Over the years I have seen people try to push some kind of sci-fi ready 'graceful failure' where somehow programs simply survive errors without programmers actually needing to do anything... so in that model one doesn't need error handling. As one can imagine, such magical no-work systems have not panned out well in real life.
True, and an important distention... still, having the two services in a single entity is something new and might indicate a trend. Though I would assume that in general states only protect accounts that are in their own currency... hrm.. now I wonder about that... would a bank holding US dollars in the EU have the same regulation and protection as one holding Euros?
Even when rules are routinely ignored and lawsuits difficult to put together, at least it represents a possible path. With bitcoin, if someone misbehaves, your best bet is paying off the mafia to track down the person and string them up.
It is still a significant milestone since it creates a new class of interface between state currencies and bitcoin, so in a way it impacts the whole bitcoin ecosystem.
Yeah, it is somewhat easier to do things economic when a government institution has already done decades of legwork for you.
Though yeah, not being sattled down with requirements for who to buy what from does SpaceX, but really it just puts them in the same spot as all the other commercial launch outfits, so they will likely become just as much a part of the problem as all the others.. their newness and geek attention is unlikely to change this.
*smirk* you actually think private investors are more careful? Or that they are generally working with their own money? Wow.....
The government is generally not trying to pick individual winners or losers, it is trying to steer an economy, the two are not the same thing. As for A123 being 'propped up'.. in case you have not noticed, the battery market has almost completely left the US at this point. Countries that have solid government investment in research and incubators have pretty much taken that market. Private firms in the US currently do not stand a chance, esp since the private equity market generally will not take risks on them because they do not care about the over all economy, only which individual companies can return a profit. We again encounter the old game theory problem.. the individual players do not have an incentive for a strong general economy, the government does.
I think the person's point was that the GoP is being hypocritical in this case since the idea of government backing away from industry is one of its major planks, which is what I suspect the person was referring to as the 'problem'. So the GoP is coming across as being in favor of regulation that supports industry against citizens, but not regulation that supports citizens against industry.
Eh, it is an old debated topic. However, in general, a government doing some tipping is better then an economy left completely to its own devices. The general problem is, businesses do what is best for them and worst for everyone else.. when everyone is doing this things end up in pretty bad shape. You need a counter force in there that can look at the big picture and do what is best for the economy as a whole. I will not pretend governments are fantastic at it, but a sub par job still results in more stability and growth then none at all... or the more likely outcome is a cabal of businesses usually end up banding together and they end up preforming that role instead. While it can be argued the fed is in buisness's pocket, the election mechanism and institutional balance still provide some counter to what would otherwise be a purely business driven scale tipping.
Unfortunately such a vote would, in many regions, not be between 'good cable company and evil cable company' but between 'cable and no cable'.. which given that cable is somewhat of a luxury item that is not all that nesseary doesn't make the choice that much harder. Still, consumer choice works best when people have equivalent choices to choose between as opposed to 'how much will people put up with in order to access a resource'.
Healthier people keep working, and are more productive in general.
Health insurance does not just take 'calculated risks', it pays people to figure out why they should not honor their commitments. They are mind numbingly profitable because they are an incentive to not actually cover health problems, and thus as a system for actually keeping a population healthy they are a dismal failure... a failure the majority of 1st world countries have learned from and stopped using.
They are not trying to patent wireless charging, they are trying to patent a particular technology for doing so.
This isn't even a software patent.. if it is legit then this is more in line with patents historically covered, physical implementable technological advancements.
Eh, I suspect that if this became law we would see a whole crop of inexpensive middleware or other accounting apps that would automate the process, probably integrating right into Quicken or whatever. It would actually be the big players with their legacy home grown systems that would take a hit.
I had a similar thought. I suspect this will have about the same impact as things like not being able to install the FPU separately... true it is one less thing that can be swapped out easily, but 'enthusiasts' will still have fun building stuff anyway.
Within geek communities, Apple hate and Android love is the trendy 'in' way to be. No payroll needed.. just feeding into the narrative that their trendy readership wants.
I highly doubt they are being that conspiratorial about their lawsuit. More likely their lawyers (and shareholders) saw an opportunity to potentially reduce the competitiveness or extract cash out of another company. No deeper plan is need. I doubt Apple feels any desire to go after 'Android'... that is really more of a fanboy fantasy thing then a company plan.
That is not how I read the comment, esp since the person said they had installers for individual applications/tools. I read the post as the person pointing out that a single installer for the whole system does not make sense and sometimes having an 'installer' is just an unnecessary extra step since all such things do is automate a process... but automation is not always applicable.
I would assume that the database itself probably does have its own installer. I think the issue is that it needs to be configured, probably based off the clients need and their existing systems.
I think what the person was trying to get at is that installers make sense for individual tools and applications, but once you start getting into entire systems or stacks the idea of having an 'installer' increasingly becomes nonsensical since there is less and less generalizable behavior.
Slashdot Mirror
Over the years I have seen people try to push some kind of sci-fi ready 'graceful failure' where somehow programs simply survive errors without programmers actually needing to do anything... so in that model one doesn't need error handling. As one can imagine, such magical no-work systems have not panned out well in real life.
