broad enough customer base to make it worth the time.
When the ecosystem gets a down to a few players you start doing a version for each. When one of the "big three" is only a percentage or so, well you have enough revenue for the next big two that your probably just ignore that part of the market. Its a death spiral situation, from there on out. Application developers stop supplying for the also ran people quite buying them, the market segment gets smaller still, more devs end support/supply....
Right because higher priced feed corn does not translate directly into higher priced beef, lamb, chicken, etc.
I think you dead wrong. There is no place as hectic as crowded filling station. Everyone lined up trying to get to a pump without their car hanging out into the street, etc. People are not going to pay more for a charge than they do a tank of gas, probably less until they can really go as far on a charge as on a tank of gas in terms of miles.
Gas stations are a volume business, the margins are tiny, they make money because a largish number of customers visit the pumps each day. If every car has to sit for hours to charge, that is failure right there. Existing stations don't have the foot print to have more than 10 or so vehicles charging/filing at any given time. So in addition to loosing on the volume proposition they certainly are not going to be able to build your fancy remote work site / entertainment complex.
Look at where the chargers are now they are all in places like municipal parking lots, large commercial garages etc. You are right people are not going to stay with their car while it charges for hours. They certainly do want to do something else. It won't be the gas station owners that are able to adapt and take advantage though it will be the parking lot / parking garage owners.
In more rural settings people will just charge at home. I don't see people wanting to sit and watch the soybeans grow while their car charges.
I think safety plays a factor too. You producing hydrogen at home is easy, even when you want to use solar as the energy source.
Your next problem is storage that is hard, hydrogen is pretty reactive, and h2 as molecules go is very small so you have to worry about leaks. Not such a problem dealing small amounts produced experimentally under the fume hood in your HS Chemistry class but could be a serious issue in quantities need to power an automobile. Next you have to start pumping it into some kind of pressure vessel which again without being special engineered for h2 will be even more leaky. If you have this indoors it might go boom.
Its the kinda thing your crazy uncle who got himself an mechanical engineering degree from Lehigh before deciding to get into abstract art and controlled substances might be able to pull off successfully in his garage. The problem is every yokel on the internet will try and copy it, and that's when it goes boom.
if you factor in the cost of rewriting every 15 years to keep up with the Joneses
I am not so sure about this. Most business change enough over the course of 15 years that there are probably efficiencies to had with a new solution that would improve the bottom line over continuing to bolt onto their initial investment.
I have tons of small SMBs for example with a situation like this. They have some seriously downlevel ERP system running on a dusty AS/400 in the corner. Non of their IT staff touches except with great reluctance when the have to. The internet happened. So they hired some guys to build a fancy website with .Net MVC/razor and biztalk behind it. They want to get the site live as a fast as possible, the .Net guys do all the public facing parts and the stuff they actually know how to do first. Someone that last step of getting the orders into the ERP system never happens. A stop gap of e-mail the orders to the same CSRs who would keying fax orders back in 1992 is employed.
Now if someone would just upgrade that ERP (painful as that might be) it would be possible to integrate stuff like the website and all those webservices the suppliers are exposing to re-order and what not quickly. They could probably automate more take on more clients or cut staffing costs considerable. Someone just needs to be willing to sign that 200k check and get some new technology in the door.
Nonsense, I can build a quick CRUD application in Ruby/RAILS just as a fast as anything could ever be built in VB5/6. It would be just as usable too.
With additional advantages of you don't need to figure out how to when you are going to update it on the desktops of the 20 users at that SMB where they certainly don't have any kind of standard image or patch/deployment management for the desktops. Nope much much easier to run one instance on some little department server they already have.
Second Advantage, single application interacting with the database rather than multiple clients each with their own connection. A perfectly average programmer will be able to manage concurrency and multiple changes in a shared environment that way. There was a lot of opportunity to get it wrong or do it badly with multiple fat clients all talking to the same DB.
Not really, its more when you insist on not reprocessing fuel because of irrational fears about proliferation. The only reason we have a problem with waste is the first place is that Jimmy Carter should stayed on the peanut farm.
Lynch and Holder have run the most overtly corrupt (and therefore like most corrupt) DOJ in history.
I don't care much for Trump but I sure as hell hope he wins at this point because we need someone with the stones to actually look into and prosecute members of the former administration for their misdeeds. I can understand why that isn't a precedent most politicians want to see set, but its the only way we are going to get things cleaned up.
A small fire in the cabin is something that will almost certainly be smelt or spotted in time for someone to beat it out with a coat, towel, or hit with a fire extinguisher long before its likely able to threaten the plane. A fire in tightly packed cargo hold on the other hand will likely be quite a lot larger before a smoke detector is triggered and very much more difficult to get near enough to do anything about. It very well could threaten the plane. There may be enough air trapped in the luggage to permit combustion even while fire suppression methods are being deployed for quite some time time.