The migration strategy is especially complex because consultants "see them coming" when they see they're transitioning from Oracle; those clients are used to paying more than 10 times what people using alternatives pay, and so the rates go up. Yes there is a lot to replace, but you're replacing low quality stuff that is designed to be a huge mess with much simpler stuff that has less parts and where each part is less complicated.
Oracle tricks these companies that see themselves as being super-duper-enterprisey into spending more money on COTS than a custom system would cost, and in that environment, the more you're willing to spend to move to a new system the sooner you're saving money.
I could save some of these companies millions of dollars if they wanted, but unfortunately the management failings that lead to being in that situation also get in the way of admitting and correcting the mistakes. But as long as they choose a small technical consultancy instead of a big company flogging clients from yesteryear they'll still save a lot, even while getting fleeced! That's just how much more it costs to use Oracle than to use postgres. Even IBM DBII would save them money.
If you're switching to postgresql then the stored procedures are easy to port.
People who think it is hard probably don't know about the options.
Smart companies with big databases hire generic DBAs, not BrandyBrand(TM) Certified people who appear to be technical employees working for you, but because their training is company-other-than-yours dependent they actually act as sales engineers for the vendor!
There is no reason to consider the BrandyBrand(TM) DB once you look at the cost, and realize that you have to hire a DBA either way; if you choose postgresql then the DBA is your whole cost! And they don't even cost more than BrandyBrand(TM) DBAs.
If you ever meet a liberal, ask them if the New York Times is a liberal newspaper, or not.
When Reagan was President, most people considered the New York Times to be a center-right newspaper that published both liberal and conservative opinions on the editorial page; and their reporting hasn't actually changed.
You moved so far to the right that you think center-right means far-left liburaal, but there is no reason to presume that liberals would start considering right-wing corporatist blah-blah to be "liberal."
I especially loved his "million year trend." Yeah, fucker, what happens if you open an anthropology book and find out that we only agree on what happened in the past ~4k years?
Some weeds break at the soil line and the roots regrow, you say? It's a robot, run it again in a month or two.
Yeah, talk to experienced gardeners about that. You have to either pull up the root, or keep cutting the new growth every week. A month is too long; as soon as the first new group of leaves start producing energy, the weeds put that energy into restoring the stored energy in the root necessary to put up another shoot. After two weeks, it hasn't just restored it's energy, it has also started to extend it's root system! If you wait a month, you don't just have another shoot to pull up; you went from one weed to a patch of weeds.
Pulling the roots is really hard. I know this because I'm good at it, so I've often done it even when others thought it was too much work. I've cleared a whole back yard of blackberries where the roots were well established with 3' deep runners. It takes a lot of digging, not just pulling; a carefull combination of both. And one of the difficult parts is usually that there are other plants you want to keep; this requires not only just not pulling them up, it requires being careful not to compact their soil, too.
Even just a simple weed like something from the Amaranth family is hard to pull up; in that case it likes to break off, but it also likes to grow right next to other plants. It requires a combination of digging and pulling that probably easier for a robot than blackberries; no runners connecting the different plants, just a deep tap root that you can push a "weed popper" tool down next to; but pulling that weed out without damaging other plants requires a bunch of generalized gardening skills and context awareness that a simple robot won't have.
Spraying of course might be more harmful, depending on your goals and conditions. I'll take a simple surface-cutting bot please, and I'll run it twice a week. Frequent cutting is highly effective, but very difficult and inconvenient for human gardeners to pull off. But the robot in the story is the one that will actually reduce the health warnings on eating fish from the local river, so many kudos to the engineers!
It is hard not to be smug when you can't even hear me and just spew something about "sides" in response.
Spoiler: I wasn't taking a "side," I was pointing out the contradiction in accusing people of making a "think about the children" argument, when the topic is actually about children. People on any "side" should be able to understand that, if, but only if they're capable of both reading and comprehending before responding. If not, they'll just knee-jerk and presume sides based on the simple formula: "Is agree me? No? Other side!" The funniest part is that even if I spell it out, you don't have any opportunity for comprehension, because Reasons.
