I'm not so sure that's the right answer. Perhaps if the standards would add various built-in bounds checking, that might be a better answer. Naturally, it would need a directive to override it for some situations and a compiler option to turn it off for legacy code.
On the other hand, while it is possible to use a circular saw with no guard without hurting yourself and others, the guard is required because too many people were being hurt in practice.
Meanwhile, there are many regulations surrounding 18-wheelers to make sure they can be and are operated safely.
I'm saying employees and the larger society should be a part of the decisions. For example, in many countries it is customary for at least one seat on the board to represent employees.
It's not like a company would ever be anything without people who actually do the work. It's not like founders are shy about asking employees to be patient about raises or overtime, or a zillion other things when they're up and coming. When they respond favorably, that is just as meaningful an investment as money.
Think wider. All a monarchy is is a company that got big enough to squash all the competition, including the previous government.
It's interesting that you put a lot of weight on the skill to start a company but none on the skill to actually produce anything. A company whose only skill is being a company is not going to last very long and is economically a deadweight we're better off without.
You also put a lot of weight on investors and the risk to their money and none on creators and the risk to their creative efforts and careers. How do you think an engineer feels when years of effort and occasional creative genius sink into the pit because the business people just couldn't get it together?
It makes sense that a business person would handle the purely business matters and that engineers would handle the purely engineering decisions. But everyone has a stake in morals and ethics.
Even well done laws set an outer bounds on behavior. That is, they set a bright line in the middle of a wide grey line. They represent the line beyond which the behavior is unquestionably unethical or immoral. They leave plenty of things inside the line that are still unethical most of the time.
Of course, there are also the bought and paid for laws that do no such thing and simply represent something a wealthy person or group doesn't want people to do (for example, compete with them or be able to live without them).
A more detailed reading shos that Adobe creates a cache folder within the path that you give it and places the cache files in the cache folder. It then deleted files OUTSIDE of the cache folder.
You missed the part where Adobe created a cache folder inside the Videos folder, put the cache files in the cache folder, then deleted things from the Videos folder. That was not intended by Adobe or the user, it was a bug (later patched by Adobe).
So the program behaved in a surprising and undocumented manner and caused data loss. Had it behaved as documented, he wouldn't have lost anything.
I'm guessing that since they apparently didn't arrest her (no web access in jail), they don't have much to show she was involved. Perhaps they hoped the phone would provide what they needed, but that's not going to happen now.
Actually, I'm basing it on family who asked me what they could use to browse the wen abd read some email. They ended up set up with modest desktops running Ubuntu with XFCE. It's never been a problem.
In other words, they took the second option I suggested (ask for help). Because Linux isn't stuck on Gnome3, there were options I could choose that would actually help them.
People routinely make choices. They don't reject "cars" because a manual transmission is too hard, they just choose one with an automatic. They certain;y don't reject a car because the driver's seat is too far back. They know it's adjustable and so they adjust it. If you put the computer in front of them and don't go through the UI options they have, you failed, not Linux.
But as for the sustainability of the effort, Bill Gates could fund the next 100 years of security updates just out of his personal funds, imagine what MS could do!
I'm presuming they didn't install Linux themselves (or they would have the knowledge you believe they lack), so that means it's down to clicking on a selection when they log in. Are you saying they are incapable of clicking on a selection? And further that they are incapable of asking for help?
How do these imaginary users manage to get to work? All those dizzying breakfast options, eggs, cereal, OJ, coffee, butter, jam, or both on the toast choosing which clothes to wear, picking a station on the car radio, it' just too much!
Those poor people shivering naked in their childhood bedrooms unable to choose clothes, bedding, a setting on the thermostat, a house, a car, what they want to be when they grow up or even which free GUI they want on their Linux box.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not so sure that's the right answer. Perhaps if the standards would add various built-in bounds checking, that might be a better answer. Naturally, it would need a directive to override it for some situations and a compiler option to turn it off for legacy code.
On the other hand, while it is possible to use a circular saw with no guard without hurting yourself and others, the guard is required because too many people were being hurt in practice.
Meanwhile, there are many regulations surrounding 18-wheelers to make sure they can be and are operated safely.
Post quantum doesn't mean you need a quantum computer to run it.
I'm saying employees and the larger society should be a part of the decisions. For example, in many countries it is customary for at least one seat on the board to represent employees.
