Virus writers make their viruses evolve? Creationism, anyone? Computer viruses don't evolve, they are engineered/programmed.
How the process of change is implemented is irrelevant to evolution. Evolution means that in response to challenges of the environment, lesser fit forms die off and fitter forms proliferate. By some process of change, the fittest forms continue to keep apace of environmental shifts. Nobody ever stipulated that the hand of change had to be random chance mutation in a particular sort of chemical structure -- the hand of an engineer is a hand just the same.
The plane did not fall from the sky. It arrived at it's destination in one piece. But you now have a pilot who, next time he sees a smoke alarm go off in the cargo bay, might be inclined to ignore it since it's probably a cellphone. And when it isn't, well, I suppose it will be the pilot's fault for not paying attention.
It is absolutely the pilot's responsibility, agreed. If the pilot actually believes that electronic devices could cause such a problem, then he or she should not permit the devices on board the aircraft. If pilots are knowingly allowing dangerous equipment on board their aircraft then we the flying public have a serious problem.
It's amazing the mental contortions one must go through to convince themselves this is actually a problem. If this danger was actually present, it would be used to take down airplanes. The fact that that has not occurred, and the fact that the FAA permits me to bring these devices on board but won't permit me to bring a metal fork on board, should be evidence enough for anyone that this is a load of bullshit.
Sounds like you're doing quite well already, in a large org, with a nice title. Not that titles mean a whole lot. But if you approach another company with the experience you seem to have gained already, I don't think your education is going to be high on the list of interview topics.
If you start double-punishing yourself with school, you risk fucking up your work performance and that WILL reflect on you. Unless your current job is a real shit hole, stick it out for another two or three years and then start poking around. See if you can climb any higher at your current place, too.
You're 26 and have a "Senior Software Engineer" title. I say your whole body is well inside the door by now, not just your foot. Don't worry so much.
That you run Debian in a chroot to get at its power is evidence enough of Android's inherently crippled nature. It runs on the Linux kernel, but shares virtually nothing with the common Linux environment encountered everywhere else. Not surprising, given that Android was proprietary to start then opened to the world. An entirely custom stack that continues to be developed behind closed doors and just results in a duplication of effort.
Your post makes no sense. The fact that you can install a Debian build on an Android device (just did it myself yesterday) means that Android is... crippled? You must be using some definition of crippled I haven't heard of before. Yes, Android has a non-GNU userland. What's your point? That anything that deviates from the 40-year-old UNIX way of thinking is inherently immoral?
Then they are not innocent. If you want to run a node on the internet, a worldwide shared resource, you are responsibile for not abusing that resource. If you are unable or unwilling to do that, then your ISP should disconnect you until that time when you are able and willing.
There is no reason to expect every human being to be an information security expert. The failure is entirely on the shoulders of those who make the tech. A digital device absolutely can and should be safe for anyone to purchase, plug in (or not), and use while connected to the Internet. Your attitude is egotistical and quaint -- the idea that a 50 year old who buys a Windows tablet at Walmart is "running a node" in the sense that you mean is clearly ridiculous. Average people should not need to understand or think about this stuff. Self-righteous attitudes such as yours are depressingly prevalent and contribute to our ongoing lack of secure technologies. By blaming the user you avoid expending the intellectual effort to provide a system that isn't full of holes.
That's not to say the user isn't ultimately responsible. I agree that malware-infested home networks should be cut off, and services provides to remedy the problem (for-a-fee malware removal services, etc). But to think of the user as an idiot or a criminal is to misunderstand the situation. It is we who create the tech who have failed the user, not the other way around.
People are living truly sheltered fucking lives when they see a bunch of greasy hand totes and become terrified. A friend of mine makes biodiesel. He has shit that looks like that lying around. It could be for making soap. Maybe the guy presses his own olive oil. Why the hell knows. Maybe the cops know something, but you sure as hell don't.
I'm not disputing that overbearing processes can waste a lot of time. But when a process is in place, if you attempt to subvert or struggle against the process, you are making it even less efficient than it already is. The real solution is to fix the process, but if you can't do that, there is nothing to be gained by deviating from it. Usually.
