The grandparent is right. Your experience if LaTex being indespensible is a result of the disipline you are in. As a biology Ph.D., I never touched, or had any remote desire to touch LaTex. I knew plenty of grad students in CS/Physics/Mathmatics that need it and love it, but if your work doesn't involve lots of equations, using Word with Endnote (for citations) is just a much easier default software load. There are plenty of graduate students in fields that don't rely on lots of equations in their papers.
I just skimmed the article but is there any standard for the amount of time this has to be retained?
No, but there is a law that upon request, an ISP will retain the logs for 90 days for a specific investigation. That should work for most jobs. There's no need to add to it to give up everyones privacy.
There's a problem with your argument, however. The prisoners at Gitmo are NOT POW's. To be a POW your government has to have declared war on another nation and then fielded an army against that nation. The prisoners at Gitmo are not soldiers, they are not field troops, they are private citizens who have decided to kill large numbers of people who's government they disagree with. That is why they are not covered by the Geneva conventions.
If they are not POWs then they are criminals. Put them through the criminal justice system.
Where does beheading your captives for political propaganda films come under the Geneva conventions?
It either puts them as war criminals, if you think it's a war, or as murderers if you don't think it's a war. There's no 'limbo' status, just because you'd like one.
Lots of us are very concerned, but unfortunately not 51% of the voting public. The country is overrun with idiot neocons running the country now who are also trying to shove their disbelief in global warming, evolution, etc, down the throats of the rest of us. I'm a scientist and really really troubled by the censoring happening to scientists at the NOAA. I'm also troubled that neocons keep trying to get 'intelligent design' put into our science classes, and evolution taken out. These same folks have no trouble giving up all their personal liberties and let the government spy on them. They definitely don't have a problem letting 'the terrorists' be held without charges. Bush et. al. have them so terrified of terrists that they'll do about anything.
There are plenty of us who are troubled by it. Just not the 51% that it would take to get rid of the moron that currently resides at the White House. The last two races were close. Very close. Hopefully by the coming election enough of the brighter neocons (an oxymoron if ever there was one) will wake up and see how our country had been trashed by all these events, and we'll get in a more reasonable administration.
As the other poster said, they do have clearance. Unsurprisingly, if they trust their hardware/software vendors enough to use them, they also trust their support staff to work on the machines.
It might be different if we were talking about a secret CIA/Pentigon network with top secret information on it. We're not. We're talking about a network with most of it's workstations in airports throughout the country. Not exactly stuff locked behind vaults.
And it's not super-secret information. The terminals just query a big central database server with a list of restricted passengers (with lots of non-terrorists, including congressmen on it). People find out they are on the list if they get turned down to fly. It's not exactly super secret Pentigon/CIA information.
And because it isn't a true reversal, these cells are likely to be seriously mucked up long term.
Downs syndrome is caused by an extra copy of chromosome 21.
If you have two copies of chromosome 18, you get Trisomy 18. Something you don't want.
Basically, having extra copies of any chromosome is a 'bad thing'. Having an additional 23 pairs of chromosomes in addition to the normal 23 pairs, is extremely likely to lead to very abnormal cellular function.
While this is a very interesting finding in ways to manipulate events in mitosis, this isn't some miracle reversal of mitosis. It's a way to make a seriously messed up cell.
government-issue tech staff? The examples of this occuring that I've always heard about were always vendor technicians bringing in infected laptops. Not government-issue techs. I think you give way too much credit to hadware/software vendors tech staffs.
Certainly that port shouldn't be open to the internet. That goes without saying. But more than one network totally disconnected from the internet has gotten nuked before when a repair technician, etc, plugged an infected laptop into that private LAN. With a network the size if the one we are talking about, it's only a matter of time before something infected from outside gets plugged in somewhere. Patching is still neccessary unless you absolutely know that no infected machine will ever have the possibility of being plugged into the net behind the firewall. With a national network, there's never going to be that certainty.
the administrators dont trust the patch (cant see what it exactly does) so need to test
I hope that doesn't mean you think OS admins should patch away without testing, just because the code is available.
First of all, lots of admins aren't programmers. They might know some code, but for most of them, looking at a patch to some arcane TCP/IP code isn't going to be very easy to interpret. If it's a patch to a bug that got by the original coders, there's not that good of likelihood a typical administrator is going to find any flaw that might be in the patch, possibly changing it's interaction with something else on the system.
