No, it isn't. Accessibility is a concession security types make. If a thing is DDoSd, the security is actually improved. The PHBs will whine and cry, though.
Have you guys seen theverge.com ? For a bunch of geeks who left whatever site the left, in some sort of righteous exodus, they sure put together one shitty looking site. I don't think I'll ever go back there again.
Total visual cacophony. Or cacorasi. I DON'T KNOW GREEK.
Oh, you're recompressing it? Enjoy the additional quality loss.
These days, the codecs are good enough that if you use the same one at the same bit rate, it will result in almost no loss of quality, as the first compression removed all the "hard to compress" parts.
Absolutely incorrect. The first encode failed at the "hard to compress part", and introduced all sorts of noise. The second encode will try to retain that noise and will fail, and will introduce additional noise.
No. It's DRM because it controls when I can watch it, removes time shifting, locks down content even when the DRM company is ut of business or no longer supported. Make backups difficult, and removes consumer choice.
THAT is why it's DRM. I should be able to record wherever I want and then watch it for my personal used when ever and where ever I want.
I really ahve no desire to steal anyopnes content, but I will. If I miss an episode of family guy, I'll go look for it and if it isn't available for streaming, I'll find a rip.
I would perfer it was all online with revenue so the creatirs can get money. I also wish I could pay for the option of getting what every has been on TV without commercials for a fee.
IN both cases, there is one critical factor: It has to have what I want.
If the media companies would realized that competing by locking there own content, have there own special place to view the content is costing them money without much of a return. Then maybe they can get together, and create a Common Online TV Repository. Compete with the quality of the shows, not on what is on other channels.
It's really simple, can be done, doesn't require magic technology and would make them money.
You disagree with the security model. That does not mean it is not a security model. It is doing exactly what it was intended to do - prevent you from copying shit, time shifting, skipping ads, watching in certain countries, or accessing content when certain parties have died off.
The fact that it's a shitty security model for the consumer doesn't mean it's not a security model.
DId I say it was? I don't have anything against DRM for video rental; in that context I'd even call it sensible. My point is that if (as seems to be the case) the only traction Silverlight has got is in playing video, that niche would be much better served by a smaller and far less general plugin.
Do you not understand the concept of "attack surface"? Do you not think that a general-purpose platform maybe has a larger one than, say, a dedicated video player? Or are you just trolling, as your tone suggests?
You referred to video with DRM as being "encumbered", and yet this post now says such a scheme is "sensible". Way to backpedal on that vitriol. And Silverlight is used for far, far more than video, just as Flash was. The view of Silverlight that you present is myopic and highlights the fact that you do not understand it.
"Attack surface"? Making the browser do everything that Silverlight does increases the browser's attack surface just as much as adding the Silverlight plugin does. When you have plugins, you can disable them individually, or only use the ones you want. When your entire browser is bloated to include features you don't want or need, then you're fucked. This is the direction modern browsers are going, and it is bad.
Of course, you are too focused on video to see this, and you're probably already typing your "OMFG You're against HTML5?!" post. Not only is HTML5 far more than <video>, the <video> aspect of HTML5 is mostly good. The spec fails because it doesn't specify a codec, but it works. It doesn't work when you want DRM, but it works. It doesn't present a larger "attack surface" in and of itself because your browser won't be relying on a system codec to do the job (unless you're using MS's plugin that makes FF work with H.264, of course, but hey - we're back to a plugin to make shit work).
The problem lies with people like you. People who think that plugins are inherently bad because they're slow, insecure, or not available on all platforms. The only valid point of contention is shit not being available on all platforms, but guess what - the people making the content and the people making the plugin cover every platform they care about. If you're not on that list, either buy a device to get on that list or just deal with it - you probably didn't want that content anyway. Performance and security are not intrinsic to the plugin model - any browser with the same capabilities would have the same amount of shit to deal with in those departments.
The idea that a general-purpose applet platform, with all the attendant security risks, is worth keeping simply to play DRM-encumbered video strikes me as utterly daft. It's like keeping a rabid rottweiler in your kid's playroom so that they'll have something to draw.
Silverlight is not just for video. Nether is Flash. Silverlight's DRM can be harnessed by anyone seeking to make (get this!) secure applications.
When it's something you don't understand, it's an "attendant security risk". When it's security that prevents you from stealing shit, it's DRM.