The US might not care about anything other than nuclear disarmament, in which case we can have everything we want, and we likely will one way or another. The reason diplomacy has a chance is that we only want one thing, and if they won't give it to use, we'll still get it.
OTOH, North Korea wants lots of different things, many of which the world would be happy to give them if they're willing to make the right agreements. So as long as they give up their nukes, they can seek various things as "compromise."
Interesting analysis, but it is a huge gamble; it may be that Trump is planning an Iran campaign for the midterms, and Israel can provide an excuse for that on a day's notice. But it may also be that he wants a limited war in North Korea for completely different reasons, in which case the North Korean response boxes them into making serious concessions, or else having the war start much sooner than it otherwise would.
It is worth noting that India and Pakistan did about the same number of tests and then agreed to stop.
There is a broad consensus that additional testing is not useful; bigger warheads don't significantly increase the deterrent effect. Additional development is expected to be in delivery systems after that, which don't need to carry real warheads.
It is as if people can't comprehend that the "test site" is literally just a mine shaft into the side of a mountain, and there is nothing important kept there except for the part that blows up, which is there temporarily right before it blows up.
Or that they had backup tunnels a few hundred yards away. Or that they can just move half a mile down the ridgeline and dig another hole.
Maybe they just don't realize that a "nuclear program" is mostly a bunch of physicists and engineers doing technical work? Maybe they think you dig your way to a bomb? Or maybe you smash rocks together inside a tunnel for 7 years until they reach a state of metaphysical enrichment?
I thought the interest to nerds was based on, "Trump cancels Singapore Summit and once again all your favorite k-pop idols are about to burn in a fiery inferno."
I'll be off watching AoA music videos at double speed so I can get more views in before it makes me cry. <3 <3 <3 Hyejeong! The world's greatest fashionista.
"He likes his steak well done." What is the tense there? Does the information tell you about what he eats, or something else?
"He only eats fast food." Is this statement about what he eats, or what he likes? Does it have a tense?
And it is much more true than false; all of it. Trump is known to like his steaks well-done with ketchup. It is also known that he stopped eating in restaurants other than ones he owns because he's worried about his food being tampered with.
The lack of a minor caveat like "when not at home" when the context is already not at home ("fast food") does not imply the statement is problematic, it just means it wasn't that heavily edited or smithed.
If you're not willing to think of the children even when the subject is actually what to do about the children, there's really no hope for you. You're just not capable of thinking.
The thing that would make it a more honest conversation would be if you were honest, instead of just talking shit based on perceived political teams.
No, if he says, "Won't somebody rid me of this meddlesome priest," and so twitter bans him, the Court is going to have no trouble at all determining that the Government abused somebody's right to participate in the forum.
It is amazing how susceptible to rank bullshit and pathetic word games and misdirection some people presume the Courts to be; they even presume that the Courts would be unable to comprehend obvious and traditional attempts at bullshit. The lamest part is that most Judges are intelligent and highly educated; and yet this attitude presumes them to be bumbling idiots. If you thought the Courts were even half as clever as yourself, hopefully you'd realize they must have some system to deal with word games. And if you realized that they're probably really smart people, then you wouldn't even be looking for gimmicks, you'd just read a damn book for once in your life.
There is nothing weird about it, the weird thing is that you're ignorant of history, and yet also ignorant of your ignorance, and you seem to just not know that history ever happened!
Asking the right questions is essential to Buddhism. Getting the answer to the wrong question merely moves you further away from the teaching.
The answer to your question is so obvious, that the asking of the question shows a deeper lack of understanding of the basic nature of Buddhism.
I actually answered it at length above, multiple times, and even explained the related teachings and also the implications.
You complained above that translating dukkha as "suffering" is something you don't really understand; if you endeavor to understand why Buddhists translate it that way, you should be able to easily arrive at the answer to why your question above is not skillful.
As was widely predicted by lawyers when the practice was first reported on. Everybody knew they aren't allowed to do it, but everybody also knew that they can get away with doing it until a lawsuit results in a ruling.
