Yes, you generally have to get a permit from the city in order to put in a pool. This isn't anything new nor is it some obscure thing. It's a pretty typical part of city zoning ordinances.
Not to mention that this is a comparison of a phone from a single company to a multitude of phones from a variety of companies. The fact that the iPhone holds it own so well with so few models against all the Android phones is quite a feat.
they are instead smug about hopping on the walled-off Apple bandwagon where customizing a device you own is not allowed unless it's approved by the company that sold it to you.
I hate to break it to you, but the vast majority of people who own phones don't care about customizing it.
now that we have gorgeous 400Hz LCD screens with amazing contrast and colors
Looks like someone buys a little too much into those made-up marketing figures about 10 billion:1 contrast ratios or 80 billion colors that they put on LCDs. If anything, the new 240hz and 480hz TVs look worse than the older LCDs. I don't want to watch everything so that it looks like a live-action soap opera, thank you very much.
It's funny how the ones who fight hardest against the spread of their works are, in effect, ensuring that their efforts will be forgotten and they will not leave a mark on gaming history. They are cementing themselves into a tomb of their own making, burying themselves alive.
You are making a big assumption thinking that almost any of these game companies care about such a thing.
The stigma of DMCA used against consumers who otherwise would not have been paying for the digital media
Then maybe they should have just gone without getting the media to begin with? Saying that you wouldn't have paid for it otherwise is not a justification for obtaining a work-for-pay for free. If your boss wants to stop paying you but demands you continue working for them would you accept those terms?
But, to be fair, given the content of that article (or rather the lack of it), I doubt they would have paid to have an image there in the first place -- it would have been either no image at all, or a CC image with a less restrictive license.
Then if you aren't willing to meet the terms of using the work you don't use it. It's entirely irrelevant whether you would have paid for it or not.
In the past, successful developers were all highly skilled. It was a necessary trait for success both because development was difficult, and because there were so few ways to make money developing software. Unsuccessful developers stopped developing, and their code does not persist until today.
You must not work with much legacy code. I've dealt with shitty code that is both a couple years old to a many decades old (a mix of C, Fortran, Ada, various assembly, etc). This notion that all old programmers were godlike gurus is mostly myth.
Self-learning often brings instant positive and false feedback - Did the thing work or not. And self-learning starts with a motivation so big to learn by self.
That something "works or not" isn't necessarily meaning that you are doing something right. Something than appear to work but it can contain all sorts of subtle bugs or security holes that you may not know about. And without someone with some level of experience to help mentor you to some degree you may never learn that you are writing code with such issues. Until at some later date someone exploits them.
I find people who are saying that "self-learned people are shit, they can't get the job done" to be usually highly educated, putting very high effort but yet achieving at best only slight above average results. Time and time again.
That's great for those people. I never said or even implied that. I don't subscribe to either extreme. As I said, self-learning is great but you NEED someone to make sure you aren't learning things the wrong way because this happens all the time.
He may use source code if it's available, which it isn't for IE which has has found exploits in, once he's found something by after doing the fuzzing but I can assure you he doesn't just stare at the source code and go "AHA! A BUFFER OVERFLOW!!".
With your budget beater gaming PC, this is absolutely not true.
I have an PC with an AMD 4800+, 1 gig of RAM and an old AGP 7800GT video card. There is nothing special about the hardware and the CPU and video card are at least 5 years old and I've been able to play pretty any current game at medium to higher quality with no "competitive disadvantage" and more than 30fps. In conclusion, you're full of it.
If the 3GS drops two calls per hundred and the iPhone 4 drops 2.8 calls per hundred then that would indicate the iPhone 4 drop rate is over 70% higher than the 3GS.
Fail at math much? 2.8 - 2 =.8 difference..8/2 =.4 or 40% increase. Now you can say in this scenario that the 3GS only suffers 70% of the amount of dropped calls as the iPhone 4 but that isn't a 70% increase.
That is a retarded statement. Certifications for both doctors and civil engineers are completely different than what he is talking about. Both of these professions involve people dying when it is not done properly.
What about the cases of people dying due to buggy software in x-ray machines? Or all the software that is running life-critical infrastructure in a hospital? Or the software controlling a nuclear plant? Or an airplane? There are plenty of places where writing software DOES involved people dying if it doesn't work properly.
Nice false dichotomy there. There are plenty of people who actually know things AND have certifications.
Needing a course to learn is some what of an automatic fail to me.
Why? While self-learning is nice there are plenty of self-taught programmers and sysadmins that are complete garbage because they taught themselves to do things the wrong way and since they had no positive or negative feedback from someone like an instructor they have no idea that they are even doing things wrong.
These researchers don't find the exploits and bugs by reading the source code. They do it by fudging around with the binary while the program is running.
What entitlement? Finding these major exploits are not easy and can easily take weeks or months or work to uncover. To think that $500 is a sufficient payment to recompense them for their work is a joke. Especially when they can get anywhere from 10 to 100 times that by selling these exploits to the black market.
Slashdot Mirror
Is this the first time you've ever heard of zoning laws?
Yes, you generally have to get a permit from the city in order to put in a pool. This isn't anything new nor is it some obscure thing. It's a pretty typical part of city zoning ordinances.
There will probably be an Android for every type of user, rather than just one version that everyone will be forced to adapt to.
Because people are forced to buy and use iPhones against their will? *rolls eyes*
Who says there wasn't such a jump? The figures in the article are before the iPhone4 release.