We live in the future, why don't our tools enforce these standards automagically?
Some do. As the developer it's your job to make sure it happens, however you do it.
As a result, I've lost hundreds of hours in code reviews because some pedant was more interested in picking nits over whitespace than actually reviewing my algorithms
Was the nit picker correct? That is, was he pointing out true variances from the standard? If so, the fastest way to appease him is to cram your ego and make the changes. If you're arguing about something that is clearly spelled out in the coding standard, then YOU are the one who is wasting time by arguing about it. If not, and the nit picker is just slinging shit, then call him out for wasting time in meetings.
Plain and simple. This will be used for unstoppable spam. A dollar per impression seems steep, but there it depends on the price of the item, your financial status, how susceptible you are to marketing, and what the chances are you'll actually buy. And Facebook knows all of that information. Because they're Facebook. They'll take advertisers money to get the market data, then take more to transmit the message in a "personal" way right to your inbox. So this service will not be used to send urgent messages or anything like that. It will be a direct spam feed to your inbox.
The violence is quite real. The "rights" are just the abstractions that people say they are defending when they employ violence. You can put your hand on your heart and gaze into the sky with great pomp and seriousness if you want to, but that doesn't make your rights anything more than flutterings in your brain.
You are an idiot. Homesteading has existed for all of history. One guy with a sniper rifle can't take away someone else's land because everyone recognizes the rights of the homesteader, while very few recognize the rights of the thief.
You are missing the point. The guy with the sniper rifle can just kill everyone who disputes his claim on the land. Your "rights" are a gentlemen's agreement between members of society. They can exist only if backed by force. Otherwise, the force user will eliminate those who eschew force. This isn't about civilization, it's about the laws of physics.
How do you know the user is a child and thus subject to special rules? By asking them? If so, this is awesome -- I'll just tell everybody I'm a kid and get all the same privacy safeguards (because my "parent" is me, and he'll never give consent).
Why not support the study? Why not give science a chance to bear out these arguments?
Because there is no way to study this in a scientific way. You can't have a control group that gets no video games, and an experimental group that gets them, and then measure how many acts of violence occur. It is obviously completely unethical to conduct such an experiment, not to mention the rate of incidence of mass murders is so small that it simply would never happen -- your sample size would be zero.
Barring any experiment, all you can do is look at the data that already exists. And the data shows that there are very few (double digit) mass murderers, but tens of millions of violent video game players. And suppose we DO find some correlation between the two. How are you going to prove that it's causative? You can't do the experiments required to determine that, because they involve acts of violence. The whole question is pointless, and all that can come out of it is some statistical bullshit that politicians will use to justify all kinds of stupid shit.
Since the shooting, I've heard calls to weaken the First Amendment (to silence the Westboro assholes), the Second Amendment (take ALL the guns), and the Fifth Amendment (pre-emptively locking up people who are deemed "weird.") Why not just throw the entire document in the shredder at this point?
My mother always told me to never make a decision when I'm upset. I wish the people of this country would take that advice.
A government funded cyber campaign based on BAT2EXE and 16-bit code? Which doesn't even work effectively? If your goal is actually to destroy files, and you are a nation state, then you understand that simply deleting the files using the "del" command is not actually going to destroy any data. (I have no evidence that "del" was used, but hey, they ain't releasing the binary for me to analyze.)
If this was perpetrated by a nation state, then it must be meant as some kind of weird psy-op to confuse the shit out of people. I think chances are better that it was written by an idiot.
The free market fairy simply cannot wave her magic wand over everything. The government cannot avoid playing a role in i.e. wireless communications if you want them at all. Someone has to decide who can use what spectrum. Someone has to enforce the rules. There is a finite supply - meaningful competition is not possible even when this is done efficiently.
Right now there is a finite supply of spectrum, because all of our technologies are broadcast technologies. If we can find a way to shift from broadcast transmission to directional transmission, the sky will be the limit (quite literally). I realize there are deep technical challenges with directional radio, but over time we may overcome most of those.
Until such time, though, I agree some form of regulation is obviously necessary.
