I haven't seen any evidence of them caring the slightest bit about improving the parameters to inflate prices.
If anything it's the other way around. They are happy for parameters to go backwards so they can ship shittier specifications (which Joe Public doesn't care about anyway) at lowish prices but in larger volumes.
Machines that are accessed by users should not be the same servers storing the account security data. One of the key benefits to domain authentication provided by Kerberos and it's relatives is that the authentication data is isolated on a server that is supposed to be doing nothing but authentication and authorization.
Well kinda, but not really.
If you're running a public website, you won't be using the standard Kerberos 3 three headed triangle between the users PC/browser, the webserver and the KDC that you would be able to use on eg a LAN.
All you'll be doing is getting the webserver to acquire tickets from the KDC on behalf of the users, which means that the security data (ie plaintext passwords) is passing through the web server anyway. You've effectively bypassed what makes Kerberos secure (user passwords not being sent to the server).
There is a reason why all kinds of effort has gone into trying to solve web authentication with stuff like OpenID, OAuth, BrowserID etc rather than everyone just using Kerberos.
They have access to your server already, customers passwords are the least of your worries...
Although likely that isn't necessarily the case. They could've lifted them via offsite database backups, or (less common these days) via a lame SQL injection vulnerability in the app etc etc.
You do realise that New Zealand is not part of the United States don't you? US law does not apply in New Zealand...
That's just an imminent free trade agreement away.
In return for NZ being allowed to sell a couple of shipping containers full of cheese and lamb chops to US supermarkets, NZ will cede all sovereignty and law making to US drug companies, movie studios, record labels and patent trolls.
Commodore was once the #1 selling computer of 1983, 84, 85, 86. A mere seven years later it ran out of cash and filed for bankruptcy (and the new #1 computer was the IBM PC). It all comes down to mutton-headed managers making bad decisions, whether it happened in the 80s with Commodore or the Present with PalmOS.
Also, didn't Palm end up owning what was left of the Amiga at one point?
Even ignoring all the existing evidence that doesn't fit, one of the really wonky parts to me is:
All that water is appearing over time at just the correct variable rate to keep the same sea level relative to the land so the coastlines can stay exactly where they always were.
That is astoundingly mind-bogglingly convenient (and of course completely silly). What is so special about where the coastline is that the system will go to that enormous amount of seemingly magical effort to keep it constant?
the ruling on remedies (break up microsoft) was overturned, but the ruling on fact (microsoft is a monopoly and abused it to enter new markets) was NOT overturned.
Thank you. At least someone remembered it correctly.
CO2 is not a pollutant like say, ground-level ozone, which animal's lungs, or soot from cars which also damages animal's lungs.
I don't care either way on the semantics of the word 'pollutant' but I do find some of the arguments from either side getting a bit stretched:
Ozone in the upper atmosphere is also important for life on Earth. So if where something is located can be used to define whether or not something important to life is a pollutant or not, why couldn't that somethings excess concentration also be part of that equation?
Yep. Power (watts) is the 1st derivative of energy with respect to time (ok the intervening decades might've mangled my calculus terminology - but you get the picture). Watts per hour would be a 2nd derivative of energy with respect to time.
So if watts are a bit like units for measuring the 'velocity' of energy, watts per hour would be for measuring the 'acceleration' of energy - ie how fast the rate of your energy consumption or generation is increasing or decreasing. Yeah not really a practical everyday measurement for most people.
Not according to the foreman - even the jurors leaning towards Googles side in the deliberations thought that it was bad practice to rely on a blog posting.
I post on Facebook and I also post on G+ - the content I post is VERY different. Also, many people may not post directly on their own profiles, but use G+ primarily to engage with other posters.
I honestly am seeing G+ as more of a competitor to blogging platforms than as a competitor to Facebook at this point.
Agreed. I find G+ is starting to take over from my RSS feed reader as more and more interesting tech bloggers seem to be switching to it. It is starting to sit somewhere between a blog and twitter in terms of commentary (although towards the blogging end) but with better sharing and upvoting than traditional blogs.
I don't use it to post anything related to my own life (I don't use Facebook either), just to follow and comment on stuff coming from eg the Python or Javascript development communities.