It's not like a company would ever be anything without people who actually do the work. It's not like founders are shy about asking employees to be patient about raises or overtime, or a zillion other things when they're up and coming. When they respond favorably, that is just as meaningful an investment as money.
Think wider. All a monarchy is is a company that got big enough to squash all the competition, including the previous government.
It's interesting that you put a lot of weight on the skill to start a company but none on the skill to actually produce anything. A company whose only skill is being a company is not going to last very long and is economically a deadweight we're better off without.
You also put a lot of weight on investors and the risk to their money and none on creators and the risk to their creative efforts and careers. How do you think an engineer feels when years of effort and occasional creative genius sink into the pit because the business people just couldn't get it together?
It makes sense that a business person would handle the purely business matters and that engineers would handle the purely engineering decisions. But everyone has a stake in morals and ethics.
They run the business now?
Ideally, yes.
Kinda like democracy is the radical idea that the citizens run the country, not some guy that had a watery tart throw a sword at him.
Even well done laws set an outer bounds on behavior. That is, they set a bright line in the middle of a wide grey line. They represent the line beyond which the behavior is unquestionably unethical or immoral. They leave plenty of things inside the line that are still unethical most of the time.
Of course, there are also the bought and paid for laws that do no such thing and simply represent something a wealthy person or group doesn't want people to do (for example, compete with them or be able to live without them).
A more detailed reading shos that Adobe creates a cache folder within the path that you give it and places the cache files in the cache folder. It then deleted files OUTSIDE of the cache folder.
That's a pretty big bug.
You missed the part where Adobe created a cache folder inside the Videos folder, put the cache files in the cache folder, then deleted things from the Videos folder. That was not intended by Adobe or the user, it was a bug (later patched by Adobe).
So the program behaved in a surprising and undocumented manner and caused data loss. Had it behaved as documented, he wouldn't have lost anything.
This
I'm guessing that since they apparently didn't arrest her (no web access in jail), they don't have much to show she was involved. Perhaps they hoped the phone would provide what they needed, but that's not going to happen now.
Then as it gets started it will trip over an IP landmine and die.
Actually, I'm basing it on family who asked me what they could use to browse the wen abd read some email. They ended up set up with modest desktops running Ubuntu with XFCE. It's never been a problem.
In other words, they took the second option I suggested (ask for help). Because Linux isn't stuck on Gnome3, there were options I could choose that would actually help them.
People routinely make choices. They don't reject "cars" because a manual transmission is too hard, they just choose one with an automatic. They certain;y don't reject a car because the driver's seat is too far back. They know it's adjustable and so they adjust it. If you put the computer in front of them and don't go through the UI options they have, you failed, not Linux.
Also, PIN would get in the way of their big campaign for just tapping your card to pay.
They rarely do exactly because it's useless.
New computers become old computers. Often enough, switching to Linux can salvage a lot more use out of an otherwise obsolete computer.
Or we're just seeing the tip of the iceberg.
I said SUPPORT and I meant it.
But as for the sustainability of the effort, Bill Gates could fund the next 100 years of security updates just out of his personal funds, imagine what MS could do!
If support is just a software subscription, it's a rip-off. When I say support, I mean SUPPORT.
He runs them in much the same way. Perhaps where you live it is different, but that's how it works here. Your bald assertions notwithstanding.
I'm presuming they didn't install Linux themselves (or they would have the knowledge you believe they lack), so that means it's down to clicking on a selection when they log in. Are you saying they are incapable of clicking on a selection? And further that they are incapable of asking for help?
TL;DR, Linux != gnome3
That's what support contracts are for. Of course, that would require actually supplying support other than reboot or reinstall.
How do these imaginary users manage to get to work? All those dizzying breakfast options, eggs, cereal, OJ, coffee, butter, jam, or both on the toast choosing which clothes to wear, picking a station on the car radio, it' just too much!
Those poor people shivering naked in their childhood bedrooms unable to choose clothes, bedding, a setting on the thermostat, a house, a car, what they want to be when they grow up or even which free GUI they want on their Linux box.
I suppose it's good in the same sense that a serial killer pledging to murder less people this year is good news...
I'm guessing you believe a corporate CEO is utterly powerless when he visits a regional field office. They probably don't even let him in.