Now there will be additional lawsuits forcing others to unban people. It will take time to enforce, but it will happen.
Even if he flips a coin, he can't do it. If he hires a foreigner to press the button, he still can't do it.
There is no gray area there. There is also nothing about companies being "in bed" with the government.
It is literally exactly the same as if the City Council rents their meeting room instead of buying a "City Hall" building. Happens in small towns every week.
For example, if the City Council decides to rent a big restaurant to hold a public meeting, the meeting is still a public meeting and the City Councilors are under all the normal public meeting laws.
And the restaurant is still a restaurant, they didn't turn into government property.
There is literally no conflict of rights or responsibility there, simply overlapping use of land.
"Public forum" applies to the situation the City Council creates, it doesn't stick in rem to the land.
If you invite Trump to your garden party, and he actually just asks as your average guest, making small talk with the other guests and so on, then he's just a guest.
If you invite Trump to your garden party and he starts using it as a political soapbox, then TRUMP doesn't get to kick other guests out of your garden party when they start booing at the buzzkill.
If you invite Trump to your garden party and he starts using it as a political soapbox, then YOU still get to kick the people out who go from booing to yelling, "Kill the President!" because hey, it is YOUR garden party.
In the third example, even if you just think they showed insufficient enthusiasm you can boot them.
The problem with your setup is that if it is a garden party and he's on a soapbox, it isn't obvious that he's acting in an official capacity rather than running for reelection; as a candidate he can still be involved in banning the people. That's why before Trump claimed that his twitter posts were official statements, people were arguing over the legality! They might have merely been very-early campaign statements. But once they're statements of the President, rather than a candidate for President, then it is all very easy analysis and the only possible outcome is that he can't ban anybody unless they're spamming, and half the time not even then.
Slashdot Mirror
The migration strategy is especially complex because consultants "see them coming" when they see they're transitioning from Oracle; those clients are used to paying more than 10 times what people using alternatives pay, and so the rates go up. Yes there is a lot to replace, but you're replacing low quality stuff that is designed to be a huge mess with much simpler stuff that has less parts and where each part is less complicated.
Oracle tricks these companies that see themselves as being super-duper-enterprisey into spending more money on COTS than a custom system would cost, and in that environment, the more you're willing to spend to move to a new system the sooner you're saving money.
I could save some of these companies millions of dollars if they wanted, but unfortunately the management failings that lead to being in that situation also get in the way of admitting and correcting the mistakes. But as long as they choose a small technical consultancy instead of a big company flogging clients from yesteryear they'll still save a lot, even while getting fleeced! That's just how much more it costs to use Oracle than to use postgres. Even IBM DBII would save them money.
If you're switching to postgresql then the stored procedures are easy to port.
People who think it is hard probably don't know about the options.
Smart companies with big databases hire generic DBAs, not BrandyBrand(TM) Certified people who appear to be technical employees working for you, but because their training is company-other-than-yours dependent they actually act as sales engineers for the vendor!
There is no reason to consider the BrandyBrand(TM) DB once you look at the cost, and realize that you have to hire a DBA either way; if you choose postgresql then the DBA is your whole cost! And they don't even cost more than BrandyBrand(TM) DBAs.
If you ever meet a liberal, ask them if the New York Times is a liberal newspaper, or not.
When Reagan was President, most people considered the New York Times to be a center-right newspaper that published both liberal and conservative opinions on the editorial page; and their reporting hasn't actually changed.
You moved so far to the right that you think center-right means far-left liburaal, but there is no reason to presume that liberals would start considering right-wing corporatist blah-blah to be "liberal."
"by themselves," but otherwise I agree.
I especially loved his "million year trend." Yeah, fucker, what happens if you open an anthropology book and find out that we only agree on what happened in the past ~4k years?
Bicycle generator.
Dude, go and look at a topo map of California. I'll wait.
*ROFLCOPTER*
Some weeds break at the soil line and the roots regrow, you say? It's a robot, run it again in a month or two.
