You're the one making up nonsense about the people you're supporting when their own words prove you to be a liar. How is that rational exactly?
You're about to buckle under the stress of intelligent ideas aren't you? You are completely irrational. You look at something I say and you see something completely different, I say show me specific examples of where this has been stated, that we are employing some 20th century economic incarnation of manifest destiny and you come back with some more bs you pulled out of your ass, then you call me a liar, then you claim to know exactly what a neo-con is, down to the bone. You're so convinced that we're killing people in Iraq, not doing any good, I can show you numerous documents to support the claim that less people are dieing in Iraq right now than there were in the late 90s. You think George Bush hates black people too, don't you? And Condi Rice is Aunt Jemima. That's the kind of shit I hear coming from liberals.
Look at how many more people are getting food now, compared with the old broken oil-for-food program. Look at the number of vaccinations administered to children (3,000,000 last I checked), which is important given the sess pools and trash heaps littering Iraq. Infant mortality rate, mothers mortality rate, health care in general. Why do I have to explain this to you? You're just going to go on thinking whatever you want to think, whatever supports your other views. You never answered my question about economic sactions. Did you say you'd do absolutely nothing? No economic sanctions or military action? Is that what you meant by "stay out of my business"? No, I know what you meant by that, you want the gov to legalize crack or some nonsense. That's the problem with you liberals, you're fucked up on drugs and irrational.
And when it comes to economics you think you know a whole lot, but when someone comes along who really does know what they're talking about, you look like a complete idiot, just rattling off things you read on the internet, things meant to scare people. The american currency other people are using to deal with is not counted in the national debt. An economy is measured by it's real assets, not floating currency. That's beside the point, you just went off on a tangent there. Our economy is measured by our real assets, debt represents capital investment in America. You never answered my question, is it wise to buy a house in cash?
See you're trying to run things by me again, for show apparently, because it doesn't make any sense. National debt is represented as real assets in our homeland. If the dollar value were to fall, we make off like bandits, we being your average American (don't know about you). It's true that we wouldn't have the priviledge of importing so much, foreign investments in our homeland would fall, but then you go back to what I said before, that situation balances itself out, it usually manifests itself as higher American wages and what not, bolstering our manufacturing. Some areas of the economy would certainly suffer, the ones who are dependent on imports and financial transactions (banks), but that is not a huge deal, we have a relatively robust economy, perhaps the most versatile in the world. Energy is still the paramount issue. Enough with these doomsday scenarios, look at history, this has happened before and in every case I can recall the rest of the world tanks worse than we do at times of struggle.
As for borrowing and spending, that is not a partisan issue. I'm not even going to take a position there. Perhaps there's more than meets the eye. I don't relate national debt to persronal finance at all, that is, national debt hasn't been proven to be a bad thing for America. I put myself in hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt when I bought my first house, and I intend to pay it off before I'm dead. Difference is, America doesn't necessarily have a limited lifespan, and right now, we're a prime place to do investments. Is it wise to pay for your house in cash? Think about that in the broader scope for a second.
I don't know what connection you're trying to make with PNAC and the current administration, but I as a neo-con, agree that we aught to be enforcing human rights all over the world, through military force. What is meant by promoting economic domination is not clear to me either, you haven't sited a particular instance of that being said. Perhaps they were saying they want to promote American free-market policies, free-trade and all that. I suppose you would settle for economic sanctions on rogue nations, but I feel like they do more harm than strategic military strikes. Look at the facts in Iraq, we've probably saved more children from starvation and disease than the current death toll. Things have taken a turn for better since we invaded. I'm not going to prove those claims however as I don't have time to sit down with you. It's not clear what you're for and against, I think you are just full of irrational hatred.
Ok, set partisan politics aside for a moment, look at that for what it is. They were saying reconstruction funds can come from Iraq. This is a good policy, but "paying for the Iraq war", i.e. the billions of dollars to pay for bombs and fuel, military salaries, that is not included in reconstructionn. That's what I hate about politics, the house themselves are just as rhetorical and biased as the radical media is. I'm watching the news right now and some Imam in Afghanistan is jumping up and down waving his hands, trying to get the crowd all riled up about some silly cartoon. That's the kindof shit we deal with here in the U.S. too! Some guy comes up with a chart, I'm sure the rest of the congressmen look at it and go "nice job... probably got some votes with that". That one in particular was really effective because it went under the radar of people like me, who see it for what it is.
Those are the Iraqi dinars hard at work. What're you talkin about? That is Bush's BABY right there, he's snuggling Iraq, trying to give them a good home. Give the man a little credit, sheesh. Put yourself in his shoes. Seriously, you need to lighten up and look at things with a rational eye. I would certainly hesitate to think that Bill Clinton would have been so cruel as to steal money from another country! Bill Clinton's problem is he saw too much that could go wrong in Iraq, he fought wars from the air as a matter of policy. I think that is a recurring trend among Democrats, given their base supporters, who cringe at the thought of any American's dieing. That's the simple truth. The rest is just bullshit designed to keep voters grounded in the party. Of course some criticism is good, but this argument is just ridiculous.
