I do not know much about enterprise DBs like what Oracle offers. I wonder if there are viable alternatives.
Probably 95%-99% of organizations currently on Oracle would be better off on MS SQL Server instead. It's a far superior product.
She didn't though, the clampdown was about using Reddit to organize harassment, not the viewpoints of the people concerned.
That was the official line. But in fact, every subsequent attempt to create an anti-fat subreddit was immediately banned, even if they were created by completely different people and hadn't ever committed any harassing behavior. There was viewpoint discrimination going on whether the management admitted it or not.
That's not really relevant. Your right to free and offensive speech does not impose on anyone else, person or corporation, an obligation to provide you with a platform for said speech.
It isn't about who has a legal obligation to do what. It's about the fact that Reddit was founded as, and run as, a platform specifically dedicated to free speech. If someone comes in and tries to change the culture so that the site can more easily be sold to a big conglomerate, it's not surprising that the site's long-term users are going to push back.
It's the same reason why people get upset about universities curtailing freedom of expression even when they are privately run and not part of the state government. Academic freedom is a major part of what a university is supposed to be. In the same way, free speech (restricted only by the handful of exceptions required by U.S. law) is part of what Reddit is supposed to be about.
Actually, it's not at all brazen. The facts of the case painted the firm as pretty sexist.
What facts? Most of the claims in that article are unfounded allegations. We only have Ellen Pao's word that they happened, and I don't believe that is worth much. Neither, apparently, did the men and women on the jury.
All kidding aside, 40 years from now we'll still be driving our own cars because programmers won't be able to help a car decide if it is allowed to avoid a collision that will kill a driver by swerving onto a sidewalk and killing two pedestrians.
Self-driving cars won't even attempt to make decisions like that. If faced with a no-win situation, they'll default to trying to stop as quickly and safely as possible. If that still results in a crash, the car's black box should contain enough sensor data to prove that the crash was either a freak of nature (mechanical failure, etc.) or someone else's fault.
Without Flash, what's the preferred way to deploy vector animations of the sort seen on Homestar Runner, Weebl's Stuff, Newgrounds, Dagobah, and Albino Blacksheep, without bloating them by a factor of 10 by rendering them to WebM?
Animated SVG for the simpler stuff, HTML5 canvas with JavaScript for more complicated animations.
The problem though is going to be corporate customers. The ones with thousands of desktop systems that do pay. Big corps tend to be conservative about IT upgrades, and by giving Windows away MS would be sacrificing that revenue stream. They're probably reluctant to do that.
Of course, they could just drop the price of the Home Edition (or whatever they're calling it today) to zero and charge for the Pro one. But then they need to make the home edition good enough to be useful, but not so good that business would be happy using it. That's not compromise that's worked well for them in the past.
Actually, it's quite straightforward: the Pro edition can join domains, while the Home edition can't. This by itself will work quite well as a differentiator. Big businesses aren't going to give up Active Directory and Group Policy to save a few bucks on license fees, while home uisers (and some small businesses) won't give a damn.
I'll agree that I haven't seen very much Qt out in industry, but I haven't seen much
Maybe you haven't been looking very hard? The job listings I see are about 40%
This is very good news. ASP.NET is a great web development platform, far superior to the atrocious hack that is PHP. The only reason so far why PHP has predominated is licensing costs: until now, you needed a Windows Server to do ASP.NET properly (or else resort to unsupported hacks like Mono), whereas PHP is free. Now that the playing field is about to become more level, hopefully it will be the beginning of the end for PHP.
Would a 'friendly community' welcome a new boss who supported banning inter-racial marriage? No, and the oh but it's just a personal view nonsense wouldn't fly there either.
What you're overlooking is that Proposition 8 passed. You're not talking about blacklisting people for views way outside the Overton Window. You're talking about blacklisting people for taking part in an active political controversy where you don't like their position.
According to an Oct. 1, 2013, report prepared for Home Depot by consultant FishNet Security, the retailer left its computers vulnerable by switching off Symantecâ(TM)s Network Threat Protection (NTP) firewall in favor of one packaged with Windows.
No enterprise installation should ever be relying on individual client firewall software for network security. At best, that should be a second line of defense. It is the job of the perimeter firewall to handle these kind of threats.
A week from now if someone does follow through on the threats is it still a joke? Seriously, sometimes threats do get carried out.
When was the last time an Internet threat by a stranger was actually carried out in meatspace?
Note that I'm not including cases where the victim already knew the perpetrator in the real world and the threat just happened to take place on an online service, nor am I counting instances where the entire crime took place online, such as DoS attacks or stealing personal information. I'm talking about some guy on the Internet making a threat of committing violence against someone they don't already have a personal real-life acquaintance with, and then actually carrying it out. Has this ever happened? If not, why shouldn't all such threats be disregarded as meaningless and empty?
Death threats are illegal, they don't become legal because they're On The Internet any more than an old technology should become patentable because it's done On The Internet.
The legality of death threats is actually not a cut-and-dried issue. This article discusses various U.S. court cases related to death threats, and what criteria the courts use to determine whether they are protected free speech or not.
I suspect that a death threat accompanied by "doxxing" would be considered more serious than an isolated threat out of the blue in a chat room, since posting personal information would make it more likely that "a reasonable listener would understand [it] as an actual threat of violence" and not just rhetoric. But I'm not a lawyer, so I can't be certain of this. Of course, it goes without saying that the safest (and most ethical) course of conduct is not to issue any death threats at all.
And no matter what the charter is, if they are liquidated the court will sell all of your data to the highest bidder to pay off creditors.
That is true if the user data is considered part of the bankruptcy estate. But that won't necessarily be the case. Under US law, everyone automatically has copyright for anything they write or compose. If the primary concern is to protect user privacy, the user agreement for the site could stipulate that users retain copyright to all their data, and the site has a nonexclusive, nontransferrable license to use that data so long as they adhere to the privacy terms. In the case of bankruptcy, the only "asset" would be the nontransferrable license – not the data itself, which would still belong to the end users.
I expect issues like this to come up once a few mid-size or large cloud providers go broke. I don't think the courts are going to allow the creditors to seize data assets belonging to customers in these instances.
8 Catfish = 1 Octo-puss