With a lot of RAM, you won't notice the SSD gains as much compared to an hard drive.
I have 10 GB in my home machine, not a small amount. I installed an SSD a few days ago. It is, hands down, the most amazing performance upgrade I have ever done in 20 years of building computers. I feel like getting a few more drives and RAID'ing them just to amplify the awesome.
Further proof celebs are fucking dumb. This guy wasn't a "real hacker".
On the contrary, guessing a password is a truly classic hack. What is more of a "real hack" from your perspective? Downloading and running a cracking script? To guess a person's password from information publicly available about them is a prime example of security-oriented thinking.
The best hacks are tailored precisely to the circumstances.
I think what happened is horrible and truly no one should go through it, however why has no one questioned the gun laws? I have yet to hear anyone blame that fact that a gun can be obtained so easily.
Are you on crack? That's pretty much the whole topic of national conversation at the moment!
what needs to happen is for all firearms to get banned.
If you want to change the Constitution to modify the 2nd Amendment, go for it. But any attempt to outlaw guns without first altering the Constitution is no less than high treason, and any lawmaker who signs his name to such legislation should be subject to the death penalty we have put in place for such crimes.
If you dont like what that group has to say then dont pay attention to them. Its really that easy. But dont be a stupid american jerk when it comes to someone elses thoughts or opinions you dont like.
"Blah blah free speech, you should all shut up." You're hilarious.
I'm not sure what the "it" is that you are referring to, but I assume you mean a headlong slide into totalitarianism. Frankly, if somebody was to take out every one of these motherfuckers, I don't think that, of all things, would be the trigger to form the "Fascist States of America."
People kill each other every day in this country because of what they say. It's no big deal. Eventually, somebody will be enraged enough by these idiots that they'll just take the fall for the rest of us and execute these people. That person will be caught, prosecuted, convicted, and then we can all go on with our lives and forget about the Westboro Baptist Church. No government involvement is required.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows 8 has been such a mind blowing success that we just have to get that swiping stuff into Ubuntu. Apparently.
Virus writers make their viruses evolve? Creationism, anyone? Computer viruses don't evolve, they are engineered/programmed.
How the process of change is implemented is irrelevant to evolution. Evolution means that in response to challenges of the environment, lesser fit forms die off and fitter forms proliferate. By some process of change, the fittest forms continue to keep apace of environmental shifts. Nobody ever stipulated that the hand of change had to be random chance mutation in a particular sort of chemical structure -- the hand of an engineer is a hand just the same.
The plane did not fall from the sky. It arrived at it's destination in one piece. But you now have a pilot who, next time he sees a smoke alarm go off in the cargo bay, might be inclined to ignore it since it's probably a cellphone. And when it isn't, well, I suppose it will be the pilot's fault for not paying attention.
It is absolutely the pilot's responsibility, agreed. If the pilot actually believes that electronic devices could cause such a problem, then he or she should not permit the devices on board the aircraft. If pilots are knowingly allowing dangerous equipment on board their aircraft then we the flying public have a serious problem.
It's amazing the mental contortions one must go through to convince themselves this is actually a problem. If this danger was actually present, it would be used to take down airplanes. The fact that that has not occurred, and the fact that the FAA permits me to bring these devices on board but won't permit me to bring a metal fork on board, should be evidence enough for anyone that this is a load of bullshit.
Shareholder returns? What are those? I bought some shares and never received a check in the mail...
Sounds like you're doing quite well already, in a large org, with a nice title. Not that titles mean a whole lot. But if you approach another company with the experience you seem to have gained already, I don't think your education is going to be high on the list of interview topics.
If you start double-punishing yourself with school, you risk fucking up your work performance and that WILL reflect on you. Unless your current job is a real shit hole, stick it out for another two or three years and then start poking around. See if you can climb any higher at your current place, too.
You're 26 and have a "Senior Software Engineer" title. I say your whole body is well inside the door by now, not just your foot. Don't worry so much.
