Yeah. For USD10k I'd prefer to have 20 x RPG-7s and extra ammo. Or 10 x RPG-29s plus extra ammo.
Whether I was on foot, in a tank or in a helicopter, the enemy having plenty of RPGs would scare me more than enemies in mobile metal coffins.
Getting those RPG-7s might be tricky, but supplies and logistics is part of winning wars. If you really had the cash, I'm sure you could find someone willing to sell you the RPGs even near a warzone.
Yeah, I thought it would be self-limiting since they'd take down Tor with the extra load, but if each bot becomes a Tor relay/end-point that is less likely to happen.
Many sites bock certain sort of access from Tor relays, so a few users might notice their infection because of that. However the sort who don't notice their machine doing bitcoin mining are unlikely to fall in that category. Google's search blocks some Tor IPs but I think that's if there's "bot like" usage of it, so if the number of Tor relays goes up more than the "bot like" usage of Google, the blocking might go down.
If there were no workers involved in the production of our most complex products, the potential price of these same productions would be little over the cost of the raw materials.
Think of the Chinese workers as robots. Are the prices a little over the cost of the raw materials?
Also think how you non-robots in the USA are doing in this "robot" world. Is it going to get better for you in a real robot world?
Probably but I don't think they log context the way I'm talking about.
Their idea of context is something like prepending log messages with some string depending on the code context. I do that sort of stuff too, but that's code context, not log context.
Example of the way my log context stuff works: do stuff log("lots of details",DEBUG) do stuff log("more details",DEBUG) do stuff log("some info", INFO) do stuff If an error happens, log("error info", ERROR). - Then assuming the log level is set at the INFO level and nothing goes wrong you will just see the "some info" message. But if an error is logged you will see the DEBUG messages too in addition to the INFO and ERROR messages. The log context buffer is emptied (default is 20 log entries of context).
This way I don't have to set the log level to debug to get the details. I get the debug level details whenever an error is logged. Yes it's slower, but I don't care, I let Intel/AMD take care of that;).
I can't even work out many of the recaptcha's mangled texts at a 100% rate.
But seems they allow one or two character errors (I purposely substituted an o instead of a p for one and it worked, and an h instead of a for another).
Full, bi-directional Internet access will become a privilege, concentrated into the hands of corporations
To them that's a benefit not a problem. Same goes for users not being able to P2P as well or run servers easily. Many corporations will be happy with that.
In theory you should just catch the specific exceptions that you can handle. But the reason why many programmers catch everything is because there is no easy way for the programmer to know upfront which exceptions could be thrown at that point, AND there are very many exceptions that can be ignored -as in you can go "ok that didn't work, we'll try again later" rather than, something really weird happened we better stop the program now! Yes you could go through every possible path and figure out all the possible exceptions then catch the ones you want one by one (the Pokemon School of Coding). But who has time to do that?
If it were easier then we'd do stuff the "proper" way. As it is, catching everything works well enough in most cases- and if you log the details you can improve things later.
Coarse-grained try isn't a problem if you can get a stack trace. At the cost of performance many of my programs by default log a lot of stuff in a log context buffer (debug level etc). If everything goes smoothly you only see stuff at the configured log level. But if something goes wrong, you see the error log message and some lines of context (debug logs etc) leading up to the error. I can configure that to be off if performance is needed, but so far performance hasn't been an issue- the DB stuff tends to be the bottleneck.
If the storage drive vanishes there's nothing much you can do except show an error and abort (or if you're brave, retry after an interval:) ). Nowadays this is more likely to happen with SAN, NAS, iSCSI etc. And yes we've had experienced it a few times before - the datacenter guys go "oh yeah, we were doing some maintenance over the weekend and took the SAN down". Me: "...". They seem to like doing that when I'm on leave too. From what I see the database server doesn't like losing access to the SAN. So it doesn't really matter how well my stuff handles it. Someone still has got to manually go check and fix stuff.
Yeah, fixing some programs is like shovelling out shit from a huge barn that's built with shit. You have to be figure out carefully which shit to remove first and how to remove it, or you end up in deep shit.
