There is one letter a year to registered members of the church where the church states what its financial goals are, and then there's the required minimum One Dollar donation in order to keep oneself registered.
Then, if one chooses to go to one of the churches, the church actually passes around a collection bag! Criminal! And heaven forbid one just passes it on without putting any money in -- the church workers completely act as if they weren't paying attention to whether one put a donation in or not.
You can say lots of things about the religion, but perhaps the simplest, most easily disproveable argument about the church is that they milk members for money.
It is fully transactional when using InnoDB storage.
You can choose the storage method (InnoDB, BDB) per table, so you can choose the ultimate performance (BDB) in cases where you don't need transactions (like for lookup-only tables).
Backups require very little effort. Simply read lock the table and copy the table file, or you can use a live backup command.
Most reports of lacking features or non-enterprise-readiness are simply a lack of education on the part of the speaker. A quick trip to the MySQL.com site will resolve those questions.
And you assume that all database needs in the enterprise are the same?
Sure there are situations where MySQL isn't the best (in the enterprise), but there are many situations (in the same enterprise) where MySQL would excel.
You know, I was about to continue my arguments, but I've just hopped over to your blog. I can see I would be talking to a wall. You have your opinions formed, and they're as solid as fact I'm sure.
A nipple is obscene to many people because America has been traditionally modest (compared to Europe, for example).
By your argument, I should be able to go around pointing my penis at people, erect and proud. Why should the head of my penis be obscene? It's just a part of my natural body right?
Where do you draw the line? Historically in the US, the vagina, anus, nipples, and penis stay covered in public. There are designated places where this is not true, but in general that's the norm.
If people are allowed to display body parts that have previously been considered "private", where then do we draw the line on physical contact regarding those displayed body parts? In other words, it is considered reasonable, if in poor taste, for a couple to share a passionate kiss in public. If nipples are allowed to be displayed, is it then ok for one to kiss another's nipple in public? Now we're talking about where things become sexual, and what is appropriate to see.
Can I get a blowjob in public? I mean, the penis is just a part of my body, as is her mouth. I'm sure some people might think it's ok for this to be public, but it would definitely cause some problems for young people who might see this.
Where do you draw the line on language? Can I say "fuck" on TV? In the past I couldn't. "Fuck" is still considered an obscene word. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language calls fuck "vulgar slang". Of course, with enough public use it will cease to be considered slang, and will then just become another common language word.
So the summary is, each society must draw lines to mark what is appropriate and what is not appropriate. Previously, vulgar slang and certain body parts were not allowed to be said or shown in public, on television, radio, etc. (except in special context, such as seeing documentaries of natives in lands who didn't wear clothes).
Maybe the FCC is being selective in its enforcement, and if so, that's the issue that should be argued.
Radical Islamists hate everyone other than themselves, not just Americans.
Radical Islamists hate Moderate Islamists. They hate Hindus. They hate Christians. They hate Jews. They hate essentially everyone.
You're with them, or you're an "infidel", and of course the punishment for infidels is death by any means.
You are living in a fantasy world if you think diplomacy will solve the problem with radical Islamists. Their god has instructed them to kill all infidels, or die trying. That doesn't leave much room for compromise.
The only lasting solution will be for moderate Islam to work to educate/unbrainwash the youngest generation of current radicals and try to stop the growth of the radical movement.
Excuse me, but I would argue that Arabs in America generally have better ability to follow their religious beliefs than in most countries, probably including their home country. Want to wear a scarf in public? Go for it. Want to walk in public as a woman without covering your face? Feel free. Want to interpret the Koran as a non-militant, non-violent creed, by all means go for it. I don't believe most Arab countries allow their citizens that level of freedom.
The US is the most religion-friendly country in the world. That's arguably why the US was founded.
His words may have been big, but they said exactly what he meant. They also probably said it in fewer words than if he'd used smaller, less precise words. In fact, this paragraph of mine should be a counter example:P
This is in stark contrast to Jesse Jackson. To hear him is to hear a random selection of big words, some of which aren't even real words.
My response wasn't to the code, which clearly falls thru to the last case.
My response was to the snide remarks that suggest that the Bush camp needs to cheat to get votes. On the contrary, half of America actually wants to vote for him, despite what the 25% far left would like everyone to believe.