True, and an important distention... still, having the two services in a single entity is something new and might indicate a trend. Though I would assume that in general states only protect accounts that are in their own currency... hrm.. now I wonder about that... would a bank holding US dollars in the EU have the same regulation and protection as one holding Euros?
Even when rules are routinely ignored and lawsuits difficult to put together, at least it represents a possible path. With bitcoin, if someone misbehaves, your best bet is paying off the mafia to track down the person and string them up.
It is still a significant milestone since it creates a new class of interface between state currencies and bitcoin, so in a way it impacts the whole bitcoin ecosystem.
Yeah, it is somewhat easier to do things economic when a government institution has already done decades of legwork for you.
Though yeah, not being sattled down with requirements for who to buy what from does SpaceX, but really it just puts them in the same spot as all the other commercial launch outfits, so they will likely become just as much a part of the problem as all the others.. their newness and geek attention is unlikely to change this.
*smirk* have you ever seen inside the big contractors?
Sure, put them miles above my head. There would be very little left of them if they tried to use that height advantage.
*smirk* you actually think private investors are more careful? Or that they are generally working with their own money? Wow.....
The government is generally not trying to pick individual winners or losers, it is trying to steer an economy, the two are not the same thing. As for A123 being 'propped up'.. in case you have not noticed, the battery market has almost completely left the US at this point. Countries that have solid government investment in research and incubators have pretty much taken that market. Private firms in the US currently do not stand a chance, esp since the private equity market generally will not take risks on them because they do not care about the over all economy, only which individual companies can return a profit. We again encounter the old game theory problem.. the individual players do not have an incentive for a strong general economy, the government does.
I think the person's point was that the GoP is being hypocritical in this case since the idea of government backing away from industry is one of its major planks, which is what I suspect the person was referring to as the 'problem'. So the GoP is coming across as being in favor of regulation that supports industry against citizens, but not regulation that supports citizens against industry.
Eh, it is an old debated topic. However, in general, a government doing some tipping is better then an economy left completely to its own devices. The general problem is, businesses do what is best for them and worst for everyone else.. when everyone is doing this things end up in pretty bad shape. You need a counter force in there that can look at the big picture and do what is best for the economy as a whole. I will not pretend governments are fantastic at it, but a sub par job still results in more stability and growth then none at all... or the more likely outcome is a cabal of businesses usually end up banding together and they end up preforming that role instead. While it can be argued the fed is in buisness's pocket, the election mechanism and institutional balance still provide some counter to what would otherwise be a purely business driven scale tipping.
What makes you think that just because your boxes do not have it that none do? That is kinda the point of 'some'. In fact: example.
Since most start ups lack the resources to engage in patent litigation, it is not a tool that is all that useful at this point.
Unfortunately such a vote would, in many regions, not be between 'good cable company and evil cable company' but between 'cable and no cable'.. which given that cable is somewhat of a luxury item that is not all that nesseary doesn't make the choice that much harder. Still, consumer choice works best when people have equivalent choices to choose between as opposed to 'how much will people put up with in order to access a resource'.
EULA.
Such laws usually state that both parties must consent.. not that both parties must understand hey are consenting.
Healthier people keep working, and are more productive in general.
Health insurance does not just take 'calculated risks', it pays people to figure out why they should not honor their commitments. They are mind numbingly profitable because they are an incentive to not actually cover health problems, and thus as a system for actually keeping a population healthy they are a dismal failure... a failure the majority of 1st world countries have learned from and stopped using.
They are not trying to patent wireless charging, they are trying to patent a particular technology for doing so.
This isn't even a software patent.. if it is legit then this is more in line with patents historically covered, physical implementable technological advancements.
Eh, I suspect that if this became law we would see a whole crop of inexpensive middleware or other accounting apps that would automate the process, probably integrating right into Quicken or whatever. It would actually be the big players with their legacy home grown systems that would take a hit.
I guess they could promise to cut taxes without restraint in exchange for votes instead....
Steve Jobs is dead, thus he is not exactly setting corporate policy at Apple.
Even if he were, rants do not policy make.
I had a similar thought. I suspect this will have about the same impact as things like not being able to install the FPU separately... true it is one less thing that can be swapped out easily, but 'enthusiasts' will still have fun building stuff anyway.
Within geek communities, Apple hate and Android love is the trendy 'in' way to be. No payroll needed.. just feeding into the narrative that their trendy readership wants.
I highly doubt they are being that conspiratorial about their lawsuit. More likely their lawyers (and shareholders) saw an opportunity to potentially reduce the competitiveness or extract cash out of another company. No deeper plan is need. I doubt Apple feels any desire to go after 'Android'... that is really more of a fanboy fantasy thing then a company plan.
That is not how I read the comment, esp since the person said they had installers for individual applications/tools. I read the post as the person pointing out that a single installer for the whole system does not make sense and sometimes having an 'installer' is just an unnecessary extra step since all such things do is automate a process... but automation is not always applicable.
I would assume that the database itself probably does have its own installer. I think the issue is that it needs to be configured, probably based off the clients need and their existing systems.
I think what the person was trying to get at is that installers make sense for individual tools and applications, but once you start getting into entire systems or stacks the idea of having an 'installer' increasingly becomes nonsensical since there is less and less generalizable behavior.
Not all software is that simple. There are more then just 'apps' out there.