You could rebuild it, but the huge shit barn "sort of works", whereas your new barn won't work till it's mostly complete.
I'd be happy to shovel shit from a barn for USD500/hour if I only had to do a very few hours a week;).
Many of us eat honey and like it. Then there are eggs and bacon. Some of us like eating grass seeds that are crushed, mixed with water and then allowed to ferment, then baked.
Immune systems for some of these creatures might have changed too.
But the horseshoe crabs immune system might not have changed much (there might be some tweaks for new fungi and bacteria, but the general mechanism is still probably the same).
Seems way easier for me to follow Netflix or their CEO on Facebook, than for me to be a party to those conference calls, or get those press releases at the exact same time as more "blessed" investors.
Many may hate Facebook, but if you're talking about public fair disclosure, it's definitely a lot more public and fair than conference calls and press releases. Depending on how public the page/posting is, you might see it without even logging in to Facebook or having an account.
If I happen to be online I can probably see the Facebook posting within a minute of it being posted. Whereas I'd be behind by much longer for press releases etc.
Yeah, I've a batch of Byford socks that are still around after 20 years (they're getting slightly threadbare but no holes, elastic bands still OK). But the recent Byford socks don't last a year without losing their elasticity - exactly the same usage and washing conditions. And I don't like the feel of many of the socks in the market nowadays - kind of too slippery.
I know making cheap and good socks that last 20 years is not financially viable, but it's still kinda sad that so many products today are actually a lot worse now. Aren't the other customers misplacing their socks at a high enough rate?;)
What might happen with your suggestion is most manufacturers labeling their stuff "crap grade". But at least the expensive high grade stuff might actually be better.
I like the review+test method since it can help the manufacturers at the low end making cheap and good stuff (I doubt they can afford the cost of supporting long warranties- returns, etc while still remaining cheap). And I like people who supply cheap/affordable and good products/services. I'm quite sad whenever such business that I like go out of business.
So I think we need better information. Of course tastes differ, but many things can be measured objectively. Whether some detergent actually cleans various loads better than another. Which tyres stop better in dry/wet conditions, have lower road noise, better fuel economy. Not every product can be tested, but the usual low, mid, high can be good enough.
They can't easily change GW1 to be what GW2 is like.
They are very different games. Many GW1 players still prefer GW1 to GW2. I'd say the more casual players of MMOs like WoW might like or even prefer GW2.
In GW1 you can go around doing PvE with your private custom army using heroes and mercenaries - which can be fun for some people. You can assign skills to heroes and control them. The gameplay mechanics are different. It can be quite technical too. You can only have 8 skills at a time, but there are hundreds to choose from, and many are very powerful, and a number are pretty interesting in the effects (it's not the boring "heal, big heal" or "fireball, bigger fireball" that are common in many other MMOs[1]). Many GW1 skills would be overpowered in GW2's more massive PvP formats, or they won't work at those scales. So while GW2 is similar to GW1 in that you can only have 9 skills at a time (OK it's more complicated than that but...), the skills have to be different.
GW1 has significant flaws - you can't queue for PvP while doing something else interesting in game. So this causes many PvP formats to die due to lack of players (nobody wants to wait around indefinitely for enough people). The problem is it would not be easy to create such a feature, since the sort of skills you'd bring can differ a lot- different PvP or PvE. And some PvP formats require teams to have builds that work well together - you can't throw a random bunch of people together- if they all turn out to be healers they can't kill anything.
With GW2 there's no real healer class - everyone is responsible for their primary healing. So there's no healer to blame;).
GW2 encourages players to help each other in PvE. GW1 is neutral to negative in this aspect -you can have your own private army, you don't need to team up with anyone else.
I've never played CoH. But who is going to buy CoH2 after they screwed CoH like that?
It's still making money! Just keep it going. If your new game is good enough, people will jump to it, and your old game will start losing money. You prepare the players and developers for the end (say shutting down in X months). Set up an epic end of the world battle against some big villain (have it repeat every X hours- since servers WILL crash), then big villain wins, everyone dies, then have a "heaven/credits scene"- big party, fireworks etc. Everyone has closure - players, developers etc. They move to the new game or find something else. There will still be complainers but nobody that matters to your bottom line will care.
