This is rearranging deck chairs. They're not addressing the actual problem, which is that people do not feel safe or comfortable. It's the crime, stupid!

Even more sad: the residential areas will almost certainly be used as low-income housing nearly immediately. Please don't misunderstand; I do not have a problem with wanting to house the poor....the issue is that if you're looking for an economic kickstart to your downtown area...well, this ain't it.

This is, without a doubt, one of the dumbest articles I've ever seen on Slashdot. Anyone, much less someone with the title "Principle Software Engineer", could have predicted that even a slightly tuned Postgres install would be faster than SQLlite.

I admit, I am waiting with baited breath for the amazed reaction when said engineer discovers what indexes and multiple cores can do.

Ridiculous. Been reading slashdot since the late 90's and man, this one takes the cake.

It is official; Netcraft confirms: *BSD is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead. /s....couldn't help myself; this is /. after all....

*sigh*

And in 2016, STILL the juvenile potshots at Microsoft are being perpetuated. So, I'll take one of my own: I suppose you like Postgres (which is a great alternative) or Oracle (which sucks so hard you probably owe it money now) simply because they're more difficult to use, and therefore must be better somehow.

I used to think that MS-SQL was a toy, but, now, in 2016, for probably 95% of all the database installations out there, assuming you have a choice, MS-SQL is a cheaper and easier to administer than either Postgres or Oracle. This is coming from a guy that has been doing this for 20 years, and have actually holds the title of DBA, administering Oracle, Postgres, MySQL and MS-SQL side by side.

A license for MS-SQL is a whole lot cheaper than an Oracle or Postgres DBA, by the way.

TRIGGER WARNING: Mentions Wikipedia

The Wikipedia article on the book seems to indicate that he thought of Brave New World as a dystopia, so I'm assuming he was against such a future.

Reminds me more of "Brave New World". Mustapha Mond would be proud; we're working ourselves into exactly the population that Huxley describe:

- "[T]hey also want to be social and never lonely" (Very nearly a direct quote from the book)
- "Millennials are staying single longer than previous generations" (No more moms and dads...) ...and the comments here are filled with examples of the sexual angle...

Of course, the quotes from the article are, like, that guy's opinion man, but I'm assuming he's done the research enough to see that those are at least somewhat accurate assertions.

Between Orwell and Huxley, I think Huxley was more accurate.

I heard Steorn was reviewing it.

A thread complaining about how broken American politics is includes a nugget like "[I] forget who vetoes who". Wow.

We should bring back these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0

While I know it's bad form to use Wikipedia as a scholarly reference, the article on the Founding Fathers does indicate that the term is a broad one, and specifically references the group that signed the Declaration as being encompassed by the term.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Additionally, I would assume that putting your signature on something that would mean your death sentence for treason against the crown means that you agree with it so wholeheartedly that you may as well have written it for yourself.

*sigh*

I'm not sure why there's so much vitriol coming my way. I am sincerely sorry that I, personally, am responsible for your anger at "religion".

By the way, I'm a religion major; I'm pretty sure I know a good bit about both my own religion and many others that you probably are not familiar with.

Again, friend, these aren't my words (though I do agree with them). These are the words of the people who decided that maybe it's a good thing to start a new country and this is how it should run. Please re-read the declaration of independence. Not a legally binding document, of course, but it does demonstrate what was going through the head of those to whom you owe a great debt.

Thank you for a well-reasoned, cogent response. I disagree with your definition of what a right is (as evidenced from my comments), but I do appreciate your civil comment.

Let's start at the beginning. The declaration of independence says that among our rights are "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". The 14th amendment says that a state shall not deprive anyone of "life, liberty or property"....essentially their rights.

And again, I reiterate what I said earlier. Where do rights come from?

If they come from God, well, the religions practiced by virtually all people worldwide have consistently said throughout their history that such a marriage is not a marriage.

If they do not come from God, then they are simply a social construct, freely defined by humans. And the humans in many states said that such a marriage is not a marriage.

And yet the "three great religions" practiced by the vast majority of the people who inhabit your biosphere have for their entire collective history said that this same creator says that such a marriage is not a marriage.

Where do rights come from again? If you do not subscribe to any sort of God (and it sounds like you may not), then you have to say that rights are a social construct made up by people. And then you're back to square one with prop 8 and all the constitutional amendments.

The declaration of independence would seem to disagree with you: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights". It's not me saying that...it's the founding fathers.