The problem is that your copy is now somewhere around 1.1 Gbps. Oh, you're recompressing it? Enjoy the additional quality loss. Lossless recompression will still result in an unwieldy, gargantuan size.
Nintendo made a loss. The 3DS tanked and Wii sales are dropping.
Nintendo has made huge amounts of profits off of the Wii. And huge amounts of profits off of the DS. The 3DS did not tank by any measure. It sold more units in the first X months than the original DS.
The video game industry operates on generations, not fiscal years. Furthermore, the bulk of Nintendo's "loss" is on paper (vs previous forecasts), and the main cause is the strong yen and failing dollar/euro.
If you stir pots of rice, you're cooking it wrong.
Rice is cooked by soaking it in water. Typically, we heat the water to increase the speed at which it cooks and the amount of water the rice absorbs. We typically heat the water indirectly by heating the pot itself. When you heat the pot, you risk burning rice that comes into contact with the pot. When the rice burns, the sugars crystallize, and rice becomes stuck to the bottom of the pot. You absolutely should stir a pot of rice.
Now if you're referring to an automatic rice cooker, many actually recommend that you stir the rice in between the cooking cycle, and others actually use a double boiler method to cook the rice. These you don't have to stir, but they're not pots.
Relaxation is a meaningful use of time. Not to the extent people play Angry Birds (or other video games) or that there aren't better ways (girls come to mind... oh wait this is/., nevermind
This truly is slashdot, isn't it? And you truly are a slashdotter. If you had any interactions with females you would know that relaxation is not something that happens in their presence.
It would be fantastic if all of that time (100M hrs?!?!) was recaptured into some meaningful or valuable effort. Even if it was a stupid game maybe having that effort stored into stirring pots of rice for hungry children in the 3rd world would be a good use of time.
99% of that time is spent multitasking anyway. How much more productive can you be while taking a dump?
Here's how it goes: Sit on the shitter. Grab phone out of pants pocket. Check email. Read all tweets/social media bullshit updates. Play all turns on Wordfeud (or Words with Friends, if you like buggy, inferior shit). Load up Angry Birds because there's nothing else to do. Play until you're done shitting, AND you've gotten 3 stars on the current level.
If a waking lifetime is around 450,000 hours then at 1,200,000,000 hours Angry Birds consumes nearly 2,700 lifetimes per year.
Tetris was a Soviet plot to undermine American productivity (and has consumed orders of magnitude more time and money than any other game). The Swedes just stole a free flash game and drew some pigs and birds.
Isn't there a limit where it becomes harassment? It's one thing if they have enough evidence to get a warrant - it's another if they are fishing blindly.
A very low limit, actually. But you have to be female to be a victim. A common tactic of drug dealers and other such thugs is to have their current girlfriend get a restraining order against the cop who's investigating them.
Notice someone sniffing around. Find out their name. Have a female stay with you. Have the female file for a temporary restraining order. It will be granted for no reason. They always are. Next time the piggie is snooping around, you call up the station and threaten to sue sue sue.
The investigation is set back weeks, typically, and you're free to execute whatever deals you had lined up and then shuffle product and people among different properties.
So why did they not get a warrant? Either they have a good reason to get one, or this is bullshit.
It's h4rr4r being a derpus, yet again. They get a warrant only when they need to. For tracking people's cars via GPS, they don't need to. That will hopefully change soon. They may or may not have a warrant covering other aspects of their investigation.
I might as well ask you why you didn't get your post notarized.
You also might find they raise your bill after you switch. They raised my rates a month later claiming I had a bunch of unreported accidents. Turns out the CLUE report had the wrong driver listed, so they counted all the accidents twice. Once when I told them and once when CLUE told them.
The old hypothetical monkeys-at-typewriters eventually banging out a Shakespeare play describes this. Essentially the monkeys are just a bunch of random character generators. Even if they don't write Shakespeare, they'll eventually stumble across some sort of pattern purely by random chance.
Even though the pattern is not intentional, a pattern can be formed.
I guarantee you that the noise this guy shat out has more identifiable patterns in it than what you'd get from any RNG not used by Sony. Saying something has no "pattern" is absurd - a pattern is not just something that repeats. A pattern is any recognizable characteristic of a thing. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 has no repetition but it is obviously a patten. sfhsl;ga;sgb has no obvious sequence or repetition, but it is obviously just me spamming on the keyboard.