Well if it isn't Darby, the guy with the nutty sig.
I've heard your Euro argument from a number of people, it must be all over the liberal blogs, eh? I'll tell you something your intellectual pals probably never learned in school, Economics 101, there is no proof that the value of the dollar in comparison to other currencies has any effect on the well being of America. The effects are complex, and not easy to predict, but you show me an instance when the value of the dollar sank and the economy did poorly as a direct result. It's not like stocks, the value goes down and you lose. What happened when the Dollar sank in value compared to the Euro? American businesses began buying less european goods, the rest of the world quits buying european goods and starts buying more American goods. Europe wasn't doing too well, check out France, one of europe's biggest exporters, they're tanking right now because nobody can afford their chachka's. As it turns out, the REPUBLICAN'S pursue this policy more often than the dems. The REPUBLICANS support big business, dems are afraid of big evil businesses. This idea that the value of the dollar in reference to other nations is critical, that it's "holding our economy afloat" is simply stupid. OIL IS ALREADY TRADED IN EUROS AND OUR ECONOMY DOES FINE! The only reason they traded it in dollars is because it was a stable currency, but now the euro is about as stable, so it doesn't matter which. Iran isn't even invested in Euros anymore, as it turns out. There's also the fact that the neo-con agenda has involved invading Iraq as a means to promote American economic domination. Where the hell do you get these so-called FACTS, that's just stupid. We already dominate, and it's real easy to do, you make a positive environment to do business and people will do business there. We went into Iraq after 9/11 to battle terrorists and that's exactly what we're doing, handing their asses to them, you guys will accept anything but the obvious facts. You want some good news? Read this: http://michaelyon.blogspot.com/Those are pretty much the only reasons we are in Iraq right now. You know who you remind me of when you talk like that? Napoleon Dynamite's brother, Kip is it?
I don't remember Bush ever saying that the war would be a few months long, or that we would pay for it with Iraqi oil exports, neither of those were his plans. Major combat operations did end after a few weeks, maybe that's what you mean, but everybody knew the rebuilding process would be long and hard. He never intended to take oil from Iraq, that's silly, maybe you should check your facts. Wherever this inane idea came from, you don't pay any thought to the effect of taking oil for our own benefit. Furthermore, you're completely short sighted, to you this war is already over and we've lost. That's ridiculous.
Take a step back and think out your own arguments. You really WANT to believe that our leadership is as intelligent as a bunch of primates with big sticks, going and taking whatever they want. You've been compromised, buddy. You're the fool. Funny too, you use nice big words and well constructed sentences.
Iran decided to switch off the dollar a long time ago, they recently switched off the Euro. No big deal. If you look at the implications of this it's not a big deal. It's the oil exporting countries investing their assets, they may very well come back to the dollar.
Somehow this WMD thing became the topic of discussion amongst liberals, as if they were somehow duped into the war in Iraq after 9/11.
I have a class this semester where the teacher encourages political debate, he is a liberal and I am a neo-con (I love that), so we get into the topic of the war in Iraq, and he says "You know why we went into Iraq right? OIL!" and so I politely responded "See, I just don't see what we have to gain by overtaking Iraq, in terms of oil." to which he responded "That's right, we don't! It's not worth it!". He made my point quite cleary, and quickly realized the quandary he had gotten into so we moved on at that point. The fact that Iraq exports oil is not just a coincidence, it is not a reason for going to war but it WOULD explain why Iraq is so corrupt, that is the only correlation I, myself, can make between the Iraq war and oil.
Yep, I use them for comparisons, for example, I had a list of orders a supplier sent me and a list I made myself, because I wanted to see how crappy the list the supplier gave me was, so on one side I had a list of orders they supplier gave me that shouldn't have been there, the ones we both got right, and then the ones I had but the supplier didn't. Not much practical use in my experience, more for analyzing stuff, but if you're shopping for the perfect database you look for stuff like that.
By the way, all you need to do is a left join and a right join, using "union" (and not "union all") would eliminate any duplicates. This is the preferred method because it is faster.
Another aspect I failed to mention is that there is no defacto replication for PGSQL. I investigated last year and it was a half assed attempt at replication, and a bunch of commercial offerings.
All the other databases have some supported solution, including free replication with MySQL (integrated).
By full outer join I mean a combination of left and right outer joins, i.e. *=*
Last I checked Oracle didn't support them, I dunno, it is always possible to do a left outer and right outer and union the results, that has always been my approach when working with sybase/oracle without ever even thinking about it, like I didn't ever expect it to change. Standards, like you say. For a while I wanted for things to change, but obviously they never change.
