>All of our Pacific fleet was bottled up in Pearl Harbor at a time when we were on alert over the Japanese. That's called putting your eggs in one basket and it certainly made Pearl Harbor the most strategically obvious target. We couldn't defend the Philillipines without Pearl Harbor. They wanted to wipe out our fleet to buy themselves some time. Obviously the Japanese thought it was the most strategic target, despite being a riskier one.
Wrong. The strategic target Yamamoto was aiming for were the carriers. And they weren't in Pearl now were they? Pearl itself was immaterial, because Yamamoto knew he could not take Pearl or hold it.
>As for Kimmel and Short, they were recently cleared of any wrong doing.
RECENTLY. This boob I was replying to was blaming them for LETTING the bombing happen.
>On the declaration of war, when was the last time we ever declared one? Yet we've been fighting them my entire life.
Iraq, Afganestan, Korea, WWII, Desert Storm.
>We had the Japanese military codes broken. We knew what was coming.
Yes, we had the codes, we knew it was coming eventually, but we expected the attacks in the Phillipines. Thus the orders to McArthur to prepare.
>We worked hard to maneuver them into it. What's your explanation for why they bombed Pearl Harbor?
Yamamoto was after the carriers.
>Did they just hate us for our freedom? Do you think they really thought they could take us? They were backed into a corner and they fell for the provacations.
No, Japan suffered from "Victory Desease". They had not lost a war in their recorded history. Tojo and the Military (except Yamamoto) thought that they could take us. In retrospect, it looks dumb, but that is what they thought.
With extensive reading, I can state that the conclusion you draw is totally WRONG about FDR and Pearl Harbor.
1. It was NOT strategically obvious that Pearl was a target. It was strategically obvious that the Phillipines were. And McArthur parked the B-17s wingtip to wingtip, only making it worse. In fact, strategically, attacking Pearl Harbor was about the worst thing the Japanese could have done. If they had not, we would have executed plan Orange. And gotten our butts kicked in the Phillipines.
2. Kimmel and Short were made scapegoats for failed policies above them. The got the notice of imminant attack AFTER the attack.
3. The declaration of war came in AFTER the attack, which is part of what pissed us off.
So, maybe you better go back and study again, cause you are the kind that makes up these BS conspiracy theories.
If you look at my other follow up, you will find that there is previous evidence of DEMOCRATIC cheating in multiple elections in that county. In the two previous presidential elections.
I am not saying that anything is sure, but in Palm Beach County, if there is cheating, bet on the Demcorats to be doing it.
Once again, too little and too late, Bush won anyway. Palm Beach is heavily Demcoratic, and run by the Democrats guys, nothing to see here, move along.
I wrote the following document to relieve some of the stress. Each of these statements was received by ME during that time frame in the late 90s. The follow up is my translation. Remember, It's to LAUGH!
"Our company has surveyed the industry, and we have adjusted our pay rates to match".
The sooner in the interview process that a company makes this statement, the less true it is. At the rate the data processing industry is changing now, any survey more than about one month old is worthless. Further, the rates vary according to the state, the city, the phase of the moon, and the layoff rates in the companies in the immediate area. A good consultant will have listened to a number of possible offers over the previous month or two and have a better idea of the industry average than the recruiter.
"We think you are worth $$$ based upon our interview process, and the current market".
This really means, this is all we can afford to pay, so we are going to do it this way to make you feel like you aren't worth what you are currently getting from somewhere else. A good consultant will have listened to a number of possible offers over the previous month or two and have a better idea of the industry average than the recruiter.
"We are a FORTUNE XXX company".
And so were the other five companies I talked to this week. If you were really a big company, you wouldn't have to tell me you are FORTUNE 500. PS. This really means "I am number 499 or I would tell you that I was 498" and so on.
"A good candidate should have researched the company before talking to us."
In today's market, a good data processing professional is contacted about one to five times in a week. (During the first week or two of a quarter, about double that, during the first week or two of January, about four times that.) Of those, he or she will eliminate about 75-80% by listening to the job description, and the rate being paid. He or she will then agree to be submitted to the position, and contacted for a preliminary interview. The preliminary interview is the first point in time where the data processing professional finds out the name of the company he/she is interviewing with, yet the human resource person already expects them to know this. Human resource people, wake up! There is a good reason for this. There are something like 50 contracting/headhunting firms active in any given city at any given time. If these firms tell the candidate who they are interviewing with, some candidates then try to strike a deal on their own, or enlist a firm with a lower overhead rate.
