There is no legitimacy to the death penalty for the very simple reason of abuse or just fair mistake or freak coincidence. The fact that people trust the chain of government, law-enforcement, forensic investigators, prosecutors, witnesses, jury as input for enforcing an irrevocable and terminal punishment such as the death penalty is baffling. There's so much that can (and does, and will continue to) go wrong there that the death penalty is just an overall dumb idea.
If someone tries to seriously harm you then shoot that son of a bitch dead but passing the same authority to a bureaucracy... I don't know what to say to that.
Maybe you are. The fact that you sometimes, or even often, want sex, doesn't make you a "sexually-driven monkey"... not anymore than when I look at a guy and then fantasize about the size of his cock means I'm about to just spazz out, rip off his clothes, and scream "Fuck me now, man-beast!" But I'll fantasize about it.
Nowadays, folks try to do as much as possible in RAM -- by that I mean no patching files or writing to the FS at all. So, keeping track of modifications to any sort of executable file (even indirectly executable, hell, even if it's not executable) will certainly be a handy tool but not as much as you'd think. Also, debsums already does this and I'm sure other package managers support similar functionality. Now, if there's no such utility for your system (even commercial 3rd-party) then you may have chosen/setup the wrong system.
Also, AppArmor-like systems are quite handy too as they allow very fine-grained control for what operations a certain process/executable can perform, thereby allowing you to avoid modifications to the FS via an exploited vulnerability in the first place (and also limit what the exploit's payload will be able to execute once in RAM, no execution privs means no way to execute a shell which makes things much harder).
But even so, privs can be escalated and jails can be broken and vulns can be chained, better get some security education and minimize the chances of writing vulnerable code in the first place, and then carefully fix the inevitable vulnerabilities which you'll surely introduce as soon as you learn about them.
The dude replied to a valid and well-thought-out question with (irrelevant) lyrics from a Greek song. I wouldn't trust him to fill a glass of water, he obviously just wants some attention.
You took a simple mind teaser and turned it into...I don't know what, but it really confused me. It's actually much simpler than that. Forward force will be generated due to the jet thrust, the plane will thus move forward as usual, just like on a stable runway. Generation of a plane's motion has nothing to do with its wheels, ergo the wheel-treadmill system is irrelevant. A better question would be: Could the wheels withstand lift-off speeds double of the ones they were rated? -- My guess is yes...
Well, I was...or had been, at some singular instance when I was that age. It doesn't take a lot to get a 14 y.o. puking drunk, a few cans of beer are enough to have that effect. And that's in a long list of mischievous adventures I embarked as a kid and I turned out fine. I'm neither a drunk nor junkie nor turning tricks to survive. So, what's your point? "kid behavior" is precisely what that was, immature and unconsidered.
I'm pretty sure others have had similar experiences which turned out to be to their benefit since they enabled them to learn that acting stupid has a nasty price a lot of the time. I've no comments about the second part of your argument though.
Ah, you're one of those people who label everyone who doesn't share their beliefs/judgment as somehow lacking in intelligence. Ironically enough, this makes it impossible to have an intelligent/reasoned discussion.
Oh you devil, your wit has scarred me for ever. I shall henceforth sit in the dark and re-evaluate my life's decisions while sitting in the fetal position trapped by a flood of my own bitter tears.
Just out of curiosity, please e-mail me personally, and tell me what prompted you to write that reply and what your expected outcome was -- my e-mail address is publicly visible. I'm not kidding, just asking human to human, nothing to do with the discussion about this news item.
What sabotage? You play a prank on them and then show them that it was a silly coordinated Internet sort of prank, NOT REALLY TRUE. It's not like you send them the SMS and then go and take a snort in front of them.
I find it funny to startle my parents when they're not looking my way, I do that to them and they do that to me. Does that sabotage our relationship? The brief moment one feels they're in imminent danger intensifies the comedic effect which soon follows.
When did our society become one of precious little snowflakes that get overwhelmed by the stupidest pranks?
Either that or I'm just too thick skinned to discern the difference, not sure about me being a moron though.
No, at best they get you back in a funny way; at worst you freak them out for a bit and after a short laugh you set them straight.
If your parent are nutjobs and take some insane extreme measure in response then you've got serious problems and it's better you know that your parents are morons sooner rather than later.
I just stopped reading at that point, he basically belittled every young, single, childless male -- unless I misunderstood and the term "brogrammer" is somehow complimentary. If that's your basic premise then your whole argument is of no value buddy.
Also, random CEO of random start-up expresses own misguided opinion, everyone better take a knee and listen up.
I don't know, I found the title funny -- which was probably the editor's intention in the first place. And she wasn't a feminist, that word has a real meaning that I'd rather we didn't dilute; she was a prissy, attention whoring, holier-than-thou, PC bitch.
And to answer the article's question: If I were a Python dev, I wouldn't attend. That would send a more clear message to everyone involved that those situations are ridiculous than a bunch of posts on random message boards.
I assume 10Gbps were eaten by protocol overhead and arbitrary resource restrictions. Perfect distribution/load-balancing is seldom the case in the real world and this does seem like quite an achievement, all things considered. Easy link aggregation at the protocol level, a big thank you to the devs.:)
It does feel like that's their real agenda isn't it? I mean, how is treating women like unreasonably fragile creatures who are unable to handle the mere mention of sex feminism?
Or save space (not in cases of "send" bur for lengthier texts) and/or "catch" the eye and help the mind make an instant map of the UI to help recall[1].
[1] Don't quote me on that but that's how it works for me.
There are a few assumptions being made here that should be addressed for people unfamiliar with the field:
It would be impossible for results of that magnitude to be manually verified in order to weed out false-positives, which are a real problem.
Just because that scanner hasn't found any vulns it doesn't mean there aren't any.
As others have pointed out, this is highly unethical. Scanning a site can be disruptive (and even devastating under some circumstances) which is why every such vendor discourages use of their software against live/production websites.
I imagine you saw HD Moore's nmap scan of the internet and thought to yourself "Wow, we got to get us some of that!" but this is a really bad idea and I imagine you already know that. The only way to have gone forward with this is after weighting the bad (ethical issues, fallout from site owners, possible legal troubles, etc.) and the good (getting attention) and here we are.
The prof gave a wrong simile, you are an idiot. WebAppSec scanners can inject harmful payloads (like emptying whole DB tables harmful, a simple string like "or 1=1" in the wrong place can can cause loads of trouble) and should be never run again live/production websites.
Also, those guys are overly excited about their own work to the point or arrogance but give them time. They'll either get to appreciate all the complexities of those types of systems and power on or just give up after a while.
They got the attention they wanted now anyways...
Slashdot Mirror
There is no legitimacy to the death penalty for the very simple reason of abuse or just fair mistake or freak coincidence. The fact that people trust the chain of government, law-enforcement, forensic investigators, prosecutors, witnesses, jury as input for enforcing an irrevocable and terminal punishment such as the death penalty is baffling. There's so much that can (and does, and will continue to) go wrong there that the death penalty is just an overall dumb idea.
If someone tries to seriously harm you then shoot that son of a bitch dead but passing the same authority to a bureaucracy... I don't know what to say to that.
A lot of those seem to imply absolute numbers rather than per capita, which is excusable seeing as the USA is quite large. Point taken though.
That's not funny!
Maybe you are. The fact that you sometimes, or even often, want sex, doesn't make you a "sexually-driven monkey"... not anymore than when I look at a guy and then fantasize about the size of his cock means I'm about to just spazz out, rip off his clothes, and scream "Fuck me now, man-beast!" But I'll fantasize about it.
Ah! Size does matter! I knew it!
Nowadays, folks try to do as much as possible in RAM -- by that I mean no patching files or writing to the FS at all. So, keeping track of modifications to any sort of executable file (even indirectly executable, hell, even if it's not executable) will certainly be a handy tool but not as much as you'd think. Also, debsums already does this and I'm sure other package managers support similar functionality. Now, if there's no such utility for your system (even commercial 3rd-party) then you may have chosen/setup the wrong system.
Also, AppArmor-like systems are quite handy too as they allow very fine-grained control for what operations a certain process/executable can perform, thereby allowing you to avoid modifications to the FS via an exploited vulnerability in the first place (and also limit what the exploit's payload will be able to execute once in RAM, no execution privs means no way to execute a shell which makes things much harder).
But even so, privs can be escalated and jails can be broken and vulns can be chained, better get some security education and minimize the chances of writing vulnerable code in the first place, and then carefully fix the inevitable vulnerabilities which you'll surely introduce as soon as you learn about them.
The dude replied to a valid and well-thought-out question with (irrelevant) lyrics from a Greek song. I wouldn't trust him to fill a glass of water, he obviously just wants some attention.
You took a simple mind teaser and turned it into...I don't know what, but it really confused me. It's actually much simpler than that. Forward force will be generated due to the jet thrust, the plane will thus move forward as usual, just like on a stable runway. Generation of a plane's motion has nothing to do with its wheels, ergo the wheel-treadmill system is irrelevant. A better question would be: Could the wheels withstand lift-off speeds double of the ones they were rated? -- My guess is yes...
Well, I was...or had been, at some singular instance when I was that age. It doesn't take a lot to get a 14 y.o. puking drunk, a few cans of beer are enough to have that effect. And that's in a long list of mischievous adventures I embarked as a kid and I turned out fine. I'm neither a drunk nor junkie nor turning tricks to survive. So, what's your point? "kid behavior" is precisely what that was, immature and unconsidered.
I'm pretty sure others have had similar experiences which turned out to be to their benefit since they enabled them to learn that acting stupid has a nasty price a lot of the time. I've no comments about the second part of your argument though.
Ah, you're one of those people who label everyone who doesn't share their beliefs/judgment as somehow lacking in intelligence. Ironically enough, this makes it impossible to have an intelligent/reasoned discussion.
Oh you devil, your wit has scarred me for ever. I shall henceforth sit in the dark and re-evaluate my life's decisions while sitting in the fetal position trapped by a flood of my own bitter tears.
Just out of curiosity, please e-mail me personally, and tell me what prompted you to write that reply and what your expected outcome was -- my e-mail address is publicly visible. I'm not kidding, just asking human to human, nothing to do with the discussion about this news item.
What sabotage? You play a prank on them and then show them that it was a silly coordinated Internet sort of prank, NOT REALLY TRUE. It's not like you send them the SMS and then go and take a snort in front of them.
I find it funny to startle my parents when they're not looking my way, I do that to them and they do that to me. Does that sabotage our relationship? The brief moment one feels they're in imminent danger intensifies the comedic effect which soon follows.
When did our society become one of precious little snowflakes that get overwhelmed by the stupidest pranks?
Either that or I'm just too thick skinned to discern the difference, not sure about me being a moron though.
Oh man...forget about the college fund, you better invest in a therapy fund for the kids.
I've made it a point not to believe stories told by stand-up comedians, do you know that some of that stuff is made up? Seriously.
That's cruel and sadistic, not moronic. Also, not even close to the same thing. Now, answer me please.
No, at best they get you back in a funny way; at worst you freak them out for a bit and after a short laugh you set them straight.
If your parent are nutjobs and take some insane extreme measure in response then you've got serious problems and it's better you know that your parents are morons sooner rather than later.
Sure sure, just one question, why are they morons?
I just stopped reading at that point, he basically belittled every young, single, childless male -- unless I misunderstood and the term "brogrammer" is somehow complimentary. If that's your basic premise then your whole argument is of no value buddy.
Also, random CEO of random start-up expresses own misguided opinion, everyone better take a knee and listen up.
They get to appear all feminist and enlightened in the media.
I don't know, I found the title funny -- which was probably the editor's intention in the first place. And she wasn't a feminist, that word has a real meaning that I'd rather we didn't dilute; she was a prissy, attention whoring, holier-than-thou, PC bitch.
And to answer the article's question: If I were a Python dev, I wouldn't attend. That would send a more clear message to everyone involved that those situations are ridiculous than a bunch of posts on random message boards.
I assume 10Gbps were eaten by protocol overhead and arbitrary resource restrictions. Perfect distribution/load-balancing is seldom the case in the real world and this does seem like quite an achievement, all things considered. Easy link aggregation at the protocol level, a big thank you to the devs. :)
How good can someone who can be replaced by a couple of "brogrammers" be?
It does feel like that's their real agenda isn't it? I mean, how is treating women like unreasonably fragile creatures who are unable to handle the mere mention of sex feminism?
Or save space (not in cases of "send" bur for lengthier texts) and/or "catch" the eye and help the mind make an instant map of the UI to help recall[1].
[1] Don't quote me on that but that's how it works for me.
I imagine you saw HD Moore's nmap scan of the internet and thought to yourself "Wow, we got to get us some of that!" but this is a really bad idea and I imagine you already know that. The only way to have gone forward with this is after weighting the bad (ethical issues, fallout from site owners, possible legal troubles, etc.) and the good (getting attention) and here we are.
The prof gave a wrong simile, you are an idiot. WebAppSec scanners can inject harmful payloads (like emptying whole DB tables harmful, a simple string like "or 1=1" in the wrong place can can cause loads of trouble) and should be never run again live/production websites.
Also, those guys are overly excited about their own work to the point or arrogance but give them time. They'll either get to appreciate all the complexities of those types of systems and power on or just give up after a while.
They got the attention they wanted now anyways...