I want to use longer names for some tables in my Ruby on Rails application, machine generated names for the most part (mimicking multi-to-multi joins between DAO's.
They both sprung about at about the same time, from the same "crowd" if you will, the guys over at Berkeley working on Ingres. That's what I meant by that, none of the other databases really go back that far.
Yeah I experienced that too, thats because of the lousy query optimizer. You can even manually specify indexes and it will still not use them when you want it to. I don't know the explanation for that, but "lousy query optimizer" pretty much encompasses it doesn't it?
Here are the major differences between commercial databases I've used, all offer a free "express" edition:
Sybase
Cheaper version of Oracle, much of the same underlying code, optimised for speed although maybe not quite as fast as Oracle. Missing some features like GIS datatypes. Annoying limitations like a 30 character name limit and no full outer joins (only the union trick). Recently integrated with the java virtual machine to do java stored procedures, good for java development. Popular with financial transaction companies, probably due to stable codebase (not a lot changes).
MS SQL
Microsoft buys Sybase codebase, which is decent, and build into it a lot of developer studio tools and integration, no Java.
Oracle
Much the same as Sybase, grew out of the same early-era databases, with more features/options (like GIS datatypes) and arguably, it's faster too. Also the most expensive. Popular with Java applications, java integration just like Sybase. Same annoying limitations like 30 character limit on names and no full outer joins.
DB2
Move forward with new features unlike Oracle and Sybase, noticably different feel than the classic databases. Java integration also. None of the annoying limitations mentioned earlier.
MySQL
Lots of advanced features added in newer versions, such as GIS datatypes (by programmers for programmers, as they say). Fast, low memory footprint, free. Widespread support. Biggest setbacks are the lousy query optimizer and other fundamental aspects of the core which may come back to bite you, although I hear it has a well organized design that aids in development of new features.
PGSQL
Great database, been around long time, used to be slow but now is faster with more popularity due to mysql success. Free and all that. Biggest limitation in my limited experience is the lack of any replication features built in.
I know I may have missed some major issues that I'm not aware of, so feel free to add to this.
He has done nothing his entire career to engender in me the kind of trust that you have placed in him.
Your focus is like a laser beam on the president, nothing else matters to you, and you only see bad, even when it's made up. Someones taking pictures of Iraqi prisoners naked? Blame the fucking president! Hell, call it torture! Oooh, Halliburton's stock price is going up, GeT THE PRESIDENT! Fuck... WMD's? You're still hanging on to that? Everybody knew Saddam had WMDs. Holy shit, you are irrational.
I'll tell you where we diverge. I see everything through the lense of war. I'm all for using military force. I served in the military, got out a little over a year ago. I'm what you call a NEO-CON, I want to see Iran get the shit blown out of them. I would launch a fucking volley of cruise missiles at Ahmadinejad for threatening our allies, judge jury and executioner. Anybody who's willing to go up to bat for MY VALUES has earned my respect. I don't care about these small beans you're so hung up about, I'll be pissed if Iran has it's way, I'm pissed that we're not building a 50 foot wall along the mexican border and we have rats moving drugs and terrorists into the US. I'm pissed that I have to pay so much of my income in taxes. That's about it. I seriously couldn't care any less about all the other bullshit.
McVeigh actually set off a bomb and killed people and he got his day in court as called for by the fifth amendment.
Well shit, you keep telling yourself that, in my opinion mcveigh never should have been able to set off his bomb. Were it in my power, I would have taken preventative measures. You think that by allowing people the level of privacy that they've had for the last 250 years in America that things will calm down, every now and then there may be a massacre but god forbid we lose our illusionary right to privacy. Well, think again. The same technology that makes it easier and easier to spy on people is used for anonymous communications. Years ago a transatlantic communication required a high-power, low frequency broadcast over the airwaves, and we were listening to EVERYBODY. That is not the case any more. Your dumb ass doesn't see it, you just run around with your underwear over your head screaming about privacy being violated, which by the way, you most certainly haven't actually been affected by.
If Bush doesn't like it, he can put his party's balls on the line, step up, and announce that he's officially suspending Habeus Corpus (for once, an actually recognized war power). Even Abraham Lincoln had the balls to do that.
Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus for a different reason. You know what an illegal enemy combatant is? You go read all about illegal enemy combatants, and then read about the sort of people Abe was putting in jail. Your talk about an actually recognized war power is skirting the truth, that the president can do whatever the fuck he wants during time of war, like Abe did. That it is RECOGNIZED is just stating the obvious, a historical fact, I recognize that the president has the power to declare marshal law, and drop a daisy cutter on a U.S. city if it is in the best interests of the country, i.e. a biological weapon. He may even be voted out of office for something like that, hopefully if it ever comes to that we don't have a bunch of whiners like yourself getting in the way of it. You're the one with no balls, you live in fantasy world.