That you run Debian in a chroot to get at its power is evidence enough of Android's inherently crippled nature. It runs on the Linux kernel, but shares virtually nothing with the common Linux environment encountered everywhere else. Not surprising, given that Android was proprietary to start then opened to the world. An entirely custom stack that continues to be developed behind closed doors and just results in a duplication of effort.
Your post makes no sense. The fact that you can install a Debian build on an Android device (just did it myself yesterday) means that Android is... crippled? You must be using some definition of crippled I haven't heard of before. Yes, Android has a non-GNU userland. What's your point? That anything that deviates from the 40-year-old UNIX way of thinking is inherently immoral?
Then they are not innocent. If you want to run a node on the internet, a worldwide shared resource, you are responsibile for not abusing that resource. If you are unable or unwilling to do that, then your ISP should disconnect you until that time when you are able and willing.
There is no reason to expect every human being to be an information security expert. The failure is entirely on the shoulders of those who make the tech. A digital device absolutely can and should be safe for anyone to purchase, plug in (or not), and use while connected to the Internet. Your attitude is egotistical and quaint -- the idea that a 50 year old who buys a Windows tablet at Walmart is "running a node" in the sense that you mean is clearly ridiculous. Average people should not need to understand or think about this stuff. Self-righteous attitudes such as yours are depressingly prevalent and contribute to our ongoing lack of secure technologies. By blaming the user you avoid expending the intellectual effort to provide a system that isn't full of holes.
That's not to say the user isn't ultimately responsible. I agree that malware-infested home networks should be cut off, and services provides to remedy the problem (for-a-fee malware removal services, etc). But to think of the user as an idiot or a criminal is to misunderstand the situation. It is we who create the tech who have failed the user, not the other way around.
People are living truly sheltered fucking lives when they see a bunch of greasy hand totes and become terrified. A friend of mine makes biodiesel. He has shit that looks like that lying around. It could be for making soap. Maybe the guy presses his own olive oil. Why the hell knows. Maybe the cops know something, but you sure as hell don't.
I'm not disputing that overbearing processes can waste a lot of time. But when a process is in place, if you attempt to subvert or struggle against the process, you are making it even less efficient than it already is. The real solution is to fix the process, but if you can't do that, there is nothing to be gained by deviating from it. Usually.
We live in the future, why don't our tools enforce these standards automagically?
Some do. As the developer it's your job to make sure it happens, however you do it.
As a result, I've lost hundreds of hours in code reviews because some pedant was more interested in picking nits over whitespace than actually reviewing my algorithms
Was the nit picker correct? That is, was he pointing out true variances from the standard? If so, the fastest way to appease him is to cram your ego and make the changes. If you're arguing about something that is clearly spelled out in the coding standard, then YOU are the one who is wasting time by arguing about it. If not, and the nit picker is just slinging shit, then call him out for wasting time in meetings.
Plain and simple. This will be used for unstoppable spam. A dollar per impression seems steep, but there it depends on the price of the item, your financial status, how susceptible you are to marketing, and what the chances are you'll actually buy. And Facebook knows all of that information. Because they're Facebook. They'll take advertisers money to get the market data, then take more to transmit the message in a "personal" way right to your inbox. So this service will not be used to send urgent messages or anything like that. It will be a direct spam feed to your inbox.
The violence is quite real. The "rights" are just the abstractions that people say they are defending when they employ violence. You can put your hand on your heart and gaze into the sky with great pomp and seriousness if you want to, but that doesn't make your rights anything more than flutterings in your brain.
You are an idiot. Homesteading has existed for all of history. One guy with a sniper rifle can't take away someone else's land because everyone recognizes the rights of the homesteader, while very few recognize the rights of the thief.
You are missing the point. The guy with the sniper rifle can just kill everyone who disputes his claim on the land. Your "rights" are a gentlemen's agreement between members of society. They can exist only if backed by force. Otherwise, the force user will eliminate those who eschew force. This isn't about civilization, it's about the laws of physics.
How do you know the user is a child and thus subject to special rules? By asking them? If so, this is awesome -- I'll just tell everybody I'm a kid and get all the same privacy safeguards (because my "parent" is me, and he'll never give consent).
Why not support the study? Why not give science a chance to bear out these arguments?
