Not giving source would make it a bit harder for the black hats, although a sufficiently good explanation of the problem would be an excellent starting point for a script kiddie.
The problem is that making it "a bit harder" is pretty much useless. Once the information on an exploit is out there, it's a *very* short trip from a nice responsible white-hat exploit warning to a one-click automated VB application making the rounds on IRC.
As a vendor, you can either try to completely bury an exploit, and pray that no one finds it and mounts an attack before you can patch, or you can completely open up about it and let users (and malicious hackers!) deal with the risk as they see fit. There really isn't a useful middle ground.
This device has a whole lot of potential. Now, they just have to scrap the half-assed camera functionality, and they'll have a nice watch computer with a useful hi-res greyscale display.
Seriously, who cares about the lame camera. The CPU and display are what's cool here.
other than typographical errors (which can be easily found and fixed), there should be no *logical* bugs.
Congrats, you are the most perfect software developer to have ever walked the face of the earth. Either that, or you simply aren't experienced enough to know that all software has bugs. And when you get to the enterprise scale of software, developing good software is very, very hard. You need *good* (good == top 5%ile, based on my experience) coders, *good* architects, *good* testing and *good* project management. Getting any ONE of those is rare!
Take the Linux kernel. I think there's a pretty good bunch of smart people working on that. I think they care about the quality of their code. I think they appreciate correctness and elegance. And *every single version* of the kernel has had bugs. Why is that?
If programmers as a whole stopped thinking along the "bugs are inevitable" line...
The average programmer should care more about the quality of his work. Duh. That's a feel-good tautology. It's not that easy.
This is the environment Sega thinks that they can be successful in?
No, this is the environment that Sega knows they have been and ARE successful in.
This is only about introducing the Xbox as another arcade hardware platform for the company, not a change in their strategy. I imagine they'll use Xbox hardware for the "commodity" games, and they'll continue to use their custom hardware for the "A" games.
They were in trouble then because Kodak's SX-70 instant-picture technology that didn't require user intervention or a wastebasket had obviated Polaroid's 35-year-old watch-your-watch system.
Uh... Could it sell more because of the fact that most people prefer the taste of Coke to milk? It doesn't have to be because one is force-fed to us by the media.
Exactly. You've missed the point entirely, and in the process managed to drive the home the point of the original post: People watch CNN because CNN shows you what you want to see, as opposed to the truth.
It's more palatable, more agreeable, easier on the eyes and easier on the mind. It's designed to be all those things. And consequently, reporting the objective truth becomes a secondary goal.
Lucasart's first two games, released in 1984, were Ballblazer and Rescue on Fractalus. Rescue on Fractalus had a fractally generated landscape, in realtime, on 8 bit machines, almost 20 years ago.
I don't think it really qualifies as a religion at all. It's simply a collection of people who study and practice a particular set of skills.
What is the "faith" of the religion? It all seems pretty self-evident to me, requiring no faith at all. The force is (in the context of the movies) an entirely real, scientifically provable phenomena, right down to the disappointingly biological midichlorians introduced in Episode One.
I don't recall the question of God ever being brought up in the movies. Is "Jedi" ever referred to in the movies explicitly as a religion?
Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC!
on
Biking @ 80 MPH
·
· Score: 2
Canada has been using the Metric system since... a while ago.
Only halfway. While distance is kilometers, and gas is litres, we still for the most part measure our height in feet & inches, and our weight in pounds. Construction still uses feet & inches. Temperature is still reckoned by many people in Fahrenheit, though that is changing.
You have a virtual display of 3200x3200, anti-aliased and scaled down on the fly to fit within 1600x1600 at 60-90 FPS..You accomplish the same effect in a smaller piece of real-estate. Seems like it would be easy to pull off, actually. Does such a thing already exist?
It's called supersampling, and it's how anti-aliased fonts work today. I don't think there's much point to doing "FSAA" on the desktop. It makes sense for arbitrary angled-polygon-style graphics, where you're blending edge detail. But desktops are generally generated as bitmaps, which would only get blurry with AA.
'Hercules' should be in there somewhere too. It becames a defacto standard for hi-res (720x348!) graphics.
Why don't manufacturers use a simple naming convention instead of these hideously long acronyms
Outside of marketing literature, I haven't heard anything past "VGA" used very often in real life. People usually say either the exact res ("ten-twenty-four by seven-sixty-eight"), abbreviated res ("ten by seven"), or just the horizontal res ("ten-twenty-four"). I usually use the latter.