Bush specifically has the power to defend us, except for the limits placed on him by the fourth amendment: that the government specifically obtains warrants when wiretapping a citizen of the united states.
You are bending the truth, on the verge of lieing here. The wiretaps were targeted at foreign terrorists. It's not in my nature to call you a liar, I know some people are just misinformed, misguided, misunderstood. I know what you were trying to say, but look, you're not scaring me here, if that is your motive. I wouldn't even care if he were conducting domestic wiretaps, personally, but he wasn't because that would have been unlawful.
Then we won. We successfully shattered the communication lines for all the terrorist cells in the US, they will no longer be able to coordinate attacks and have a serious damper put on their fundraising and recruiting capabilities. Oh wait, there's a billion other ways to communicate, and guess what, the NSA knows about them too. Most likely, any terrorists assumed that they were already being tapped, otherwise their stupidity would have taken themselves out years ago.
Oh I see, so you're just trying to single out the president here. Ok. I already knew that, but thanks for stating it so clearly. And you really give the terrorists way too much credit. Go do some reading, we have caught thousands of terrorists worldwide because of phone records and wiretaps. The Saudis have a less restrictive wiretapping policy, and the success over in Saudi Arabia has been phenomenal. You see, the terrorists thought that by using pre-paid cell phones with stolen or fake identities that they were safe, and that they could say whatever they wanted over the air. I remember in one instance we caught terrorists because we picked up a phone call between two of these pre-paid phones that was just 60 seconds of silence. We went in (by we I mean U.S. intelligence
FBI agents getting busted for insider trading using illegal wiretaps
People get busted for insider trading from all walks of life. Take a finance officer who scours over financial figures daily, they have a lot more access to sensitive information, they pride themselves on their strong sense of ethics, but you'll always have your Anderson Coopers.
...Jose Padilla...
What the fuck? Jose Padilla the terrorist? Possibly other cases? There are plenty of cases where enemy combatants are detained. I don't know why you bring him up, like I'm supposed to feel sorry for him or something. We should have dropped a guided bomb on his house, in the US, wouldn't that go over well? Heh heh.
What's your point? Might makes right? That the police are above the law like Bush thinks he is?
Allow me to clarify. A right to privacy doesn't exist, it isn't written law, the constitution talks about freedoms, freedom of speech, the law puts limits on what agencies can do, but there is no statutory right to privacy. The president has wartime powers, specifically he is obligated to protect the people and uphold the constitution, the right to LIFE. It's plain as day if you know how to read the constitution. You think the president is just some schmuck who does his job like a cop does his, but no, I'm not relating the president to cops, his job is much different.
Oh wouldn't you like to see some domestic spying allegations. If you ask me the whole plan is already ruined, some fucking senator leaked what we were doing, now all lines are probably dead. They should be imprisoned for it, undermining war efforts for political gain is all it is. He/SHE remains anonymous.
Liberty doesn't really refer to privacy either. You can do and say whatever you want, but there isn't much to guarantee your privacy in doing so. The po-po could bust down your door for any old reason, throw your underwear drawer out on the front lawn for the world to see.
If you quit making up these fantastic scenarios and look at it for what it is, it's not so bad at all. You know the reasons too, I don't have to convince you. You're just playing a trendy game called "Get the President: War Time Edition"(TM)
I hear you about the lazy leeches bit. If I were going to donate massive amounts of charity, I'd donate it to a serious cause. I don't believe in handouts, at least outside of a crisis situation.
But about the morality of Gates, I think he has some unethical business practices in the past, but if you're going to tag morality to the question, the argument could be made that he was playing for his own employee's benefit, or for other altruistic motives.
And as I was saying in my previous message, I think Bill actually stumbled upon the richest man in the world status. I don't think he ever intended to be the richest man in the world, which is something to keep in mind. I wouldn't trust another man who wants to be the richest.
And as for Jobs, I once heard a quote from him, back when he was getting paid $1 per year to work for Apple, "I had $300 million by the time I was [20 something] how much more do I need?" [Laughter, applause]
I think I could spend $300 million mighty quick myself.
Some guys play the game with a bad attitude, they just want to reach the "richest man in the world" status, like Larry Ellison of Oracle, never makes any charity donations and seems to be very interested in beating out Gates.
I don't think Gates was ever playing the game like others play it. I don't think he's one of these guys who just HAS to be the richest man in the world. It seems like he is gearing up to make massive donations to charity closer to the end of his life, when he can cash out his earnings. Honestly, why WOULDN'T you do that? Unlike the Waltons, who each inherited $30 billion or something, who cares to give their kids that much money? If my parents gave me $30 billion I would immediately hand off $29 billion to charity and live like a billionaire on the last of it.
