you would now that squeamishness is not associated with process but with the risk of failure in that process
Well, perhaps not. It may also be associated with pure and genuine mental retardation, self-inflicted mental retardation, not the one caused by actual brain damage or deficiency.
Why are we wasting money on desalination when we can recycle our water for a fraction of the cost?
We are talking about a state where in some municipalities, they will completely empty the local water supply when a drunk teenager is caught on camera pissing in it. They even have cameras watching the reservoirs for cases such as this.
So, how do you think these retards will feel if you say to them: From tomorrow on you will be showering in recycled piss. They will go ape. OK, so we use the recycled water for agriculture only, then they will go ape because their food has been "showered in piss".
The "average person" is fundamentally retarded, that's (part of the reason) why.
No pilots is probably going too far, but what about refusing to do stupid shit? A plane has GPS, it knows how high it is. Why would it even allow a pilot to crash into a mountain? Trying to land a plane in an area that is not an airport should require some sort of manual override by either two pilots or pilot plus ground crew. The computer could even give full control to pilot in case of emergencies (Sully).
Which certainly doesn't claim 5000+ researchers per capita. The highest possible number of anything per capita you can have is 1 (one). Sweden has 5000+ researchers per 1 million capita (to put it like that).
One central requirement is that the person punished can learn something from it
and experience it. Since the end of your life is the end of experience, the "punished" doesn't experience the punishment.
Capital Punishment is vengeance, no more, no less. A civilized society doesn't do vengeance. A civilized society is governed by logic and reason. Sadly that hasn't been the case anywhere in the US since at least the late 1970s, and since the 1990s it's been all about Jesus, God, Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy and other childhood fantasy figures.
And none of that has to do with the facts that some people do deserve it
Lots of people deserve to die. Capital "punishment" is not punishment however, given the fact that the "punished" just stops existing and is therefore no longer neither punished nor capital. This is why the base difference between a civilized society and a non-civilized society is whether the government engages in acts of vengeance (capital punishment). No civilized society engages in vengeance. It's for the mentally deficient.
The USA though stands shoulder to shoulder with Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and The ISIS in supporting capital punishment.
Execution is vengeance, not punishment. A civilized society doesn't engage in vengeance. Simple as that. The US in this regard is about as civilized as Saudi Arabia and The ISIS.
Just for the record, if this was the case it would be a huge benefit for the US economy. There is nothing better for a country than having a work force that is educated by some other country (lots of savings there) and when that work force grows old it is taken care of by another country. 90% of your cost is from your born and until your in he work force and then from the day you retire to the day you die.
The error here is that the programmer was given a login to a database and that login had been granted "DELETE" permissions. On vital systems, the standard software should basically never be granted "DELETE" permissions, only CREATE, SELECT and UPDATE. Deleting a record should involve setting its status to "deleted" nothing else. There is only one reason (except the obvious ability to use referential integrity when doing business operations) to delete something from a table, and that is to free up space. Since it costs less to add more storage to the system than it does to pay a programmer to enter "DELETE FROM WHERE LAST_UPDATED
Programmers do frequently need to be given access to databases, and as such they will typically have lots of access to sensitive data. Sadly most companies include delete access when granting to the logins the developers use. That is never necessary. Only a single login should have delete access, and it should be strictly monitored.
There is never a need to remove anything at all from such records. Set the "status" to "deleted" is appropriate. This means that whatever the SQL user the programmer can log into the database with is not granted "DELETE" permission on anything at all.
I'm not even sure at the moment if film is still available for it, just your normal 35mm type
Just a side-note: If it was an SLR, it uses 35mm film, so film is available for it. "All" SLRs have "always" used 35mm film (until they became digital).
I have no use for a camera no matter the type at this time
So, what you are saying is that you have no interest in photography. You never take pictures for the sake of taking pictures, you only take pictures of stuff you need to identify and similar. Your camera phone is only a basic visual note-taker. You have no kids or others you want to take pictures of.
OK, then I agree with you. If you have no need to take pictures, you (obviously) have no need for a camera. I wonder what happened to "I was very much into photography" then.
I like one item that replaces many which the cell phone does. One item required is a decent camera and the S5 takes some incredible pictures for a cell phone
Yes, the S5 takes incredible pictures for a cell phone, which is the same as to say that a child's to spade does an incredible amount of work for a dump truck. Seriously, you do not need to compare the S5 with a DSLR for it to be bad. The majority of brand-name point and shoots (as for example the Canon S100 series) are going to blow your S5 out of the water, and they are not hefty or unwieldy.
