You can't swim or play basketball competitively and get paid enough to last your entire life, but that doesn't mean that people don't still take those as their career early on and still end up doing quite well and being happy after it ends. And most professional sports players are super-stars in the majors getting paid millions.
You can't live your entire life only thinking about what happens after you job ends.
Bad analogy. The piano is an instrument that has been around for centuries and one that you can measure yourself by players of past/future generations, we are talking about being the best at manipulating a computer program that won't be around in five years.
This is a blizzard game. They have ridiculously long (for computer games) playable lifespans, and have basically single-handedly established professional (rather than just competitive) RTS gaming as a viable full-time profession. Blizzard RTS's only start dying out when they get replaced by the next Blizzard RTS with similar mechanics, and many who are successful at StarCraft II were also very good at its predecessors StarCraft:Brood Wars and WarCraft III.
Exactly, and how many pianists out of all those who dedicate themselves make 6 figure incomes.
Wanting your child to be the best, or for your child to want to make their parents proud is only a natural need for a parent/child relationship.
To honor your parents (and ancestors) is a rather deep rooted thing in East and South Asian cultures. Parents need to define what is and isn't honoring - being a slave to online gaming is hardly something to aspire to.
Obviously, this Derren Brown video is a little dramatic and not very scientific, but the fact remains that we humans draw a lot of our "spontaneous" creativity and "rational" decisions from our surroundings. You may think that you're immune to the effect, but regardless of the amount of truth in an ad for ACME brand frozen lasagna, the fact that Morgan Freeman is telling you that it is delicious and nutritious will have an effect on your decision 3 months from now when you're deciding which brand you trust more.
Yes....this is a known thing that big companies do. Google and Microsoft both spend a ton keeping up a patent portfolio and a team of lawyers, not only to push people around if they need to, but also as a deterrent to being sued. If you follow the news, you'll see something like, Samsung sues Google for violation on 52 patents, and google countersues for infringement on 41 of its own patents.
There's even Intellectual Ventures, which offers their protection as a service. They don't make any products; they just hoard patents and sue people.
I'm saying you can't get an edge by playing nice in an environment like this, at least if you get to any decent size others can coerce you into settling for money if you don't have teeth of your own.
Anyway, your definition is stupid. If no one dies, it's not a war? There is so much grey area. What if people are maimed? Bleeding? What if country A bombs a warehouse and the only injuries are blindness, deafness, or bruised people? What if you destroy enough food to cause a famine? Nobody directly died. And does that make all assassinations war? What if the US just parked 400 tanks in the capital of some tiny country with no military in order to get unconditional surrender, or bloodlessly threatened the leader of a nation?
How about you think about the real sense of the word war, where it's one nation's making major moves against another nation in an area where they have no jurisdiction to do so, in a way that greatly harms and threatens that other nation? And considering the powder keg that is the Middle East and Iran-US relations, don't you think both nations will basically consider Stuxnet something serious. Even if it's not the same as dropping bombs on a city, it's at least on the level of running live exercises on your border. Nobody is casually throwing around words by using "war."
And these security holes and certs were hardly any more insecure than any other OS. Stop MS bashing when you have no idea what you are talking about.
The question is that will they then proceed to get their pants sued off because they have no teeth in the form of patents and lawyers. Not saying it's fair, but the reality of the patent system in the US right now is that it is a business weapon that can be used to pressure companies to license patents they don't need, or to devalue a stock, or a number of other things.
Yes, if everyone played nice, we probably wouldn't need very many patent lawyers at all, but as things are,companies do need to protect themselves.
How is calling it one continent, Eurasia trying to distinguish between Europe and Asia? And how is calling the entire continent "Asia" better than calling it Eurasia?
The underlying problems don't arise out of an industry-wide antipathy. If anything the reality is opposite, the entire industry in quite interested in the fundamentals of security.
Whoa, I'm blown away by the concept that there are compromises that establish a balance of different needs due to budget limitations. That never affects anything but security.
Stop being stupid. Sarcasm doesn't make you right, and my point is quite clear, but I see I need to spell it out for you anyway.
There IS industry-wide apathy, and the reason is because higher-ups benefit more from pushing features that edge out the competition next month than they do from long-term investment in security that might save them two years from now, which is what they are doing. If the managers/CEOs at a small car maker could save money by making one identical key/lock across all their cars, then they would, and they would jump ship before someone discovered and exploited the problem, after they took their big raise for saving the company big bucks...in the short term.