Anything that is deemed "mathematically random" nowadays is, in fact, so very finely tuned to appear random that it is the exact opposite of random.
The pattern of this guy's work is, in fact "Apparently "random" noise with no obvious repetition or sequences".
So even though the source is closed it's not really "closed" because you know the basics about how it works? The mental gymnastics you Google fanbois go through to defend them art all costs is hilarious.
So much truth. I guess.doc isn't really closed either, huh?
Google is the king of search, and Android can't search for files by filename. If you have a ringtone named "smw.mp3" on your phone, you can't find it by searching for Mario.mp3. You can't find it by searching for smw You can't find it by searching for *.mp3.
You can find it by searching for certain metadata (ID3 tags in this case). "Super Mario World" might return a hit. "Koji Kondo" might return a hit.
If you want to search for files by something as bizarre as their fucking file name, you have to use a 3rd party application, or just mount the fucking SD card in your computer.
Of course, MS isn't much better with Windows Vista and 7 - shit takes ages to search non-indexed locations even if you have a pair of SSDs in RAID 0 and specifically use the file: filter to search for a specific file name only. And it'll take about 8 years if you're searching a network location.
VMware has a couple of really BIG problems in their platform.
1. Their management tools are windows centric and so is Virtual Center for that matter 2. Their licensing model is confusing as hell and requires a spreadsheet to figure out what you need without overpaying 3. They have so many products that it gets downright confusing to determine which one works for your purpose. 4. They use "old school" sales tactics that just don't work for more modern companies.
Your first point is slowly becoming less of an issue. With vSphere 5 you can now run a Linux appliance for Virtual Center which will do for starters, and it doesn't even require (or support) an external database. Hopefully this will expand to be the only way to get VC, but they'll expand it to use a DB when you get big enough, and make plugins work with it. There's also supposed to be a '75%' web client, e.g. good enough for 75% of tasks and a full web client in the next major update, (5.5?) That's how VMView has been for at least the last major release too, the previous might have been web too, I can't remember.
They have a lot of products because they do a lot of things... regular old server virtualization, enterprise grade server virtualization with HA, desktop (I want a test box), desktop (VDI), disaster recovery (with a replicating san), disaster recovery (without a replicating SAN)... If you don't know what you want to do, looking at their product sheet won't help you any.
I'll give you that vRAM is evil and sales people are douches, but isn't that one a given?
I defy you to go to VMware's website and tell me what the current version of ESXi is, what the free license includes, what the cost is for an academic institution that wants the cheapest licensed version, what features that includes - with specific descriptions, not just names and vague "Enable more robust blah blah" horseshit, and what exactly you would need to download.
The site is intentionally a mess in order to trick people into buying more than they need. It also makes getting updates and changelogs near impossible because you never know what version of what shittily-named product you have. They recently went to ESXi 5, and there was a press release that touted hundreds of new features, and explained about 5 of them in the vaguest detail possible. There are links to various pages on their site to learn more about the hundreds of other new features, but that information simply doesn't exist. All you can get is the shitty presser.
The short answer is "Yes, just install it with no license.", but the real answer is there is no fucking specific license for a free version, so there is no guarantee it will remain an option, or that anupdate won't break it, or that your trial license won't be invalidated at some point, or that features won't be turned off for no reason as they did when going from ESX 3 to ESX 4 / ESXi 4.
VMware is fast approaching IBM and Cisco levels of intentional ambiguity. All they need is a shitty "brand awareness" marketing campaign that doesn't feature a product or service, but shows school kids in china teleconferencing with school kids in the US, with no lag, in the middle of the day at both locations.
If they ask you to implement a common algorithm, and you can't do it without having to copy it from Google search results, they don't want you. Why can't you understand that?
I'd prefer the candidate who said "I dunno, I'd just grab it from Google" over the candidate who invented the damn algorithm. Google has a better memory.
Slashdot Mirror
Accessibility is an aspect of security
No, it isn't.
Accessibility is a concession security types make.
If a thing is DDoSd, the security is actually improved.
The PHBs will whine and cry, though.
Where do you store the millions of STMs that you need to run them?
In the millions of molecular trunks, of course.
Have you guys seen theverge.com ?
For a bunch of geeks who left whatever site the left, in some sort of righteous exodus, they sure put together one shitty looking site.
I don't think I'll ever go back there again.
Total visual cacophony. Or cacorasi. I DON'T KNOW GREEK.