I learned at some point that if I spent my free time working, I would be successful. It didn't matter how good I was at doing what I did (programming), if I just DID it, non-stop, all my free time, it became routine. Sure sometimes I wanted to take a break and go out with my wife to a movie or something (my wife by the way, I asked her to keep me busy, she's the slave master if you will), but if I took too much time off I became lazy and the next day it was harder to get back into my working groove.
Now, if I were a genius like Steve Jobs or something, my ideas would be tremendously successful, but as it is, they are only slightly successful, but as a result I have a lot more money to throw around, paid off all my credit card bills in no time. I still have a subscription to WoW, and my wife plays with her younger siblings sometimes, I stopped playing the instant I reached level 40, it's still waiting there, beckoning to me, but I just haven't had *any* time since I started my working frenzy a few months ago. I really do think it would be fun to get back on and buy my mount and stuff, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.
And if you tell yourself, "well who am I working for? I don't have any JOBS to do..." you are only making excuses. You work for yourself, or for the community. I write open source software when I don't have anything to do (yet in all cases, my open source projects have been components of my own projects). When it's done, I figure out how to make money with it (in all cases, by selling the entire thing to someone who could put it to better use than I). Point I'm making is as long as you are doing SOMETHING constructive, you are benefitting yourself more than you know. The open source stuff I have released has brought job offers to me, which is reason enough to do this, although I turned down the job offers because my goal is to be financially independent, creating the things I want to create, never asking myself who was going to buy them (allthough, like I said, someone always buys them).
I understand that working all the time will drive some people crazy, I have tried this off and on over the last few years, but trust me, the first time you sell something you created it all becomes worthwhile. Someone I know, who runs his own successful business, once told me that all the successful people he knew had one thing in common; they were workaholics.
Slashdot Mirror
You're the one making up nonsense about the people you're supporting when their own words prove you to be a liar. How is that rational exactly?
You're about to buckle under the stress of intelligent ideas aren't you? You are completely irrational. You look at something I say and you see something completely different, I say show me specific examples of where this has been stated, that we are employing some 20th century economic incarnation of manifest destiny and you come back with some more bs you pulled out of your ass, then you call me a liar, then you claim to know exactly what a neo-con is, down to the bone. You're so convinced that we're killing people in Iraq, not doing any good, I can show you numerous documents to support the claim that less people are dieing in Iraq right now than there were in the late 90s. You think George Bush hates black people too, don't you? And Condi Rice is Aunt Jemima. That's the kind of shit I hear coming from liberals.
Look at how many more people are getting food now, compared with the old broken oil-for-food program. Look at the number of vaccinations administered to children (3,000,000 last I checked), which is important given the sess pools and trash heaps littering Iraq. Infant mortality rate, mothers mortality rate, health care in general. Why do I have to explain this to you? You're just going to go on thinking whatever you want to think, whatever supports your other views. You never answered my question about economic sactions. Did you say you'd do absolutely nothing? No economic sanctions or military action? Is that what you meant by "stay out of my business"? No, I know what you meant by that, you want the gov to legalize crack or some nonsense. That's the problem with you liberals, you're fucked up on drugs and irrational.
And when it comes to economics you think you know a whole lot, but when someone comes along who really does know what they're talking about, you look like a complete idiot, just rattling off things you read on the internet, things meant to scare people. The american currency other people are using to deal with is not counted in the national debt. An economy is measured by it's real assets, not floating currency. That's beside the point, you just went off on a tangent there. Our economy is measured by our real assets, debt represents capital investment in America. You never answered my question, is it wise to buy a house in cash?
Don't answer any of it, I'm done with you.
As for borrowing and spending, that is not a partisan issue. I'm not even going to take a position there. Perhaps there's more than meets the eye. I don't relate national debt to persronal finance at all, that is, national debt hasn't been proven to be a bad thing for America. I put myself in hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt when I bought my first house, and I intend to pay it off before I'm dead. Difference is, America doesn't necessarily have a limited lifespan, and right now, we're a prime place to do investments. Is it wise to pay for your house in cash? Think about that in the broader scope for a second.
I don't know what connection you're trying to make with PNAC and the current administration, but I as a neo-con, agree that we aught to be enforcing human rights all over the world, through military force. What is meant by promoting economic domination is not clear to me either, you haven't sited a particular instance of that being said. Perhaps they were saying they want to promote American free-market policies, free-trade and all that. I suppose you would settle for economic sanctions on rogue nations, but I feel like they do more harm than strategic military strikes. Look at the facts in Iraq, we've probably saved more children from starvation and disease than the current death toll. Things have taken a turn for better since we invaded. I'm not going to prove those claims however as I don't have time to sit down with you. It's not clear what you're for and against, I think you are just full of irrational hatred.
Here dude! Check it out: http://www.export.gov/iraq/pdf/iraq_development_st rategy_063005.pdf read the first part about economic development.