OSS patches have been released before that were re-patched in subsequent days.
Open Source is no excuse for not testing patches before updating production machines.
Billions of dollars available. The agency is building tons of new buildings, hiring so much new staff than congress is looking at what's going on... and they can't afford an extra workstation with the fingerprint scanners, etc, for testing purposes? That 'critical' patch should have been tested within a day or two of Microsoft's release.
A virtualisation solution running on Windows with, say 5 instances of Windows. That's 6 copies of patches to apply, resulting in at least 11 reboots (1 for each instance and 1+5 for the primary OS).
6 copies of patches to apply? Um no. Any admin working with that kind of setup SHOULD know about WSUS server and be rolling out patches (after he's evaluated them on a test rig to make sure they don't break any of his company-specific software) automatically.
And no, it's not 11 reboots. That's a really really dumb way to do it. You set a group policy to prevent the machines from automatically rebooting after patch installation. When it's time for the scheduled maintenence you shut down all the VM's, reboot the host OS, then crank back up the VMs. That's a total of 6 reboots for 6 windows machines.
Virtualisation is a fun toy and may be a useful tool if you're a multi-platform developer. But it does not seem to be a serious enterprise solution for the datacenter.
Virtualization IS a serius enteprise solution. Lots and lots of us have it in production. Then again, we know a bit about the field and don't patch every machine by hand and do unneccessary reboots.
The cost savings are real if you hire someone competent to run the machines.
Brilliant. Why don't you go over to the BMW forums and tell them all how you can't buy the sweet new set of 3rd party tires for them because you won't buy a German made car. I'm sure they'll all be interested in that insightful comment.
Morrowind had a couple NPCs that would join you (if you knew where to find them). I never used them, but it was build into the game. I'd be suprised if they didn't do the same for Oblivion. It's probably just a matter of finding them (before something kills you).
Sure, he could deny them service. That still won't cut down his bandwidth charges which are the issue.
If your going to bother doing anything all, instead of blocking the traffic with a linux box, I'd just set the time to midnight 1-1-1900 or something like that to make all the d-link boxes look broken (which they are, but just in a different way).
It's the same with Yahoo!. MySQL fanboys always claim 'Yahoo! uses MySQL not Oracle. That proves it's as good of a database'. Guess what? Yahoo! does use Oracle as well (and no, not just for financials. Just like Google).
In case you hadn't noticed, Google and Yahoo are very nich companies. Their largest 'product' (a search engine) requires massive ammounts of simple selects. It also doesn't require strict data integrity. If you only get 14,000 hits rather than 14,005, because the 5 are corrupt, who cares? The same goes for companies who's main product is an online forum (digg.com, etc). Simple selects. And if a few flamefests go missing now and then, no great loss.
The vast vast majority of companies out there aren't search engines or web forums. Most companies have data in their databases that are precious to them. I'm sorry to tell you, but the new *strict* feature in MySQL isn't all that. There are still plenty of areas where you can be running as strict and tell MySQL to do one thing, and it will not throw any errors, but will silently do another. That doesn't cut it when your data is precious.
That's one of the reasons Yahoo! uses Oracle for their email service, and not MySQL (Gee, look, a use other than financials!). People tend to get a lot more upset if an email they counted on having disappears than if they get 5 fewer hits on a web search than they potentially could have.
There are lots of applications in the world that aren't based on primarily simple selects, but use lots of inserts/deletes/updates/complex-nested-subquires where MySQL just isn't the right tool for the job, and even more where data integrity is a primary factor. That's why saying:
"I mean, cripes, GOOGLE uses MySql. If THEY don't need Oracle, who the hell does?"
Everyone keeps responding as if I'm saying "No one needs Oracle, therefore everyone can get by with MySQL."
Probably because you say patently rediculous things like
"I mean, cripes, GOOGLE uses MySql. [computerworld.com.sg] If THEY don't need Oracle, who the hell does?"
Google DOES need Oracle. If you'd bother to look at their jobs board for positions they are trying to fill in Google, there are LOTS of them asking for Oracle DBA's or folks who know Oracle apps. Just because they can get away with using MySQL to do simple selects from large tables where data integrity doesn't matter for one application, doesn't mean they don't have plenty of other applications they use that require REAL data integrity, and/or are much more relient on inserts/updates or complicated nested subselects where MySQL would be totally inappropriate.
