> I spoke to the developers and was told in a rather snooty reply that they had no plans to allow the user to optionally disable transactional 'features'.
If you don't need transactions, why are you bothering with a database? Just use a coherent shared-memory cache and dispense with the slowdown from parsing queries.
It's called a design decision, and the postgres developers decided to focus on features important to people who need transactions. If you really want this 'feature' (non-transactional behavior), and it can't be set as one of the transaction isolation levels, I'm sure they'd be willing to accept a patch from you.
Or use Postgres' autovacuum features. You aren't, by chance, referring to an ancient version of Postgres that lacked autovacuum, are you? I was under the impression (having used Postgres in some fairly heavy-duty deployments with thousands of concurrent users) that this is exactly what VACUUM takes care of. Autovacuum must be even nicer. I wouldn't know, I seem to use MySQL all the time nowadays unless the task requires a real database.
Or, hell, you could (gasp) use MySQL. Its original design was focused on non-transactional database needs. It's great for light-duty things where you want to throw them together and not spend too long optimizing queries.
Use the right tool for the job... maybe postgres isn't the right tool for your jobs.
That's not really something you can attribute to the tool manufacturers, you know?
Courage is doing the right thing even when you're scared shitless of the risks.
You are an excellent example of what modern patriotism is all about. You didn't have to make this sacrifice, at least from a legal standpoint, but by doing so, you may have saved the lives of Coast Guardsmen and perhaps those whom they protect.
Ironic that those who bandy about terms like 'freedom' and 'terrorism' most glibly are the ones whose incompetence and graft you are exposing.
> Differentiated cells can be reprogrammed to an embryonic-like state by transfer of > nuclear contents into oocytes or by fusion with embryonic stem (ES) cells. Little is > known about factors that induce this reprogramming. Here, we demonstrate induction of > pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic or adult fibroblasts by introducing four > factors, Oct3/4, Sox2, c-Myc, and Klf4, under ES cell culture conditions. Unexpectedly, > Nanog was dispensable. These cells, which we designated iPS (induced pluripotent stem) > cells, exhibit the morphology and growth properties of ES cells and express ES cell > marker genes. Subcutaneous transplantation of iPS cells into nude mice resulted in tumors > containing a variety of tissues from all three germ layers. Following injection into > blastocysts, iPS cells contributed to mouse embryonic development. These data demonstrate > that pluripotent stem cells can be directly generated from fibroblast cultures by the > addition of only a few defined factors.
Funny, I was looking at the Young lab's results from Nanog/Oct4/Sox2 co-occupation of transcription factor binding sites (these genes appeared to control self-renewal in pluripotent stem cells) and thinking, "Why hasn't anyone tried this?"
Looks like they had... the paper was probably under review when Young et al. published theirs. I was surprised that Nanog was unnecessary for self-renewal; the belief had been that it was *THE* crucial gene regulating the others. Apparently not.
It will be interesting to see whether descendents of these adult-derived pluripotent cells exhibit the same bizarre "accelerated aging" as embryonic nuclear transplants (eg. Dolly) due to what seems to be patterns of DNA methylation. If they have found away around that problem I will be very impressed; the derived cell lines really would be just like embryonic lines in all respects. We shall see, and I'm sure with all this excitement, we'll see very soon if that's the case.
Web designers have been asking Microsoft this question for 10 years.
(And now they're asking why Firefox 2.0 can't pass the ACID2 test, either)
Funny how monopolies don't care much about competing on merits like that. You, the consumer, get screwed as a result. 10 years on, and it still needs to be explained?
Quote from TFA: > To draw Unix developers back into its embrace, SCO is offering cash incentives for > developers to attend its upcoming user group conference in Las Vegas in August.
Quote from promotional materials for the above user group conference: > SCO and MySQL AB have teamed to create the ideal applications platform SMB and > replicated/branch enterprise computing environments. With SCO and MySQL, you gain the > competitive advantages offered by both open standards and open source.
MySQL AB is listed as a 'Gold' sponsor and the preceding is the copy for that placement.