Oh, you're recompressing it? Enjoy the additional quality loss.
These days, the codecs are good enough that if you use the same one at the same bit rate, it will result in almost no loss of quality, as the first compression removed all the "hard to compress" parts.
Absolutely incorrect.
The first encode failed at the "hard to compress part", and introduced all sorts of noise.
The second encode will try to retain that noise and will fail, and will introduce additional noise.
No. It's DRM because it controls when I can watch it, removes time shifting, locks down content even when the DRM company is ut of business or no longer supported.
Make backups difficult, and removes consumer choice.
THAT is why it's DRM. I should be able to record wherever I want and then watch it for my personal used when ever and where ever I want.
I really ahve no desire to steal anyopnes content, but I will. If I miss an episode of family guy, I'll go look for it and if it isn't available for streaming, I'll find a rip.
I would perfer it was all online with revenue so the creatirs can get money. I also wish I could pay for the option of getting what every has been on TV without commercials for a fee.
IN both cases, there is one critical factor: It has to have what I want.
If the media companies would realized that competing by locking there own content, have there own special place to view the content is costing them money without much of a return. Then maybe they can get together, and create a Common Online TV Repository. Compete with the quality of the shows, not on what is on other channels.
It's really simple, can be done, doesn't require magic technology and would make them money.
You disagree with the security model. That does not mean it is not a security model.
It is doing exactly what it was intended to do - prevent you from copying shit, time shifting, skipping ads, watching in certain countries, or accessing content when certain parties have died off.
The fact that it's a shitty security model for the consumer doesn't mean it's not a security model.
DId I say it was? I don't have anything against DRM for video rental; in that context I'd even call it sensible. My point is that if (as seems to be the case) the only traction Silverlight has got is in playing video, that niche would be much better served by a smaller and far less general plugin.
Do you not understand the concept of "attack surface"? Do you not think that a general-purpose platform maybe has a larger one than, say, a dedicated video player? Or are you just trolling, as your tone suggests?
You referred to video with DRM as being "encumbered", and yet this post now says such a scheme is "sensible". Way to backpedal on that vitriol.
And Silverlight is used for far, far more than video, just as Flash was. The view of Silverlight that you present is myopic and highlights the fact that you do not understand it.
"Attack surface"? Making the browser do everything that Silverlight does increases the browser's attack surface just as much as adding the Silverlight plugin does.
When you have plugins, you can disable them individually, or only use the ones you want. When your entire browser is bloated to include features you don't want or need, then you're fucked. This is the direction modern browsers are going, and it is bad.
Of course, you are too focused on video to see this, and you're probably already typing your "OMFG You're against HTML5?!" post. Not only is HTML5 far more than <video>, the <video> aspect of HTML5 is mostly good. The spec fails because it doesn't specify a codec, but it works. It doesn't work when you want DRM, but it works. It doesn't present a larger "attack surface" in and of itself because your browser won't be relying on a system codec to do the job (unless you're using MS's plugin that makes FF work with H.264, of course, but hey - we're back to a plugin to make shit work).
The problem lies with people like you. People who think that plugins are inherently bad because they're slow, insecure, or not available on all platforms. The only valid point of contention is shit not being available on all platforms, but guess what - the people making the content and the people making the plugin cover every platform they care about. If you're not on that list, either buy a device to get on that list or just deal with it - you probably didn't want that content anyway. Performance and security are not intrinsic to the plugin model - any browser with the same capabilities would have the same amount of shit to deal with in those departments.
The idea that a general-purpose applet platform, with all the attendant security risks, is worth keeping simply to play DRM-encumbered video strikes me as utterly daft. It's like keeping a rabid rottweiler in your kid's playroom so that they'll have something to draw.
Silverlight is not just for video. Nether is Flash.
Silverlight's DRM can be harnessed by anyone seeking to make (get this!) secure applications.
When it's something you don't understand, it's an "attendant security risk".
When it's security that prevents you from stealing shit, it's DRM.
The problem is that your copy is now somewhere around 1.1 Gbps.
Oh, you're recompressing it? Enjoy the additional quality loss.
Lossless recompression will still result in an unwieldy, gargantuan size.
first porst
Yours was actually the second post.
You got the first failure, though.
Nintendo made a loss. The 3DS tanked and Wii sales are dropping.
Nintendo has made huge amounts of profits off of the Wii. And huge amounts of profits off of the DS.