Do it well and it could be considered as marketing for the new game. After all wouldn't you be more inclined to spend $$$ and time in their new game if their old game ended well?
In my opinion NZ's spy agency behaving like the USA's dog creates way more national security concerns than Kim Dotcom ever did.
The NZ citizens should be concerned that their spy agency behaved like that, and take measures to ensure that their spy agency is really serving NZ's interests instead of some other entity's interest.
Yeah. It's rather inefficient, Many of us are spending money, resources and time on products that are way crappier than they should be, all because there is no reasonable way of finding out which products are better.
It may be bad to buy a cheap crappy product, but it's worse to buy an expensive crappy product, so many just settle for cheap and crappy.
Then the companies that are making cheap noncrap stuff that's lost in the sea of crap will give up and make cheap crap too.
There's stuff like Consumer Reports but you need to be a subscriber. I wouldn't mind some of my taxes going to something similar, but reviewing and testing a wider range of popular stuff, with the results being available to everyone. It'll be worth it if it results in fewer companies churning out oceans of crap or at least makes it easier to buy cheap stuff that's not crap. Means throwing away less crap too.
It's more efficient to have a few hundred specialized people with better equipment test the stuff, than expect millions of consumers to test the stuff for themselves - especially if it means having to buy the crap in the first place.
Of course consumers should still be free to buy crap if they want/have to.
So are these the same thing? a) taking your brain away and bringing it back 90 minutes later b) making a copy of your brain It's not like you're using your brain much anyway. So no difference right?
Are you going to bet that sites with that sort of SQL injection won't be exploitable in other ways? I'm just going to assume they will get pwned and thus not waste my time setting up strong "GPU-thwarting" passwords.
Also, unless they are specifically targeting you it doesn't matter if your password is cracked at that point. Because almost everyone else will be having the same problems and thus that service/site will have to deal with it. They'll notice lots of passwords are cracked, they'll ask people to change their passwords (which may just give the hackers an opportunity to get more passwords if they haven't closed all the holes;) ). You then switch to a different service if it really matters.
If the hackers are targeting you, and they are the sort who would invest in extra hardware just to hack you, you are probably going to get pwned whatever you do, unless you're the competent paranoid sort that doesn't do stuff like use banks that do insecure stuff like send text messages to phones as verification. And you make sure they aren't prone to social engineering and other silliness (good luck finding a bank that isn't- most banks/companies have too may stupid customers to be really secure ). Many sites use unencrypted email for password resets. That won't be good enough if you're being targeted. Hackers can divert network traffic: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/08/revealed-the-in/
Of course. Doesn't make the other stuff better though.
We've been making chairs for many thousands of years. And still a good comfortable, adjustable and long-lasting chair costs a lot, while the cheaper ones aren't comfortable etc and/or fall apart a bit too fast.
There might be cheap, good chairs out there but they are lost in a sea of crap. Who has time and money to test 1000 chairs? So the people making good chairs for cheap don't do as well as those making crap chairs for cheap.
Maybe this is where governments can step in - not to impose additional regulations, but to help or encourage independent high quality reviews of chairs so that people can skip the crap and the people making decent cheap chairs might be encouraged to continue doing so. And the ones making crap might go do something else instead, hopefully something they are better at.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah. For USD10k I'd prefer to have 20 x RPG-7s and extra ammo. Or 10 x RPG-29s plus extra ammo.
Whether I was on foot, in a tank or in a helicopter, the enemy having plenty of RPGs would scare me more than enemies in mobile metal coffins.
Getting those RPG-7s might be tricky, but supplies and logistics is part of winning wars. If you really had the cash, I'm sure you could find someone willing to sell you the RPGs even near a warzone.
Google maps? ;)
That said: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20442487
It's[the island is] on Google Earth and other maps so we went to check and there was no island. We're really puzzled. It's quite bizarre.