"Any time we get more than one resume about a candidate, we throw them all away."
In order to get presented at all of the good jobs in a given town, a consultant must be in contact with several firms. Sometimes it is hard to tell which ones are honest, and even contact you each time they are going to submit you for a job. This means there are firms out there that just collect resumes, and ship them out en mass to every opening they hear about. The human resource people should time/date stamp them when they come in. (Fax machines and e-mail already do this, too.)
"We can submit you with a zero rate, so that we will get the job even if you have been submitted by another firm."
So you want me to undercut myself, and the other firm that was there first?
"Let me let you in on a little secret: We rewrite every resume for the specific job."
And so does each and every other contracting/headhunting firm. If you are telling me this "secret" then you are naive enough to think I don't already know it. Also, it is the contracting/headhunting firm's job to do this, to earn part of the cut they get from the process.
"Our benefits package is 'WORLD CLASS'".
Right, and that's why you don't have a dental plan, or something else that is basic. More common is a health care plan from some rinky dink company you never heard of. One h
>But having the paper ballot stored securely at the voting site ensures that, in the event of a contested election, officials can return to the voter-verified paper ballots which we're certain are correct, verified by each voter independently, and furthermore, unquestionably legible (and thus superior to handwritten or punch-card ballots), as the thing is printed in plain English.
Not hardly. If you print them out and let the voter touch them, they are not verifiable. And if the voter doesn't touch them, then you have no garuntee they say what the receipt given to the voter says.
>While it's ostensibly possible to rig an election using any one sort of ballot, I would submit that it is perhaps a bit more difficult to rig an election using two different media to document a ballot
And if it is possible, it WILL be done. So, you admit that all we are getting for the paper trail is the ILLUSION of more security. So, why spend the money for the illusion.
>>Oh, and don't get on mark sense ballots either. I SAW those scammed in the 2000 election by the supervisor of elections in Orange County Florida.
>I don't know what you're talking about, but that's OK: I fixed the world in responding to your two earlier paragraphs:)
You have solved or fixed NOTHING. The supervisor of elections was showing the world, on TV, how during the 2000 elections, they MANUALLY reviewed all mark sense ballots and "decided" which ones the machine could not read, then "decided" what those ballots said, instead of running them thru and letting the machine spit out the bad ones. Orange County defrauded the voters, and handed some 50 bogus votes to Al Gore.
As a Democrat, you probably want to go back to paper trails because they are easier to rig. In the 2000 Election, I witnessed some scamming FOR GORE. I also saw some attempts to steal the election, including a court case to try and steal MY properly cast ballot. And my ballot HAD a paper trail to it.
>This is the same thing I keep harping on. The usual response from Diebold (and others) is that because it is electronic there is no need for a paper ballot.
I don't know about Diebold, but a paper receipt BUYS YOU NOTHING! How do you know that your paper receipt says the same thing as the electronic registers kept in the machine? Are you going to have a complete count of the paper receipts every election? And don't give me that random audit crap. If you are going to do a random audit, someone knows which precinct it is in, and just rigs the ones in other precincts.
Either you go to a complete paper system, with it's ability to be scammed or you go completely electronic with it's ability to be scammed. At least the electronic produces fast returns, and faster processing of people.
Oh, and don't get on mark sense ballots either. I SAW those scammed in the 2000 election by the supervisor of elections in Orange County Florida.
I am telling you that "postgreSQL" can't handle the load. Not for this table, not for the others in our system.
The selects during the DDL operation are normally handled. The problem on the example table was caused by the use of a tool written by samrt alecks who think there is nothign wrong with HOLDING a lock on a table all day long. Tools that are put in when developers IGNORE the Bureaucracy of the IT department, and then the IT department pays the penalty.
And YOUR conversation was one trying to tell me to switch to "tool A" because it is "better". FYI, we have looking at MySQL. Whoefully short of the mark, even the new version 5, but that doesn't stop you from suggesting it.
My 20x30 wqs printed using an 70mm laser corrected interneg. 6mp, I don't think so.