I was very much into photography
If you were, you were not into quality images. If you were, you'd hate your S5 in almost every single way except its portability. Image quality is mediocre at best, features are non-existing (RAW please?), the chip is so tiny it is almost impossible to take pictures with narrow depth of field (pictures of people in general requires narrow depth of field) and to get them you'd have to go close, exposing the extreme wide-angle of your phone camera and the associated distortions.
I use my Canon S100 for ultra-portability, I use my Panasonic-GX7 for portability (both fits in a pocket) and the ability to use interchangeable lenses. For video and good portability I carry the Panasonic GH4, but when quality is important I bring out the Canon DSLR every time.
To many DSLR users, having those features in the camera are a gimmick
and the camera manufacturers agree, so they don't put those features in. Result: 75% drop in P&S sales, 70% drop in DSLR sales, 20% drop in mirror less sales. Hopefully Canon and Nikon will wake up and smell the shit they are shoveling.
Though I still don't get why anyone would want to make a timelapse video or stitch photos right in the field
The consumer wants to. He doesn't care for sitting in front of his computer stitching and editing video (that's boring work and seriously, he barely understands the magic of his computer). He never will. It must come out of the camera.
Have you actually used a DSLR within the last 5 years? People use them to make pro movies now.
He's right though. I have the Panasonic GH4 in addition to my Canon gear. The GH4 will shoot a time-lapse in camera and store it as a movie. In camera. Can you do that with any Canon? No. My Panasonic will shoot 96 fps and when I get it off the memory card it is already slow-mo. Can Canon do that? No, I have to go import the video into some sort of editor on my PC to make it slo-mo. In camera stitching of panorama - check.
His point is seriously valid. Camera manufacturers need to get their shit together and create better enthusiast cameras. Compact sales are down 75%. DSLR sales are down 70%. Mirrorless system cameras sales are down 20%. None of this is related to smart phones as such. People expect more and camera manufacturers are not delivering. It's been possible to put an intervalometer (it's only software) into any Canon or a Nikon for a long time, just ask the guys at Magic Lantern, but Canon and Nikon are refusing to do so. They are morons.
A *good* photographer is actually working often - THAT is the different
A good wedding photographer works about 60 hours per wedding he shoots. A few of those are work that ends up not being paid (selling to prospective clients - they typically interview about 3-4, and only one dude can get the job), but he still has to get the income. 60 hours for $3K is nothing. Remember, he is self-employed, and need to cover health-care, retirement, insurance etc in addition to gear.
This is why all the "good" photographers try to write books etc, they make far more money out of that. You will find very, very, very few rich photogs. Good or excellent.
Seriously? You think a photographers work, for example at a wedding, is done in a day? Clueless nonsense. You pay for not only about a week of work, you also pay for the fact that, for example a wedding photographer, can not work taking pictures every day. There is generally only a couple of days of the week where weddings are held (unless you live in Vegas).
A wedding photog working alone will typically spend between 50 and 60 hours on "a wedding". A bit of that, about 6-8 hours, is time that he tries to sell to other clients, but fails, so he can not bill them. In the US, a photog can expect to make about $2-3K for a wedding. Given the number of hours required, he can expect to book about two weddings a month if he is working with no assistant (with an assistant the maths gets worse). Now, for a quick calculation. He'll pull in about $60K a year. Sounds not too bad, problem is, that's for his business, not for take-home pay. Out of that $60K he has do do health insurance, disability, retirement savings etc. This would typically amount to about $35K a year, leaving the photog with a take-home pay of about $35K.
This is why you never see any rich photogs out there. The ones who make money do so by writing books, giving lectures etc, and they are not actual photogs as such since they do not make a significant amount of their income taking pictures. There are only so many open positions for a Scott Kelby out there.
Slashdot Mirror
No, Apple just forces all development for their device to be with their dev kit only
BZZZT! WRONG!
Then Microsoft was never guilty of anything. Using your "logic" I mean.
or perhaps Nokia didn't break EU law (irrelevant if you think the law is "good" or not).