(emphasis mine).
I might trust the better commercial ones more than military grade. Most airliners don't have ejection seats for the passengers ;).
Yeah, I thought it would be self-limiting since they'd take down Tor with the extra load, but if each bot becomes a Tor relay/end-point that is less likely to happen.
Many sites bock certain sort of access from Tor relays, so a few users might notice their infection because of that. However the sort who don't notice their machine doing bitcoin mining are unlikely to fall in that category. Google's search blocks some Tor IPs but I think that's if there's "bot like" usage of it, so if the number of Tor relays goes up more than the "bot like" usage of Google, the blocking might go down.
If there were no workers involved in the production of our most complex products, the potential price of these same productions would be little over the cost of the raw materials.
Think of the Chinese workers as robots. Are the prices a little over the cost of the raw materials?
Also think how you non-robots in the USA are doing in this "robot" world. Is it going to get better for you in a real robot world?
Probably but I don't think they log context the way I'm talking about.
;).
Their idea of context is something like prepending log messages with some string depending on the code context. I do that sort of stuff too, but that's code context, not log context.
Example of the way my log context stuff works:
do stuff
log("lots of details",DEBUG)
do stuff
log("more details",DEBUG)
do stuff
log("some info", INFO)
do stuff
If an error happens, log("error info", ERROR).
-
Then assuming the log level is set at the INFO level and nothing goes wrong you will just see the "some info" message. But if an error is logged you will see the DEBUG messages too in addition to the INFO and ERROR messages. The log context buffer is emptied (default is 20 log entries of context).
This way I don't have to set the log level to debug to get the details. I get the debug level details whenever an error is logged. Yes it's slower, but I don't care, I let Intel/AMD take care of that
I can't even work out many of the recaptcha's mangled texts at a 100% rate.
But seems they allow one or two character errors (I purposely substituted an o instead of a p for one and it worked, and an h instead of a for another).
Full, bi-directional Internet access will become a privilege, concentrated into the hands of corporations
To them that's a benefit not a problem. Same goes for users not being able to P2P as well or run servers easily. Many corporations will be happy with that.
In theory you should just catch the specific exceptions that you can handle. But the reason why many programmers catch everything is because there is no easy way for the programmer to know upfront which exceptions could be thrown at that point, AND there are very many exceptions that can be ignored -as in you can go "ok that didn't work, we'll try again later" rather than, something really weird happened we better stop the program now! Yes you could go through every possible path and figure out all the possible exceptions then catch the ones you want one by one (the Pokemon School of Coding). But who has time to do that?
:) ). Nowadays this is more likely to happen with SAN, NAS, iSCSI etc. And yes we've had experienced it a few times before - the datacenter guys go "oh yeah, we were doing some maintenance over the weekend and took the SAN down". Me: "...". They seem to like doing that when I'm on leave too. From what I see the database server doesn't like losing access to the SAN. So it doesn't really matter how well my stuff handles it. Someone still has got to manually go check and fix stuff.
If it were easier then we'd do stuff the "proper" way. As it is, catching everything works well enough in most cases- and if you log the details you can improve things later.
Coarse-grained try isn't a problem if you can get a stack trace. At the cost of performance many of my programs by default log a lot of stuff in a log context buffer (debug level etc). If everything goes smoothly you only see stuff at the configured log level. But if something goes wrong, you see the error log message and some lines of context (debug logs etc) leading up to the error. I can configure that to be off if performance is needed, but so far performance hasn't been an issue- the DB stuff tends to be the bottleneck.
If the storage drive vanishes there's nothing much you can do except show an error and abort (or if you're brave, retry after an interval
Yeah, fixing some programs is like shovelling out shit from a huge barn that's built with shit. You have to be figure out carefully which shit to remove first and how to remove it, or you end up in deep shit.
;).
You could rebuild it, but the huge shit barn "sort of works", whereas your new barn won't work till it's mostly complete.
