You do realize that OP was referring to MySQL, do you not?

I suspect similar arguments were made for having gears shift without manual intervention, but people got use to the situation so thoroughly that only in niche markets is it even possible to sell a second-hand car with a manual transmission.

You must have been stoned to come up with that. Shale on you!

will never replace rule of law.

And of course, John Woo. Let's hear it for two-fisting, slow motion and doves!

I don't know. What makes him so good?

The actual article is about an enzyme. The chemical transformation still requires energy, just as charging a battery does.

You will, of course, be demanding accountability in military spending that's equal to what scientist using public funds have now, right? How about starting with the total decommissioning of our nuclear weapons? We spend about 8 billion dollars on each nuclear submarine. Has anyone been asked to present a post-Cold War case for ever having one of those?

When you frame something as "demonizing," you're implying that the characterization of demonic behavior is not accurate.

Given the actual track record of corporations since the beginning of the East India Company, your implication is false on its face.

If you've experienced Oracle's "24/7/365 top-notch support," as you phrase it, you know there are certain problems it will not help you with. For example, there are known bugs, some of which cause what in Oracle jargon are called "600 errors," which means, "you're screwed, and you've lost data irretrievably." These bugs have remained unfixed for years, and no matter what kind of support you buy from Oracle, they will not fix them. Their green-eyeshade people have decreed that the cost of fixing them is not worth it.

Better pro tip: always use your SQL engine's parameterization rather than rely on "sanitizing" such inputs. Your engine's parameterizer is extremely well tested, even if it's an engine with relatively sloppy coding practices. Your "sanitizing" script can never be tested quite as well.

She was like a little ball of sunshine.

As for statistics, does this really surprise anyone in a time when net polls are being reported as hard news?

Let's talk about some voice acting we liked.

My favorite example of voice acting is Bioshock. Withing that my favorite is Armin Shimerman.

I agree, games that have professional voice actors (or even professional actors) tend to produce good voice acting. It is a shame that this is the only good thing I can say about Bioshock, System Shocks retarded cousin.

"An unjust law is no law at all", said St Augustine, providing the foundation of civil disobedience movements across the globe. If a law is not really a law at all, it is argued, one has a right -- even a duty -- to break it. Martin Luther King articulated this view in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: "one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws".

The problem is that while the law is a matter of public record, justice is an intensely personal matter. What one person regards as just may strike another as an unwarranted imposition. This is why we need law; if we all behaved according to our personal standards of morality, anarchy would rule. While we may have our own views about the justice of particular laws, we generally accept that some rules must apply universally. If we are to follow Martin Luther King's exhortation to resist unjust laws, then, there must be an unusual type or degree of injustice to justify that. What kind of injustice might do so?

The great American democrat Henry David Thoreau had an answer. In his classic essay Civil Disobedience, Thoreau observed that "a government in which the majority rule in all cases cannot be based on justice". An infantile deference to the will of the majority, however ill-informed, is still common today. It informs the thoughtless "majority rules!" which is frequently blurted out as if, on its own, it magically justifies anything (I always want to ask whether, if the majority jumped off a cliff, the speaker would too). In fact, "majority rules" is a solution of last resort. Ideally, people should act according to their consciences. If that is inappropriate, unanimity should be sought. Only if these two fail should the will of the majority be imposed on the rest. Thoreau called for this kind of government, "in which the majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience... in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable".

http://xkcd.com/652/