Keep was a FREE app written by Google. What do you expect? The shit is free
IE was a FREE app written my Microsoft. What do you expect? The shit is free
you would now that squeamishness is not associated with process but with the risk of failure in that process
Well, perhaps not. It may also be associated with pure and genuine mental retardation, self-inflicted mental retardation, not the one caused by actual brain damage or deficiency.
Why are we wasting money on desalination when we can recycle our water for a fraction of the cost?
We are talking about a state where in some municipalities, they will completely empty the local water supply when a drunk teenager is caught on camera pissing in it. They even have cameras watching the reservoirs for cases such as this.
So, how do you think these retards will feel if you say to them: From tomorrow on you will be showering in recycled piss. They will go ape. OK, so we use the recycled water for agriculture only, then they will go ape because their food has been "showered in piss".
The "average person" is fundamentally retarded, that's (part of the reason) why.
For the record, Repugnicans are more likely to add pork than Dems.
No pilots is probably going too far, but what about refusing to do stupid shit? A plane has GPS, it knows how high it is. Why would it even allow a pilot to crash into a mountain? Trying to land a plane in an area that is not an airport should require some sort of manual override by either two pilots or pilot plus ground crew. The computer could even give full control to pilot in case of emergencies (Sully).
Which certainly doesn't claim 5000+ researchers per capita. The highest possible number of anything per capita you can have is 1 (one). Sweden has 5000+ researchers per 1 million capita (to put it like that).
One central requirement is that the person punished can learn something from it
and experience it. Since the end of your life is the end of experience, the "punished" doesn't experience the punishment.
Capital Punishment is vengeance, no more, no less. A civilized society doesn't do vengeance. A civilized society is governed by logic and reason. Sadly that hasn't been the case anywhere in the US since at least the late 1970s, and since the 1990s it's been all about Jesus, God, Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy and other childhood fantasy figures.
And none of that has to do with the facts that some people do deserve it
Lots of people deserve to die. Capital "punishment" is not punishment however, given the fact that the "punished" just stops existing and is therefore no longer neither punished nor capital. This is why the base difference between a civilized society and a non-civilized society is whether the government engages in acts of vengeance (capital punishment). No civilized society engages in vengeance. It's for the mentally deficient.
The USA though stands shoulder to shoulder with Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and The ISIS in supporting capital punishment.
Execution is vengeance, not punishment. A civilized society doesn't engage in vengeance. Simple as that. The US in this regard is about as civilized as Saudi Arabia and The ISIS.
I assume you have a mullet too, since you're stuck in the 1980s
You suffer from a severe case of paranoia. Go see a psychologist.
He will never be as stupid, mentally retarded and moronic as the one who corrected his spelling.
Just for the record, if this was the case it would be a huge benefit for the US economy. There is nothing better for a country than having a work force that is educated by some other country (lots of savings there) and when that work force grows old it is taken care of by another country. 90% of your cost is from your born and until your in he work force and then from the day you retire to the day you die.
The error here is that the programmer was given a login to a database and that login had been granted "DELETE" permissions. On vital systems, the standard software should basically never be granted "DELETE" permissions, only CREATE, SELECT and UPDATE. Deleting a record should involve setting its status to "deleted" nothing else. There is only one reason (except the obvious ability to use referential integrity when doing business operations) to delete something from a table, and that is to free up space. Since it costs less to add more storage to the system than it does to pay a programmer to enter "DELETE FROM WHERE LAST_UPDATED
Programmers do frequently need to be given access to databases, and as such they will typically have lots of access to sensitive data. Sadly most companies include delete access when granting to the logins the developers use. That is never necessary. Only a single login should have delete access, and it should be strictly monitored.
There is never a need to remove anything at all from such records. Set the "status" to "deleted" is appropriate. This means that whatever the SQL user the programmer can log into the database with is not granted "DELETE" permission on anything at all.
I'm not even sure at the moment if film is still available for it, just your normal 35mm type
Just a side-note: If it was an SLR, it uses 35mm film, so film is available for it. "All" SLRs have "always" used 35mm film (until they became digital).
I have no use for a camera no matter the type at this time
So, what you are saying is that you have no interest in photography. You never take pictures for the sake of taking pictures, you only take pictures of stuff you need to identify and similar. Your camera phone is only a basic visual note-taker. You have no kids or others you want to take pictures of.