I'd be happy to shovel shit from a barn for USD500/hour if I only had to do a very few hours a week
FWIW some people actually eat silkworms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD0lk4M3aCI
Many of us eat honey and like it. Then there are eggs and bacon. Some of us like eating grass seeds that are crushed, mixed with water and then allowed to ferment, then baked.
Then there's sausage and worse: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanically_separated_meat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_slime
So just give it a new name and people won't care.
Immune systems for some of these creatures might have changed too.
But the horseshoe crabs immune system might not have changed much (there might be some tweaks for new fungi and bacteria, but the general mechanism is still probably the same).
Seems way easier for me to follow Netflix or their CEO on Facebook, than for me to be a party to those conference calls, or get those press releases at the exact same time as more "blessed" investors.
Many may hate Facebook, but if you're talking about public fair disclosure, it's definitely a lot more public and fair than conference calls and press releases. Depending on how public the page/posting is, you might see it without even logging in to Facebook or having an account.
If I happen to be online I can probably see the Facebook posting within a minute of it being posted. Whereas I'd be behind by much longer for press releases etc.
Yeah, I've a batch of Byford socks that are still around after 20 years (they're getting slightly threadbare but no holes, elastic bands still OK). But the recent Byford socks don't last a year without losing their elasticity - exactly the same usage and washing conditions. And I don't like the feel of many of the socks in the market nowadays - kind of too slippery.
;)
I know making cheap and good socks that last 20 years is not financially viable, but it's still kinda sad that so many products today are actually a lot worse now. Aren't the other customers misplacing their socks at a high enough rate?
What might happen with your suggestion is most manufacturers labeling their stuff "crap grade". But at least the expensive high grade stuff might actually be better.
I like the review+test method since it can help the manufacturers at the low end making cheap and good stuff (I doubt they can afford the cost of supporting long warranties- returns, etc while still remaining cheap). And I like people who supply cheap/affordable and good products/services. I'm quite sad whenever such business that I like go out of business.
So I think we need better information. Of course tastes differ, but many things can be measured objectively. Whether some detergent actually cleans various loads better than another. Which tyres stop better in dry/wet conditions, have lower road noise, better fuel economy. Not every product can be tested, but the usual low, mid, high can be good enough.
They can't easily change GW1 to be what GW2 is like.
They are very different games. Many GW1 players still prefer GW1 to GW2. I'd say the more casual players of MMOs like WoW might like or even prefer GW2.
In GW1 you can go around doing PvE with your private custom army using heroes and mercenaries - which can be fun for some people. You can assign skills to heroes and control them. The gameplay mechanics are different. It can be quite technical too. You can only have 8 skills at a time, but there are hundreds to choose from, and many are very powerful, and a number are pretty interesting in the effects (it's not the boring "heal, big heal" or "fireball, bigger fireball" that are common in many other MMOs[1]). Many GW1 skills would be overpowered in GW2's more massive PvP formats, or they won't work at those scales. So while GW2 is similar to GW1 in that you can only have 9 skills at a time (OK it's more complicated than that but...), the skills have to be different.
GW1 has significant flaws - you can't queue for PvP while doing something else interesting in game. So this causes many PvP formats to die due to lack of players (nobody wants to wait around indefinitely for enough people). The problem is it would not be easy to create such a feature, since the sort of skills you'd bring can differ a lot- different PvP or PvE. And some PvP formats require teams to have builds that work well together - you can't throw a random bunch of people together- if they all turn out to be healers they can't kill anything.
With GW2 there's no real healer class - everyone is responsible for their primary healing. So there's no healer to blame ;).
GW2 encourages players to help each other in PvE. GW1 is neutral to negative in this aspect -you can have your own private army, you don't need to team up with anyone else.
[1] Examples of interesting GW1 skills:
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Visions_of_Regret
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Diversion
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Wastrel's_Worry
Use a skill get punished -get damaged or can't use it again for a long time. Don't use a skill get punished too.
Also: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Shield_of_Absorption
The more the target gets hit the less damage the target gets.
I've never played CoH. But who is going to buy CoH2 after they screwed CoH like that?