Trees are graphs; M2M is a general graph structure
on
The Art of SQL
·
· Score: 1
Storing things as adjacency lists (which, obviously, is an M2M table where the node properties live in their own normalized table) tends to be faster in the long run for all but the largest and most active trees.
Nested sets are cool, and I've implemented them (in MySQL 4.1 no less), but at the end of the day, traversing a graph happens far more often and more usefully.
This seems to be where the CS majors separate from the rest of the crowd. Point out that they ought to know how to do this unless they failed 2nd year;-)
Umm, not to be a dick, but the entire Windows support industry (a very profitable one) is predicated on the existence of horrendously buggy 'release' quality software.
There are a lot of people making a lot of money doing 'maintenance'.
A cynic might take this opportunity to note that, unless you're in business for yourself (selling and maintaining your own products as your livelihood), the most sensible thing to do is find a language with massive library support, kick a product out the door, and take your chances. It's usually better than arriving late to the party with a perfect product (ironically, if you're *really* good, this can be the deciding factor for something like Lisp).
Not really taking a side (I have found many things to hate in every language I have used, including mostly-wonderful tools like Ruby and R), just pointing out the obvious. If you're the one paying for maintenance, the equation is different than if you're getting paid for it (and the opportunity arises as a result of quick time-to-market).
> I guess I don't see the point of hanging out in chat rooms and social networking sites > when there's a ton of people all over the place you could be actually meeting and > hanging out with.
The point would be to meet them and hang out with them, since you're less likely to stumble across someone in Kyrgyzstan or Milwaukee who just happens to have similar interests to yours without the assistance of the Interwebs.
Same reason people go to trade shows and play pickup basketball, really.
Due to the advanced editing and revision facities offered by Slashdot's cutting-edge architecture, I'm afraid that I have to spread my blather across two posts. My sincerest apologies.
([Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs!] - update your fucking software, this isn't a fucking stone tablet I'm hammering out here.)
Anyways, let's suppose that you can cram some large number of compressed DNA markers (0/1 for some variant, or whatever... many ways to code this) onto a few DVD's. Now, instead of just being useful for stealing identities and establishing credit, you have data that can be used to quietly discriminate when hiring, firing, insuring, lending to, or buying from any individual in this database.
If you think this won't be abused, you probably also believe that the journalists the NSA and FBI have been tracking (via their phone calls) are all terrists.
Anyone remember those catchy "visualize armed revolution" bumper stickers that started appearing after people got sick of the "visualize world peace" delusions? Just an aside, that's all. Nothing to see here...
> Bloomberg compared his proposed federal identification database to the > Social Security card, insisting that such a system would not violate > citizens' privacy and was not a civil liberties issue.
I'm sure that when a CD-ROM containing DNA markers for every single worker in New York's economy is obtained by the Russian mafia after being stolen from a (vendor|employee|contractor)'s (house|car|laptop), the tight security afforded by the mandatory (fingerprint|weak encryption|screen door) security will be of great comfort to the affected. And instead of some artificial construct like a SSN, a physically significant identity will have been stolen.
Not to mention that completely resequencing a human's genome is incredibly expensive even today.
What an incredible jackass. If this comes to pass, move to Singapore, at least they seem to have some grip on what makes business work there.
Do you honestly think that someone else won't fill the void?
That's the beauty of a properly functioning free market. DRM, abusive terms of copyright, and poor patent practices all attempt to break the free market. But it has survived in the past, and will continue to in the future.
Apple doesn't want to lose the French market, and they don't want to play fair with their competitors. Too bad. The French government giveth them rights, and taketh them away, as it suits the interests of the French.
> Many of us care about the freedom that comes with free software. Compare > with free speech and free press. In the long run, it's really non-free > software that limits ones choices.
OK, that's great. So did you miss the part about how Google's Picasa porting effort resulted in over 200 patches to Wine, and a high-profile bug-chasing effort? If you don't think that Windows compatibility for Linux is important, you are out of your mind. The only reason I ever boot into Windows is when a research project or assignment requires a program that won't run under Wine. As that number converges to zero, there is less and less motivation for developers to get distracted from Linux and its rich ecosystem of GPL'ed tools.