As for some of my prints, I have another one expanded usign the same process. Picked up by a national magazine. A 5mp scanner could not even scan the original image.
We understand, but the project people swore up and down that nothing kept locks on the table. They LIED. Happens all the time, just now we have the ammunition to tell them to stuff it.
And your "options" can't keep up with the million hits and hour that the table takes.
Bah, try mainframe DB2 system, with over 900 tables. Take your little Mysql and stick it. Not a serious package. We have looked at it and it can't even begin to support some of our minor stuff, let alone the majors. The table in question takes over 1 million hits per hour.
And I was giving an EXAMPLE. Not neccessarily what would have an effect on EXACTLY what the user was talking about.
Actually, we are forced to do DDL changes in the middle of the day all the time - it is called 24 x 7 availability. The new wave of the future. If you don't have to do that, count yourself lucky.
We found the problem later, the table in question has a "rogue" application. Pretty much puts a lock on the table all day long. It is being fixed, but the developers for that particular subsystem (who were the sames ones as the ones requesting the change) assured us that NOTHING was using the table that much.
As for knowing hte usage patterns? Do you know the usage patterns of 58 systems? That's how many I support at one time. That is over 900 tables all told, just on the mainframe. Another 500 on subsystems.
So before you start casting "idiot" around, you better look more carefully at what you are talking about. Cause all you did was look in the mirror.
I used to get calls from collection agencies for a guy with the same name who lived about 40 miles away, especially after the area code split. My area kept the one he used to have, and his area got the new one.
I finally cured it by moving and going to an unlisted phone number. But these bozos found it hard to believe me EVEN WHEN I DIRECTED THEM RIGHT TO HIM.
may require much more than you realize. Case in point. A developer needed a single column added to a table, and we had done test and acceptance testing. He wanted the column added during the day, so we put it in with an alter - no big deal right? After 50 seconds or so, the alter timed out, and took down users all over the country with it!!!! And the alter did nothing wrong, but it needed exclusive access to the table - and could not get it.
We had to step back and put the alter in in the middle of the night on a Sunday. And with our usage, we can't even get that time every week.
Bottom line? Get over yourself. You would do better to go talk to IT and find out WHY things are the way they are, and work with them, rather than against them.
Having been part of project to deal with some of that data a while ago, 300 terabytes sounds about right. You do not just do major searches against the whole thing, you have to be going after specific things. And that much data *only* lists the connect points and the billing and the time. That has nothing to do with recording the conversations themselves. There is not enough storage on earth to record all the conversations.
Unless you have dealt with AT&T and some of this data, you have no idea how much data is neccessary just to hold the billing information for a huge network like AT&T.
I am a DBA in a DB2 shop. We are still running 7.x and they are giving away 8.2 This will give me several months to try out new features of 8.2 before the upgrade to our mainframe.
I can throw this on my laptop, and try out some ODBC stuff as well which is going to come down the pike from the development side of the house.
I never said I bought it in 1966. I said it was made in 1966. I bought it, used, in 1979. And the point is that until recently, all you could count on was a camera slowly losing value. Now they are gaining value. What does that say about the camera market?
The last true Alpa was made in around 1988. I spent some time over the years collecting the lenses I wanted, the accessories I desired. Haven't had to buy anything but film and batteries for years. (And a typical camera battery for those cameras lasts 10+ years).
I, for one, welcome many Nikon and Minolta owners to the orphaned cameras club.
I have watched the price of my cameras do nothing but INCREASE on e-bay and in used camera stores and shows over the years, to the point that I can sell my gear for more than I paid for it NEW (for the parts I got new).
Heck, my oldest camera body (made in 1965/6) has increased 5-6 fold in value from what I paid for it, used, many years ago.
There are still several shops around where I can get repairs, including one that can fabricate parts.
I learned years ago to have my own backups for the time repairs take.
Slashdot Mirror
>All of our Pacific fleet was bottled up in Pearl Harbor at a time when we were on alert over the Japanese. That's called putting your eggs in one basket and it certainly made Pearl Harbor the most strategically obvious target. We couldn't defend the Philillipines without Pearl Harbor. They wanted to wipe out our fleet to buy themselves some time. Obviously the Japanese thought it was the most strategic target, despite being a riskier one.