Those are the Iraqi dinars hard at work. What're you talkin about? That is Bush's BABY right there, he's snuggling Iraq, trying to give them a good home. Give the man a little credit, sheesh. Put yourself in his shoes. Seriously, you need to lighten up and look at things with a rational eye. I would certainly hesitate to think that Bill Clinton would have been so cruel as to steal money from another country! Bill Clinton's problem is he saw too much that could go wrong in Iraq, he fought wars from the air as a matter of policy. I think that is a recurring trend among Democrats, given their base supporters, who cringe at the thought of any American's dieing. That's the simple truth. The rest is just bullshit designed to keep voters grounded in the party. Of course some criticism is good, but this argument is just ridiculous.
I've heard your Euro argument from a number of people, it must be all over the liberal blogs, eh? I'll tell you something your intellectual pals probably never learned in school, Economics 101, there is no proof that the value of the dollar in comparison to other currencies has any effect on the well being of America. The effects are complex, and not easy to predict, but you show me an instance when the value of the dollar sank and the economy did poorly as a direct result. It's not like stocks, the value goes down and you lose. What happened when the Dollar sank in value compared to the Euro? American businesses began buying less european goods, the rest of the world quits buying european goods and starts buying more American goods. Europe wasn't doing too well, check out France, one of europe's biggest exporters, they're tanking right now because nobody can afford their chachka's. As it turns out, the REPUBLICAN'S pursue this policy more often than the dems. The REPUBLICANS support big business, dems are afraid of big evil businesses. This idea that the value of the dollar in reference to other nations is critical, that it's "holding our economy afloat" is simply stupid. OIL IS ALREADY TRADED IN EUROS AND OUR ECONOMY DOES FINE! The only reason they traded it in dollars is because it was a stable currency, but now the euro is about as stable, so it doesn't matter which. Iran isn't even invested in Euros anymore, as it turns out. There's also the fact that the neo-con agenda has involved invading Iraq as a means to promote American economic domination. Where the hell do you get these so-called FACTS, that's just stupid. We already dominate, and it's real easy to do, you make a positive environment to do business and people will do business there. We went into Iraq after 9/11 to battle terrorists and that's exactly what we're doing, handing their asses to them, you guys will accept anything but the obvious facts. You want some good news? Read this: http://michaelyon.blogspot.com/ Those are pretty much the only reasons we are in Iraq right now. You know who you remind me of when you talk like that? Napoleon Dynamite's brother, Kip is it?
Take a step back and think out your own arguments. You really WANT to believe that our leadership is as intelligent as a bunch of primates with big sticks, going and taking whatever they want. You've been compromised, buddy. You're the fool. Funny too, you use nice big words and well constructed sentences.
awwwwwwwwww yeah :D
Iran decided to switch off the dollar a long time ago, they recently switched off the Euro. No big deal. If you look at the implications of this it's not a big deal. It's the oil exporting countries investing their assets, they may very well come back to the dollar.
I have a class this semester where the teacher encourages political debate, he is a liberal and I am a neo-con (I love that), so we get into the topic of the war in Iraq, and he says "You know why we went into Iraq right? OIL!" and so I politely responded "See, I just don't see what we have to gain by overtaking Iraq, in terms of oil." to which he responded "That's right, we don't! It's not worth it!". He made my point quite cleary, and quickly realized the quandary he had gotten into so we moved on at that point. The fact that Iraq exports oil is not just a coincidence, it is not a reason for going to war but it WOULD explain why Iraq is so corrupt, that is the only correlation I, myself, can make between the Iraq war and oil.
Should you happen to create mighty-mouse, it would probably make a fortune as a movie star.
By the way, all you need to do is a left join and a right join, using "union" (and not "union all") would eliminate any duplicates. This is the preferred method because it is faster.
All the other databases have some supported solution, including free replication with MySQL (integrated).
Last I checked Oracle didn't support them, I dunno, it is always possible to do a left outer and right outer and union the results, that has always been my approach when working with sybase/oracle without ever even thinking about it, like I didn't ever expect it to change. Standards, like you say. For a while I wanted for things to change, but obviously they never change.
I want to use longer names for some tables in my Ruby on Rails application, machine generated names for the most part (mimicking multi-to-multi joins between DAO's.
They both sprung about at about the same time, from the same "crowd" if you will, the guys over at Berkeley working on Ingres. That's what I meant by that, none of the other databases really go back that far.
Yeah I experienced that too, thats because of the lousy query optimizer. You can even manually specify indexes and it will still not use them when you want it to. I don't know the explanation for that, but "lousy query optimizer" pretty much encompasses it doesn't it?
Newer versions of Sybase have row-level locking, I dunno, I figured it was common amongst the databases, a progression they all went through.