Google is, has been, and continues to do the Right Thing whenever possible. Who knows, maybe they will open up the source to Picasa eventually. There may be cross-licensing agreements inside of it that we don't know about. But the Free alternatives don't work for shit, for me, and I am happy to have a choice of tools, even if one of them is not (yet?) as Free as we'd like. The side benefits of having Google's resources behind a Linux end-user application are immense and should not be disregarded.
Signature bug -- fixed in CVS?
on
The CVS Cop-Out
·
· Score: 1
> any of you so geeky you misread guitar as some graphical front end for tar?
Your signature contains a bug -- real geeks avoid GUIs like the plague.
I assume you have already checked in a patch and will release it shortly.
I just realized that I can bind attaching to a screen session running Mutt to a key in Vim. This has great (recursive) potential for rending the fabric of the universe (or at least blowing up the stack in my shell). Why didn't I think of that earlier?
The ''inspiration'' for the lame hack to which the submittar done linked, is a disclaimer which patrons of a privately owned natural preserve in West Virginia are required to sign prior to entering the premises. It outlines the various activities permitted within (hiking, bolted and traditionally protected rock climbing, via ferrata including a bridge, etc.) and then proceeds to present a brutally frank summary of all the nasty things that can happen to you whilst engaging in those pursuits. The (original, and far more amusing, as well as far more useful) disclaimer is worth reading; it is meant to make people acutely aware that the primary offerings of the Preserve are inherently dangerous (lead climbing is dangerous, no matter what; Via Ferrata are dangerous, no matter what; the Nelson Rocks Preserve cannot change this) and ward off idiotic, frivolous lawsuits.
We live in a world full of brutally stupid people, hence the brutal disclaimer. Read it and ask yourself why the original is not posted at state and national park entrances. Answer? Because puffy, sheltered 'merricans want to believe that they can 'tame' the wilderness, or at least pay someone else to do so. Thankfully, legal precedent (both historical and recent, as with the Yosemite/Glacier Point Apron lawsuit last year) suggest otherwise. But it never hurts to remind people.
Sorry if you were duped into writing a poor fascimile of the original (not the posted piece of shit, but the original Nelson Rocks disclaimer, familiar to any DC-area climber who's decided that Seneca was too damned crowded).
Stu's a lawyer. The purpose of the disclaimer is to help fend off frivolous lawsuits, not defend against gross negligence. You cannot write a document that magically circumvenes existing law, in spirit or in letter, but you can point to a brutally straightforward disclaimer which customers are required to read and then sign, in the event that one of them files a lawsuit for actions undertaken of their own free will, and consequences thereby suffered.
Go to Nelson Rocks and observe the variable quality of the metamorphic conglomerate rock. The purpose of this disclaimer should become immediately obvious to you. You can't change the law with a piece of paper, but you can most certainly make people aware of your obligations under it.
It would be unwise (and unprofitable) to operate a faulty bridge or via ferrata as a business. Your hypothetical situation is bullshit.
Why did you fail to include the name of the author of this piece? He is Sean Wilentz, and his name is RIGHT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE YOU CUT-AND-PASTED. If you are Sean Wilentz, then I admire your humility and deference to the matter at hand. But I kind of doubt that this is the case.
If you are not Sean Wilentz, then plagiarizing his work to fluff up your karma on Slashdot, and failing lazily to even credit him for the words he wrote, means that you are a disgracefully lazy person.
The lemmings that reward this sort of behavior are the dregs of society, and are at least partly to blame. But you chose an excellent article, presented it as your own, and unless you are in fact the author of the article, you ought to be ashamed of your behavior.
It's such a tiny (but significant) thing to credit the author of a piece of writing -- why not do so?
Preferentially stifling debate is even worse than wholesale gag orders.
I may not agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. Ring a bell? It bloody well should, unless you're a big fan of Franco, Mussolini, and Stalin.
If any of our countrymen's freedoms are being taken away, whether we agree or disagree with them and their views, we are all poorer and less free for it. Silencing dissent weakens the commonwealth by encouraging ignorance and mindless assent. It is time to take a stand, and not budge one micron until the traitors who propose this have been excised from the fabric of the legislature.