Wrong. The strategic target Yamamoto was aiming for were the carriers. And they weren't in Pearl now were they? Pearl itself was immaterial, because Yamamoto knew he could not take Pearl or hold it.
>As for Kimmel and Short, they were recently cleared of any wrong doing.
RECENTLY. This boob I was replying to was blaming them for LETTING the bombing happen.
>On the declaration of war, when was the last time we ever declared one? Yet we've been fighting them my entire life.
Iraq, Afganestan, Korea, WWII, Desert Storm.
>We had the Japanese military codes broken. We knew what was coming.
Yes, we had the codes, we knew it was coming eventually, but we expected the attacks in the Phillipines. Thus the orders to McArthur to prepare.
>We worked hard to maneuver them into it. What's your explanation for why they bombed Pearl Harbor?
Yamamoto was after the carriers.
>Did they just hate us for our freedom? Do you think they really thought they could take us? They were backed into a corner and they fell for the provacations.
No, Japan suffered from "Victory Desease". They had not lost a war in their recorded history. Tojo and the Military (except Yamamoto) thought that they could take us. In retrospect, it looks dumb, but that is what they thought.
With extensive reading, I can state that the conclusion you draw is totally WRONG about FDR and Pearl Harbor.
1. It was NOT strategically obvious that Pearl was a target. It was strategically obvious that the Phillipines were. And McArthur parked the B-17s wingtip to wingtip, only making it worse. In fact, strategically, attacking Pearl Harbor was about the worst thing the Japanese could have done. If they had not, we would have executed plan Orange. And gotten our butts kicked in the Phillipines.
2. Kimmel and Short were made scapegoats for failed policies above them. The got the notice of imminant attack AFTER the attack.
3. The declaration of war came in AFTER the attack, which is part of what pissed us off.
So, maybe you better go back and study again, cause you are the kind that makes up these BS conspiracy theories.
If you look at my other follow up, you will find that there is previous evidence of DEMOCRATIC cheating in multiple elections in that county. In the two previous presidential elections.
I am not saying that anything is sure, but in Palm Beach County, if there is cheating, bet on the Demcorats to be doing it.
is already labeled Terrorist. The official announcement is at 4:35 pm today.
Slashdot to follow, next week Tuesday at 10:31am.
LOL
in the 2000 election. It isn't a stretch to see them cheating the same way again. Just that this tme, like that time, they didn't cheat ENOUGH.
t m
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a0c85230a29.h
Once again, too little and too late, Bush won anyway. Palm Beach is heavily Demcoratic, and run by the Democrats guys, nothing to see here, move along.
I wrote the following document to relieve some of the stress. Each of these statements was received by ME during that time frame in the late 90s. The follow up is my translation. Remember, It's to LAUGH!
"Our company has surveyed the industry, and we have adjusted our pay rates to match".
The sooner in the interview process that a company makes this statement, the less true it is. At the rate the data processing industry is changing now, any survey more than about one month old is worthless. Further, the rates vary according to the state, the city, the phase of the moon, and the layoff rates in the companies in the immediate area. A good consultant will have listened to a number of possible offers over the previous month or two and have a better idea of the industry average than the recruiter.
"We think you are worth $$$ based upon our interview process, and the current market".
This really means, this is all we can afford to pay, so we are going to do it this way to make you feel like you aren't worth what you are currently getting from somewhere else. A good consultant will have listened to a number of possible offers over the previous month or two and have a better idea of the industry average than the recruiter.
"We are a FORTUNE XXX company".
And so were the other five companies I talked to this week. If you were really a big company, you wouldn't have to tell me you are FORTUNE 500. PS. This really means "I am number 499 or I would tell you that I was 498" and so on.
"A good candidate should have researched the company before talking to us."
In today's market, a good data processing professional is contacted about one to five times in a week. (During the first week or two of a quarter, about double that, during the first week or two of January, about four times that.) Of those, he or she will eliminate about 75-80% by listening to the job description, and the rate being paid. He or she will then agree to be submitted to the position, and contacted for a preliminary interview. The preliminary interview is the first point in time where the data processing professional finds out the name of the company he/she is interviewing with, yet the human resource person already expects them to know this. Human resource people, wake up! There is a good reason for this. There are something like 50 contracting/headhunting firms active in any given city at any given time. If these firms tell the candidate who they are interviewing with, some candidates then try to strike a deal on their own, or enlist a firm with a lower overhead rate.