Here are the major differences between commercial databases I've used, all offer a free "express" edition:
Sybase Cheaper version of Oracle, much of the same underlying code, optimised for speed although maybe not quite as fast as Oracle. Missing some features like GIS datatypes. Annoying limitations like a 30 character name limit and no full outer joins (only the union trick). Recently integrated with the java virtual machine to do java stored procedures, good for java development. Popular with financial transaction companies, probably due to stable codebase (not a lot changes). MS SQL Microsoft buys Sybase codebase, which is decent, and build into it a lot of developer studio tools and integration, no Java. Oracle Much the same as Sybase, grew out of the same early-era databases, with more features/options (like GIS datatypes) and arguably, it's faster too. Also the most expensive. Popular with Java applications, java integration just like Sybase. Same annoying limitations like 30 character limit on names and no full outer joins. DB2 Move forward with new features unlike Oracle and Sybase, noticably different feel than the classic databases. Java integration also. None of the annoying limitations mentioned earlier. MySQL Lots of advanced features added in newer versions, such as GIS datatypes (by programmers for programmers, as they say). Fast, low memory footprint, free. Widespread support. Biggest setbacks are the lousy query optimizer and other fundamental aspects of the core which may come back to bite you, although I hear it has a well organized design that aids in development of new features. PGSQL Great database, been around long time, used to be slow but now is faster with more popularity due to mysql success. Free and all that. Biggest limitation in my limited experience is the lack of any replication features built in.I know I may have missed some major issues that I'm not aware of, so feel free to add to this.
He has done nothing his entire career to engender in me the kind of trust that you have placed in him.
Your focus is like a laser beam on the president, nothing else matters to you, and you only see bad, even when it's made up. Someones taking pictures of Iraqi prisoners naked? Blame the fucking president! Hell, call it torture! Oooh, Halliburton's stock price is going up, GeT THE PRESIDENT! Fuck... WMD's? You're still hanging on to that? Everybody knew Saddam had WMDs. Holy shit, you are irrational.
I'll tell you where we diverge. I see everything through the lense of war. I'm all for using military force. I served in the military, got out a little over a year ago. I'm what you call a NEO-CON, I want to see Iran get the shit blown out of them. I would launch a fucking volley of cruise missiles at Ahmadinejad for threatening our allies, judge jury and executioner. Anybody who's willing to go up to bat for MY VALUES has earned my respect. I don't care about these small beans you're so hung up about, I'll be pissed if Iran has it's way, I'm pissed that we're not building a 50 foot wall along the mexican border and we have rats moving drugs and terrorists into the US. I'm pissed that I have to pay so much of my income in taxes. That's about it. I seriously couldn't care any less about all the other bullshit.
McVeigh actually set off a bomb and killed people and he got his day in court as called for by the fifth amendment.
Well shit, you keep telling yourself that, in my opinion mcveigh never should have been able to set off his bomb. Were it in my power, I would have taken preventative measures. You think that by allowing people the level of privacy that they've had for the last 250 years in America that things will calm down, every now and then there may be a massacre but god forbid we lose our illusionary right to privacy. Well, think again. The same technology that makes it easier and easier to spy on people is used for anonymous communications. Years ago a transatlantic communication required a high-power, low frequency broadcast over the airwaves, and we were listening to EVERYBODY. That is not the case any more. Your dumb ass doesn't see it, you just run around with your underwear over your head screaming about privacy being violated, which by the way, you most certainly haven't actually been affected by.
If Bush doesn't like it, he can put his party's balls on the line, step up, and announce that he's officially suspending Habeus Corpus (for once, an actually recognized war power). Even Abraham Lincoln had the balls to do that.
Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus for a different reason. You know what an illegal enemy combatant is? You go read all about illegal enemy combatants, and then read about the sort of people Abe was putting in jail. Your talk about an actually recognized war power is skirting the truth, that the president can do whatever the fuck he wants during time of war, like Abe did. That it is RECOGNIZED is just stating the obvious, a historical fact, I recognize that the president has the power to declare marshal law, and drop a daisy cutter on a U.S. city if it is in the best interests of the country, i.e. a biological weapon. He may even be voted out of office for something like that, hopefully if it ever comes to that we don't have a bunch of whiners like yourself getting in the way of it. You're the one with no balls, you live in fantasy world.
Bush specifically has the power to defend us, except for the limits placed on him by the fourth amendment: that the government specifically obtains warrants when wiretapping a citizen of the united states.
You are bending the truth, on the verge of lieing here. The wiretaps were targeted at foreign terrorists. It's not in my nature to call you a liar, I know some people are just misinformed, misguided, misunderstood. I know what you were trying to say, but look, you're not scaring me here, if that is your motive. I wouldn't even care if he were conducting domestic wiretaps, personally, but he wasn't because that would have been unlawful.
Then we won. We successfully shattered the communication lines for all the terrorist cells in the US, they will no longer be able to coordinate attacks and have a serious damper put on their fundraising and recruiting capabilities. Oh wait, there's a billion other ways to communicate, and guess what, the NSA knows about them too. Most likely, any terrorists assumed that they were already being tapped, otherwise their stupidity would have taken themselves out years ago.