Yes, computers are powerful, but that doesn't mean there NEED to be security flaws, especially not at the level we're seeing them for most software. For example: sanitizing your inputs for SQL queries doesn't get rid of any functionality for your application, but not doing so is one of the biggest reasons people lose money. However, you could easily have PHP automatically sanitize form requests so no database special-characters are passed on, and have programmers set a flag to take user-input literally when it's necessary. This default would work wonderfully in 99% of all PHP web applications that take user-input. Such safeguards aren't implemented because they take time and money to implement in a time where we everyone is tripping over their own feet to race to be the first with new features.
I'd say ask IT security people. Apple is hardly a good example since their reasons for their walled garden model has been more about what makes money than what makes things secure. It's been very successful at creating a certain experience for the users, but only recently has it taken up the slack as far as security goes, so I feel Apple deserves the criticisms it receives.
I disagree. While what you're saying COULD be true, everything I've heard from everyone from programmers to IT employees point to the opposite. As if the news weren't enough. Sure, a security firm getting hacked might be an instance of "if someone wants to hack you badly enough, they will," but many more problems arise because management makes the decisions about where to spend resources, and they're always pushing edge for features because that is where the money is.
What are you saying? That modern languages aren't powerful because you can't perform buffer overruns? You realize that even if your statement that more power --> more exploit were true, there are a million other vulnerabilities out there besides buffer overruns, which is a feature completely useless for the vast majority of programming.
Yeah, and tools have safety standards too. Just because you accept the risk of a car crash when you buy a car doesn't mean you have to accept the risk of your car spontaneously exploding.
More importantly, if you're writing PHP code that costs money when you have an XSS vulnerability, that means you're responsible for your users' information. So, no, if you want to leave your PHP open to XSS, do it where it doesn't add to the cost of crappy security. And do it in a way that doesn't result in your site being hijacked to serve malware and spam for months on end before you notice.
You're not an island. Personal responsibility means you don't blame other people for stuff that's your own responsibility (like getting hacked); it doesn't mean you can just neglect the responsibility of protecting you customers' or boss's data, or the network that your share.
The only reason people are moving in that direction is that it's already built into the legislation. If the law said that governments could open your snail mail without a warrant, people are not going to start suddenly encrypting their letters to each other.
The same thing is happening now: the law allows governments to obtain relatively private correspondences with relatively little probable cause. People haven't started caring less about their privacy; the governments are simply better at disguising the purpose and reach of introduced legislation.
And don't think that you are protecting yourself by not using social media. Do you really think it matters that you don't post your information online if most of your friends and family do because they don't know any better? Fixing the laws or keeping these sorts of things in TFA from becoming law are the only way to reverse the trend.
We Americans also happen to be the best at exporting our culture, especially the stupid, lazy parts, so you may laugh at us now, but in 5-10 years, expect to find yourself doing the exact same thing.
No, I think it would be like the agent just selling the list of bookmarks.
Dish is just selling the hardware and feature that exists on the hardware. If this weren't the case, and they had an agreement with Fox, Fox could just shut them out of that agreement.
This article is news not because it was crazy accomplishment, but because it's a new tool/building block that opens up enormous new possibilities for creativity in Minecraft. Sure, if someone had ported Tetris as a mod into Minecraft, you would have a point, but this guy ported a processor, and that is something certainly worth getting excited about.
I do no think you comprehend the difference in scale between the molecular level and anything remotely recognizable or interesting to us. If your basic water molecule is 275 pm, and anything complex enough to be recognizable as "wood" would be something like 0.1 mm, you'd need something like 3 million building blocks. In addition, you're asking for many more degrees of freedom for position/angle of your basic building blocks as well as interactions between a much greater number of blocks. Here is something that could give you a better sense of how small things are:
Even if all of this were possible to simulate on our dinky little home computers, the time and effort it would take to actually build anything interesting would be far too much for almost every body.
Slashdot Mirror
You can't swim or play basketball competitively and get paid enough to last your entire life, but that doesn't mean that people don't still take those as their career early on and still end up doing quite well and being happy after it ends. And most professional sports players are super-stars in the majors getting paid millions.
You can't live your entire life only thinking about what happens after you job ends.
Bad analogy. The piano is an instrument that has been around for centuries and one that you can measure yourself by players of past/future generations, we are talking about being the best at manipulating a computer program that won't be around in five years.
