You could cut military spending to zero, and you'd still have a huge deficit
But it would be a much smaller huge deficit.
(You are correct in that its rather silly to focus on just one area, however it does seem rather foolish to be pumping so much cash into the war machine when the consensus seems to be that the empire is crumbling.)
To get code upstream Microsoft has to approve (pretty typical)
So, tell me, which flag ship open source projects main branch can you just merge your code into without approval? The Linux kernel? Apache? X? MySQL? Firefox?Thats a fucking pathetic jibe "Unknown Lamer", not something an editor should be making.
I read (pretty typical) as (this is standard practice for most big projects like this). It took your mini rant for me to consider that it could be derogatory.
I'm all against editorials in my summaries, but I think your freaking out about the wrong thing here.
(Unless of course it was meant in the way you have interpreted - in which case, yes, by all means fuck that guy right in the ear!)
I'm pretty sure that Access' mission in life is making it comparatively easy for people to develop database frontends(and often get in over their heads and produce some real nightmares...) not to be a database per se. Although I think that MS has been moving toward killing JET, in favor of SQL Server 3-legged-puppy edition, to make upselling to SQL server proper easier, the point is making it easy to dump some forms and buttons in place without having to be a real programmer.
It was... However the latest ribbonified reincarnation of Access is a big bucket of wtf. Its uglier than a hat full of arseholes and as user friendly as a razor blade ice cream. Now its like some sort of bastardized excel with forms. And whilst you might be able to make a case for the ribbon tool bar on word and excel (NOOOOO! I will hate if for EVER!) it sure as hell doesn't belong on a development platform.
(Can someone please explain to me how the new navigation thingy works? What was so hard about 'tables,views,forms,reports,code' because I'm fucked if I can find anything now.)
All they are testing is pre-cognition, aka time travel of the mind, and really the least likely psychic power to exist. The ability to do this would pretty much break science.
No it wouldn't, it would open up a completely new field of study and theory. It would be awesome.
I'm not sure it is possible to 'break' science, theories yes for sure, but not so much Science.
(Interesting though experiment though - how could you break science? Observing a specific set of conditions that both confirm and contradict a given theorem?)
Obligatory Onion
http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-constantly-mentioning-he-doesnt-own-a-tel,429/
Very true, but there is something very liberating about not living your life around the tv schedule any more - and who doesn't want to share the secrets of happiness with their friends. (I guess this is how the fervently religious feel all the time.)
Sounds like a good idea and I'm all for it, but the cost and logistics involved of storing, indexing & maintaining the ooglebytes of data would quickly destroy the meager regional/local Police IT budgets.
So your solution is to vainly hope that human nature changes in response to your pout? Good luck with that.
As opposed to you solution to vainly hope a rich billionaire person will give you money to bribe a politician?
After today a shit load of people are now more informed about the nasty side of the SOPA and related acts. The pollies dont like the press they are getting and 'things are happening' that *might* (might) get these bills if not killed, then fixed.
How much money did you get of those billionaires for your idea? How much of a difference have *you* made in getting killing these bills?
People power is over-rated. Yes, I agree, but sometimes its all we got.
If you've got a better idea that isn't an unpossible arms crossed 'other people should take the risks I'm not prepared to then I'm all ears. Until then the score is 1-nill and you aint winning.
Isn't Facebook currently 'under investigation' by some political types. I guess they don't want to rock the boat in a-la: "we wont make a stink about this (lucrative for you) bit of legislation and you don't go further than menacing vote winning sound bites and 'something should be done' type media releases."
Round up some web billionaires and get them to lobby the hell out of congress. If you can't get the money out of politics then use money as a weapon the same way Hollywood and the Music Industry does. "Going Dark" is insufferably silly because it gives ordinary anonymous slackers the impression they are doing something while in fact it accomplishes nothing. You'd be better off selling ribbon magnets.
You can say the same about every 'X' awareness day of the year then. Why buy a pink ribbon cause women are still going to die of breast cancer anyway.
These campaigns are about getting people informed about stuff they normally wouldn't know shit about. In this case the pure self interested evil of entertainment industry lobbyists and the piss weakness of politicians for hire.
Paying of the politicians will work up until someone pays them more, and I'm sure I don't need to draw you a diagram of how 'industry money from a pool of money that will grow larger with bad legislation' will outlast 'donated cash from friendly billionaires'
My hope is this whole debacle is the start of a serious look at the whole entertainment industry, starting with their funny accounting methods that show lord of the rings and the latest #1 pop star star albums as loss makers.
in a veto-proof manner, after Obama had the language softened, and it doesn't apply to any random American, and it doesn't apply to anyone labeled a 'terrorist', only to people associated with specific terrorist groups.
And who identifies these terrorist groups? And how does one prove they are not a member of these groups?
I'm thinking there's a shit load of annoying activist type people who have the most tenuous link to that shadowy Anonymous terror organization that can now be made to 'disappear' for a short time, if required.
And how does one get to the necessary judicial assistance to prove that you *are* an American once your in the part of the system that says 'no trials, indefinite secret detention'?