"Any time we get more than one resume about a candidate, we throw them all away."
In order to get presented at all of the good jobs in a given town, a consultant must be in contact with several firms. Sometimes it is hard to tell which ones are honest, and even contact you each time they are going to submit you for a job. This means there are firms out there that just collect resumes, and ship them out en mass to every opening they hear about. The human resource people should time/date stamp them when they come in. (Fax machines and e-mail already do this, too.)
"We can submit you with a zero rate, so that we will get the job even if you have been submitted by another firm."
So you want me to undercut myself, and the other firm that was there first?
"Let me let you in on a little secret: We rewrite every resume for the specific job."
And so does each and every other contracting/headhunting firm. If you are telling me this "secret" then you are naive enough to think I don't already know it. Also, it is the contracting/headhunting firm's job to do this, to earn part of the cut they get from the process.
"Our benefits package is 'WORLD CLASS'".
Right, and that's why you don't have a dental plan, or something else that is basic. More common is a health care plan from some rinky dink company you never heard of. One h
>But having the paper ballot stored securely at the voting site ensures that, in the event of a contested election, officials can return to the voter-verified paper ballots which we're certain are correct, verified by each voter independently, and furthermore, unquestionably legible (and thus superior to handwritten or punch-card ballots), as the thing is printed in plain English.
:)
Not hardly. If you print them out and let the voter touch them, they are not verifiable. And if the voter doesn't touch them, then you have no garuntee they say what the receipt given to the voter says.
>While it's ostensibly possible to rig an election using any one sort of ballot, I would submit that it is perhaps a bit more difficult to rig an election using two different media to document a ballot
And if it is possible, it WILL be done. So, you admit that all we are getting for the paper trail is the ILLUSION of more security. So, why spend the money for the illusion.
>>Oh, and don't get on mark sense ballots either. I SAW those scammed in the 2000 election by the supervisor of elections in Orange County Florida.
>I don't know what you're talking about, but that's OK: I fixed the world in responding to your two earlier paragraphs
You have solved or fixed NOTHING. The supervisor of elections was showing the world, on TV, how during the 2000 elections, they MANUALLY reviewed all mark sense ballots and "decided" which ones the machine could not read, then "decided" what those ballots said, instead of running them thru and letting the machine spit out the bad ones. Orange County defrauded the voters, and handed some 50 bogus votes to Al Gore.
As a Democrat, you probably want to go back to paper trails because they are easier to rig. In the 2000 Election, I witnessed some scamming FOR GORE. I also saw some attempts to steal the election, including a court case to try and steal MY properly cast ballot. And my ballot HAD a paper trail to it.
>This is the same thing I keep harping on. The usual response from Diebold (and others) is that because it is electronic there is no need for a paper ballot.
I don't know about Diebold, but a paper receipt BUYS YOU NOTHING! How do you know that your paper receipt says the same thing as the electronic registers kept in the machine? Are you going to have a complete count of the paper receipts every election? And don't give me that random audit crap. If you are going to do a random audit, someone knows which precinct it is in, and just rigs the ones in other precincts.
Either you go to a complete paper system, with it's ability to be scammed or you go completely electronic with it's ability to be scammed. At least the electronic produces fast returns, and faster processing of people.
Oh, and don't get on mark sense ballots either. I SAW those scammed in the 2000 election by the supervisor of elections in Orange County Florida.
How to kill a good product.
I am telling you that "postgreSQL" can't handle the load. Not for this table, not for the others in our system.
The selects during the DDL operation are normally handled. The problem on the example table was caused by the use of a tool written by samrt alecks who think there is nothign wrong with HOLDING a lock on a table all day long. Tools that are put in when developers IGNORE the Bureaucracy of the IT department, and then the IT department pays the penalty.
And YOUR conversation was one trying to tell me to switch to "tool A" because it is "better". FYI, we have looking at MySQL. Whoefully short of the mark, even the new version 5, but that doesn't stop you from suggesting it.
My 20x30 wqs printed using an 70mm laser corrected interneg. 6mp, I don't think so.
