I found your quote interesting. The font you choose is hard for these old eyes to read. Must you use something smaller and harder to read than the default font? It interferes with your message.
I am certainly not a lawyer. 'Evidence' may not be the correct legal term. However, if your wife is missing, and people can be confirmed to have heard you fighting right before you went missing, that would seem to indicate more than an unfounded suspicion that it would worth looking into you as a suspect. Certainly no reasonable person would question the police checking your past history and whereabouts based on that information.
The concepts of evidence and warrants are not as tightly connected as your post implies. My understanding of US law is that you request a search warrant to get access to protected premises or items that are not otherwise legally available to the authorities, such as your property inside your house or locked vehicle, bank records, or, we'd desire, your browsing history. A cop does not need a search warrant, for example, to seize a bag of pot laying in plain sight on your car seat, if he sees it when issuing you a ticket. The pot then becomes evidence, no warrant required, and you, sir are about to have legal issues.
Case law is also quite clear that cops can search your garbage, no warrant required, and items found will be used as evidence against you. A cop can seize a weapon used in a bar fight, no warrant required, and it certainly becomes evidence. The controlling concept, as I understand it, is reasonable expectation of privacy, as embodied in the fourth amendment, which can be seen here.
Our browsing history is not in 'plain sight', and under US law, that means that it would normally require a warrant, which requires reasonable evidence of probable cause(I'm probably mis-using that e-word again).
At any rate, that's quibbling over the major point, which is at what point does an investigation become founded on some fact, and more than a fishing expedition which we are protected against by our laws.
A good example would be if your wife is missing. The night before people heard you fighting with her. I can see a judge giving a search warrant based on that suspicion. I think most people could. And that is mere suspicion.
No argument here. You're talking to a guy who drives a Scion. I get a real 30+ mpg on mixed driving. At the 15000+ mi a year I drive, I'm going to save about 500 gallons of gas a year over the Explorer my neighbor drives. At $4 a gallon, I'll pay for the car over it's lifetime in gas savings. And I feel better about my overall footprint.
Before anyone with a hybrid jumps in, I considered one of those, but the battery disposal liability convinced me otherwise. Hybrids are not an unadulterated blessing.
I think you're right on target, but you're treating closed source licensing as a trump card rather than as a factor. The.NET environment, for one good example, can rightfully claim a lot of solid productivity features that could certainly make it worth using ( I don't), and Oracle adherents argue, probably at least partly correctly that it has a lot of enterprise level features that make the expense worthwhile. If you have clear visibility into your app's future, these could be reasonably estimated, and you can analyze whether you have a case for using the closed tech.
That said, I code in Java, Python, Perl, MySQL and Postgres whenever I can. My one weakness is SQL Server, which is pretty reasonably priced for the kind of things I do, and is substantially more usable and productive than the open source DB's. YMMV
Um, the generals didn't decide to go put the soldiers into harm's way. Bush and Cheney did. The record is quite clear that the brass thought and think that going into Iraq was a mistake. The forces were -ordered- to go, and they went, because that's what military forces do, follow their orders.
I don't hold the services responsible for the wounded. That is the responsibility of the Administration, and Congress, and the american people for tolerating our misbegotten government.
I was browsing on a new, clean machine, so I decided to try the link. Noscript worked perfectly. No apparent problems, nothing reported by AVG. Of course, I din't get the dancing windows, either...
And because there are no testable alternative hypotheses. Even if you swallow the full Creationism/ID pill, you still need a way to explain and predict things like bird flu. It may well be that his Noodliness is driving our speciation, but how does he do it?
I install noscript on the browsers, and know how to keep out of trouble. My point was merely that it's naive to assume that the Linux user model always protects you.
The measures you take are smart. However, when I'm on one of these servers, it's usually because something is wrong, and I'm in a hurry to get it fixed, so taking exotic protection measures are usually the last thing on my mind. I suspect my situation is not unusual in that respect.
I think this is a naive assumption about the risk to Linux users. I manage several Linux servers. While I log into them rarely, when I log into them, I often use Firefox, because I'm usually troubleshooting something. That usually involves surfing forums, which not uncommonly have flash based ads on them. This is a predictably activity, and, because I'm fixing something, I'm usually running as root.
I doubt that I am unusual in this pattern of behavior, so this is a fairly serious risk.