Oh I see, so you're just trying to single out the president here. Ok. I already knew that, but thanks for stating it so clearly. And you really give the terrorists way too much credit. Go do some reading, we have caught thousands of terrorists worldwide because of phone records and wiretaps. The Saudis have a less restrictive wiretapping policy, and the success over in Saudi Arabia has been phenomenal. You see, the terrorists thought that by using pre-paid cell phones with stolen or fake identities that they were safe, and that they could say whatever they wanted over the air. I remember in one instance we caught terrorists because we picked up a phone call between two of these pre-paid phones that was just 60 seconds of silence. We went in (by we I mean U.S. intelligence
FBI agents getting busted for insider trading using illegal wiretaps
People get busted for insider trading from all walks of life. Take a finance officer who scours over financial figures daily, they have a lot more access to sensitive information, they pride themselves on their strong sense of ethics, but you'll always have your Anderson Coopers.
What the fuck? Jose Padilla the terrorist? Possibly other cases? There are plenty of cases where enemy combatants are detained. I don't know why you bring him up, like I'm supposed to feel sorry for him or something. We should have dropped a guided bomb on his house, in the US, wouldn't that go over well? Heh heh.
What's your point? Might makes right? That the police are above the law like Bush thinks he is?
Allow me to clarify. A right to privacy doesn't exist, it isn't written law, the constitution talks about freedoms, freedom of speech, the law puts limits on what agencies can do, but there is no statutory right to privacy. The president has wartime powers, specifically he is obligated to protect the people and uphold the constitution, the right to LIFE. It's plain as day if you know how to read the constitution. You think the president is just some schmuck who does his job like a cop does his, but no, I'm not relating the president to cops, his job is much different.
Oh wouldn't you like to see some domestic spying allegations. If you ask me the whole plan is already ruined, some fucking senator leaked what we were doing, now all lines are probably dead. They should be imprisoned for it, undermining war efforts for political gain is all it is. He/SHE remains anonymous.
If you quit making up these fantastic scenarios and look at it for what it is, it's not so bad at all. You know the reasons too, I don't have to convince you. You're just playing a trendy game called "Get the President: War Time Edition"(TM)
But about the morality of Gates, I think he has some unethical business practices in the past, but if you're going to tag morality to the question, the argument could be made that he was playing for his own employee's benefit, or for other altruistic motives.
And as I was saying in my previous message, I think Bill actually stumbled upon the richest man in the world status. I don't think he ever intended to be the richest man in the world, which is something to keep in mind. I wouldn't trust another man who wants to be the richest.
And as for Jobs, I once heard a quote from him, back when he was getting paid $1 per year to work for Apple, "I had $300 million by the time I was [20 something] how much more do I need?" [Laughter, applause]
I think I could spend $300 million mighty quick myself.
I don't think Gates was ever playing the game like others play it. I don't think he's one of these guys who just HAS to be the richest man in the world. It seems like he is gearing up to make massive donations to charity closer to the end of his life, when he can cash out his earnings. Honestly, why WOULDN'T you do that? Unlike the Waltons, who each inherited $30 billion or something, who cares to give their kids that much money? If my parents gave me $30 billion I would immediately hand off $29 billion to charity and live like a billionaire on the last of it.
Yeah, the islamic extremists history books as "The man who broke America!"
Now, if I were a genius like Steve Jobs or something, my ideas would be tremendously successful, but as it is, they are only slightly successful, but as a result I have a lot more money to throw around, paid off all my credit card bills in no time. I still have a subscription to WoW, and my wife plays with her younger siblings sometimes, I stopped playing the instant I reached level 40, it's still waiting there, beckoning to me, but I just haven't had *any* time since I started my working frenzy a few months ago. I really do think it would be fun to get back on and buy my mount and stuff, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.
And if you tell yourself, "well who am I working for? I don't have any JOBS to do..." you are only making excuses. You work for yourself, or for the community. I write open source software when I don't have anything to do (yet in all cases, my open source projects have been components of my own projects). When it's done, I figure out how to make money with it (in all cases, by selling the entire thing to someone who could put it to better use than I). Point I'm making is as long as you are doing SOMETHING constructive, you are benefitting yourself more than you know. The open source stuff I have released has brought job offers to me, which is reason enough to do this, although I turned down the job offers because my goal is to be financially independent, creating the things I want to create, never asking myself who was going to buy them (allthough, like I said, someone always buys them).
I understand that working all the time will drive some people crazy, I have tried this off and on over the last few years, but trust me, the first time you sell something you created it all becomes worthwhile. Someone I know, who runs his own successful business, once told me that all the successful people he knew had one thing in common; they were workaholics.
It's the bizarro sun, harboring a bizarro earth