And anyway, an AC is calling me a twit? When you get out of college, spend some time and figure out how to get a slashdot account. Then have some balls and use it when you make rude replies.
It's interesting how much loud anti-Bush crap like yours there is, and yet, when it comes time to vote, half of America wants him.
I personally think it's a pretty good thing that half of America leans left, and the other half leans right. Or more accurately, half of America is sitting right in the middle, and the other two quarters are on the fringes.
Loud lefties are typically in that 25% left. Religious Righters are typically in the 25% right. The rest of us are in the middle. We like some left ideas, and some right ideas.
But it's nice to see Slashdot mods stick to their convictions (left fringe, of course).
And let's be serious, how many employees really have access to valuable and confidential information?!
Perhaps large companies have a very clear, very draconian data access policy, but I'll bet that most small-med companies are not going far beyond isolating data per department. In other words, someone in my accounting department can walk away with some of our $ data on a 256MB device. Heck it's part of their job that they be able to read that data in the first place.
Could be that MS does fear that OO will blatantly "steal" patented MS Office technology.
Or it could be that MS has intent to sue OO after MS receives a patent for something novel (like using a Tab key to jump between items) and then chooses to sue OO for _stealing_ their critical technology.
I think his point wasn't necessarily (just?) that we shouldn't write essays about literature (because as you point out there are good reasons), but rather that we shouldn't _just_ teach essay writing in conjunction with _only_ literature.
Essays can be valuable for any topic. I bet most students graduate high school or college thinking that essays are papers one writes about literature.
I don't see how having to use text as a communications medium could do anything but help spelling abilities
You must be assuming that people know how to spell to begin with. Many people apparently don't know how to spell worth a darn. And unless a spell checker runs automatically, many people never bother to force a spell check.
And as other people have mentioned, lazy internet typists have propogated annoying abbreviations for words. L8r!? Eeep that's horrid. Surely U agree w/ me.
But you're right about one thing. We now see how horribly people spell (and write) because we're more easily able to see examples of their writing (thanks to blogs, emails, and instant messaging).
MT
Slashdot Mirror
Really, this troll amuses me.
There is one letter a year to registered members of the church where the church states what its financial goals are, and then there's the required minimum One Dollar donation in order to keep oneself registered.
Then, if one chooses to go to one of the churches, the church actually passes around a collection bag! Criminal! And heaven forbid one just passes it on without putting any money in -- the church workers completely act as if they weren't paying attention to whether one put a donation in or not.
You can say lots of things about the religion, but perhaps the simplest, most easily disproveable argument about the church is that they milk members for money.
It is fully transactional when using InnoDB storage.
You can choose the storage method (InnoDB, BDB) per table, so you can choose the ultimate performance (BDB) in cases where you don't need transactions (like for lookup-only tables).
Backups require very little effort. Simply read lock the table and copy the table file, or you can use a live backup command.
Most reports of lacking features or non-enterprise-readiness are simply a lack of education on the part of the speaker. A quick trip to the MySQL.com site will resolve those questions.
Now I personally like PostgreSQL, but MySQL is indeed good, and enterprise-ready. Don't take my word for it... http://www.mysql.com/it-resources/case-studies/
What important stuff does it lack?
And you assume that all database needs in the enterprise are the same?
Sure there are situations where MySQL isn't the best (in the enterprise), but there are many situations (in the same enterprise) where MySQL would excel.
You know, I was about to continue my arguments, but I've just hopped over to your blog. I can see I would be talking to a wall. You have your opinions formed, and they're as solid as fact I'm sure.
A nipple is obscene to many people because America has been traditionally modest (compared to Europe, for example).
By your argument, I should be able to go around pointing my penis at people, erect and proud. Why should the head of my penis be obscene? It's just a part of my natural body right?
Where do you draw the line? Historically in the US, the vagina, anus, nipples, and penis stay covered in public. There are designated places where this is not true, but in general that's the norm.
If people are allowed to display body parts that have previously been considered "private", where then do we draw the line on physical contact regarding those displayed body parts? In other words, it is considered reasonable, if in poor taste, for a couple to share a passionate kiss in public. If nipples are allowed to be displayed, is it then ok for one to kiss another's nipple in public? Now we're talking about where things become sexual, and what is appropriate to see.
