Why is this particular image such a viral hit? Have people tried creating images which would appear of different colors but failed to split opinion on such a wide scale?
[Rant]
First everyone started arguing over their gut-reaction, "it's obviously color X!"
Then everyone started trying to sound smart by doing some variation of: "Colors are perceived by your brain! Can you imagine that? Your brain. Like, literally!"
The/. crowd can mostly understand without much fuss that colors are subjective. A more geek-oriented analysis -- which I'm pining to read somewhere -- would deal with what took the Internet so long to catch up to this phenomenon.
[/Rant]
It does not exist, and the "best" solution is abstinence. (In this case, Not running every EXE you find on the internet.)
Actually, the equivalent analogy would be to just not go on the Internet. Even then you run the risk of getting infected with something like Stuxnet. The real "abstinence" would be to not interact with any external/untrusted data at all.
I honestly, sincerely, without-any-prejudice, spent 5 minutes on that page trying to figure out the differences in quality in "three-way comparison" but for the life of me all I am able to discern is minor differences which can be attributed to a plethora of reasons other than the hardware capabilities.
If anything, this comparison served well to make me consider buying a console. I mean, if I'm not able to see a significant difference, why would it make sense for me to spend extra bucks on the PC? Just because some videophile found the console version to be "muddy"?
Nearly all of the development tools of Linux are available on OSX via ports, brew or simply compiling oneself. Even fairly advanced stuff like valgrind. There is no shortage of cross platform GUI toolkit like Qt.
Sure, the Kickstarter is canceled but the makers have continued their marketing campaign. From the official website:
Looks like the Kickstarter is over. The device will be for sale soon directly through this website though, so check back soon. Sign up for our mailing list to be notified as soon as its [sic] available.
It'll be interesting to see how the general public's trust pans out over this thing. Do they take Kickstarter's cancellation as a red flag or are they so desperate for a easily-configurable Tor router that they'll pay whoever they can for it. Even if that means trusting these assholes vs. their ISPs.
With hundreds of millions of distinct websites "out there," if the same proportion holds, that would suggest that there about a million or more websites similarly affected.
Why are you assuming that this scales linearly? Are you suggesting that this is a technical glitch? If the websites are blocked due to the nature of their content it most certainly won't scale in a linear fashion.
Had the most interesting built-in "pseudo-hacking" experience for a video-game.
Even though it's nowhere close to the real deal. It did require the casual gamer to go through a command-line interface, guess a 5-digit binary code based on feedback about how many did he get right, solve a Kanji puzzle, find password in one directory and apply it to the other etc. The end result neatly tied in with the game where you could, for example, acquire a sword in the Matrix or set off an EMP.
Certainly much better than a Michael Bay fever dream.
WhatsApp is working on voice-calls and is aspiring to compete against Skype. Somewhere down the road a desktop client for WhatsApp is definitely in the works. At that time Facebook is most likely going to market WhatsApp pretty aggressively as the end-all-be-all messaging and communication platform.
A machine operating at the rate of one variation per micro-second would require over 1090 years to calculate the first move
I'm guessing that we have gotten a little faster since then with our current peta and soon to be exascale machines... micro-second? An eternity. Recalculate that spreadsheet, professor.
Shannon -- the "professor" -- was simply taking into account the technology available at the time.
Hans-Joachim Bremermann has also made an interesting argument:
"Speed, memory, and processing capacity of any possible future computer equipment are limited by specific physical barriers: the light barrier, the quantum barrier, and the thermodynamical barrier. These limitations imply, for example, that no computer, however constructed, will ever be able to examine the entire tree of possible move sequences of the game of chess.
On the other hand, Claude Shannon has argued about the original game being unsolvable by computers:
"With chess it is possible, in principle, to play a perfect game or construct a machine to do so as follows: One considers in a given position all possible moves, then all moves for the opponent, etc., to the end of the game (in each variation). The end must occur, by the rules of the games after a finite number of moves (remembering the 50 move drawing rule). Each of these variations ends in win, loss or draw. By working backward from the end one can determine whether there is a forced win, the position is a draw or is lost. It is easy to show, however, even with the high computing speed available in electronic calculators this computation is impractical. In typical chess positions there will be of the order of 30 legal moves. The number holds fairly constant until the game is nearly finished as shown... by De Groot, who averaged the number of legal moves in a large number of master games. Thus a move for White and then one for Black gives about 103 possibilities. A typical game lasts about 40 moves to resignation of one party. This is conservative for our calculation since the machine would calculate out to checkmate, not resignation. However, even at this figure there will be 10120 variations to be calculated from the initial position. A machine operating at the rate of one variation per micro-second would require over 1090 years to calculate the first move!"
Please stop using arguably the most useless of marketing slogans. Every desktop environment which has been around long enough has won an award of some kind. (Yes, even Gnome.)
I don't understand how they could root you if you're not running any plugin and have Javascript disabled, could you explain ?
By exploiting vulnerabilities in the browser. Being a piece of software it's no more secure than any other out there.
Spoofing user-agent might help, but the dilemma runs like this:
* Using a non-popular browser (e.g., Midori, Lynx) would make you slightly less prone to these attacks as the focus is usually on the popular ones (Firefox, IE).
* The browser in question might have "leaks" (e.g. cookies) which Tor community tries actively to plug against by releasing a standard bundle based on a popular browser.
I was surprised to read that Fedora didn't have any students this year (after all, my proposal for Fedora was accepted but I chose Tor in the de-duplication process). As it turns out, Fedora actually has six projects this year. The full list of accepted projects is available here.
I am in Pakistan right now and find the whole situation amusing. Perhaps they should block queries to root name servers as well since ICANN are not blocking the queries to zones that can resolve blasphemous domains. Yeah. That would service the Internet *right*!
The lower-cost automated ones don't care. It's all handled by software; at no point in the process (on the CA side) is a human involved.
And I'm betting that if the browsers aren't catching it, neither are the CAs.
Somehow all the CA softwares are reading beyond the null whereas most of the browsers stop doing so?
I tried to drag and drop a jpg in a browser window (Firefox) to some photo editor. It didn't work. Macs and Windows have been able to do this since at least the mid-90s. I have no idea if you can drag an image from Firefox to the Gimp nowadays, and I don't care.
Just tried it, GIMP connected to the server and pulled the image from there. Not sure if that's how you want it to work though.
All those poor souls with IT-dept mandated MS desktops that they're not allowed to change just moved one step closer to really running linux on that meaningless host.
People running Hyper-V in Server editions aren't exactly "poor souls" either.
Seriously, what bug it was? A GPL violation? "Patches" also implies that it's already accepted in the code tree. In fact, to a non-technical user, the headline would read something like "Linux had a flaw, Microsoft fixed it. Linux people still won't stop bitching."
Slashdot Mirror
Why is this particular image such a viral hit? Have people tried creating images which would appear of different colors but failed to split opinion on such a wide scale?
/. crowd can mostly understand without much fuss that colors are subjective. A more geek-oriented analysis -- which I'm pining to read somewhere -- would deal with what took the Internet so long to catch up to this phenomenon.
[Rant]
First everyone started arguing over their gut-reaction, "it's obviously color X!"
Then everyone started trying to sound smart by doing some variation of: "Colors are perceived by your brain! Can you imagine that? Your brain. Like, literally!"
The
[/Rant]
We can't stop putting the same build on the front page.
It does not exist, and the "best" solution is abstinence. (In this case, Not running every EXE you find on the internet.)
Actually, the equivalent analogy would be to just not go on the Internet. Even then you run the risk of getting infected with something like Stuxnet. The real "abstinence" would be to not interact with any external/untrusted data at all.
I honestly, sincerely, without-any-prejudice, spent 5 minutes on that page trying to figure out the differences in quality in "three-way comparison" but for the life of me all I am able to discern is minor differences which can be attributed to a plethora of reasons other than the hardware capabilities.
If anything, this comparison served well to make me consider buying a console. I mean, if I'm not able to see a significant difference, why would it make sense for me to spend extra bucks on the PC? Just because some videophile found the console version to be "muddy"?
People who have problems making the difference between reality and fantasy could also snap by reading a book or any other trigger.
Exactly. Imagine the outrage if Mark David Chapman was caught with a PS Vita playing Killzone instead of The Catcher in the Rye.
Nearly all of the development tools of Linux are available on OSX via ports, brew or simply compiling oneself. Even fairly advanced stuff like valgrind. There is no shortage of cross platform GUI toolkit like Qt.
In what way is OSX crippled as a dev box ?
Well, obviously the lack of systemd.
It'll be interesting to see how the general public's trust pans out over this thing. Do they take Kickstarter's cancellation as a red flag or are they so desperate for a easily-configurable Tor router that they'll pay whoever they can for it. Even if that means trusting these assholes vs. their ISPs.
With hundreds of millions of distinct websites "out there," if the same proportion holds, that would suggest that there about a million or more websites similarly affected.
Why are you assuming that this scales linearly? Are you suggesting that this is a technical glitch? If the websites are blocked due to the nature of their content it most certainly won't scale in a linear fashion.
Had the most interesting built-in "pseudo-hacking" experience for a video-game.
Even though it's nowhere close to the real deal. It did require the casual gamer to go through a command-line interface, guess a 5-digit binary code based on feedback about how many did he get right, solve a Kanji puzzle, find password in one directory and apply it to the other etc. The end result neatly tied in with the game where you could, for example, acquire a sword in the Matrix or set off an EMP.
Certainly much better than a Michael Bay fever dream.
WhatsApp is working on voice-calls and is aspiring to compete against Skype. Somewhere down the road a desktop client for WhatsApp is definitely in the works. At that time Facebook is most likely going to market WhatsApp pretty aggressively as the end-all-be-all messaging and communication platform.
So yes, definitely related.
A machine operating at the rate of one variation per micro-second would require over 1090 years to calculate the first move
I'm guessing that we have gotten a little faster since then with our current peta and soon to be exascale machines... micro-second? An eternity. Recalculate that spreadsheet, professor.
Shannon -- the "professor" -- was simply taking into account the technology available at the time.
Hans-Joachim Bremermann has also made an interesting argument:
By the way, 3x3 Chess was strongly solved in 2004.
On the other hand, Claude Shannon has argued about the original game being unsolvable by computers:
Please stop using arguably the most useless of marketing slogans. Every desktop environment which has been around long enough has won an award of some kind. (Yes, even Gnome.)
VLC, Maemo, TwimGo, LXDE; I for one would like to see a future where GIMP is the only major application left using GTK. Poetic justice.
I don't understand how they could root you if you're not running any plugin and have Javascript disabled, could you explain ?
By exploiting vulnerabilities in the browser. Being a piece of software it's no more secure than any other out there. Spoofing user-agent might help, but the dilemma runs like this:
Just in time for Chrome 2147483647.
http://blog.oldversion.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/real-one.png
I was surprised to read that Fedora didn't have any students this year (after all, my proposal for Fedora was accepted but I chose Tor in the de-duplication process). As it turns out, Fedora actually has six projects this year. The full list of accepted projects is available here.
I am in Pakistan right now and find the whole situation amusing. Perhaps they should block queries to root name servers as well since ICANN are not blocking the queries to zones that can resolve blasphemous domains. Yeah. That would service the Internet *right*!
The lower-cost automated ones don't care. It's all handled by software; at no point in the process (on the CA side) is a human involved. And I'm betting that if the browsers aren't catching it, neither are the CAs.
Somehow all the CA softwares are reading beyond the null whereas most of the browsers stop doing so?
I tried to drag and drop a jpg in a browser window (Firefox) to some photo editor. It didn't work. Macs and Windows have been able to do this since at least the mid-90s. I have no idea if you can drag an image from Firefox to the Gimp nowadays, and I don't care.
Just tried it, GIMP connected to the server and pulled the image from there. Not sure if that's how you want it to work though.
Microsoft is sharing its stuff because they were caught red handed.
But they obviously won't admit so.
Well he has said in past that GPL'ing Linux was the "best thing" he ever did.
All those poor souls with IT-dept mandated MS desktops that they're not allowed to change just moved one step closer to really running linux on that meaningless host.
People running Hyper-V in Server editions aren't exactly "poor souls" either.
Seriously, what bug it was? A GPL violation? "Patches" also implies that it's already accepted in the code tree. In fact, to a non-technical user, the headline would read something like "Linux had a flaw, Microsoft fixed it. Linux people still won't stop bitching."