Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Really Stupid (Score 1) 1198

by glenebob (#46883773) Attached to: Oklahoma Botched an Execution With Untested Lethal Injection Drugs

I dunno, I've deprived myself of oxygen before. Just breath in a bag for awhile. You'll go into full panic long before reaching the point of losing consciousness.

On the other hand, I've also cut the flow of blood to my brain by constricting my jugglers, and actually passed out a couple times doing it. I freaked a bunch of kids out in grade school doing it in class, actually. It's completely painless and doesn't trigger the slightest bit of panic. You can be pleasantly unconscious in 15 seconds that way. I suspect that bleeding to death is similar.

How long would it take to drain an inmate's circulatory system to the point of rapid unconsciousness? Guaranteed to kill, and no less humane than lethal injection.

Comment: Re:Assisted Suicide (Score 1) 1198

by glenebob (#46883679) Attached to: Oklahoma Botched an Execution With Untested Lethal Injection Drugs

I LOVE this idea. Except, I would expand it make it a no-strings-attached option for anyone charged with any felony, maybe even any misdemeanor. Change the guilty plea to, "how do you plead, guilty, not guilty, or kill me now?" And, of course, the option should be extended to anyone currently service time. Our prisons would be nearly empty within a year.

Comment: Re:Doesn't matter (Score 5, Informative) 141

by glenebob (#46537651) Attached to: Gmail Goes HTTPS Only For All Connections

Somebody mod this up. This is dead right.

Google can encrypt the data all they want, right down to encrypting it when it arrives, and leaving it encrypted for its lifetime on their servers, but the NSA can just say "gimme the data AND the keys to unlock it". The keys are just data, and obviously Google has access to them, therefore so does the NSA.

Comment: Re:locking? (Score 1) 372

by glenebob (#44272127) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is Postgres On Par With Oracle?

I stand corrected. And somewhat confused. I found the 6.5 release notes:

"Multi-version concurrency control(MVCC)

        This removes our old table-level locking, and replaces it with a locking system that is superior to most commercial database systems. In a traditional system, each row that is modified is locked until committed, preventing reads by other users. MVCC uses the natural multi-version nature of PostgreSQL to allow readers to continue reading consistent data during writer activity. Writers continue to use the compact pg_log transaction system. This is all performed without having to allocate a lock for every row like traditional database systems. So, basically, we no longer are restricted by simple table-level locking; we have something better than row-level locking."

That seems to imply that the "MV" existed, perhaps all along, but that the "CC" part was new in 6.5. Maybe that explains my confusion. Anyway, that was a long time ago. Thanks for whacking me with the clue stick :D

Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.