This is a blizzard game. They have ridiculously long (for computer games) playable lifespans, and have basically single-handedly established professional (rather than just competitive) RTS gaming as a viable full-time profession. Blizzard RTS's only start dying out when they get replaced by the next Blizzard RTS with similar mechanics, and many who are successful at StarCraft II were also very good at its predecessors StarCraft:Brood Wars and WarCraft III.
Exactly, and how many pianists out of all those who dedicate themselves make 6 figure incomes.
Wanting your child to be the best, or for your child to want to make their parents proud is only a natural need for a parent/child relationship.
To honor your parents (and ancestors) is a rather deep rooted thing in East and South Asian cultures. Parents need to define what is and isn't honoring - being a slave to online gaming is hardly something to aspire to.
Bold claim. What's your reasoning?
You give yourself and human brains too much credit. It doesn't take that much to get into our subconscious, and into our decision making process.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyQjr1YL0zg
Obviously, this Derren Brown video is a little dramatic and not very scientific, but the fact remains that we humans draw a lot of our "spontaneous" creativity and "rational" decisions from our surroundings. You may think that you're immune to the effect, but regardless of the amount of truth in an ad for ACME brand frozen lasagna, the fact that Morgan Freeman is telling you that it is delicious and nutritious will have an effect on your decision 3 months from now when you're deciding which brand you trust more.
And imagine how susceptible kids are.
It's wires and electricity, not nuclear waste. By your logic, maybe we should be afraid of balloons that we rub on our hair too.
And you don't need to be an electrical engineer to get a basic understanding of the difference between static charge and radiation.
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/content/kitchenscience/exp/lighting-bulbs-without-wires/
And no one is trolling you. People are calling you out for your stupid, uninformed, FUD-mongering.
Why not use it?
Didn't GP just say, "That has security holes u can drive a truck thru and MS has ended support." Those are great reasons not to use it.
Probably write good code in the first place.
Yes....this is a known thing that big companies do. Google and Microsoft both spend a ton keeping up a patent portfolio and a team of lawyers, not only to push people around if they need to, but also as a deterrent to being sued. If you follow the news, you'll see something like, Samsung sues Google for violation on 52 patents, and google countersues for infringement on 41 of its own patents.
There's even Intellectual Ventures, which offers their protection as a service. They don't make any products; they just hoard patents and sue people.
I'm saying you can't get an edge by playing nice in an environment like this, at least if you get to any decent size others can coerce you into settling for money if you don't have teeth of your own.
Too bad the US made a statement that it would consider such actions an act of war.
Source:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304563104576355623135782718.html
Anyway, your definition is stupid. If no one dies, it's not a war? There is so much grey area. What if people are maimed? Bleeding? What if country A bombs a warehouse and the only injuries are blindness, deafness, or bruised people? What if you destroy enough food to cause a famine? Nobody directly died. And does that make all assassinations war? What if the US just parked 400 tanks in the capital of some tiny country with no military in order to get unconditional surrender, or bloodlessly threatened the leader of a nation?
How about you think about the real sense of the word war, where it's one nation's making major moves against another nation in an area where they have no jurisdiction to do so, in a way that greatly harms and threatens that other nation? And considering the powder keg that is the Middle East and Iran-US relations, don't you think both nations will basically consider Stuxnet something serious. Even if it's not the same as dropping bombs on a city, it's at least on the level of running live exercises on your border. Nobody is casually throwing around words by using "war."
And these security holes and certs were hardly any more insecure than any other OS. Stop MS bashing when you have no idea what you are talking about.
The question is that will they then proceed to get their pants sued off because they have no teeth in the form of patents and lawyers. Not saying it's fair, but the reality of the patent system in the US right now is that it is a business weapon that can be used to pressure companies to license patents they don't need, or to devalue a stock, or a number of other things.
Yes, if everyone played nice, we probably wouldn't need very many patent lawyers at all, but as things are,companies do need to protect themselves.
I doubt it. That's not really a priority for most buyers.
How is calling it one continent, Eurasia trying to distinguish between Europe and Asia? And how is calling the entire continent "Asia" better than calling it Eurasia?
It doesn't really break the flow as badly as an off-topic post.
The underlying problems don't arise out of an industry-wide antipathy. If anything the reality is opposite, the entire industry in quite interested in the fundamentals of security.
Whoa, I'm blown away by the concept that there are compromises that establish a balance of different needs due to budget limitations. That never affects anything but security.
Stop being stupid. Sarcasm doesn't make you right, and my point is quite clear, but I see I need to spell it out for you anyway.