Depending on what type of application it is, Oracle may very well be much better suited for the job than Postrgres, MS SQL, or Sybase. I think Google knows their needs a lot better than you do, and they DO use Oracle to fill some of those needs.
Use my karma? I don't think so. I haven't used a bit. I'm at excellent, and responding to your trolls has only added points. There's no need to follow you around. I'm sure you'll do yourself in.
My guess is your right. That or he works for D-Link.
That would be the best irony: His trolling articles against his company just leading to highly moderated comments about how the complaints are legitimate so that more people can see them.:)
I would have contacted a lawyer right after step four
Right, because lawyers are cheap... right.
I like how he doesn't mention any numbers. He already has dedicated hosting, do they charge him $1 per megabyte or something?
If you'd bother to RTFA, once again, he answers how much the hosting is costing him. He talks about numbers all over the place.
" because I offer this service free of charge and NTP is a low bandwidth protocol, the organization behind the DIX has graciously waived the normal DKR 27.000,00 (approx USD 4,400) connection fee."
" the current theory is that I will have to close the GPS.DIX.dk server or pay a connection-fee of DKR 54.000,00 (approx USD 8,800) a year as long as the traffic is a significant fraction of total traffic to the server."
" I owe $5000 to an external consultant who helped me track down where these packets came from."
" I have already spent close to 120 non-billable hours (I'm an independent contractor) negotiating with D-Link's laywers and mitigating the effect of the packets on the services provided to the legitimate users of GPS.dix.dk."
" Finally I have spent approx DKR 15.000,00 (USD 2,500) on lawyers fees trying to get D-Link to negotiate in good faith."
" If I closed the GPS.dix.dk server right now, wrote off all the time I have spent myself, then my expenses would amount to between DKR 45.000,00 and DKR 99.000,00 (USD 7,300 to 16,000) and several hundered administrators throughout Denmark would have to spend time reconfiguring their servers.
If on the other hand we assume I leave the service running and that the unauthorized packets from D-Link products continue for the next five years, the total cost for me will be around DKR 115.000,00 + 54.000,00 per year (approx USD 18,500 + USD 8,800 per year) or DKR 385.000,00 over the next five years (USD 62,000). "
block the NTP traffic from anything outside his network if it is sooooo expensive for him. You can do that at the ISP level in most cases.
He also mentions how blocking traffic is not feasible, and why, IF YOU'D BOTHER TO READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE. Learn how to read or STFU about him being an asshole.
He discovered a problem.
He contacted the company causing the problem.
He explained the problem, and simply asked them to fix it.
They didn't.
They put him off.
They threw a lawyer at him to threaten him.
They offered 'compensation' that didn't come close to covering his costs.
He was trying to do it all quietly and nicely, not crusading, and they wouldn't have it.
So instead of going through the often extremely troublesome and lengthy legal procedings (which are even worse than normal since this is an international case), he was hoping to publically embarrass the company into fixing the problem they caused. Seems like a reasonable attempt at a speedy solution, not a crusade.
If you'd bother to read the article, you'd see that their offer didn't even cover his most direct expenses, let alone all the inderects this thing has/will cause.
If you make an open NTP server you don't have any legal rights other than to turn it off
His NTP server lists it's terms of service. D-link is breaking those. I think a court is better suited to say if this is illegal than some idiot on/. who can't even RTFA.
I don't know. I still feel sympathy towards him. What they did was rotten and deserves punishment.
I'd steer clear of him, just because I wouldn't want to be the next person sued for whatever else sets him off. How is he going to make friends?
My guess is that if your not a total ass who tries to humiliate him on the internet, he won't sue you. Do you have any evidence he's ever sued anyone else before and that he get's 'set off' easily?
He was talking about corporate use. I was talking about corporate use. I thought that was kind of clear.
Yes a forum will run fine off off of MySQL. So? We used to run forums and BBS's off of flat text files. Having them run off a toy database is no great feat.
Some specialized companies (search engines or online forums) might do well running MySQL on lots of their machines, but certainly not all, if they are a big corp. A few hits being missing from 20,000 returns is no big deal. Neither is a missing Godwin-invoking flame on a forum. However folks tend to get more upset when email they counted on having disappears. That's one of the reasons Yahoo! uses Oracle and not MySQL for mail.