It's still making money! Just keep it going. If your new game is good enough, people will jump to it, and your old game will start losing money. You prepare the players and developers for the end (say shutting down in X months). Set up an epic end of the world battle against some big villain (have it repeat every X hours- since servers WILL crash), then big villain wins, everyone dies, then have a "heaven/credits scene"- big party, fireworks etc. Everyone has closure - players, developers etc. They move to the new game or find something else. There will still be complainers but nobody that matters to your bottom line will care.
Do it well and it could be considered as marketing for the new game. After all wouldn't you be more inclined to spend $$$ and time in their new game if their old game ended well?
In my opinion NZ's spy agency behaving like the USA's dog creates way more national security concerns than Kim Dotcom ever did.
The NZ citizens should be concerned that their spy agency behaved like that, and take measures to ensure that their spy agency is really serving NZ's interests instead of some other entity's interest.
Yeah. It's rather inefficient, Many of us are spending money, resources and time on products that are way crappier than they should be, all because there is no reasonable way of finding out which products are better.
It may be bad to buy a cheap crappy product, but it's worse to buy an expensive crappy product, so many just settle for cheap and crappy.
Then the companies that are making cheap noncrap stuff that's lost in the sea of crap will give up and make cheap crap too.
There's stuff like Consumer Reports but you need to be a subscriber. I wouldn't mind some of my taxes going to something similar, but reviewing and testing a wider range of popular stuff, with the results being available to everyone. It'll be worth it if it results in fewer companies churning out oceans of crap or at least makes it easier to buy cheap stuff that's not crap. Means throwing away less crap too.
It's more efficient to have a few hundred specialized people with better equipment test the stuff, than expect millions of consumers to test the stuff for themselves - especially if it means having to buy the crap in the first place.
Of course consumers should still be free to buy crap if they want/have to.
Really? I thought North Korea and Iran were trying to repeat it.
It'll be nice if they can protect against class 3B lasers. There seem to be too many around nowadays in the hands of untrained people.
So are these the same thing?
a) taking your brain away and bringing it back 90 minutes later
b) making a copy of your brain
It's not like you're using your brain much anyway. So no difference right?
You don't seem to be thinking the same at all. Not even sure you are reading what I'm writing.
Are you going to bet that sites with that sort of SQL injection won't be exploitable in other ways? I'm just going to assume they will get pwned and thus not waste my time setting up strong "GPU-thwarting" passwords.
Also, unless they are specifically targeting you it doesn't matter if your password is cracked at that point. Because almost everyone else will be having the same problems and thus that service/site will have to deal with it. They'll notice lots of passwords are cracked, they'll ask people to change their passwords (which may just give the hackers an opportunity to get more passwords if they haven't closed all the holes ;) ). You then switch to a different service if it really matters.
If the hackers are targeting you, and they are the sort who would invest in extra hardware just to hack you, you are probably going to get pwned whatever you do, unless you're the competent paranoid sort that doesn't do stuff like use banks that do insecure stuff like send text messages to phones as verification. And you make sure they aren't prone to social engineering and other silliness (good luck finding a bank that isn't- most banks/companies have too may stupid customers to be really secure ). Many sites use unencrypted email for password resets. That won't be good enough if you're being targeted. Hackers can divert network traffic: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/08/revealed-the-in/
Of course. Doesn't make the other stuff better though.
We've been making chairs for many thousands of years. And still a good comfortable, adjustable and long-lasting chair costs a lot, while the cheaper ones aren't comfortable etc and/or fall apart a bit too fast.
There might be cheap, good chairs out there but they are lost in a sea of crap. Who has time and money to test 1000 chairs? So the people making good chairs for cheap don't do as well as those making crap chairs for cheap.
Maybe this is where governments can step in - not to impose additional regulations, but to help or encourage independent high quality reviews of chairs so that people can skip the crap and the people making decent cheap chairs might be encouraged to continue doing so. And the ones making crap might go do something else instead, hopefully something they are better at.
Maybe they think they can sell lots of units by having HQ buy it for employees, rather than having the employees wanting to buy it for themselves.
;)
Sure worked well for RIM.