Forest for the trees, my friend. Does mysql support
"select this, that and theother from sometable join someothertable on sometable.keyfield = someothertable.keyfield"
and deliver a set of rows and columns? Has it always done this? That's pretty much what Codd and Date were using as a definition. SQL only matters in that it assumes the tabular view. MySQL may have a limited feature set, a non-standard feature set, and may not be what you want. But it just doesn't make sense to say that that isn't implementing a relational model, and that it's databases aren't 'real' relational databases. Quacks like a duck, might as well be a duck.
Her strategy may or may not be effective, but I don't think there can be any reasonable disagreement that this is how she's positioning herself.
I question your assertion that anyone of a conservative bent hates her. I tend to that edge of the spectrum (middle/right), and I think she'd be a perfectly reasonable leader, infinitely preferable to the last offering of the deep conservative ranks.
Just once in this, I'd like to see some data about how big this problem really is. Pedophiles are certainly icky, but how many of them are there, really, and how much child porn is there, really, and how much is the internet a cause/enabler in this, really?
From what data I have seen, via news reports, churches, schools, summer camps, youth activities and boy scout troops seem to be the predominant locales for these activities. If you want to protect the children, maybe we should outlaw these?
Actually, just having three parties would change the political dynamic pretty dramatically. My Pol Sci professor described this as the Burger King Problem.
Visualize a small town, with one main street. A McDonalds comes into town, and locates at one end of the town, let's call it the east end.
Now let's say Burger King wants to come into the same town. Where is the most logical place for the BK to locate? Answer: right next to the McDonalds, on the side that is closer to the most people.
In politics we see this in the clustering of positions. It makes sens for the Democrats to be just slightly more liberal than the Republicans, so that they can capture the votes of people that are somewhat liberal republicans. If they adopt a very liberal stance, then there is no way of knowing how people in the middle will vote.
We see this in Hillary Clinton, who in other times might have been described as a moderate republican, by here views. This stance makes sense, so that she can capture the middle of the spectrum. We saw this in the last 7 years, as democrats scrambled to be almost as conservative as the republicans, because that is what made political sense.
If you have a third player in the mix, let alone many players, that destablizes this balance. Then you'll start seeing a spectrum of views, rather than polarized (abortion) or highly similar (war on terrorism) positions. It's just game theory, which seems to be the meme of the day.
Mine is a Bushmaster. You can actually buy full auto sears quite easily and legally, but I wouldn't want one anyway. If we're in this situation, conservation of ammo will be a need.
AR-15's have been made by lots of manufacturers under government contract. It's an open source design - anyone can make them.
Whatever. You clearly have never used COBOL. If you aren't old enough to have spilled a deck of punch cards, you don't know how easy you have it.
Java is a solid language, that is stable, rich, well documented, with great industry support. It's free, comes with a great IDE, and there are multiple rich app server environments to develop to, which are also mostly free. Perhaps this is the 'bloat' you refer to.
I've been coding long enough to remember when FORTRAN 77 was new and neat, and we all wanted it. After living through and delivering production applications in FORTRAN, 3 versions of BASIC, COBOL, PL/1, C, VB, Java, Perl and Python, so far, it's my not so humble opinion that anyone who sneers at Java is a spoiled brat. Sure, there are other great environments, but Java is a technological asset of no small value.
Internally, every DBMS has a structure that isn't tabular in nature, but which is accessed and managed by the DBMS so that it seems like it is to the user. Oracle, SQL Server, MySQL, they all have some internal data structure that is physically not organized into rows and columns. MySQL in particular allows use of multiple storage managers.
The definition I presented previously, from Codd himself (see Edgar Codd ) , focuses on how the data can be accessed by and is presented to the using process. If you can access it with standard SQL, it's an RDB, as far as he and I are concerned.
Slashdot Mirror
I found your quote interesting. The font you choose is hard for these old eyes to read. Must you use something smaller and harder to read than the default font? It interferes with your message.
There are also people who still ride horse, but they don't call it transportation. (ducks)
I'm porting a fortran app to python currently.
I am certainly not a lawyer. 'Evidence' may not be the correct legal term. However, if your wife is missing, and people can be confirmed to have heard you fighting right before you went missing, that would seem to indicate more than an unfounded suspicion that it would worth looking into you as a suspect. Certainly no reasonable person would question the police checking your past history and whereabouts based on that information.