The vast majority of companies aren't search engines or forums. The data they have in their databases means money to them, and needs to be consistant. Having your financial, HR database or customer records database accepting 'February 31st' as a valid date isn't acceptable (Yes, I know MySQL recently fixed it recently, after leaving that very very low hanging fruit alone for years). It's also not acceptable to have someone input one number into a field with a constraint, and have the database silently change it to a different number (and yes, I know all about the *new* strict feature. It doesn't solve the problem in all instances, there are still things you can tell the database to do, and it will silently do something else instead. Oh, btw, strick is on by default only on the windows version. Mature databases don't have a 'switch' to 'accept out-of-bounds data and silently change it to something else').
In the context of the corporate environment, which the grandparent had set the question, saying MySQL is always enough is beyond foolish.
Slashdot Mirror
The grandparent is right. Your experience if LaTex being indespensible is a result of the disipline you are in. As a biology Ph.D., I never touched, or had any remote desire to touch LaTex. I knew plenty of grad students in CS/Physics/Mathmatics that need it and love it, but if your work doesn't involve lots of equations, using Word with Endnote (for citations) is just a much easier default software load. There are plenty of graduate students in fields that don't rely on lots of equations in their papers.
No, but there is a law that upon request, an ISP will retain the logs for 90 days for a specific investigation. That should work for most jobs. There's no need to add to it to give up everyones privacy.
If they are not POWs then they are criminals. Put them through the criminal justice system.
Where does beheading your captives for political propaganda films come under the Geneva conventions?
It either puts them as war criminals, if you think it's a war, or as murderers if you don't think it's a war. There's no 'limbo' status, just because you'd like one.
There are plenty of us who are troubled by it. Just not the 51% that it would take to get rid of the moron that currently resides at the White House. The last two races were close. Very close. Hopefully by the coming election enough of the brighter neocons (an oxymoron if ever there was one) will wake up and see how our country had been trashed by all these events, and we'll get in a more reasonable administration.
It might be different if we were talking about a secret CIA/Pentigon network with top secret information on it. We're not. We're talking about a network with most of it's workstations in airports throughout the country. Not exactly stuff locked behind vaults.
And it's not super-secret information. The terminals just query a big central database server with a list of restricted passengers (with lots of non-terrorists, including congressmen on it). People find out they are on the list if they get turned down to fly. It's not exactly super secret Pentigon/CIA information.
Downs syndrome is caused by an extra copy of chromosome 21.
If you have two copies of chromosome 18, you get Trisomy 18. Something you don't want. Basically, having extra copies of any chromosome is a 'bad thing'. Having an additional 23 pairs of chromosomes in addition to the normal 23 pairs, is extremely likely to lead to very abnormal cellular function.
While this is a very interesting finding in ways to manipulate events in mitosis, this isn't some miracle reversal of mitosis. It's a way to make a seriously messed up cell.
government-issue tech staff? The examples of this occuring that I've always heard about were always vendor technicians bringing in infected laptops. Not government-issue techs. I think you give way too much credit to hadware/software vendors tech staffs.
Certainly that port shouldn't be open to the internet. That goes without saying. But more than one network totally disconnected from the internet has gotten nuked before when a repair technician, etc, plugged an infected laptop into that private LAN. With a network the size if the one we are talking about, it's only a matter of time before something infected from outside gets plugged in somewhere. Patching is still neccessary unless you absolutely know that no infected machine will ever have the possibility of being plugged into the net behind the firewall. With a national network, there's never going to be that certainty.
I hope that doesn't mean you think OS admins should patch away without testing, just because the code is available.
First of all, lots of admins aren't programmers. They might know some code, but for most of them, looking at a patch to some arcane TCP/IP code isn't going to be very easy to interpret. If it's a patch to a bug that got by the original coders, there's not that good of likelihood a typical administrator is going to find any flaw that might be in the patch, possibly changing it's interaction with something else on the system.
OSS patches have been released before that were re-patched in subsequent days.
Open Source is no excuse for not testing patches before updating production machines.
Billions of dollars available. The agency is building tons of new buildings, hiring so much new staff than congress is looking at what's going on... and they can't afford an extra workstation with the fingerprint scanners, etc, for testing purposes? That 'critical' patch should have been tested within a day or two of Microsoft's release.