Not to mention that this is a comparison of a phone from a single company to a multitude of phones from a variety of companies. The fact that the iPhone holds it own so well with so few models against all the Android phones is quite a feat.
they are instead smug about hopping on the walled-off Apple bandwagon where customizing a device you own is not allowed unless it's approved by the company that sold it to you.
I hate to break it to you, but the vast majority of people who own phones don't care about customizing it.
It is determining how portable device will be used by the mainstream. Locked down, or open?
And how many non-geeks really care about such a thing? Oh yeah, almost none. They buy Android phones because of the marketing of slick looking phones.
Or I can, you know, just buy a TV that doesn't look like ass and comes at a premium to look like ass to boot?
That's sort of the problem. Editors are supposed to, you know, edit the things they post.
now that we have gorgeous 400Hz LCD screens with amazing contrast and colors
Looks like someone buys a little too much into those made-up marketing figures about 10 billion:1 contrast ratios or 80 billion colors that they put on LCDs. If anything, the new 240hz and 480hz TVs look worse than the older LCDs. I don't want to watch everything so that it looks like a live-action soap opera, thank you very much.
It's funny how the ones who fight hardest against the spread of their works are, in effect, ensuring that their efforts will be forgotten and they will not leave a mark on gaming history. They are cementing themselves into a tomb of their own making, burying themselves alive.
You are making a big assumption thinking that almost any of these game companies care about such a thing.
And yet here are 4 virtualboy emulators.
The stigma of DMCA used against consumers who otherwise would not have been paying for the digital media
Then maybe they should have just gone without getting the media to begin with? Saying that you wouldn't have paid for it otherwise is not a justification for obtaining a work-for-pay for free. If your boss wants to stop paying you but demands you continue working for them would you accept those terms?
But, to be fair, given the content of that article (or rather the lack of it), I doubt they would have paid to have an image there in the first place -- it would have been either no image at all, or a CC image with a less restrictive license.
Then if you aren't willing to meet the terms of using the work you don't use it. It's entirely irrelevant whether you would have paid for it or not.
There's a reason his mom killed herself. Would you want to be known as the one who gave birth to that festering, pustule of fat?
In the past, successful developers were all highly skilled. It was a necessary trait for success both because development was difficult, and because there were so few ways to make money developing software. Unsuccessful developers stopped developing, and their code does not persist until today.
You must not work with much legacy code. I've dealt with shitty code that is both a couple years old to a many decades old (a mix of C, Fortran, Ada, various assembly, etc). This notion that all old programmers were godlike gurus is mostly myth.
Self-learning often brings instant positive and false feedback - Did the thing work or not. And self-learning starts with a motivation so big to learn by self.
That something "works or not" isn't necessarily meaning that you are doing something right. Something than appear to work but it can contain all sorts of subtle bugs or security holes that you may not know about. And without someone with some level of experience to help mentor you to some degree you may never learn that you are writing code with such issues. Until at some later date someone exploits them.
I find people who are saying that "self-learned people are shit, they can't get the job done" to be usually highly educated, putting very high effort but yet achieving at best only slight above average results. Time and time again.
That's great for those people. I never said or even implied that. I don't subscribe to either extreme. As I said, self-learning is great but you NEED someone to make sure you aren't learning things the wrong way because this happens all the time.
He may use source code if it's available, which it isn't for IE which has has found exploits in, once he's found something by after doing the fuzzing but I can assure you he doesn't just stare at the source code and go "AHA! A BUFFER OVERFLOW!!".
With your budget beater gaming PC, this is absolutely not true.
I have an PC with an AMD 4800+, 1 gig of RAM and an old AGP 7800GT video card. There is nothing special about the hardware and the CPU and video card are at least 5 years old and I've been able to play pretty any current game at medium to higher quality with no "competitive disadvantage" and more than 30fps. In conclusion, you're full of it.
If the 3GS drops two calls per hundred and the iPhone 4 drops 2.8 calls per hundred then that would indicate the iPhone 4 drop rate is over 70% higher than the 3GS.
Fail at math much? 2.8 - 2 = .8 difference. .8/2 = .4 or 40% increase. Now you can say in this scenario that the 3GS only suffers 70% of the amount of dropped calls as the iPhone 4 but that isn't a 70% increase.
That is a retarded statement. Certifications for both doctors and civil engineers are completely different than what he is talking about. Both of these professions involve people dying when it is not done properly.
What about the cases of people dying due to buggy software in x-ray machines? Or all the software that is running life-critical infrastructure in a hospital? Or the software controlling a nuclear plant? Or an airplane? There are plenty of places where writing software DOES involved people dying if it doesn't work properly.
Nice false dichotomy there. There are plenty of people who actually know things AND have certifications.
Needing a course to learn is some what of an automatic fail to me.
Why? While self-learning is nice there are plenty of self-taught programmers and sysadmins that are complete garbage because they taught themselves to do things the wrong way and since they had no positive or negative feedback from someone like an instructor they have no idea that they are even doing things wrong.
They aren't catering to security researchers? Who else are they supposed to be catering to?
These researchers don't find the exploits and bugs by reading the source code. They do it by fudging around with the binary while the program is running.
What entitlement? Finding these major exploits are not easy and can easily take weeks or months or work to uncover. To think that $500 is a sufficient payment to recompense them for their work is a joke. Especially when they can get anywhere from 10 to 100 times that by selling these exploits to the black market.