On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 4:40 AM, Greg Stark<gsstark@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Scott Mead<scott.lists@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> As with many different types of security (i.e. the 3 foot high fence) this
>> is really just a deterrent to most people who either aren't capable of
>> reverse engineering or are just not interested in the first place.
>
> Someone I know used to work at a nuclear power and research facility
> (No Dave, someone else) and told me an interesting story.
Yet bizarrely it's almost identical in meaning to a story I did tell
you not so long ago...
(assuming you mean me of course!)
:-)
> The facility in question was often beset by protesters who invariably
> managed to scale the perimeter fence. He asked one of the security
> guards one day why they didn't build a better fence since the
> run-of-the-mill fence was obviously not up to the task for such a
> large perimeter against determined foes.
>
> The answer was that the fence was not there to keep people out at all.
> It's purpose was in fact to ensure that when they prosecuted it would
> be impossible for anyone to claim they hadn't realized they were
> trespassing...
>
>
> --
> greg
> http://mit.edu/~gsstark/resume.pdf
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com