The concepts of evidence and warrants are not as tightly connected as your post implies. My understanding of US law is that you request a search warrant to get access to protected premises or items that are not otherwise legally available to the authorities, such as your property inside your house or locked vehicle, bank records, or, we'd desire, your browsing history. A cop does not need a search warrant, for example, to seize a bag of pot laying in plain sight on your car seat, if he sees it when issuing you a ticket. The pot then becomes evidence, no warrant required, and you, sir are about to have legal issues.
Case law is also quite clear that cops can search your garbage, no warrant required, and items found will be used as evidence against you. A cop can seize a weapon used in a bar fight, no warrant required, and it certainly becomes evidence. The controlling concept, as I understand it, is reasonable expectation of privacy, as embodied in the fourth amendment, which can be seen here.
Our browsing history is not in 'plain sight', and under US law, that means that it would normally require a warrant, which requires reasonable evidence of probable cause(I'm probably mis-using that e-word again).
At any rate, that's quibbling over the major point, which is at what point does an investigation become founded on some fact, and more than a fishing expedition which we are protected against by our laws.
Right before they get to suspected marijuana users, I hope.
A good example would be if your wife is missing. The night before people heard you fighting with her. I can see a judge giving a search warrant based on that suspicion. I think most people could. And that is mere suspicion.
No, that's suspicion supported by evidence.
When did we lose the freedom to question our government?
This was certainly a pretty good attempt.
No argument here. You're talking to a guy who drives a Scion. I get a real 30+ mpg on mixed driving. At the 15000+ mi a year I drive, I'm going to save about 500 gallons of gas a year over the Explorer my neighbor drives. At $4 a gallon, I'll pay for the car over it's lifetime in gas savings. And I feel better about my overall footprint.
Before anyone with a hybrid jumps in, I considered one of those, but the battery disposal liability convinced me otherwise. Hybrids are not an unadulterated blessing.
US government policy appears to be that we will be as wasteful as practical.
I don't notice the government at the car dealers forcing people to buy SUV's. Seems to me that that is the doing of the American consumer.
I think you're right on target, but you're treating closed source licensing as a trump card rather than as a factor. The .NET environment, for one good example, can rightfully claim a lot of solid productivity features that could certainly make it worth using ( I don't), and Oracle adherents argue, probably at least partly correctly that it has a lot of enterprise level features that make the expense worthwhile. If you have clear visibility into your app's future, these could be reasonably estimated, and you can analyze whether you have a case for using the closed tech.
That said, I code in Java, Python, Perl, MySQL and Postgres whenever I can. My one weakness is SQL Server, which is pretty reasonably priced for the kind of things I do, and is substantially more usable and productive than the open source DB's. YMMV
That would be what you do to the Doritos.
We didn't smoke our way through high school.
;-)
Speak for yourself.
Seriously, I don't think it's a bad thing, just a conversational approach that seeks to engage the reader.
Um, the generals didn't decide to go put the soldiers into harm's way. Bush and Cheney did. The record is quite clear that the brass thought and think that going into Iraq was a mistake. The forces were -ordered- to go, and they went, because that's what military forces do, follow their orders.
I don't hold the services responsible for the wounded. That is the responsibility of the Administration, and Congress, and the american people for tolerating our misbegotten government.
I was browsing on a new, clean machine, so I decided to try the link. Noscript worked perfectly. No apparent problems, nothing reported by AVG. Of course, I din't get the dancing windows, either...
Have you ever done physical work? Does wire get stripped, do packages get opened, does rope get cut where you live?
A pocket knife is one of the most useful tools I can think of.
And because there are no testable alternative hypotheses. Even if you swallow the full Creationism/ID pill, you still need a way to explain and predict things like bird flu. It may well be that his Noodliness is driving our speciation, but how does he do it?
I install noscript on the browsers, and know how to keep out of trouble. My point was merely that it's naive to assume that the Linux user model always protects you.
The measures you take are smart. However, when I'm on one of these servers, it's usually because something is wrong, and I'm in a hurry to get it fixed, so taking exotic protection measures are usually the last thing on my mind. I suspect my situation is not unusual in that respect.