It doesn't really change anything if you look at integers alone. Sure, in Python they are objects, but they don't have an intrinsic object identity (i.e. any int 1 is identical - in terms of operator "is" - to any other int 1, no matter how you have produced that value).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that it (ie optimising by caching/reusing int objects below some arbitrary value) was an implementation detail that shouldn't be relied on to behave consistently between different implementations or versions.
eg:
Python 2.6.6 (r266:84292, Sep 15 2010, 15:52:39) [GCC 4.4.5] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> a = 1 >>> b = 1 >>> a is b True >>> a = 300 >>> b = 300 >>> a is b False
ie the interpreter cached the creation of 1 so that a and b refer to the same object, but 300 wasn't cached and so a and b refer to two different integer objects.
And although Python is not statically typed like Java is, it is strongly typed like Java is
Uh what? No it's not, it's about as loosely typed as you can get.
Even considering the variation in definitions (and there are many), it sounds like you're mixing up static typing with strong typing.
Some oversimplified examples: Java is statically and strongly typed, Python (and eg Ruby) is dynamically and strongly typed, C is statically and weakly typed, Javascript (and eg PHP) is dynamically and weakly typed.
ie Javascript and Java are polar opposites in regards to type system and Python shares some aspects of both.
Try adding an integer to a string in Python - then try it in a weakly typed language like Javascript or PHP. Unlike the weakly typed languages, Python throws a type error like Java does - which means it isn't "about as loosely typed as you can get".
Not flaming, but how exactly do you reckon that Javascript is closer to Java than Python is? I'm curious...
Apart from completely superficial stuff like having braces and semicolons that is.
Python and Java have classical OO rather than the prototypical OO Javascript uses. And although Python is not statically typed like Java is, it is strongly typed like Java is. Javascript is neither. Python has an extensive standard library and set of builtin objects/functionality (like Java), and Javascript doesn't.
This isn't a criticism of Javascript - but it is further away from most other common languages than Python is and requires a very different mindset than C# or Java. Javascript is a sort of hybrid functional language all by itself with an unusual OO design and unusual scoping rules.
Personally I'd probably put Python somewhere between Java and Javascript on most arbitrary sets of language style continuums. In fact I reckon Javascript and Java seem almost like polar opposites in a lot of ways.
I'm finding the opposite. After quite a few years of increasingly infuriatingly irrelevant and spammy results, things have reversed for me in recent months.
It's probably all that new fangled privacy invasion they are doing lately, and they fact I normally just stay logged in now and have stopped caring about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah it's what you do when you use aliteration ;)
BTW - does Bob have one of those helpful guides for people who don't understand closing HTML tags?
Not any more! Now with the new Dos on Dope framework you can be a web developer BY writing DOS batch files!
http://secretgeek.net/dod_intro.asp
Damn right! They lay eggs like all the other birds out there.
I haven't seen any evidence of them caring the slightest bit about improving the parameters to inflate prices.
If anything it's the other way around. They are happy for parameters to go backwards so they can ship shittier specifications (which Joe Public doesn't care about anyway) at lowish prices but in larger volumes.
Well kinda, but not really.
If you're running a public website, you won't be using the standard Kerberos 3 three headed triangle between the users PC/browser, the webserver and the KDC that you would be able to use on eg a LAN.
All you'll be doing is getting the webserver to acquire tickets from the KDC on behalf of the users, which means that the security data (ie plaintext passwords) is passing through the web server anyway. You've effectively bypassed what makes Kerberos secure (user passwords not being sent to the server).
There is a reason why all kinds of effort has gone into trying to solve web authentication with stuff like OpenID, OAuth, BrowserID etc rather than everyone just using Kerberos.
Although likely that isn't necessarily the case. They could've lifted them via offsite database backups, or (less common these days) via a lame SQL injection vulnerability in the app etc etc.
That's just an imminent free trade agreement away.
In return for NZ being allowed to sell a couple of shipping containers full of cheese and lamb chops to US supermarkets, NZ will cede all sovereignty and law making to US drug companies, movie studios, record labels and patent trolls.
So I was :)
"I'll be taking these huggies and whatever cash you got."
On the other hand, there's no harvesting to be done in rocky places where seed could find no purchase.