6 copies of patches to apply? Um no. Any admin working with that kind of setup SHOULD know about WSUS server and be rolling out patches (after he's evaluated them on a test rig to make sure they don't break any of his company-specific software) automatically.
And no, it's not 11 reboots. That's a really really dumb way to do it. You set a group policy to prevent the machines from automatically rebooting after patch installation. When it's time for the scheduled maintenence you shut down all the VM's, reboot the host OS, then crank back up the VMs. That's a total of 6 reboots for 6 windows machines.
Virtualisation is a fun toy and may be a useful tool if you're a multi-platform developer. But it does not seem to be a serious enterprise solution for the datacenter.
Virtualization IS a serius enteprise solution. Lots and lots of us have it in production. Then again, we know a bit about the field and don't patch every machine by hand and do unneccessary reboots.
The cost savings are real if you hire someone competent to run the machines.
Brilliant. Why don't you go over to the BMW forums and tell them all how you can't buy the sweet new set of 3rd party tires for them because you won't buy a German made car. I'm sure they'll all be interested in that insightful comment.
Morrowind had a couple NPCs that would join you (if you knew where to find them). I never used them, but it was build into the game. I'd be suprised if they didn't do the same for Oblivion. It's probably just a matter of finding them (before something kills you).
If your going to bother doing anything all, instead of blocking the traffic with a linux box, I'd just set the time to midnight 1-1-1900 or something like that to make all the d-link boxes look broken (which they are, but just in a different way).
From TFA you linked to:
"Today, Rekall is a dual-licensed GUI database front-end with aspirations of becoming Linux's answer to Microsoft Access."
" Note that Rekall does not include an RDMS -- it's only a front-end."
Done? I think not.
It's the same with Yahoo!. MySQL fanboys always claim 'Yahoo! uses MySQL not Oracle. That proves it's as good of a database'. Guess what? Yahoo! does use Oracle as well (and no, not just for financials. Just like Google).
In case you hadn't noticed, Google and Yahoo are very nich companies. Their largest 'product' (a search engine) requires massive ammounts of simple selects. It also doesn't require strict data integrity. If you only get 14,000 hits rather than 14,005, because the 5 are corrupt, who cares? The same goes for companies who's main product is an online forum (digg.com, etc). Simple selects. And if a few flamefests go missing now and then, no great loss.
The vast vast majority of companies out there aren't search engines or web forums. Most companies have data in their databases that are precious to them. I'm sorry to tell you, but the new *strict* feature in MySQL isn't all that. There are still plenty of areas where you can be running as strict and tell MySQL to do one thing, and it will not throw any errors, but will silently do another. That doesn't cut it when your data is precious.
That's one of the reasons Yahoo! uses Oracle for their email service, and not MySQL (Gee, look, a use other than financials!). People tend to get a lot more upset if an email they counted on having disappears than if they get 5 fewer hits on a web search than they potentially could have.
There are lots of applications in the world that aren't based on primarily simple selects, but use lots of inserts/deletes/updates/complex-nested-subquires where MySQL just isn't the right tool for the job, and even more where data integrity is a primary factor. That's why saying:
"I mean, cripes, GOOGLE uses MySql. If THEY don't need Oracle, who the hell does?"
is so patently rediculous.
Probably because you say patently rediculous things like
"I mean, cripes, GOOGLE uses MySql. [computerworld.com.sg] If THEY don't need Oracle, who the hell does?"
Google DOES need Oracle. If you'd bother to look at their jobs board for positions they are trying to fill in Google, there are LOTS of them asking for Oracle DBA's or folks who know Oracle apps. Just because they can get away with using MySQL to do simple selects from large tables where data integrity doesn't matter for one application, doesn't mean they don't have plenty of other applications they use that require REAL data integrity, and/or are much more relient on inserts/updates or complicated nested subselects where MySQL would be totally inappropriate.
Depending on what type of application it is, Oracle may very well be much better suited for the job than Postrgres, MS SQL, or Sybase. I think Google knows their needs a lot better than you do, and they DO use Oracle to fill some of those needs.
Use my karma? I don't think so. I haven't used a bit. I'm at excellent, and responding to your trolls has only added points. There's no need to follow you around. I'm sure you'll do yourself in.
That would be the best irony: His trolling articles against his company just leading to highly moderated comments about how the complaints are legitimate so that more people can see them. :)
Right, because lawyers are cheap... right.
