To whoever hacked into my Database

[Joel Goldstick]

On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 5:47 PM,  <rurpy at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 11/08/2013 11:08 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 4:11 AM,  <rurpy at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On 11/08/2013 03:05 AM, Νίκος Αλεξόπουλος wrote:
>>>> I never ignore advices.
>>>> I read all answers as carefully as i can.
>>>> But nevertheless sometimes i feel things should have been better
>>>> implemented using my way.
>>>>
>>>> Not of course that i know better, but thats better suited for me in the
>>>> level iam.
>>>
>>> Most of the "advice" I've seen posted here has, as far
>>> as I can tell, not intended to be useful but to serve
>>> as a way to telling you are incompetent are in other ways
>>> insulting or useless.  I think you are quite right to
>>> ignore it (or tell the poster to get lost.)
>>
>> Actually no; most of the advice has been genuine.
>
> Actually yes; most of the advice has not been genuine.

>
> Of course neither you nor I know for sure since we can't
> read minds.  But when "advice" consists of things like
>  "Maybe try some of the advice you have been given instead? "
>  "use php"

It seems like you take the view that people have decided to bully or
tease or laugh at this one person here.  Sometimes other's ask
question and they quickly get gently (maybe not gently) teased, but
since I have been listening here it is one person overwhelmingly who
gets this response.  It doesn't mean its really the highest order
behavior, but its not done in a vacuum either.

>  "Try starting with something simple. The following is a
>   step by step guide... Now, and this is really really
>   going to tax you..."

So, you don't like teasing.  Why not go back and see where this
teasing started.  I would guess that its not from the beginning.  Its
only after a history that makes it appropriate (maybe not appropriate,
but understandable).

>  A treatise on 1nf in six short sentences followed by
>   ruminations on competence including "...never shows
>   a glimmer of interest in learning."

This one I think is mine.  I don't pretend to be able to write a
treatise in however many sentences, let alone 6.  This 'guidance' was
to provide a link to a more substantial authority than me about why
its a bad idea to use a database without normalizing data.  If you
want to get stuff out of a database with sql you have to normalize it,
or know well why you would not.  The thread about normalizing
degenerated (sorry if the term is loaded) into people talking about
various language data types that can be stored in a sql database.
Blob, is the one I remember.  So, if you refuse the idea that its
better to build a second table with a one to many relationship to the
first table rows, then you need to know how much python code will be
required to reverse that 'shoving stuff' in a single column.  Its a
choice.  Some people like writing sql, some like writing whatever.  If
you come here for advice, and you expect to be taken seriously, you
need to come back with questions or arguments about why the advice
doesn't make sense to you.  The meme about the shortage of new lines
is amusing, not because of the first time it came up, but because it
is such a densely recurring theme.

>  "Now that helpful suggestions have been offered, and
>   the OP continues to obstinately refuse to learn,"
> I don't consider it "helpful" nor do I believe the
> claims of  such people (who have an history of antagonistic
> responses) that they are genuinely trying to be helpful.

What do you consider 'helpful', because in this case, people have
tried the go slow approach, the here is some stuff you can read
approach, the here is a 5 line piece of code that solves your problem
approach.  When not having fun, people in this list have put an order
of magnitude more time into trying to help this OP than any other
questioner, and the story always circles back.
>
> If you want to be helpful try posting useful information
> without the insults, with an attempt to tune it to the
> level of understanding the recipient and without the
> offensive "do what I tell you" attitude.
>
>>> Long before you showed up here, I noticed the tendency
>>> to not answer questions directly but to jerk people off
>>> by giving hints or telling them to do something other
>>> than they want to do.
>>>
>>> Often that is good because the original request was
>>> for something that the OP really didn't want to do.
>>> But sometimes the OP knows they want to do (but doesn't
>>> want or is unable to clearly explain why) and when
>>> they clearly state that, yes, they do want to do it
>>> their way, their question should be answered in good
>>> faith or, for those who just can't tell how to do
>>> something "wrong", ignored.
>>
>> I disagree. If you go to a doctor and ask for a prescription for
>> <insert name of medication>, the doctor is quite right in refusing if
>> s/he believes that that won't help you. If the OP asks for a way to
>> stuff more into a single record in MySQL, then we're right to say "No,
>> don't do it that way".
>
> No you're not.  Without determining how the data is to be
> used you can't say it's not normalized.  Otherwise one
> could claim every of the millions of databases containing
> addresses is not even 1nf because their designers crammed
> two pieces of information (street number and street name)
> into a single datum.

Talking about whether an address is atomic is a can of worms.  Anyone
who has worked with addresses finds this out.  But in the generic
sense an address is a single description of a location.  Saying that
it should be two fields, one with number, and one with name doesn't
sound right to me because each field is too small to have any meaning.
>
> Second, to simply say, "don't do that, it's not 1nf" when
> most database systems provide data types like arrays, set,
> composites etc whose purpose is to do what you're saying not
> to do is not being helpful -- it's being domineering and
> condescending.

You TOTALLY lose me here!  implementations may include the ability to
do that stuff, but why?  If you don't understand the basics of sql
statements, deciding you want to use features that break the basic
idea of what an RDB is should be responded to with firm condescension.
>
I'll stop.  I'm getting low on new-lines  (just kidding!)


> Finally you're wrong to say "no" because you are not in
> a position to evaluate all the criteria that determines
> right or wrong for the OP.  For example it is often easier
> when learning to use something one understands better, or
> uses less code or is  simpler is some other way to the learner,
> with the intent to fix it later if experience shows the need.
>
>> Generally, people who ask for one thing and are advised another will
>> see that the advice is actually getting them to where they really
>> wanted to be. There's another thread now about calling from Python
>> into C, which I haven't been following closely, but I saw a comment
>> from its OP to the effect of "Oh right! Standard input/output would do
>> what I want!" - it may not have been specifically what was asked for,
>> but it was helpful. If it's not helpful, give a reason for that.
>
> Right.  Which is why I wrote
>
>   >> Often that telling the OP he is doing it wrong] is good because
>   >> the original request was for something that the OP really didn't
>   >> want to do.
>
> I then went on to address my comments to the case where the OP insists
> he *does* want what he asks for.  So you could have saved us all a
> little time by leaving out the above irrelevant paragraph.
>
>> Do you (anyone) know better than all the people of this newsgroup?
>
> That you are so naive as to propose that majority opinion
> is always right is so naive I'm not sure what to think, other
> than to wonder how old you are.
>
>> I would think not, firstly because you're asking the question (why are
>> you asking if you already know better),
>
> That's pretty illogical thinking.  How can he know better *before*
> he asks and sees the answers.  Only after he gets the answers can
> one decide if they are better or not.
>
>> and secondly because the
>> collective knowledge and skill is far greater than any individual's.
>
> Really?  You can't think of cases where one individual saw beyond
> the collective view?  Your premise is defective.  There are many
> cases where the collective view is faulty do to group-think,
> influence by leaders, emotional involvement, etc.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_behavior
>
>> So why reject advice out of hand? If it's inapplicable for some
>> reason, _explain why_. Don't just go back and forth saying "But I want
>> it done like this" when all of us and conventional wisdom all say not
>> to do it.
>
> He didn't reject it out of hand, he gave some reasons why he
> rejected it.   But as is SOP here, you chose not to see or pay
> any attention to those reasons.
> --
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list



-- 
Joel Goldstick
http://joelgoldstick.com