There IS industry-wide apathy, and the reason is because higher-ups benefit more from pushing features that edge out the competition next month than they do from long-term investment in security that might save them two years from now, which is what they are doing. If the managers/CEOs at a small car maker could save money by making one identical key/lock across all their cars, then they would, and they would jump ship before someone discovered and exploited the problem, after they took their big raise for saving the company big bucks...in the short term.
Yes, computers are powerful, but that doesn't mean there NEED to be security flaws, especially not at the level we're seeing them for most software. For example: sanitizing your inputs for SQL queries doesn't get rid of any functionality for your application, but not doing so is one of the biggest reasons people lose money. However, you could easily have PHP automatically sanitize form requests so no database special-characters are passed on, and have programmers set a flag to take user-input literally when it's necessary. This default would work wonderfully in 99% of all PHP web applications that take user-input. Such safeguards aren't implemented because they take time and money to implement in a time where we everyone is tripping over their own feet to race to be the first with new features.
I'd say ask IT security people. Apple is hardly a good example since their reasons for their walled garden model has been more about what makes money than what makes things secure. It's been very successful at creating a certain experience for the users, but only recently has it taken up the slack as far as security goes, so I feel Apple deserves the criticisms it receives.
I disagree. While what you're saying COULD be true, everything I've heard from everyone from programmers to IT employees point to the opposite. As if the news weren't enough. Sure, a security firm getting hacked might be an instance of "if someone wants to hack you badly enough, they will," but many more problems arise because management makes the decisions about where to spend resources, and they're always pushing edge for features because that is where the money is.
What are you saying? That modern languages aren't powerful because you can't perform buffer overruns? You realize that even if your statement that more power --> more exploit were true, there are a million other vulnerabilities out there besides buffer overruns, which is a feature completely useless for the vast majority of programming.
Yeah, and tools have safety standards too. Just because you accept the risk of a car crash when you buy a car doesn't mean you have to accept the risk of your car spontaneously exploding.
More importantly, if you're writing PHP code that costs money when you have an XSS vulnerability, that means you're responsible for your users' information. So, no, if you want to leave your PHP open to XSS, do it where it doesn't add to the cost of crappy security. And do it in a way that doesn't result in your site being hijacked to serve malware and spam for months on end before you notice.
You're not an island. Personal responsibility means you don't blame other people for stuff that's your own responsibility (like getting hacked); it doesn't mean you can just neglect the responsibility of protecting you customers' or boss's data, or the network that your share.
The only reason people are moving in that direction is that it's already built into the legislation. If the law said that governments could open your snail mail without a warrant, people are not going to start suddenly encrypting their letters to each other.
The same thing is happening now: the law allows governments to obtain relatively private correspondences with relatively little probable cause. People haven't started caring less about their privacy; the governments are simply better at disguising the purpose and reach of introduced legislation.
And don't think that you are protecting yourself by not using social media. Do you really think it matters that you don't post your information online if most of your friends and family do because they don't know any better? Fixing the laws or keeping these sorts of things in TFA from becoming law are the only way to reverse the trend.
We Americans also happen to be the best at exporting our culture, especially the stupid, lazy parts, so you may laugh at us now, but in 5-10 years, expect to find yourself doing the exact same thing.
No, I think it would be like the agent just selling the list of bookmarks.
Dish is just selling the hardware and feature that exists on the hardware. If this weren't the case, and they had an agreement with Fox, Fox could just shut them out of that agreement.
This article is news not because it was crazy accomplishment, but because it's a new tool/building block that opens up enormous new possibilities for creativity in Minecraft. Sure, if someone had ported Tetris as a mod into Minecraft, you would have a point, but this guy ported a processor, and that is something certainly worth getting excited about.
I do no think you comprehend the difference in scale between the molecular level and anything remotely recognizable or interesting to us. If your basic water molecule is 275 pm, and anything complex enough to be recognizable as "wood" would be something like 0.1 mm, you'd need something like 3 million building blocks. In addition, you're asking for many more degrees of freedom for position/angle of your basic building blocks as well as interactions between a much greater number of blocks. Here is something that could give you a better sense of how small things are:
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/begin/cells/scale/
Even if all of this were possible to simulate on our dinky little home computers, the time and effort it would take to actually build anything interesting would be far too much for almost every body.
That would be true if driving a truck were as easy as driving a car. If you've ever tried, you'd probably realize very quickly this is not true.
You're right about one thing: you didn't RTFA.