Just a reminder that you need to keep your geek-goodies envy in perspective.
Yeah! Just think: if WE'RE jealous of this phone, and THEY'RE jealous about the power & water that we take for granted, just think how incredibly jealous they must be about this phone!
A human being
should be able to
change a diaper,
plan an invasion,
butcher a hog,
conn a ship,
design a building,
write a sonnet,
build a wall,
set a bone,
comfort the dying,
take orders,
give orders,
cooperate,
act alone,
pitch manure,
solve equations,
analyze a new problem,
program a computer,
cook a tasty meal,
fight efficiently,
and die gallantly.
If you don't want to give them an income directly and don't want to give them an income indirectly, are they just supposed to pay out of the goodness of their hearts?
No, they're supposed to close down the site and go back to working at McDonalds.
I'm astonished by how many people express this silly notion that sites deserve to stay running forever, like they're entitled to the sort of money that they made off of idiot investors 3 years ago.
Face it people, the economics of the web was ALL WRONG, and it's not going to be fixed by tweaking the old model with techniques like "enforcing" ad views. Things haven't gone down to bad from the old normal -- they've gone down to normal from the old completely out of whack high.
Given the fact that money earned from web sites is so little, I think the only thing that will allow a site to stay in the black now, is a change in the cost of running a site. I don't understand why bandwidth is still so expensive. FreeNet-style distributed systems could possibly change the economics of publishing data so that this cost is reduced.
Advertisement will fail in the long term if people do not buy the products advertised. I see lots of people claiming to be willing to put up with ads, but that's a moot point. No one is buying.
One of the problems with the perceived performance of online advertising, is that it ALONE of all forms of advertising is measured by asking a very ambitious question: "Did the user see the ad and then immediately drop everything he's doing and run into the store and buy the product.". This would be an insane way to measure the performance of a Coca-Cola ad on a bus stop.
I think the biggest "problem" with online ads is that companies advertising are completely ignoring the secondary "mindshare" effect that is the goal of more traditional forms of ads. They don't see a clickthrough, and so they measure a zero effectiveness, when this probably isn't accurate.
I threw them all out, and simply replaced them with a 10 foot pole.
Sounds elegant, but this wouldn't work for a large percentage of modern AV equipment.
The full functionality of neither my TV nor my VCR is available from the front panel of the unit. I HAVE to use a remote to adjust the picture settings on my TV, or program my VCR.
I suppose you could affix the remotes permanently to your entertainment center, and work them with the pole from the couch, though.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that making it "a bit harder" is pretty much useless. Once the information on an exploit is out there, it's a *very* short trip from a nice responsible white-hat exploit warning to a one-click automated VB application making the rounds on IRC.
As a vendor, you can either try to completely bury an exploit, and pray that no one finds it and mounts an attack before you can patch, or you can completely open up about it and let users (and malicious hackers!) deal with the risk as they see fit. There really isn't a useful middle ground.
Seriously, who cares about the lame camera. The CPU and display are what's cool here.
Is the entire moon composed of nothing but moon dust?
"Sorry Mr. Columbus, we'll have to go back to Spain. All there is on the beach where the ship landed is sand, and we can't build shelter with sand."
Don't forget Nintendo's "Playchoice 10", their arcade game system that was actually an oh-so-cunningly disguised NES.
Uh, right.
"Okay! Alpha team approach the base from the west! Beta, provide sniper cover and be prepared to fall back on defense!"
<pause>
--
TeamLeader says: "Hooray! Alpo tea map roach debase Rama vest. Bay techno wide sighter cove randy pee pear two sell bacon desense!"
--
Congrats, you are the most perfect software developer to have ever walked the face of the earth. Either that, or you simply aren't experienced enough to know that all software has bugs. And when you get to the enterprise scale of software, developing good software is very, very hard. You need *good* (good == top 5%ile, based on my experience) coders, *good* architects, *good* testing and *good* project management. Getting any ONE of those is rare!
Take the Linux kernel. I think there's a pretty good bunch of smart people working on that. I think they care about the quality of their code. I think they appreciate correctness and elegance. And *every single version* of the kernel has had bugs. Why is that?
If programmers as a whole stopped thinking along the "bugs are inevitable" line ...
The average programmer should care more about the quality of his work. Duh. That's a feel-good tautology. It's not that easy.