All the rest are cowering sycophants who place politics far, far ahead of principles. They may twist in the wind for all that I care, and for all that they care about their constituent's liberties.
Feingold, however, is the Eliot Spitzer of the halls of Congress. The guy should run for Emperor, errr Potentate, errr... what's Bush's title today?
No. Wrong. It is *THAT FUCKING BAD*. Read the parts of the bill that are available or have been analyzed:
The draft would add to the criminal penalties for anyone who "intentionally discloses information identifying or describing" the Bush administration's terrorist surveillance program or any other eavesdropping program conducted under a 1978 surveillance law. Under the boosted penalties, those found guilty could face fines of up to $1 million, 15 years in jail or both.
Any Senator or Congressman who signs this bill should hang for treason. I am not joking. Signing this bill would be high treason. Full Stop.
When one uploads a video to Google Video, the option to distribute the content to one, many, or all-but-one locale is available. The uploader selected the option not to make available the IED video referenced in the article (which has been updated, RTFA you moran/troll/whatever) to people coming from US netblocks.
This was a decision on the part of the submitter (aka 'creative control', probably a novelty around these parts) and not on the part of Google. Bitch at the submitter, if you have to bitch at someone. And try doing it in the right topic's comments.
If things were as you say they are, phishing and DNS attacks would not be a problem.
Most people don't type in IP addresses to get where they're going on the Interweb. I'm not sure most people type in URLs at all... except for maybe www.google.com now and then.
This will be a mess to resolve, half measures or no.
Slashdot Mirror
> I spoke to the developers and was told in a rather snooty reply that they had no plans to allow the user to optionally disable transactional 'features'.
If you don't need transactions, why are you bothering with a database? Just use a coherent shared-memory cache and dispense with the slowdown from parsing queries.
It's called a design decision, and the postgres developers decided to focus on features important to people who need transactions. If you really want this 'feature' (non-transactional behavior), and it can't be set as one of the transaction isolation levels, I'm sure they'd be willing to accept a patch from you.
Or use Postgres' autovacuum features. You aren't, by chance, referring to an ancient version of Postgres that lacked autovacuum, are you? I was under the impression (having used Postgres in some fairly heavy-duty deployments with thousands of concurrent users) that this is exactly what VACUUM takes care of. Autovacuum must be even nicer. I wouldn't know, I seem to use MySQL all the time nowadays unless the task requires a real database.
Or, hell, you could (gasp) use MySQL. Its original design was focused on non-transactional database needs. It's great for light-duty things where you want to throw them together and not spend too long optimizing queries.
Use the right tool for the job... maybe postgres isn't the right tool for your jobs.
That's not really something you can attribute to the tool manufacturers, you know?
Courage is doing the right thing even when you're scared shitless of the risks.
You are an excellent example of what modern patriotism is all about. You didn't have to make this sacrifice, at least from a legal standpoint, but by doing so, you may have saved the lives of Coast Guardsmen and perhaps those whom they protect.
Ironic that those who bandy about terms like 'freedom' and 'terrorism' most glibly are the ones whose incompetence and graft you are exposing.
From Cell:
> Differentiated cells can be reprogrammed to an embryonic-like state by transfer of
> nuclear contents into oocytes or by fusion with embryonic stem (ES) cells. Little is
> known about factors that induce this reprogramming. Here, we demonstrate induction of
> pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic or adult fibroblasts by introducing four
> factors, Oct3/4, Sox2, c-Myc, and Klf4, under ES cell culture conditions. Unexpectedly,
> Nanog was dispensable. These cells, which we designated iPS (induced pluripotent stem)
> cells, exhibit the morphology and growth properties of ES cells and express ES cell
> marker genes. Subcutaneous transplantation of iPS cells into nude mice resulted in tumors
> containing a variety of tissues from all three germ layers. Following injection into
> blastocysts, iPS cells contributed to mouse embryonic development. These data demonstrate > that pluripotent stem cells can be directly generated from fibroblast cultures by the
> addition of only a few defined factors.