Because there is no way to study this in a scientific way. You can't have a control group that gets no video games, and an experimental group that gets them, and then measure how many acts of violence occur. It is obviously completely unethical to conduct such an experiment, not to mention the rate of incidence of mass murders is so small that it simply would never happen -- your sample size would be zero.
Barring any experiment, all you can do is look at the data that already exists. And the data shows that there are very few (double digit) mass murderers, but tens of millions of violent video game players. And suppose we DO find some correlation between the two. How are you going to prove that it's causative? You can't do the experiments required to determine that, because they involve acts of violence. The whole question is pointless, and all that can come out of it is some statistical bullshit that politicians will use to justify all kinds of stupid shit.
Since the shooting, I've heard calls to weaken the First Amendment (to silence the Westboro assholes), the Second Amendment (take ALL the guns), and the Fifth Amendment (pre-emptively locking up people who are deemed "weird.") Why not just throw the entire document in the shredder at this point?
My mother always told me to never make a decision when I'm upset. I wish the people of this country would take that advice.
A government funded cyber campaign based on BAT2EXE and 16-bit code? Which doesn't even work effectively? If your goal is actually to destroy files, and you are a nation state, then you understand that simply deleting the files using the "del" command is not actually going to destroy any data. (I have no evidence that "del" was used, but hey, they ain't releasing the binary for me to analyze.)
If this was perpetrated by a nation state, then it must be meant as some kind of weird psy-op to confuse the shit out of people. I think chances are better that it was written by an idiot.
The free market fairy simply cannot wave her magic wand over everything. The government cannot avoid playing a role in i.e. wireless communications if you want them at all. Someone has to decide who can use what spectrum. Someone has to enforce the rules. There is a finite supply - meaningful competition is not possible even when this is done efficiently.
Right now there is a finite supply of spectrum, because all of our technologies are broadcast technologies. If we can find a way to shift from broadcast transmission to directional transmission, the sky will be the limit (quite literally). I realize there are deep technical challenges with directional radio, but over time we may overcome most of those.
Until such time, though, I agree some form of regulation is obviously necessary.
With a lot of RAM, you won't notice the SSD gains as much compared to an hard drive.
I have 10 GB in my home machine, not a small amount. I installed an SSD a few days ago. It is, hands down, the most amazing performance upgrade I have ever done in 20 years of building computers. I feel like getting a few more drives and RAID'ing them just to amplify the awesome.
Further proof celebs are fucking dumb. This guy wasn't a "real hacker".
On the contrary, guessing a password is a truly classic hack. What is more of a "real hack" from your perspective? Downloading and running a cracking script? To guess a person's password from information publicly available about them is a prime example of security-oriented thinking.
The best hacks are tailored precisely to the circumstances.
The thing that "isn't right" was Adam Lanza's brain. There is no deeper reason.
I think what happened is horrible and truly no one should go through it, however why has no one questioned the gun laws? I have yet to hear anyone blame that fact that a gun can be obtained so easily.
Are you on crack? That's pretty much the whole topic of national conversation at the moment!
what needs to happen is for all firearms to get banned.
If you want to change the Constitution to modify the 2nd Amendment, go for it. But any attempt to outlaw guns without first altering the Constitution is no less than high treason, and any lawmaker who signs his name to such legislation should be subject to the death penalty we have put in place for such crimes.
If you dont like what that group has to say then dont pay attention to them. Its really that easy. But dont be a stupid american jerk when it comes to someone elses thoughts or opinions you dont like.
"Blah blah free speech, you should all shut up." You're hilarious.
I'm not sure what the "it" is that you are referring to, but I assume you mean a headlong slide into totalitarianism. Frankly, if somebody was to take out every one of these motherfuckers, I don't think that, of all things, would be the trigger to form the "Fascist States of America."
People kill each other every day in this country because of what they say. It's no big deal. Eventually, somebody will be enraged enough by these idiots that they'll just take the fall for the rest of us and execute these people. That person will be caught, prosecuted, convicted, and then we can all go on with our lives and forget about the Westboro Baptist Church. No government involvement is required.