Enough With the Sensationalism.
No, more with the sensationalism. It is now the only way people will listen to anything through the rest of the artificial sensationalism.
And if you think that any legislation that brings your country closer to the workings of the soviet empire of old then hand in your citizen papers and continue assuming they wont come for you.
His inability to not appear to be a raving madman insured that his message would be lost to the masses.
If no one listens, who cares if you are right or wrong?
That's the biggest cop out Ive heard in a long time.
The guy made some big calls and at the time most people pointed and laughed and cried 'bullshit, will never happen'
Then the crazy predictions started coming true and the prevailing attitude is 'ITS HIS FAULT CAUSE HE IS A CRAZY PEDANTIC ARSE HOLE'.
WTF?
Face it, the guy saw the unpossible happening and tried his best to stop/slow it and was ridiculed greatly for it.
Its like a perverse boy who cried wolf story where the villages ignore the boy in the first instance and then blame him when the wolf eats their sheep.
Well for the record I care that he was right and I care that I also didn't do enough to help.
PS: Stop saying 'it wont happen' because it is happening and by lumping everyone that expresses concern into a nice 'ignore the loony' bucket you are contributing to the fall of the empire.
I find this sort of thing rather amusing. You didn't trust closed source software...
So you download ten million or so lines of source code from some anonymous server, written by thousands of people you've never met and will never know. You then build it using even more software and libraries and tools running under yet another OS, and you then install it on hardware with its own BIOS and roms and controllers.
As opposed to purchasing software made up of millions of lines of codes, bits and pieces of which were outsourced to who knows where and full of pre compiled secret sauce binaries and a giant tangle of interdependent licensing agreements?
The way I see it, Its all about risk management.
Most companies don't have a problem with using off the shelf generic software - mainly because they can swap it out without seriously impacting their business.
But a western government spy agencies probably wont use Baido-GoldenCloudAllCom for their day to day note taking.
If software is a serious part of your business, you should have a team of people that know what they are doing looking after it for you. That team of people will have a much easier time of sorting things out when 'Shit goes bad' with an open/free stack that with a ton of sealed binaries and a priority support phone number.
If software is a just necessary expense (I just need word and email damit) then outsource the lot of it and keep it as a line item. This topic doesn't concern you.
Lets face it folks Linux isn't gonna save you a dime, not in the short or medium term anyway. You are gonna need more expensive Linux admins instead of dirt cheap MCSEs, you are gonna have to hire developers to code FOSS versions of any and all niche programs you have,
1> You should be hiring expensive well trained windows admins in the first place. OTOH It is perfectly feasible that a company can hire el-cheap got a piece of paper linux admin that can balls up their infrastructure just like the el-cheapo windows ones.
2> Just because your using FOSS software does not force all your apps to become FOSS software. If its a niche application you wont be distributing it so who cares what if its glp, if its not and you want to make money selling apps then pay for the non GPL versions of what ever your using just like in windows land.
I bet if you looked at their budget they probably haven't saved squat yet and possibly have even had the price go up as they have paid for all of the above that I listed
I think that if you looked closely and included *all* the ongoing support costs for the enterprisey things like sql server, oracle, sharepoint, SAP etc you start getting a massive savings boost. Admittedly this is all back end stuff, but that's were the big money is. (Mind you, at 50$ a year, 1000 machines almost gets you a full time employee)
I think you are being disingenuous as well by discounting the ongoing costs of licenses and support contracts. Those sorts of costs can hire you a lot of on site, first loyalty is to the company/department people.
Well, that's my interpretation. Sorry it's not a car analogy or a pizza analogy.
I thought Libraries Of Congress was the imperial analogical measurement of information.
I want to know exactly how many L.O.C. can your brain retain in short term memory when moving between rooms?
What if the rooms you are moving between are within the Library of Congress itself?
I'm a contractor that has spent most of my career 'on site' at various large institutions. Never less than 2 years at any one spot - the contract has always been extended even after the original work has been done.
I've seen "in-house" development groups come up with some of the nastiest, most byzantine pieces of crap-hackery you could possibly imagine
Very true, It you hire crap staff you will get crap results. Most of the places Ive worked had environments like this. In fact, its usually why I get called in ("ARGHH!! ITS ALL SHIIIIIIT FIX IT!!!!!!!")
But with vendor approaches, if you dislike the direction the project is heading, you can kill it, cut out the vendor, and move on to something you find more acceptable.
Hang on. Your saying that an IT department that is not capable of hiring even basically competent staff is some how magically able to contract and evaluate a 3rd party to meet their businesses needs?
That's rubbish.
The same lack of management competency that led to hiring crap staff will result in a crap outsourcing project.
If you have a good management layer, you will succeed regardless of outsourcing or in sourcing. If you have a continual need for X number of developers, why pay the over head of a contracting firm? Sure bring in people when you need to, but they should support your in house team not replace them.
I say if your big enough for an IT Department, your big enough for at least one full time developer. If you want to outsource, then walk the walk and outsource THE LOT (Includes all CIO and IT related management positions)
UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker
