July 14, 2011 at 10:24 am
Stefan Krzywicki (7/14/2011)
jcrawf02 (7/14/2011)
Stefan, we have the luxury of contributing because we choose to (anticipating the mutual benefit), but that benefit was hard-won by those who did it because they were coerced to, as Gus is suggesting. Because it is commonplace, the threat of violence is not necessary, but were this the first time anyone had asked for taxes, odds are it would not be so civil.That's why (IMHO) we have 'frontiers' that become 'tamed' and end up with a 'civilization'.
Possibly. But who knows how it really started? Perhaps taxation stemmed from contributions to the local good and ended up being codified because it was done regularly enough to become "tradition". Perhaps force only came into it later for some reason (there being no current project to contribute to, a change in leadership was to someone greedy instead of effective, etc...).
And regardless of how it all started, today society is not held together by the constant threat of death.
"...today society is not held together by the constant threat of death" for what percentage of humanity?
Edit: Keep in mind, most people don't need that, most governments do.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
July 14, 2011 at 10:56 am
GSquared (7/14/2011)
Stefan Krzywicki (7/14/2011)
GSquared (7/14/2011)
Stefan Krzywicki (7/12/2011)
GSquared (7/12/2011)
Unless you define a social contract as "anything two or more people agree to, even if the agreement is coerced", you can't call the laws of pre-Magna Carta England (for one example) as a "social contract". But they were laws, by common parlance, and by the definition I use for that subject.Actually, you can call them a social contract and there were several levels of this. There was the social contract between king and nobles, then between higher and lower nobles and finally between lowest "lords" and the common people. There were also social contracts between people of the same level of social standing and between the "official" and commoner.
For example, the commoner paid the local lord taxes and in return he provided what protection he could. The laws about this merely codified the social contracts of the time, ensuring that everyone contributed and was covered. That these laws and social contracts were far more brutal than those we're used to doesn't mean they weren't still laws and social contracts.
A social contract is a concept under which a society functions. Medieval society, especially at the highest levels, was bound by precident and tradition. Essentially Precident was anything you got away with once and Tradition was getting away with it two years in a row.
Yes, there were degrees of contract, both implicit and explicit, but it was created and enforced by threat of death, not by informed, non-coerced, mutual consent.
Or do you really think the Battle of Hastings was resolved by William and Harold sitting down and mutually agreeing to William's rulership of England, and the Saxon barons all shook hands and smiled and said, "yeah, that'll be for our best mutual benefit"?
Rome's rule of Gaul was established when Vercingetorix and Caesar sat down, worked out their mutual best benefit and what would be best for the people of Gaul? The transition from Aztec to Spanish rule in what's now Mexico was based on mutual agreement of best benefit? Brittain's rule of India was because the people of India decided that would be more profitable for them than maintaining the Mogul empire? Persia's rule of central Asia was established and maintained through mutual cost/benefit analysis? The Ottoman Empire ruled because it made the lives of those in the Middle East and North Africa more pleasant and safer? The US dominion over the Sioux Nation was really for their own good? Rameses II ruled the upper and lower Nile through policies designed to keep the Egyptian people in the lifestyle they had become accustomed to?
The social theory on the subject, as you outlined about feudalism, is, in my opinion, very Pollyanaish. It pretty much ignores the fact that ruleship was essentially banditry with better clothing, through most of human history, including the majority of modern nations. I can't think of a single society where the rules weren't established by conquest through force, and then enforced in very arbitrary fashions through courts that had authority simply because they had the best-armed and best-trained killers in their employ, until modern democracies. And even those still enforce their laws through threat of death. They just operate on the not-unreasonable hope that the majority of people will comply with laws through judgement rather than punishment.
But, ask yourself, how much tax would you pay if it were 100% optional? If taxes were purely "give us as much as you want", without audits, without prison terms, without anything but your own judgement of how valuable government services are to you personally. What percentage of your income would it be? That's what "no possibility of punishment" really means. It means of your own free will and informed consent. Are you willing to take free responsibility for the mutual defense of your country (taxes to pay for common defense), and, if so, how much? How about government programs beyond that? You recognize their value in some cases, and not in others, but currently you are forced to pay for them all. Not "you pay them because it's your responsibility and the social contract". You pay them because otherwise you'll get punished. Right?
A single society where the rules weren't established through conquest or force: Rhode Island. There are likely others, but honestly I'm not inclined to put much effort into this conversation. Your views on this are extremely simplistic and overly reductionist. Societies are not maintained by the constant threat of death over every member, they're primarially maintained through the recognitoin of mutual benefit. Yes, there are instances of conquest as you mention above, but these are exceptions to the rule of law and organized society. If the Normans, for one example, had not provided the functions of government after the conquest, they would not have lasted.
I pay taxes because I understand that that is how our society functions. Not because I would be punished, but because I enjoy roads, schools, police and firefighters, trash pickup, interstate commerce, technology, civilization and not living in a cave. That said, many popular opinions of how taxes and the economy work are flat out wrong and are why the economy is a mess.
I'm fine with paying taxes for the "national defense", but there hasn't been a credible instance of that since WWII. Since I don't like it, do I just not pay taxes? Do I claim I only do it because I'll be punished otherwise? No. I pay it and do what I can to get the policies that spend the money in that way to be changed. It is called Taxation WITH Representation. I don't behave the way I do in any aspect of my life because I'll be punished if I don't, I do it because it is the right thing to do.
So, in Rhode Island, if you kill someone, you won't be arrested?
Of course, that's reductio ad absurdem, but the point is, there's a difference between law and social contract.
YES, most of society is controlled by mutual agreement, informed consent (to the extent that people care to inform themselves or aren't bothered by the consequences of lack of information), and not through punishment, IF AND ONLY IF, we are talking about modern democracies (republics, really). The majority of humanity does not live in these conditions. Even "modern Western democracies" only partially live up to that standard. Check under the heading of "segregation" in US history for an example of how idealistic it is to think "we live in a society that doesn't use coercion as a core part of it's structure". Is segregation recent?
You also didn't answer my question on the subject of taxes. Do you think you pay the right amount? Would you pay a different amount if it were purely up to you? If you decided to pay the amount you think is right, instead of the amount the government tells you to, would there be consequences?
If that's simplistic, so be it. I must be a lot dumber than I like to think. Personally, I prefer a society without the perceived need to threaten people with force for such things as driving faster than normal, or crossing the street at a non-designated location, or deciding that a medical emergency in the family is a better place to allocate funds than paying for the National Endowment for the Arts. Don't discuss it if you don't want to. We live in societies where we can say or not say what we want. Except in those cases where doing so is illegal and subject to the threat of violence.
I didn't answer the part about how much I would pay because again, it is overly simplistic. We don't operate in a vacuum. I need input to determine the correct amount which means it is never "purely up to me". I think I pay an ok amount right now and I think it'd be nice if the wealthy paid what the government told them to instead of what they felt like paying with little to no consequences for them.
"And yet, "rule of law" and your so-called "social contract" means that every single one of those things is enforced by people who carry guns and are specifically trained to use them in case I decide "to go my own way". Why is that?"
Why is that? Because there are people who only do things because of the threat of punishment. Because there are idiots that don't understand that you shouldn't go 100 MPH on a road with lots of pedestrians. Because too many people are selfish, close-minded and short-sighted. Because there are people who would be utterly content to freeload on the backs of the responsible while still garnering all the benefits of what others pay for.
So feel free to lobby your congressperson to stop funding the NEA and I'll continue lobbying them to continue funding the NEA. Making compromises on things like that are what ensures that there's a medical facility to take care of the family emergency. And if you really don't want to have to have that decision made for you, write your congressman to push for single-payer health care and educate him or her on Modern Monetary Theory.
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
July 14, 2011 at 11:28 am
May I just mention that many people in this debate are forgetting that historically speaking, there is a predecessor to paying taxes. It even predates feudalism.
It was called tribute.
Now, in some cultures it was forced upon people. But back before the Romans, before the Egyptians, before centralized empires of any sort, small groups of people came across the notion that if they paid "strong men" in valuable goods, they could get protection. They weren't all forced to. There was no death threat involved. It was a simple arrangement in which people could concentrate on working their trade and letting someone else do all the "heavy lifting".
Of course, there were some cultures in which people paid tribute to keep the big bad away (don't invade me, here, have some money and I'll pay you each year to keep you away). That evolved into the sort of tributes demanded by the ancient Greeks and the Romans. But fact of the matter is, the tribute / tax idea did evolve naturally and voluntarily in some parts of the world.
A lot like insurance, believe it or not. And I blame the medieval Italians for that one.
July 14, 2011 at 11:33 am
Might I ask for some opinions on this post?
I haven't done much with the maintenance side of SQL Server yet and this is the first time I'll be involved in restoring backups to test if they're good.
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
July 14, 2011 at 11:41 am
I didn't answer the part about how much I would pay because again, it is overly simplistic. We don't operate in a vacuum. I need input to determine the correct amount which means it is never "purely up to me". I think I pay an ok amount right now and I think it'd be nice if the wealthy paid what the government told them to instead of what they felt like paying with little to no consequences for them.
"And yet, "rule of law" and your so-called "social contract" means that every single one of those things is enforced by people who carry guns and are specifically trained to use them in case I decide "to go my own way". Why is that?"
Why is that? Because there are people who only do things because of the threat of punishment. Because there are idiots that don't understand that you shouldn't go 100 MPH on a road with lots of pedestrians. Because too many people are selfish, close-minded and short-sighted. Because there are people who would be utterly content to freeload on the backs of the responsible while still garnering all the benefits of what others pay for.
So feel free to lobby your congressperson to stop funding the NEA and I'll continue lobbying them to continue funding the NEA. Making compromises on things like that are what ensures that there's a medical facility to take care of the family emergency. And if you really don't want to have to have that decision made for you, write your congressman to push for single-payer health care and educate him or her on Modern Monetary Theory.
(Cutting the quote down to save space in the reply.)
On the point of taxation amounts, would a suggested rate be as good as a rate enforced by law? If the government sent you a "Here's what we'd like you to pay" statement, based on a set of best practices, that would fulfill the role of "social contract" fully. No need for "Pay this or we'll send armed men to your house and intimidate you in front of your children". Would also eliminate a lot of government costs, because they'd only have to suggest an amount, and would no longer have to hire people to do audits, enforcement, et al.
When Montana had "Reasonable and Prudent" as their posted speed limit, the main people who wanted it changed were insurance companies, since they ended up paying out more for vehicular damage than otherwise. Nobody went 100 MPH on a road filled with pedestrians. Not once. Hence, that argument doesn't hold water. (I'm actually straw-manning this one. Speed limits of the sort enforced in the US were originally created to make the roads non-competitive with short- and medium-range commercial passenger flights, and have been held onto since then primarily because they keep insurance company profits higher. There are better laws for this argument. Suggest one, we'll switch to that. Jaywalking and speeding are both silly laws anyway. Not fit for this discussion.)
I'm not clear on the connection between the National Endowment for the Arts and keeping emergency rooms open. Can't reply to that one, because you lost me on it.
Actually, my preference for nationalizing healthcare is that the federal government should cover everything over 15% of annual income or available personal credit, so long as at least 3 doctors agree the procedure/medicine/whatever is medically necessary, and 2 of them need to not be paid by the decision. I mention available personal credit, because Steve Jobs gets paid something like $1 per year officially, for tax-avoidance purposes, but he can definitely afford top-dollar medical attention on his own. I'm not sure that pertains to this discussion, but it seemed at least moderately sequitur to me.
Please keep in mind that I'm not an anarchist and am NOT advocating the annihilation of law. I'm merely stating there's a distinct difference between "social contract" and "law", with "social contract" being defined as "informed, non-coerced, consenting cooperation between individuals in a group", and "law" as "those rules which a group enforces through credible threat of unretaliable death". I'm adding the opinion that we currently overdo law in that sense, and that much of that is done to protect the profits of limited special interests as opposed to "the common good".
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
July 14, 2011 at 12:13 pm
Brandie Tarvin (7/14/2011)
May I just mention that many people in this debate are forgetting that historically speaking, there is a predecessor to paying taxes. It even predates feudalism.It was called tribute.
Now, in some cultures it was forced upon people. But back before the Romans, before the Egyptians, before centralized empires of any sort, small groups of people came across the notion that if they paid "strong men" in valuable goods, they could get protection. They weren't all forced to. There was no death threat involved. It was a simple arrangement in which people could concentrate on working their trade and letting someone else do all the "heavy lifting".
Of course, there were some cultures in which people paid tribute to keep the big bad away (don't invade me, here, have some money and I'll pay you each year to keep you away). That evolved into the sort of tributes demanded by the ancient Greeks and the Romans. But fact of the matter is, the tribute / tax idea did evolve naturally and voluntarily in some parts of the world.
A lot like insurance, believe it or not. And I blame the medieval Italians for that one.
Some of the even predates the idea of money (which is a pretty recent concept in the span of humanity on this planet). Heck, some of the idea of paying services/goods for protection predates conscious thought, since animals do that pretty regularly in social species.
Again, that's social contract, while the enforced version is law, in the lexicon I'm using here.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
July 14, 2011 at 6:21 pm
Hey guys, does anyone know of boot camp training session(s) for SQL Server for practical skills (not certifications). I'm talking real basics here. I didn't see much when I went browsing, though I saw a lot of high level type of classes. I have both a need to ship someone to one and my eyes are seeing dollar signs with opportunities.
EDIT: I should mention, we're talking what the different joins are, what's a clustered vs. non-clustered index, how to read an execution plan, why you control data types, what's a deadlock... that kind of thing. REAL basic, intro to databasing kind of stuff.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
July 14, 2011 at 8:42 pm
Craig Farrell (7/14/2011)
Hey guys, does anyone know of boot camp training session(s) for SQL Server for practical skills (not certifications). I'm talking real basics here. I didn't see much when I went browsing, though I saw a lot of high level type of classes. I have both a need to ship someone to one and my eyes are seeing dollar signs with opportunities.EDIT: I should mention, we're talking what the different joins are, what's a clustered vs. non-clustered index, how to read an execution plan, why you control data types, what's a deadlock... that kind of thing. REAL basic, intro to databasing kind of stuff.
I've been considering this A LOT myself because I too found a huge hole in the market for this. A friend asked how to get started in DBA so I started writing a basic syllabus/outline of the various topics and what order they should be explained in. Course, I didn't want to put in a ton of hours since it was a casual interest.
I found this on the web and ordered it: http://www.amazon.com/Server-Fundamentals-Accidental-LiveLessons-Training/dp/0321602773. I didn't watch any part of it yet, but the topics seem to be more real world and relevant. What I mean is, how to learn the basics quick to perform simple but valuable work, then expand the knowledge base from there. After all, the prereq's for the certs themselves are 2 years working with SQL Server, right? So I think it is the wrong direction to have a brand new person learn the cert direction.
Instead, I think they should learn how to be an Operational DBA quick. Backups, test restores, disk basics/raid, checking logs, and then deeper and deeper. Eventually to tuning and query plans just enough to find NCI opportunities.
THEN, start on the more rounded cert path.
The target market for this proposed product should be developers and infrastructure folks to deal with the 'Black Box of SQL Server'.
So, do you want to do something like this with me?
Jim Murphy
http://www.sqlwatchmen.com
@SQLMurph
July 14, 2011 at 9:02 pm
Jim Murphy (7/14/2011)
Instead, I think they should learn how to be an Operational DBA quick. Backups, test restores, disk basics/raid, checking logs, and then deeper and deeper. Eventually to tuning and query plans just enough to find NCI opportunities.THEN, start on the more rounded cert path.
The target market for this proposed product should be developers and infrastructure folks to deal with the 'Black Box of SQL Server'.
So, do you want to do something like this with me?
We're on the same thought pattern here, Jim. This definately sounds like something I could see creating a business out of. Real certs, not braindump versions, and not MCM level strata before anyone could really trust it.
SQLSkills and their ilk definately have their markets, but I think a ton more accidental DBAs could use this kind of training, especially if the cost is kept reasonable. Let me think more on it then we'll get together via PM or something similar. I'd like to see if anyone else knows of an equivalent level of training that's out there before I/we start chasing rabbits.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
July 14, 2011 at 9:21 pm
Craig Farrell (7/14/2011)
Jim Murphy (7/14/2011)
Instead, I think they should learn how to be an Operational DBA quick. Backups, test restores, disk basics/raid, checking logs, and then deeper and deeper. Eventually to tuning and query plans just enough to find NCI opportunities.THEN, start on the more rounded cert path.
The target market for this proposed product should be developers and infrastructure folks to deal with the 'Black Box of SQL Server'.
So, do you want to do something like this with me?
We're on the same thought pattern here, Jim. This definately sounds like something I could see creating a business out of. Real certs, not braindump versions, and not MCM level strata before anyone could really trust it.
SQLSkills and their ilk definately have their markets, but I think a ton more accidental DBAs could use this kind of training, especially if the cost is kept reasonable. Let me think more on it then we'll get together via PM or something similar. I'd like to see if anyone else knows of an equivalent level of training that's out there before I/we start chasing rabbits.
Agreed 100%. I tried to post my outline, but it lost it's formatting. Email me and I'll reply with it so you can see how it is organized.
I'm unconvinced that we can make something that'll sell (assuming no one else is doing it and that there is something unique). So I was instead starting to think about a series of blog posts for this, and a few SQLSaturday sessions; maybe 3 or 4 sessions at the 100 level and 2 or 3 at the 200 level. Then leave the deeper, more narrow content to those existing sessions.
Kevin Kline also has a series of videos through sswug. It's something like a 16 part accidental DBA series or something. Free videos. High quality. I have only watched one of them, so I can't judge the learning path relevancy of them. These may be the creation and production of what we are talking about.
As for making videos, I am thinking of something better than what everyone else is doing (from what I can find). I'm thinking something like this: http://www.ironspeed.com/products/VideoDemo.aspx We've made these 100% in our office studio with my graphics/development staff. We are now working on higher frame rate videos. Better than straight boring screen grab.
Jim Murphy
http://www.sqlwatchmen.com
@SQLMurph
July 14, 2011 at 10:35 pm
Gail - there is a miscatagorized possible data corruption post in the 2005 Admin forum. Please review to ensure my statements are accurate.
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1141597-146-1.aspx?Update=1
Jim Murphy
http://www.sqlwatchmen.com
@SQLMurph
July 14, 2011 at 11:38 pm
Craig Farrell (7/14/2011)
Hey guys, does anyone know of boot camp training session(s) for SQL Server for practical skills (not certifications). I'm talking real basics here. I didn't see much when I went browsing, though I saw a lot of high level type of classes. I have both a need to ship someone to one and my eyes are seeing dollar signs with opportunities.EDIT: I should mention, we're talking what the different joins are, what's a clustered vs. non-clustered index, how to read an execution plan, why you control data types, what's a deadlock... that kind of thing. REAL basic, intro to databasing kind of stuff.
Isn't this on the right track?
http://www.microsoft.com/learning/en/us/course.aspx?id=2778A
It doesn't cover everything (such as reading a query plan), but it covers most of the basics...
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
July 15, 2011 at 12:44 am
Koen Verbeeck (7/14/2011)
Isn't this on the right track?http://www.microsoft.com/learning/en/us/course.aspx?id=2778A
It doesn't cover everything (such as reading a query plan), but it covers most of the basics...
Hm, right idea, but certainly misses a lot of basics, such as indexing, foreign keys, datatype choices, general storage mechanics, etc.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
July 15, 2011 at 1:09 am
Craig Farrell (7/15/2011)
Koen Verbeeck (7/14/2011)
Isn't this on the right track?http://www.microsoft.com/learning/en/us/course.aspx?id=2778A
It doesn't cover everything (such as reading a query plan), but it covers most of the basics...
Hm, right idea, but certainly misses a lot of basics, such as indexing, foreign keys, datatype choices, general storage mechanics, etc.
Hmm, you are right, this course focuses more on just writing queries (hence the name probably :-D).
Datatypes are treated a bit in the beginning, but not quite extensive.
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
July 15, 2011 at 5:33 am
The problem is that as soon as you mention the words "boot camp," every trainer who has a certification boot camp comes out of the woodwork trying to sell you their class.
I ran into this issue a few years ago. My bosses had me looking for local training for our team and I started getting calls from one company who just wouldn't listen to me. "But you'll learn all you need to know for the exam." "No, you misunderstand. I need real world BI training."
The best training I've come across is offered by Four Deuce (http://www.fourdeuce.com/training/publicclasses.aspx). Andy Warren and Brian Knight are some of the best teachers I've ever met. And they will come out to your company and train there for an extra fee, though I took the classes down in Orlando.
Viewing 15 posts - 28,036 through 28,050 (of 66,712 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply