All this can be trivially stopped by ulimit. If a javascript can allocate 4 gigs of memory it is effectively a DoS. I would never let some web script allocate more than a fraction of physical memory. Besides, there is absolutely no reason for a DLL to be put into same address where allocation heap resides.
Shittiest code does not attain stability because "all the bugs" have been removed. More often it attains stability because it cannot be changed, the odd undocumented bug-like "feature" can be the expected behaviour by some client which you really cannot change ('cause you'd end up in an avalanche).
Then what I have noticed is that new code is usually bad: when you implement something, integrate and test you'll usually notice how to do it better. But then it might be too late to rewrite it.
Old coding practices (from 80s or even 90s) are almost universally bad, even if nobody admits it. Back then the memory footprint etc. had hugely bigger effect than they have now. Today usually code which helps finding bugs (tracing, syslog,...) is much more important than code which has optimal performance.
I fully agree that you must be able to explain why your code supposedly does not suck and learn when he says why it does. Do not personal, it just a bunch of characters, after all!
Company guidelines... well, if they are really good they may help, but I doubt that very much.
There is a guy in Finland who really believes what you wrote. He goes even further: those predatory women chase men even at workplaces, to collect the most wealthy ones, marry then, make a child and force the guy to work overtime, build a house, etc. Then chases for next one.
You see, men cannot think with their brains therefore the "seducing" works easily.
And as the GP says, they cannot even take a few beatings and rap...foced-coituses, they divorce! What ungrateful bastards those feminists are! Worst is that you have to pay alimony - after all it was the woman who got pregnant, not the man!
I have had several 10-11" netbooks. In the latest the touchpad is OK though "not a mouse". It has Linux and can trivially run Netbeans, browser, pdf reader and spreadsheet at same time. And more, it has 4G of memory after all! Battery life is 4-6 hours depending what you do, more than I ever need.
What it cannot do is run HD Youtube - the WIndows version can, but I do not care.
It is cheap (300€), small, light, encrypted so I can carry it around without being too much worried should it be stolen or broken. I would never take a 15" monster into a pub, for example.
Except when they are not - in the mornings. I eat every working day in a restaurant which is uncomfortably cold if the (outside) temperature has dropped during night or worse, weekend.
This idea has some uses, but is very limited what it can achieve. Bad planning can make it more a nuisance than an energy saving.
Why the fuck I get this same bullshit link every time someone shows there is likely causation? Do you really think those researchers do not know your "link"?
Deal with it, cannabis is bad for you. Maybe less so than alcohol, but it is bad.
I'd say biggest difference is that academic code always adhere to standards. If you have a "cat", it will allways "meow" in the examples. In real life "this particular cat may not be tried to meow as it will end up in catastrophe" situations happen all the time.
Then the academic books always can agree on the specifications. In real life should a "cat" "meow" if the "meow time" is zero? Ten "cats" by ten programmers and I am certain someone will "assert" and worse.
Theoretical? This is what is going on in Europe. I do not see "passive aggression" or "general misery/paranoia". Quite the contrary, it seems to increase the perceived safety as fewer loonies have guns.
The point is not to outlaw everything. The point is to make it difficult enough for vast majority of nutcases to obtain mass murder weapons. That we, or actually you Americans, could have done. It might not have saved *this* case, but there have been so many of these that most certainly you could have prevented at least one of them.
If you "don't know", shut the fuck up!
Besides, I am absolutely certain you have no clue what would have happened with a truck full of C4.
Banning stuff does solve things. It does not solve the probelm 100%, but even 1% decrease in school killings would be good enough a reason to ban guns from loonies. Right?
Now, are you really claiming stricter gun laws would be "utterly ineffective", i.e. not decrease these "random" shootings? Really?
The point is to make it as difficult and likely to fail as possible without affecting "normal" people in "normal" circumstances.
So how, and why, this person was allowed to get a gun? Was there any reason for him to own one? Was there a reason why he should not have owned one? I do not know, but I do know that is should be as difficult as reasonable for "loonies" to get a gun. Any kind of gun.
The question is: what kind of guns should what kind of people be allowed to own?
If you want to counter government you need bazookas, hand guns are totally useless. Still bazookas and high explosives are banned from practically everybody, especially from criminals and mentally unstable.
Then, this kind of people should not be allowed to own/have guns. How do we stop that? Saying "only criminals"... well, I sincerely hope other people try to limit criminals "freedom".
If you leave 3306 open to the Internet, yes, that would be an improper configuration and you kind of get what you deserve there.
Why? Why do you "deserve" that the database is not safe to use that way? Shouldn't it be? If not, why it should not be safe?
I think this is the main reason why every fucking application from browsers to document viewers to databases to webapps to firewalls to php's are buggy: developers assume "it will be protected by other means, I don't need to check my code or sanitize input. They'll use apparmor. it is not that serious a hole".
I. I was extremely frightened that they could shut the internet music up, with so enthusiac audience (customers) for DRM.
DRM really had a chance, it failed mostly not on "us" who were accustomed BSD/GPL etc, but on far too many competeting "standards". Then some DRM music stores shut down leaving customers with nothing (still someone bough zune after playsforsure... go ahead, buy now the 8).
But then, loosers learned nothing and are now "buying" ebooks.
Just a couple of days ago there was a story in the news in Finalnd about "digital inhertance". They did not say it will be close to zero as most is loaned rather than bought. Your loss, not mine, I don't loan from iTunes, etc.
Oh, yes there are. One example is Olvi Oyj (Finland, "OLVAS" in Nasdaq). The biggest owner isa trust fund which primary goal is to advance beer culture (or something similar). The company has gone so far as to help small breweries to get their beer to big shops, though it provably affects their sales negatively (marginally though).
There are companies which behave more nicely than other companies. There are companies which advance society and threre are companies which maximize profits - most in the grey area obviously.
Unless, of course, you want only to argue the semantics of word "character", which I'll skip.
Making a on-chip backdoor is extremely huge risk. If found, it would open up liability and criminal charges, plus completely ruin all sales - as it cannot be removed without new HW.
Slashdot Mirror
All this can be trivially stopped by ulimit. If a javascript can allocate 4 gigs of memory it is effectively a DoS. I would never let some web script allocate more than a fraction of physical memory.
Besides, there is absolutely no reason for a DLL to be put into same address where allocation heap resides.
Prove?
Oh fuck what an attitude!
Shittiest code does not attain stability because "all the bugs" have been removed. More often it attains stability because it cannot be changed, the odd undocumented bug-like "feature" can be the expected behaviour by some client which you really cannot change ('cause you'd end up in an avalanche).
Then what I have noticed is that new code is usually bad: when you implement something, integrate and test you'll usually notice how to do it better. But then it might be too late to rewrite it.
Old coding practices (from 80s or even 90s) are almost universally bad, even if nobody admits it. Back then the memory footprint etc. had hugely bigger effect than they have now. Today usually code which helps finding bugs (tracing, syslog, ...) is much more important than code which has optimal performance.
I fully agree that you must be able to explain why your code supposedly does not suck and learn when he says why it does. Do not personal, it just a bunch of characters, after all!
Company guidelines ... well, if they are really good they may help, but I doubt that very much.
There is a guy in Finland who really believes what you wrote. He goes even further: those predatory women chase men even at workplaces, to collect the most wealthy ones, marry then, make a child and force the guy to work overtime, build a house, etc. Then chases for next one.
You see, men cannot think with their brains therefore the "seducing" works easily.
And as the GP says, they cannot even take a few beatings and rap...foced-coituses, they divorce! What ungrateful bastards those feminists are! Worst is that you have to pay alimony - after all it was the woman who got pregnant, not the man!
I have had several 10-11" netbooks. In the latest the touchpad is OK though "not a mouse". It has Linux and can trivially run Netbeans, browser, pdf reader and spreadsheet at same time. And more, it has 4G of memory after all! Battery life is 4-6 hours depending what you do, more than I ever need.
What it cannot do is run HD Youtube - the WIndows version can, but I do not care.
It is cheap (300€), small, light, encrypted so I can carry it around without being too much worried should it be stolen or broken. I would never take a 15" monster into a pub, for example.
Except when they are not - in the mornings. I eat every working day in a restaurant which is uncomfortably cold if the (outside) temperature has dropped during night or worse, weekend.
This idea has some uses, but is very limited what it can achieve. Bad planning can make it more a nuisance than an energy saving.
Why the fuck I get this same bullshit link every time someone shows there is likely causation? Do you really think those researchers do not know your "link"?
Deal with it, cannabis is bad for you. Maybe less so than alcohol, but it is bad.
Amazon started spämming me heavily this Christmas - before that they sent me one email per month, now one every day or so.
I'll never ever buy anything from them.
I'd say biggest difference is that academic code always adhere to standards. If you have a "cat", it will allways "meow" in the examples. In real life "this particular cat may not be tried to meow as it will end up in catastrophe" situations happen all the time.