Funny, I was looking at the Young lab's results from Nanog/Oct4/Sox2 co-occupation of transcription factor binding sites (these genes appeared to control self-renewal in pluripotent stem cells) and thinking, "Why hasn't anyone tried this?"
Looks like they had... the paper was probably under review when Young et al. published theirs. I was surprised that Nanog was unnecessary for self-renewal; the belief had been that it was *THE* crucial gene regulating the others. Apparently not.
It will be interesting to see whether descendents of these adult-derived pluripotent cells exhibit the same bizarre "accelerated aging" as embryonic nuclear transplants (eg. Dolly) due to what seems to be patterns of DNA methylation. If they have found away around that problem I will be very impressed; the derived cell lines really would be just like embryonic lines in all respects. We shall see, and I'm sure with all this excitement, we'll see very soon if that's the case.
> Why the hell can't anyone stick to a standard?
Web designers have been asking Microsoft this question for 10 years.
(And now they're asking why Firefox 2.0 can't pass the ACID2 test, either)
Funny how monopolies don't care much about competing on merits like that. You, the consumer, get screwed as a result. 10 years on, and it still needs to be explained?
of the SCO conference... see http://www.caldera.com/2006forum/index_flash.html and click on 'Sponsors'. So at the very least, MySQL AB is sponsoring SCO's conference
Quote from TFA:
> To draw Unix developers back into its embrace, SCO is offering cash incentives for
> developers to attend its upcoming user group conference in Las Vegas in August.
Quote from promotional materials for the above user group conference:
> SCO and MySQL AB have teamed to create the ideal applications platform SMB and
> replicated/branch enterprise computing environments. With SCO and MySQL, you gain the
> competitive advantages offered by both open standards and open source.
MySQL AB is listed as a 'Gold' sponsor and the preceding is the copy for that placement.
Storing things as adjacency lists (which, obviously, is an M2M table where the node properties live in their own normalized table) tends to be faster in the long run for all but the largest and most active trees.
;-)
Nested sets are cool, and I've implemented them (in MySQL 4.1 no less), but at the end of the day, traversing a graph happens far more often and more usefully.
This seems to be where the CS majors separate from the rest of the crowd. Point out that they ought to know how to do this unless they failed 2nd year
Umm, not to be a dick, but the entire Windows support industry (a very profitable one) is predicated on the existence of horrendously buggy 'release' quality software.
There are a lot of people making a lot of money doing 'maintenance'.
A cynic might take this opportunity to note that, unless you're in business for yourself (selling and maintaining your own products as your livelihood), the most sensible thing to do is find a language with massive library support, kick a product out the door, and take your chances. It's usually better than arriving late to the party with a perfect product (ironically, if you're *really* good, this can be the deciding factor for something like Lisp).
Not really taking a side (I have found many things to hate in every language I have used, including mostly-wonderful tools like Ruby and R), just pointing out the obvious. If you're the one paying for maintenance, the equation is different than if you're getting paid for it (and the opportunity arises as a result of quick time-to-market).
> I guess I don't see the point of hanging out in chat rooms and social networking sites
> when there's a ton of people all over the place you could be actually meeting and
> hanging out with.
The point would be to meet them and hang out with them, since you're less likely to stumble across someone in Kyrgyzstan or Milwaukee who just happens to have similar interests to yours without the assistance of the Interwebs.
Same reason people go to trade shows and play pickup basketball, really.
Due to the advanced editing and revision facities offered by Slashdot's cutting-edge architecture, I'm afraid that I have to spread my blather across two posts. My sincerest apologies.
([Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs!] - update your fucking software, this isn't a fucking stone tablet I'm hammering out here.)
Anyways, let's suppose that you can cram some large number of compressed DNA markers (0/1 for some variant, or whatever... many ways to code this) onto a few DVD's. Now, instead of just being useful for stealing identities and establishing credit, you have data that can be used to quietly discriminate when hiring, firing, insuring, lending to, or buying from any individual in this database.
If you think this won't be abused, you probably also believe that the journalists the NSA and FBI have been tracking (via their phone calls) are all terrists.
Anyone remember those catchy "visualize armed revolution" bumper stickers that started appearing after people got sick of the "visualize world peace" delusions? Just an aside, that's all. Nothing to see here...
> Bloomberg compared his proposed federal identification database to the
> Social Security card, insisting that such a system would not violate
> citizens' privacy and was not a civil liberties issue.
I'm sure that when a CD-ROM containing DNA markers for every single worker in New York's economy is obtained by the Russian mafia after being stolen from a (vendor|employee|contractor)'s (house|car|laptop), the tight security afforded by the mandatory (fingerprint|weak encryption|screen door) security will be of great comfort to the affected. And instead of some artificial construct like a SSN, a physically significant identity will have been stolen.
Not to mention that completely resequencing a human's genome is incredibly expensive even today.
What an incredible jackass. If this comes to pass, move to Singapore, at least they seem to have some grip on what makes business work there.
Do you honestly think that someone else won't fill the void?
That's the beauty of a properly functioning free market. DRM, abusive terms of copyright, and poor patent practices all attempt to break the free market. But it has survived in the past, and will continue to in the future.
Apple doesn't want to lose the French market, and they don't want to play fair with their competitors. Too bad. The French government giveth them rights, and taketh them away, as it suits the interests of the French.
> Many of us care about the freedom that comes with free software. Compare
> with free speech and free press. In the long run, it's really non-free
> software that limits ones choices.
OK, that's great. So did you miss the part about how Google's Picasa porting effort resulted in over 200 patches to Wine, and a high-profile bug-chasing effort? If you don't think that Windows compatibility for Linux is important, you are out of your mind. The only reason I ever boot into Windows is when a research project or assignment requires a program that won't run under Wine. As that number converges to zero, there is less and less motivation for developers to get distracted from Linux and its rich ecosystem of GPL'ed tools.
Google is, has been, and continues to do the Right Thing whenever possible. Who knows, maybe they will open up the source to Picasa eventually. There may be cross-licensing agreements inside of it that we don't know about. But the Free alternatives don't work for shit, for me, and I am happy to have a choice of tools, even if one of them is not (yet?) as Free as we'd like. The side benefits of having Google's resources behind a Linux end-user application are immense and should not be disregarded.
> any of you so geeky you misread guitar as some graphical front end for tar?
Your signature contains a bug -- real geeks avoid GUIs like the plague.
I assume you have already checked in a patch and will release it shortly.
well, that would be Mutt. MUA of the gods.
I just realized that I can bind attaching to a screen session running Mutt to a key in Vim. This has great (recursive) potential for rending the fabric of the universe (or at least blowing up the stack in my shell). Why didn't I think of that earlier?
Munin is also a nanosatellite project in Sweden.
Munin the DSM project seems to be dead. Must not have been quite as earthshattering as you think. Mach seemed like a good idea at the time, too.
Remember Wolfpack? More DSM. More complexity. Not widely used.
Get off your soapbox before you fall and hurt yourself.
The ''inspiration'' for the lame hack to which the submittar done linked, is a disclaimer which patrons of a privately owned natural preserve in West Virginia are required to sign prior to entering the premises. It outlines the various activities permitted within (hiking, bolted and traditionally protected rock climbing, via ferrata including a bridge, etc.) and then proceeds to present a brutally frank summary of all the nasty things that can happen to you whilst engaging in those pursuits. The (original, and far more amusing, as well as far more useful) disclaimer is worth reading; it is meant to make people acutely aware that the primary offerings of the Preserve are inherently dangerous (lead climbing is dangerous, no matter what; Via Ferrata are dangerous, no matter what; the Nelson Rocks Preserve cannot change this) and ward off idiotic, frivolous lawsuits.
We live in a world full of brutally stupid people, hence the brutal disclaimer. Read it and ask yourself why the original is not posted at state and national park entrances. Answer? Because puffy, sheltered 'merricans want to believe that they can 'tame' the wilderness, or at least pay someone else to do so. Thankfully, legal precedent (both historical and recent, as with the Yosemite/Glacier Point Apron lawsuit last year) suggest otherwise. But it never hurts to remind people.