The 3DS did not tank by any measure. It sold more units in the first X months than the original DS.
The video game industry operates on generations, not fiscal years. Furthermore, the bulk of Nintendo's "loss" is on paper (vs previous forecasts), and the main cause is the strong yen and failing dollar/euro.
If you stir pots of rice, you're cooking it wrong.
Rice is cooked by soaking it in water. Typically, we heat the water to increase the speed at which it cooks and the amount of water the rice absorbs.
We typically heat the water indirectly by heating the pot itself.
When you heat the pot, you risk burning rice that comes into contact with the pot.
When the rice burns, the sugars crystallize, and rice becomes stuck to the bottom of the pot.
You absolutely should stir a pot of rice.
Now if you're referring to an automatic rice cooker, many actually recommend that you stir the rice in between the cooking cycle, and others actually use a double boiler method to cook the rice. These you don't have to stir, but they're not pots.
Relaxation is a meaningful use of time. Not to the extent people play Angry Birds (or other video games) or that there aren't better ways (girls come to mind... oh wait this is /., nevermind
This truly is slashdot, isn't it? And you truly are a slashdotter.
If you had any interactions with females you would know that relaxation is not something that happens in their presence.
It would be fantastic if all of that time (100M hrs?!?!) was recaptured into some meaningful or valuable effort. Even if it was a stupid game maybe having that effort stored into stirring pots of rice for hungry children in the 3rd world would be a good use of time.
99% of that time is spent multitasking anyway.
How much more productive can you be while taking a dump?
Here's how it goes:
Sit on the shitter.
Grab phone out of pants pocket.
Check email.
Read all tweets/social media bullshit updates.
Play all turns on Wordfeud (or Words with Friends, if you like buggy, inferior shit).
Load up Angry Birds because there's nothing else to do.
Play until you're done shitting, AND you've gotten 3 stars on the current level.
If a waking lifetime is around 450,000 hours then at 1,200,000,000 hours Angry Birds consumes nearly 2,700 lifetimes per year.
Tetris was a Soviet plot to undermine American productivity (and has consumed orders of magnitude more time and money than any other game).
The Swedes just stole a free flash game and drew some pigs and birds.
Politics, specifically foreign policy, is a dirty that sometimes needs to be done in private.
That is exactly why politics should never be done in private.
If you need to do it in private you're doing something wrong.
Which is why I always masturbate on the bus.
Isn't there a limit where it becomes harassment? It's one thing if they have enough evidence to get a warrant - it's another if they are fishing blindly.
A very low limit, actually. But you have to be female to be a victim.
A common tactic of drug dealers and other such thugs is to have their current girlfriend get a restraining order against the cop who's investigating them.
Notice someone sniffing around.
Find out their name.
Have a female stay with you.
Have the female file for a temporary restraining order. It will be granted for no reason. They always are.
Next time the piggie is snooping around, you call up the station and threaten to sue sue sue.
The investigation is set back weeks, typically, and you're free to execute whatever deals you had lined up and then shuffle product and people among different properties.
So why did they not get a warrant?
Either they have a good reason to get one, or this is bullshit.
It's h4rr4r being a derpus, yet again.
They get a warrant only when they need to. For tracking people's cars via GPS, they don't need to. That will hopefully change soon.
They may or may not have a warrant covering other aspects of their investigation.
I might as well ask you why you didn't get your post notarized.
You also might find they raise your bill after you switch. They raised my rates a month later claiming I had a bunch of unreported accidents. Turns out the CLUE report had the wrong driver listed, so they counted all the accidents twice. Once when I told them and once when CLUE told them.
GET A CLUE
A random number generator can generate patterns.
The old hypothetical monkeys-at-typewriters eventually banging out a Shakespeare play describes this. Essentially the monkeys are just a bunch of random character generators. Even if they don't write Shakespeare, they'll eventually stumble across some sort of pattern purely by random chance.
Even though the pattern is not intentional, a pattern can be formed.
I guarantee you that the noise this guy shat out has more identifiable patterns in it than what you'd get from any RNG not used by Sony.
Saying something has no "pattern" is absurd - a pattern is not just something that repeats. A pattern is any recognizable characteristic of a thing.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 has no repetition but it is obviously a patten.
sfhsl;ga;sgb has no obvious sequence or repetition, but it is obviously just me spamming on the keyboard.