I think this is a naive assumption about the risk to Linux users. I manage several Linux servers. While I log into them rarely, when I log into them, I often use Firefox, because I'm usually troubleshooting something. That usually involves surfing forums, which not uncommonly have flash based ads on them. This is a predictably activity, and, because I'm fixing something, I'm usually running as root.
I doubt that I am unusual in this pattern of behavior, so this is a fairly serious risk.
whoops, my lyricism got in the way of my SQL. S/B
"select this, that, theother from sometable join someothertable on sometable.keyfield = someothertable.keyfield"
Forest for the trees, my friend. Does mysql support
"select this, that and theother from sometable join someothertable on sometable.keyfield = someothertable.keyfield"
and deliver a set of rows and columns? Has it always done this? That's pretty much what Codd and Date were using as a definition. SQL only matters in that it assumes the tabular view. MySQL may have a limited feature set, a non-standard feature set, and may not be what you want. But it just doesn't make sense to say that that isn't implementing a relational model, and that it's databases aren't 'real' relational databases. Quacks like a duck, might as well be a duck.
Let me guess, you guys are Oracle fans, no?
Her strategy may or may not be effective, but I don't think there can be any reasonable disagreement that this is how she's positioning herself.
I question your assertion that anyone of a conservative bent hates her. I tend to that edge of the spectrum (middle/right), and I think she'd be a perfectly reasonable leader, infinitely preferable to the last offering of the deep conservative ranks.
Just once in this, I'd like to see some data about how big this problem really is. Pedophiles are certainly icky, but how many of them are there, really, and how much child porn is there, really, and how much is the internet a cause/enabler in this, really?
From what data I have seen, via news reports, churches, schools, summer camps, youth activities and boy scout troops seem to be the predominant locales for these activities. If you want to protect the children, maybe we should outlaw these?
Actually, just having three parties would change the political dynamic pretty dramatically. My Pol Sci professor described this as the Burger King Problem.
Visualize a small town, with one main street. A McDonalds comes into town, and locates at one end of the town, let's call it the east end.
Now let's say Burger King wants to come into the same town. Where is the most logical place for the BK to locate? Answer: right next to the McDonalds, on the side that is closer to the most people.
In politics we see this in the clustering of positions. It makes sens for the Democrats to be just slightly more liberal than the Republicans, so that they can capture the votes of people that are somewhat liberal republicans. If they adopt a very liberal stance, then there is no way of knowing how people in the middle will vote.
We see this in Hillary Clinton, who in other times might have been described as a moderate republican, by here views. This stance makes sense, so that she can capture the middle of the spectrum. We saw this in the last 7 years, as democrats scrambled to be almost as conservative as the republicans, because that is what made political sense.
If you have a third player in the mix, let alone many players, that destablizes this balance. Then you'll start seeing a spectrum of views, rather than polarized (abortion) or highly similar (war on terrorism) positions. It's just game theory, which seems to be the meme of the day.
Mine is a Bushmaster. You can actually buy full auto sears quite easily and legally, but I wouldn't want one anyway. If we're in this situation, conservation of ammo will be a need.
AR-15's have been made by lots of manufacturers under government contract. It's an open source design - anyone can make them.
Whatever. You clearly have never used COBOL. If you aren't old enough to have spilled a deck of punch cards, you don't know how easy you have it.
:-)
Java is a solid language, that is stable, rich, well documented, with great industry support. It's free, comes with a great IDE, and there are multiple rich app server environments to develop to, which are also mostly free. Perhaps this is the 'bloat' you refer to.
I've been coding long enough to remember when FORTRAN 77 was new and neat, and we all wanted it. After living through and delivering production applications in FORTRAN, 3 versions of BASIC, COBOL, PL/1, C, VB, Java, Perl and Python, so far, it's my not so humble opinion that anyone who sneers at Java is a spoiled brat. Sure, there are other great environments, but Java is a technological asset of no small value.
Now get off my lawn.
Internally, every DBMS has a structure that isn't tabular in nature, but which is accessed and managed by the DBMS so that it seems like it is to the user. Oracle, SQL Server, MySQL, they all have some internal data structure that is physically not organized into rows and columns. MySQL in particular allows use of multiple storage managers.
The definition I presented previously, from Codd himself (see Edgar Codd ) , focuses on how the data can be accessed by and is presented to the using process. If you can access it with standard SQL, it's an RDB, as far as he and I are concerned.