Also, didn't Palm end up owning what was left of the Amiga at one point?
It's true! My talking dolphin spoke to me (and confirmed it).
Even ignoring all the existing evidence that doesn't fit, one of the really wonky parts to me is:
All that water is appearing over time at just the correct variable rate to keep the same sea level relative to the land so the coastlines can stay exactly where they always were.
That is astoundingly mind-bogglingly convenient (and of course completely silly). What is so special about where the coastline is that the system will go to that enormous amount of seemingly magical effort to keep it constant?
Thank you. At least someone remembered it correctly.
I don't care either way on the semantics of the word 'pollutant' but I do find some of the arguments from either side getting a bit stretched:
Ozone in the upper atmosphere is also important for life on Earth. So if where something is located can be used to define whether or not something important to life is a pollutant or not, why couldn't that somethings excess concentration also be part of that equation?
Yep. Power (watts) is the 1st derivative of energy with respect to time (ok the intervening decades might've mangled my calculus terminology - but you get the picture). Watts per hour would be a 2nd derivative of energy with respect to time.
So if watts are a bit like units for measuring the 'velocity' of energy, watts per hour would be for measuring the 'acceleration' of energy - ie how fast the rate of your energy consumption or generation is increasing or decreasing. Yeah not really a practical everyday measurement for most people.
Ahh OK - I get what you meant now :)
Carry on....
Not according to the foreman - even the jurors leaning towards Googles side in the deliberations thought that it was bad practice to rely on a blog posting.
Some interesting info here:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/05/oracle-v-google-jury-foreman-reveals-oracle-wasnt-even-close/
Agreed. I find G+ is starting to take over from my RSS feed reader as more and more interesting tech bloggers seem to be switching to it. It is starting to sit somewhere between a blog and twitter in terms of commentary (although towards the blogging end) but with better sharing and upvoting than traditional blogs.
I don't use it to post anything related to my own life (I don't use Facebook either), just to follow and comment on stuff coming from eg the Python or Javascript development communities.
So how much did Facebook pay per photo in the end?
I could have misremembered this, but it gets worse than that:
I was under the impression that it was actually Google/Android engineers that ported Timsort to Java and contributed it upstream.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that it (ie optimising by caching/reusing int objects below some arbitrary value) was an implementation detail that shouldn't be relied on to behave consistently between different implementations or versions.
eg:
ie the interpreter cached the creation of 1 so that a and b refer to the same object, but 300 wasn't cached and so a and b refer to two different integer objects.
Even considering the variation in definitions (and there are many), it sounds like you're mixing up static typing with strong typing.
Some oversimplified examples:
Java is statically and strongly typed,
Python (and eg Ruby) is dynamically and strongly typed,
C is statically and weakly typed,
Javascript (and eg PHP) is dynamically and weakly typed.
ie Javascript and Java are polar opposites in regards to type system and Python shares some aspects of both.
Try adding an integer to a string in Python - then try it in a weakly typed language like Javascript or PHP.
Unlike the weakly typed languages, Python throws a type error like Java does - which means it isn't "about as loosely typed as you can get".
Not flaming, but how exactly do you reckon that Javascript is closer to Java than Python is? I'm curious...
Apart from completely superficial stuff like having braces and semicolons that is.
Python and Java have classical OO rather than the prototypical OO Javascript uses. And although Python is not statically typed like Java is, it is strongly typed like Java is. Javascript is neither. Python has an extensive standard library and set of builtin objects/functionality (like Java), and Javascript doesn't.
This isn't a criticism of Javascript - but it is further away from most other common languages than Python is and requires a very different mindset than C# or Java. Javascript is a sort of hybrid functional language all by itself with an unusual OO design and unusual scoping rules.
Personally I'd probably put Python somewhere between Java and Javascript on most arbitrary sets of language style continuums. In fact I reckon Javascript and Java seem almost like polar opposites in a lot of ways.
Yeah that could be a problem with wind farms that aren't in predominately windy areas... wait a sec
I'm finding the opposite. After quite a few years of increasingly infuriatingly irrelevant and spammy results, things have reversed for me in recent months.
It's probably all that new fangled privacy invasion they are doing lately, and they fact I normally just stay logged in now and have stopped caring about it.