OK, then I agree with you. If you have no need to take pictures, you (obviously) have no need for a camera. I wonder what happened to "I was very much into photography" then.
I like one item that replaces many which the cell phone does. One item required is a decent camera and the S5 takes some incredible pictures for a cell phone
Yes, the S5 takes incredible pictures for a cell phone, which is the same as to say that a child's to spade does an incredible amount of work for a dump truck. Seriously, you do not need to compare the S5 with a DSLR for it to be bad. The majority of brand-name point and shoots (as for example the Canon S100 series) are going to blow your S5 out of the water, and they are not hefty or unwieldy.
I was very much into photography
If you were, you were not into quality images. If you were, you'd hate your S5 in almost every single way except its portability. Image quality is mediocre at best, features are non-existing (RAW please?), the chip is so tiny it is almost impossible to take pictures with narrow depth of field (pictures of people in general requires narrow depth of field) and to get them you'd have to go close, exposing the extreme wide-angle of your phone camera and the associated distortions.
I use my Canon S100 for ultra-portability, I use my Panasonic-GX7 for portability (both fits in a pocket) and the ability to use interchangeable lenses. For video and good portability I carry the Panasonic GH4, but when quality is important I bring out the Canon DSLR every time.
To many DSLR users, having those features in the camera are a gimmick
and the camera manufacturers agree, so they don't put those features in. Result: 75% drop in P&S sales, 70% drop in DSLR sales, 20% drop in mirror less sales. Hopefully Canon and Nikon will wake up and smell the shit they are shoveling.
Though I still don't get why anyone would want to make a timelapse video or stitch photos right in the field
The consumer wants to. He doesn't care for sitting in front of his computer stitching and editing video (that's boring work and seriously, he barely understands the magic of his computer). He never will. It must come out of the camera.
Have you actually used a DSLR within the last 5 years? People use them to make pro movies now.
He's right though. I have the Panasonic GH4 in addition to my Canon gear. The GH4 will shoot a time-lapse in camera and store it as a movie. In camera. Can you do that with any Canon? No. My Panasonic will shoot 96 fps and when I get it off the memory card it is already slow-mo. Can Canon do that? No, I have to go import the video into some sort of editor on my PC to make it slo-mo. In camera stitching of panorama - check.
His point is seriously valid. Camera manufacturers need to get their shit together and create better enthusiast cameras. Compact sales are down 75%. DSLR sales are down 70%. Mirrorless system cameras sales are down 20%. None of this is related to smart phones as such. People expect more and camera manufacturers are not delivering. It's been possible to put an intervalometer (it's only software) into any Canon or a Nikon for a long time, just ask the guys at Magic Lantern, but Canon and Nikon are refusing to do so. They are morons.
A *good* photographer is actually working often - THAT is the different
A good wedding photographer works about 60 hours per wedding he shoots. A few of those are work that ends up not being paid (selling to prospective clients - they typically interview about 3-4, and only one dude can get the job), but he still has to get the income. 60 hours for $3K is nothing. Remember, he is self-employed, and need to cover health-care, retirement, insurance etc in addition to gear.
This is why all the "good" photographers try to write books etc, they make far more money out of that. You will find very, very, very few rich photogs. Good or excellent.
Seriously? You think a photographers work, for example at a wedding, is done in a day? Clueless nonsense. You pay for not only about a week of work, you also pay for the fact that, for example a wedding photographer, can not work taking pictures every day. There is generally only a couple of days of the week where weddings are held (unless you live in Vegas).
A wedding photog working alone will typically spend between 50 and 60 hours on "a wedding". A bit of that, about 6-8 hours, is time that he tries to sell to other clients, but fails, so he can not bill them. In the US, a photog can expect to make about $2-3K for a wedding. Given the number of hours required, he can expect to book about two weddings a month if he is working with no assistant (with an assistant the maths gets worse). Now, for a quick calculation. He'll pull in about $60K a year. Sounds not too bad, problem is, that's for his business, not for take-home pay. Out of that $60K he has do do health insurance, disability, retirement savings etc. This would typically amount to about $35K a year, leaving the photog with a take-home pay of about $35K.
This is why you never see any rich photogs out there. The ones who make money do so by writing books, giving lectures etc, and they are not actual photogs as such since they do not make a significant amount of their income taking pictures. There are only so many open positions for a Scott Kelby out there.