Anything that is deemed "mathematically random" nowadays is, in fact, so very finely tuned to appear random that it is the exact opposite of random.
The pattern of this guy's work is, in fact "Apparently "random" noise with no obvious repetition or sequences".
Many of their commercials at the time featured similar bullshit.
I wrote an angry email to them, and they responded asking me to clarify my issue.
SIR, YOUR MARKETING DEPARTMENT CLAIMS TO BE ABLE TO VIOLATE THE LAWS OF PHYSICS.
Didn't hear back after that. But the commercials stopped!
First you get the money
Then you get the power
Then you get the penises^wdicks^wclicks
So even though the source is closed it's not really "closed" because you know the basics about how it works? The mental gymnastics you Google fanbois go through to defend them art all costs is hilarious.
So much truth. I guess .doc isn't really closed either, huh?
Google is the king of search, and Android can't search for files by filename.
If you have a ringtone named "smw.mp3" on your phone, you can't find it by searching for Mario.mp3.
You can't find it by searching for smw
You can't find it by searching for *.mp3.
You can find it by searching for certain metadata (ID3 tags in this case).
"Super Mario World" might return a hit. "Koji Kondo" might return a hit.
If you want to search for files by something as bizarre as their fucking file name, you have to use a 3rd party application, or just mount the fucking SD card in your computer.
Of course, MS isn't much better with Windows Vista and 7 - shit takes ages to search non-indexed locations even if you have a pair of SSDs in RAID 0 and specifically use the file: filter to search for a specific file name only. And it'll take about 8 years if you're searching a network location.
VMware has a couple of really BIG problems in their platform.
1. Their management tools are windows centric and so is Virtual Center for that matter
2. Their licensing model is confusing as hell and requires a spreadsheet to figure out what you need without overpaying
3. They have so many products that it gets downright confusing to determine which one works for your purpose.
4. They use "old school" sales tactics that just don't work for more modern companies.
Your first point is slowly becoming less of an issue. With vSphere 5 you can now run a Linux appliance for Virtual Center which will do for starters, and it doesn't even require (or support) an external database. Hopefully this will expand to be the only way to get VC, but they'll expand it to use a DB when you get big enough, and make plugins work with it. There's also supposed to be a '75%' web client, e.g. good enough for 75% of tasks and a full web client in the next major update, (5.5?) That's how VMView has been for at least the last major release too, the previous might have been web too, I can't remember.
They have a lot of products because they do a lot of things... regular old server virtualization, enterprise grade server virtualization with HA, desktop (I want a test box), desktop (VDI), disaster recovery (with a replicating san), disaster recovery (without a replicating SAN)... If you don't know what you want to do, looking at their product sheet won't help you any.
I'll give you that vRAM is evil and sales people are douches, but isn't that one a given?
I defy you to go to VMware's website and tell me what the current version of ESXi is, what the free license includes, what the cost is for an academic institution that wants the cheapest licensed version, what features that includes - with specific descriptions, not just names and vague "Enable more robust blah blah" horseshit, and what exactly you would need to download.
The site is intentionally a mess in order to trick people into buying more than they need. It also makes getting updates and changelogs near impossible because you never know what version of what shittily-named product you have. They recently went to ESXi 5, and there was a press release that touted hundreds of new features, and explained about 5 of them in the vaguest detail possible. There are links to various pages on their site to learn more about the hundreds of other new features, but that information simply doesn't exist. All you can get is the shitty presser.
And look at this fucking 10 page topic on "Is there a free version of ESXi 5?". http://communities.vmware.com/thread/320883
The short answer is "Yes, just install it with no license.", but the real answer is there is no fucking specific license for a free version, so there is no guarantee it will remain an option, or that anupdate won't break it, or that your trial license won't be invalidated at some point, or that features won't be turned off for no reason as they did when going from ESX 3 to ESX 4 / ESXi 4.
VMware is fast approaching IBM and Cisco levels of intentional ambiguity. All they need is a shitty "brand awareness" marketing campaign that doesn't feature a product or service, but shows school kids in china teleconferencing with school kids in the US, with no lag, in the middle of the day at both locations.
If they ask you to implement a common algorithm, and you can't do it without having to copy it from Google search results, they don't want you. Why can't you understand that?
I'd prefer the candidate who said "I dunno, I'd just grab it from Google" over the candidate who invented the damn algorithm.
Google has a better memory.