Yeah, talk to experienced gardeners about that. You have to either pull up the root, or keep cutting the new growth every week. A month is too long; as soon as the first new group of leaves start producing energy, the weeds put that energy into restoring the stored energy in the root necessary to put up another shoot. After two weeks, it hasn't just restored it's energy, it has also started to extend it's root system! If you wait a month, you don't just have another shoot to pull up; you went from one weed to a patch of weeds.
Pulling the roots is really hard. I know this because I'm good at it, so I've often done it even when others thought it was too much work. I've cleared a whole back yard of blackberries where the roots were well established with 3' deep runners. It takes a lot of digging, not just pulling; a carefull combination of both. And one of the difficult parts is usually that there are other plants you want to keep; this requires not only just not pulling them up, it requires being careful not to compact their soil, too.
Even just a simple weed like something from the Amaranth family is hard to pull up; in that case it likes to break off, but it also likes to grow right next to other plants. It requires a combination of digging and pulling that probably easier for a robot than blackberries; no runners connecting the different plants, just a deep tap root that you can push a "weed popper" tool down next to; but pulling that weed out without damaging other plants requires a bunch of generalized gardening skills and context awareness that a simple robot won't have.
Spraying of course might be more harmful, depending on your goals and conditions. I'll take a simple surface-cutting bot please, and I'll run it twice a week. Frequent cutting is highly effective, but very difficult and inconvenient for human gardeners to pull off. But the robot in the story is the one that will actually reduce the health warnings on eating fish from the local river, so many kudos to the engineers!
You're probably using punctuation for numbers incorrectly even for you own local system if you though that. ;)
I love the smugness!
Keep it up. It's really helping your side.
It is hard not to be smug when you can't even hear me and just spew something about "sides" in response.
Spoiler: I wasn't taking a "side," I was pointing out the contradiction in accusing people of making a "think about the children" argument, when the topic is actually about children. People on any "side" should be able to understand that, if, but only if they're capable of both reading and comprehending before responding. If not, they'll just knee-jerk and presume sides based on the simple formula: "Is agree me? No? Other side!" The funniest part is that even if I spell it out, you don't have any opportunity for comprehension, because Reasons.
But whatabout, and whatabout, and whatabout, blah blah fucking blah. Don't forget to wipe.
The US might not care about anything other than nuclear disarmament, in which case we can have everything we want, and we likely will one way or another. The reason diplomacy has a chance is that we only want one thing, and if they won't give it to use, we'll still get it.
OTOH, North Korea wants lots of different things, many of which the world would be happy to give them if they're willing to make the right agreements. So as long as they give up their nukes, they can seek various things as "compromise."
Interesting analysis, but it is a huge gamble; it may be that Trump is planning an Iran campaign for the midterms, and Israel can provide an excuse for that on a day's notice. But it may also be that he wants a limited war in North Korea for completely different reasons, in which case the North Korean response boxes them into making serious concessions, or else having the war start much sooner than it otherwise would.
It is worth noting that India and Pakistan did about the same number of tests and then agreed to stop.
There is a broad consensus that additional testing is not useful; bigger warheads don't significantly increase the deterrent effect. Additional development is expected to be in delivery systems after that, which don't need to carry real warheads.
It is as if people can't comprehend that the "test site" is literally just a mine shaft into the side of a mountain, and there is nothing important kept there except for the part that blows up, which is there temporarily right before it blows up.
Or that they had backup tunnels a few hundred yards away. Or that they can just move half a mile down the ridgeline and dig another hole.
Maybe they just don't realize that a "nuclear program" is mostly a bunch of physicists and engineers doing technical work? Maybe they think you dig your way to a bomb? Or maybe you smash rocks together inside a tunnel for 7 years until they reach a state of metaphysical enrichment?
I thought the interest to nerds was based on, "Trump cancels Singapore Summit and once again all your favorite k-pop idols are about to burn in a fiery inferno."
I'll be off watching AoA music videos at double speed so I can get more views in before it makes me cry. <3 <3 <3 Hyejeong! The world's greatest fashionista.
"He likes his steak well done." What is the tense there? Does the information tell you about what he eats, or something else?