Then the academic books always can agree on the specifications. In real life should a "cat" "meow" if the "meow time" is zero? Ten "cats" by ten programmers and I am certain someone will "assert" and worse.
You are not allowed to fly a plane without a licence. You won't get a licence if you are a loonie.
I am happy with similar laws for guns.
Not in hands of loonies.
Theoretical? This is what is going on in Europe. I do not see "passive aggression" or "general misery/paranoia". Quite the contrary, it seems to increase the perceived safety as fewer loonies have guns.
Oh fuck are you out of your head.
The point is not to outlaw everything. The point is to make it difficult enough for vast majority of nutcases to obtain mass murder weapons. That we, or actually you Americans, could have done. It might not have saved *this* case, but there have been so many of these that most certainly you could have prevented at least one of them.
If you "don't know", shut the fuck up!
Besides, I am absolutely certain you have no clue what would have happened with a truck full of C4.
I will never ever believe that someone sane thinks 30 innocent dead is "better than nothing", anf they are "just a symptom".
WRONG!
Banning stuff does solve things. It does not solve the probelm 100%, but even 1% decrease in school killings would be good enough a reason to ban guns from loonies. Right?
Now, are you really claiming stricter gun laws would be "utterly ineffective", i.e. not decrease these "random" shootings? Really?
The point is to make it as difficult and likely to fail as possible without affecting "normal" people in "normal" circumstances.
So how, and why, this person was allowed to get a gun? Was there any reason for him to own one? Was there a reason why he should not have owned one? I do not know, but I do know that is should be as difficult as reasonable for "loonies" to get a gun. Any kind of gun.
Maybe, just maybe, this is exactly why C4 is not sold to everyone with a library card.
Maybe, I wouldn't know, I'm not american.
Sure, he could have used an ICBM. Banning ICBMs means only criminals and loonies have ICBMs.
Are you really saying there is no way to stop, or at least limit, loonies from getting a gun? REALLY? Guns in wrong hands are the problem.
Soooo wrong.
The question is: what kind of guns should what kind of people be allowed to own?
If you want to counter government you need bazookas, hand guns are totally useless. Still bazookas and high explosives are banned from practically everybody, especially from criminals and mentally unstable.
Then, this kind of people should not be allowed to own/have guns. How do we stop that? Saying "only criminals" ... well, I sincerely hope other people try to limit criminals "freedom".
If you leave 3306 open to the Internet, yes, that would be an improper configuration and you kind of get what you deserve there.
Why? Why do you "deserve" that the database is not safe to use that way? Shouldn't it be? If not, why it should not be safe?
I think this is the main reason why every fucking application from browsers to document viewers to databases to webapps to firewalls to php's are buggy: developers assume "it will be protected by other means, I don't need to check my code or sanitize input. They'll use apparmor. it is not that serious a hole".
I. I was extremely frightened that they could shut the internet music up, with so enthusiac audience (customers) for DRM.
DRM really had a chance, it failed mostly not on "us" who were accustomed BSD/GPL etc, but on far too many competeting "standards". Then some DRM music stores shut down leaving customers with nothing (still someone bough zune after playsforsure ... go ahead, buy now the 8).
But then, loosers learned nothing and are now "buying" ebooks.
Just a couple of days ago there was a story in the news in Finalnd about "digital inhertance". They did not say it will be close to zero as most is loaned rather than bought. Your loss, not mine, I don't loan from iTunes, etc.
No, the "open source" myth is not true. See e.g. http://www.debian.org/security/2012/
I'd bet that more holes are created than fixed, per day.
Oh, yes there are. One example is Olvi Oyj (Finland, "OLVAS" in Nasdaq). The biggest owner isa trust fund which primary goal is to advance beer culture (or something similar).
The company has gone so far as to help small breweries to get their beer to big shops, though it provably affects their sales negatively (marginally though).
There are companies which behave more nicely than other companies. There are companies which advance society and threre are companies which maximize profits - most in the grey area obviously.
Unless, of course, you want only to argue the semantics of word "character", which I'll skip.
Not "trivially".
Making a on-chip backdoor is extremely huge risk. If found, it would open up liability and criminal charges, plus completely ruin all sales - as it cannot be removed without new HW.
There is one thing that correlates with code quality: unit tests.
If there are unit tests with (any kind of) coverage over 80-90%, the code is much more likely to be good than bad.
But then, the OP needs a serious attitude change. I bet his/her code is not as good as he/she thinks, not by a mile.