No, this is the environment that Sega knows they have been and ARE successful in.
This is only about introducing the Xbox as another arcade hardware platform for the company, not a change in their strategy. I imagine they'll use Xbox hardware for the "commodity" games, and they'll continue to use their custom hardware for the "A" games.
Hey! You left out Pulaski!
They were probably hoping to follow the success of photo sticker machines in Japan.
You have to use www.polaroid.com.
If Kodak's SX-70 technology was such a threat, it would be on the market, not polaroid's "laughable" design.
I'd say you have no clue what you're talking about. Polaroid sued Kodak for nearly a billion dollars over patent infringement.
But then the lawyers came to the rescue! Yay!
Exactly. You've missed the point entirely, and in the process managed to drive the home the point of the original post: People watch CNN because CNN shows you what you want to see, as opposed to the truth.
It's more palatable, more agreeable, easier on the eyes and easier on the mind. It's designed to be all those things. And consequently, reporting the objective truth becomes a secondary goal.
Lucasart's first two games, released in 1984, were Ballblazer and Rescue on Fractalus. Rescue on Fractalus had a fractally generated landscape, in realtime, on 8 bit machines, almost 20 years ago.
What is the "faith" of the religion? It all seems pretty self-evident to me, requiring no faith at all. The force is (in the context of the movies) an entirely real, scientifically provable phenomena, right down to the disappointingly biological midichlorians introduced in Episode One.
I don't recall the question of God ever being brought up in the movies. Is "Jedi" ever referred to in the movies explicitly as a religion?
Only halfway. While distance is kilometers, and gas is litres, we still for the most part measure our height in feet & inches, and our weight in pounds. Construction still uses feet & inches. Temperature is still reckoned by many people in Fahrenheit, though that is changing.
Um, last I checked, the US did that too.
It's called supersampling, and it's how anti-aliased fonts work today. I don't think there's much point to doing "FSAA" on the desktop. It makes sense for arbitrary angled-polygon-style graphics, where you're blending edge detail. But desktops are generally generated as bitmaps, which would only get blurry with AA.
'Hercules' should be in there somewhere too. It becames a defacto standard for hi-res (720x348!) graphics.
Why don't manufacturers use a simple naming convention instead of these hideously long acronyms
Outside of marketing literature, I haven't heard anything past "VGA" used very often in real life. People usually say either the exact res ("ten-twenty-four by seven-sixty-eight"), abbreviated res ("ten by seven"), or just the horizontal res ("ten-twenty-four"). I usually use the latter.
Yeah! Just think: if WE'RE jealous of this phone, and THEY'RE jealous about the power & water that we take for granted, just think how incredibly jealous they must be about this phone!
You'd be THE MAN in Ethiopia with one of these!
Specialization is for insects.
- Robert A. Heinlein
No, they're supposed to close down the site and go back to working at McDonalds.
I'm astonished by how many people express this silly notion that sites deserve to stay running forever, like they're entitled to the sort of money that they made off of idiot investors 3 years ago.
Face it people, the economics of the web was ALL WRONG, and it's not going to be fixed by tweaking the old model with techniques like "enforcing" ad views. Things haven't gone down to bad from the old normal -- they've gone down to normal from the old completely out of whack high.
Given the fact that money earned from web sites is so little, I think the only thing that will allow a site to stay in the black now, is a change in the cost of running a site. I don't understand why bandwidth is still so expensive. FreeNet-style distributed systems could possibly change the economics of publishing data so that this cost is reduced.
One of the problems with the perceived performance of online advertising, is that it ALONE of all forms of advertising is measured by asking a very ambitious question: "Did the user see the ad and then immediately drop everything he's doing and run into the store and buy the product.". This would be an insane way to measure the performance of a Coca-Cola ad on a bus stop.
I think the biggest "problem" with online ads is that companies advertising are completely ignoring the secondary "mindshare" effect that is the goal of more traditional forms of ads. They don't see a clickthrough, and so they measure a zero effectiveness, when this probably isn't accurate.
Sounds elegant, but this wouldn't work for a large percentage of modern AV equipment.
The full functionality of neither my TV nor my VCR is available from the front panel of the unit. I HAVE to use a remote to adjust the picture settings on my TV, or program my VCR.
I suppose you could affix the remotes permanently to your entertainment center, and work them with the pole from the couch, though.