"He only eats fast food." Is this statement about what he eats, or what he likes? Does it have a tense?
And it is much more true than false; all of it. Trump is known to like his steaks well-done with ketchup. It is also known that he stopped eating in restaurants other than ones he owns because he's worried about his food being tampered with.
The lack of a minor caveat like "when not at home" when the context is already not at home ("fast food") does not imply the statement is problematic, it just means it wasn't that heavily edited or smithed.
If you're not willing to think of the children even when the subject is actually what to do about the children, there's really no hope for you. You're just not capable of thinking.
The thing that would make it a more honest conversation would be if you were honest, instead of just talking shit based on perceived political teams.
Don't bother, now that you told us about yours plans to pray, God won't listen anymore.
No, if he says, "Won't somebody rid me of this meddlesome priest," and so twitter bans him, the Court is going to have no trouble at all determining that the Government abused somebody's right to participate in the forum.
It is amazing how susceptible to rank bullshit and pathetic word games and misdirection some people presume the Courts to be; they even presume that the Courts would be unable to comprehend obvious and traditional attempts at bullshit. The lamest part is that most Judges are intelligent and highly educated; and yet this attitude presumes them to be bumbling idiots. If you thought the Courts were even half as clever as yourself, hopefully you'd realize they must have some system to deal with word games. And if you realized that they're probably really smart people, then you wouldn't even be looking for gimmicks, you'd just read a damn book for once in your life.
There is nothing weird about it, the weird thing is that you're ignorant of history, and yet also ignorant of your ignorance, and you seem to just not know that history ever happened!
Asking the right questions is essential to Buddhism. Getting the answer to the wrong question merely moves you further away from the teaching.
The answer to your question is so obvious, that the asking of the question shows a deeper lack of understanding of the basic nature of Buddhism.
I actually answered it at length above, multiple times, and even explained the related teachings and also the implications.
You complained above that translating dukkha as "suffering" is something you don't really understand; if you endeavor to understand why Buddhists translate it that way, you should be able to easily arrive at the answer to why your question above is not skillful.
Right.
As was widely predicted by lawyers when the practice was first reported on. Everybody knew they aren't allowed to do it, but everybody also knew that they can get away with doing it until a lawsuit results in a ruling.
Now there will be additional lawsuits forcing others to unban people. It will take time to enforce, but it will happen.
That is not a curveball at all.
Even if he flips a coin, he can't do it. If he hires a foreigner to press the button, he still can't do it.
There is no gray area there. There is also nothing about companies being "in bed" with the government.
It is literally exactly the same as if the City Council rents their meeting room instead of buying a "City Hall" building. Happens in small towns every week.
For example, if the City Council decides to rent a big restaurant to hold a public meeting, the meeting is still a public meeting and the City Councilors are under all the normal public meeting laws.
And the restaurant is still a restaurant, they didn't turn into government property.
There is literally no conflict of rights or responsibility there, simply overlapping use of land.
"Public forum" applies to the situation the City Council creates, it doesn't stick in rem to the land.
You can't tell the difference between filtering your own mail, or filtering somebody else's mail?
Really?
Not really.
If you invite Trump to your garden party, and he actually just asks as your average guest, making small talk with the other guests and so on, then he's just a guest.
If you invite Trump to your garden party and he starts using it as a political soapbox, then TRUMP doesn't get to kick other guests out of your garden party when they start booing at the buzzkill.
If you invite Trump to your garden party and he starts using it as a political soapbox, then YOU still get to kick the people out who go from booing to yelling, "Kill the President!" because hey, it is YOUR garden party.
In the third example, even if you just think they showed insufficient enthusiasm you can boot them.
The problem with your setup is that if it is a garden party and he's on a soapbox, it isn't obvious that he's acting in an official capacity rather than running for reelection; as a candidate he can still be involved in banning the people. That's why before Trump claimed that his twitter posts were official statements, people were arguing over the legality! They might have merely been very-early campaign statements. But once they're statements of the President, rather than a candidate for President, then it is all very easy analysis and the only possible outcome is that he can't ban anybody unless they're spamming, and half the time not even then.