As for some of my prints, I have another one expanded usign the same process. Picked up by a national magazine. A 5mp scanner could not even scan the original image.
I'll stick with film.
The price to come down under a reasonable point. And allow me to keep the $5000 in glass I have in my lenses.
We understand, but the project people swore up and down that nothing kept locks on the table. They LIED. Happens all the time, just now we have the ammunition to tell them to stuff it.
And your "options" can't keep up with the million hits and hour that the table takes.
3 mp photo can barely be enlarged past 5x7 without showing unacceptable effects.
Yet, I can take a 35mm image to 20x30 with fewer effects. (I have one hanging over my fireplace)
I'm still waiting for 10mp to seriously consider digital cameras as more than toys.
Bah, try mainframe DB2 system, with over 900 tables. Take your little Mysql and stick it. Not a serious package. We have looked at it and it can't even begin to support some of our minor stuff, let alone the majors. The table in question takes over 1 million hits per hour.
And I was giving an EXAMPLE. Not neccessarily what would have an effect on EXACTLY what the user was talking about.
Actually, we are forced to do DDL changes in the middle of the day all the time - it is called 24 x 7 availability. The new wave of the future. If you don't have to do that, count yourself lucky.
We found the problem later, the table in question has a "rogue" application. Pretty much puts a lock on the table all day long. It is being fixed, but the developers for that particular subsystem (who were the sames ones as the ones requesting the change) assured us that NOTHING was using the table that much.
As for knowing hte usage patterns? Do you know the usage patterns of 58 systems? That's how many I support at one time. That is over 900 tables all told, just on the mainframe. Another 500 on subsystems.
So before you start casting "idiot" around, you better look more carefully at what you are talking about. Cause all you did was look in the mirror.
I used to get calls from collection agencies for a guy with the same name who lived about 40 miles away, especially after the area code split. My area kept the one he used to have, and his area got the new one.
I finally cured it by moving and going to an unlisted phone number. But these bozos found it hard to believe me EVEN WHEN I DIRECTED THEM RIGHT TO HIM.
may require much more than you realize. Case in point. A developer needed a single column added to a table, and we had done test and acceptance testing. He wanted the column added during the day, so we put it in with an alter - no big deal right? After 50 seconds or so, the alter timed out, and took down users all over the country with it!!!! And the alter did nothing wrong, but it needed exclusive access to the table - and could not get it.
We had to step back and put the alter in in the middle of the night on a Sunday. And with our usage, we can't even get that time every week.
Bottom line? Get over yourself. You would do better to go talk to IT and find out WHY things are the way they are, and work with them, rather than against them.
Having been part of project to deal with some of that data a while ago, 300 terabytes sounds about right. You do not just do major searches against the whole thing, you have to be going after specific things. And that much data *only* lists the connect points and the billing and the time. That has nothing to do with recording the conversations themselves. There is not enough storage on earth to record all the conversations.
Unless you have dealt with AT&T and some of this data, you have no idea how much data is neccessary just to hold the billing information for a huge network like AT&T.
The day I watched the CBS news at noon declare me DEAD. Somehow I just kinda knew the report was false!
I am a DBA in a DB2 shop. We are still running 7.x and they are giving away 8.2 This will give me several months to try out new features of 8.2 before the upgrade to our mainframe.
I can throw this on my laptop, and try out some ODBC stuff as well which is going to come down the pike from the development side of the house.
I never said I bought it in 1966. I said it was made in 1966. I bought it, used, in 1979. And the point is that until recently, all you could count on was a camera slowly losing value. Now they are gaining value. What does that say about the camera market?
The last true Alpa was made in around 1988. I spent some time over the years collecting the lenses I wanted, the accessories I desired. Haven't had to buy anything but film and batteries for years. (And a typical camera battery for those cameras lasts 10+ years).
I, for one, welcome many Nikon and Minolta owners to the orphaned cameras club.
I have watched the price of my cameras do nothing but INCREASE on e-bay and in used camera stores and shows over the years, to the point that I can sell my gear for more than I paid for it NEW (for the parts I got new).
Heck, my oldest camera body (made in 1965/6) has increased 5-6 fold in value from what I paid for it, used, many years ago.
There are still several shops around where I can get repairs, including one that can fabricate parts.
I learned years ago to have my own backups for the time repairs take.