I like how he doesn't mention any numbers.
He already has dedicated hosting, do they charge him $1 per megabyte or something?
If you'd bother to RTFA, once again, he answers how much the hosting is costing him. He talks about numbers all over the place.
" because I offer this service free of charge and NTP is a low bandwidth protocol, the organization behind the DIX has graciously waived the normal DKR 27.000,00 (approx USD 4,400) connection fee."
" the current theory is that I will have to close the GPS.DIX.dk server or pay a connection-fee of DKR 54.000,00 (approx USD 8,800) a year as long as the traffic is a significant fraction of total traffic to the server."
" I owe $5000 to an external consultant who helped me track down where these packets came from."
" I have already spent close to 120 non-billable hours (I'm an independent contractor) negotiating with D-Link's laywers and mitigating the effect of the packets on the services provided to the legitimate users of GPS.dix.dk."
" Finally I have spent approx DKR 15.000,00 (USD 2,500) on lawyers fees trying to get D-Link to negotiate in good faith."
" If I closed the GPS.dix.dk server right now, wrote off all the time I have spent myself, then my expenses would amount to between DKR 45.000,00 and DKR 99.000,00 (USD 7,300 to 16,000) and several hundered administrators throughout Denmark would have to spend time reconfiguring their servers.
If on the other hand we assume I leave the service running and that the unauthorized packets from D-Link products continue for the next five years, the total cost for me will be around DKR 115.000,00 + 54.000,00 per year (approx USD 18,500 + USD 8,800 per year) or DKR 385.000,00 over the next five years (USD 62,000). " block the NTP traffic from anything outside his network if it is sooooo expensive for him. You can do that at the ISP level in most cases.
He also mentions how blocking traffic is not feasible, and why, IF YOU'D BOTHER TO READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE. Learn how to read or STFU about him being an asshole.
He discovered a problem.
He contacted the company causing the problem.
He explained the problem, and simply asked them to fix it.
They didn't.
They put him off.
They threw a lawyer at him to threaten him.
They offered 'compensation' that didn't come close to covering his costs.
He was trying to do it all quietly and nicely, not crusading, and they wouldn't have it.
So instead of going through the often extremely troublesome and lengthy legal procedings (which are even worse than normal since this is an international case), he was hoping to publically embarrass the company into fixing the problem they caused. Seems like a reasonable attempt at a speedy solution, not a crusade.
If you'd bother to read the article, you'd see that their offer didn't even cover his most direct expenses, let alone all the inderects this thing has/will cause.
If you make an open NTP server you don't have any legal rights other than to turn it off
His NTP server lists it's terms of service. D-link is breaking those. I think a court is better suited to say if this is illegal than some idiot on /. who can't even RTFA.
I'd steer clear of him, just because I wouldn't want to be the next person sued for whatever else sets him off. How is he going to make friends?
My guess is that if your not a total ass who tries to humiliate him on the internet, he won't sue you. Do you have any evidence he's ever sued anyone else before and that he get's 'set off' easily?
You are on /. You are a geek or know lots of geeks. Get your security system rewired to use a cell phone instead of a land line.
Yes a forum will run fine off off of MySQL. So? We used to run forums and BBS's off of flat text files. Having them run off a toy database is no great feat. Some specialized companies (search engines or online forums) might do well running MySQL on lots of their machines, but certainly not all, if they are a big corp. A few hits being missing from 20,000 returns is no big deal. Neither is a missing Godwin-invoking flame on a forum. However folks tend to get more upset when email they counted on having disappears. That's one of the reasons Yahoo! uses Oracle and not MySQL for mail.
The vast majority of companies aren't search engines or forums. The data they have in their databases means money to them, and needs to be consistant. Having your financial, HR database or customer records database accepting 'February 31st' as a valid date isn't acceptable (Yes, I know MySQL recently fixed it recently, after leaving that very very low hanging fruit alone for years). It's also not acceptable to have someone input one number into a field with a constraint, and have the database silently change it to a different number (and yes, I know all about the *new* strict feature. It doesn't solve the problem in all instances, there are still things you can tell the database to do, and it will silently do something else instead. Oh, btw, strick is on by default only on the windows version. Mature databases don't have a 'switch' to 'accept out-of-bounds data and silently change it to something else').
In the context of the corporate environment, which the grandparent had set the question, saying MySQL is always enough is beyond foolish.