Sorry if you were duped into writing a poor fascimile of the original (not the posted piece of shit, but the original Nelson Rocks disclaimer, familiar to any DC-area climber who's decided that Seneca was too damned crowded).
Stu's a lawyer. The purpose of the disclaimer is to help fend off frivolous lawsuits, not defend against gross negligence. You cannot write a document that magically circumvenes existing law, in spirit or in letter, but you can point to a brutally straightforward disclaimer which customers are required to read and then sign, in the event that one of them files a lawsuit for actions undertaken of their own free will, and consequences thereby suffered.
Go to Nelson Rocks and observe the variable quality of the metamorphic conglomerate rock. The purpose of this disclaimer should become immediately obvious to you. You can't change the law with a piece of paper, but you can most certainly make people aware of your obligations under it.
It would be unwise (and unprofitable) to operate a faulty bridge or via ferrata as a business. Your hypothetical situation is bullshit.
HTH
It should also be pretty obvious that, by cutting and pasting the final line from the webpage they used (http://www.rollingstone.com/news/profile/story/99 61300/the_worst_president_in_history) the plagiarist could have given full credit to the author with almost no additional effort.
That's what pisses me off the most -- failure to attribute the words in question to the person who wrote them. It's not too much to ask.
Why did you fail to include the name of the author of this piece? He is Sean Wilentz, and his name is RIGHT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE YOU CUT-AND-PASTED. If you are Sean Wilentz, then I admire your humility and deference to the matter at hand. But I kind of doubt that this is the case.
If you are not Sean Wilentz, then plagiarizing his work to fluff up your karma on Slashdot, and failing lazily to even credit him for the words he wrote, means that you are a disgracefully lazy person.
The lemmings that reward this sort of behavior are the dregs of society, and are at least partly to blame. But you chose an excellent article, presented it as your own, and unless you are in fact the author of the article, you ought to be ashamed of your behavior.
It's such a tiny (but significant) thing to credit the author of a piece of writing -- why not do so?
This was supposed to be ironical, right? Pointing out that Gates and Brin/Page were software engineers/CS types?
Just checking... I'm kind of slow on the uptake.
Preferentially stifling debate is even worse than wholesale gag orders.
I may not agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. Ring a bell? It bloody well should, unless you're a big fan of Franco, Mussolini, and Stalin.
If any of our countrymen's freedoms are being taken away, whether we agree or disagree with them and their views, we are all poorer and less free for it. Silencing dissent weakens the commonwealth by encouraging ignorance and mindless assent. It is time to take a stand, and not budge one micron until the traitors who propose this have been excised from the fabric of the legislature.
All the rest are cowering sycophants who place politics far, far ahead of principles. They may twist in the wind for all that I care, and for all that they care about their constituent's liberties.
Feingold, however, is the Eliot Spitzer of the halls of Congress. The guy should run for Emperor, errr Potentate, errr... what's Bush's title today?
No. Wrong. It is *THAT FUCKING BAD*. Read the parts of the bill that are available or have been analyzed:
The draft would add to the criminal penalties for anyone who "intentionally discloses information identifying or describing" the Bush administration's terrorist surveillance program or any other eavesdropping program conducted under a 1978 surveillance law. Under the boosted penalties, those found guilty could face fines of up to $1 million, 15 years in jail or both.
Any Senator or Congressman who signs this bill should hang for treason. I am not joking. Signing this bill would be high treason. Full Stop.
When one uploads a video to Google Video, the option to distribute the content to one, many, or all-but-one locale is available. The uploader selected the option not to make available the IED video referenced in the article (which has been updated, RTFA you moran/troll/whatever) to people coming from US netblocks.
This was a decision on the part of the submitter (aka 'creative control', probably a novelty around these parts) and not on the part of Google. Bitch at the submitter, if you have to bitch at someone. And try doing it in the right topic's comments.
If things were as you say they are, phishing and DNS attacks would not be a problem.
Most people don't type in IP addresses to get where they're going on the Interweb. I'm not sure most people type in URLs at all... except for maybe www.google.com now and then.
This will be a mess to resolve, half measures or no.