Can I get a blowjob in public? I mean, the penis is just a part of my body, as is her mouth. I'm sure some people might think it's ok for this to be public, but it would definitely cause some problems for young people who might see this.
Where do you draw the line on language? Can I say "fuck" on TV? In the past I couldn't. "Fuck" is still considered an obscene word. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language calls fuck "vulgar slang". Of course, with enough public use it will cease to be considered slang, and will then just become another common language word.
So the summary is, each society must draw lines to mark what is appropriate and what is not appropriate. Previously, vulgar slang and certain body parts were not allowed to be said or shown in public, on television, radio, etc. (except in special context, such as seeing documentaries of natives in lands who didn't wear clothes).
Maybe the FCC is being selective in its enforcement, and if so, that's the issue that should be argued.
Radical Islamists hate everyone other than themselves, not just Americans.
Radical Islamists hate Moderate Islamists. They hate Hindus. They hate Christians. They hate Jews. They hate essentially everyone.
You're with them, or you're an "infidel", and of course the punishment for infidels is death by any means.
You are living in a fantasy world if you think diplomacy will solve the problem with radical Islamists. Their god has instructed them to kill all infidels, or die trying. That doesn't leave much room for compromise.
The only lasting solution will be for moderate Islam to work to educate/unbrainwash the youngest generation of current radicals and try to stop the growth of the radical movement.
Well, if you're insinuating that Bush would shoot you, and Kerry would punch you, I'd say you might be correct...
:P
Unless of course you're a goose, in which case Kerry will point and one of the "real hunters" will shoot for him
Excuse me, but I would argue that Arabs in America generally have better ability to follow their religious beliefs than in most countries, probably including their home country. Want to wear a scarf in public? Go for it. Want to walk in public as a woman without covering your face? Feel free. Want to interpret the Koran as a non-militant, non-violent creed, by all means go for it. I don't believe most Arab countries allow their citizens that level of freedom.
The US is the most religion-friendly country in the world. That's arguably why the US was founded.
"Empowered" womyn of academia, that's who got spun up.
:P
Just a guess
His words may have been big, but they said exactly what he meant. They also probably said it in fewer words than if he'd used smaller, less precise words. In fact, this paragraph of mine should be a counter example :P
This is in stark contrast to Jesse Jackson. To hear him is to hear a random selection of big words, some of which aren't even real words.
My response wasn't to the code, which clearly falls thru to the last case.
My response was to the snide remarks that suggest that the Bush camp needs to cheat to get votes. On the contrary, half of America actually wants to vote for him, despite what the 25% far left would like everyone to believe.
And anyway, an AC is calling me a twit? When you get out of college, spend some time and figure out how to get a slashdot account. Then have some balls and use it when you make rude replies.
I don't dispute that :)
It's interesting how much loud anti-Bush crap like yours there is, and yet, when it comes time to vote, half of America wants him.
I personally think it's a pretty good thing that half of America leans left, and the other half leans right. Or more accurately, half of America is sitting right in the middle, and the other two quarters are on the fringes.
Loud lefties are typically in that 25% left. Religious Righters are typically in the 25% right. The rest of us are in the middle. We like some left ideas, and some right ideas.
But it's nice to see Slashdot mods stick to their convictions (left fringe, of course).
So you think... but from my experience dealing with state and federal government agencies, their sites are typically ASP and very low quality.
I'd bet I could find a state or federal agency for which this exploit would yield something interesting.
Perhaps large companies have a very clear, very draconian data access policy, but I'll bet that most small-med companies are not going far beyond isolating data per department. In other words, someone in my accounting department can walk away with some of our $ data on a 256MB device. Heck it's part of their job that they be able to read that data in the first place.
Could be that MS does fear that OO will blatantly "steal" patented MS Office technology.
Or it could be that MS has intent to sue OO after MS receives a patent for something novel (like using a Tab key to jump between items) and then chooses to sue OO for _stealing_ their critical technology.
Sadly, I'm thinking it's the latter.
I think his point wasn't necessarily (just?) that we shouldn't write essays about literature (because as you point out there are good reasons), but rather that we shouldn't _just_ teach essay writing in conjunction with _only_ literature.
Essays can be valuable for any topic. I bet most students graduate high school or college thinking that essays are papers one writes about literature.
MT