When I said "middle of the word", I was referring to the specific word that we are talking about, not the usage of apostrophes in words in general. I realize what apostrophes are used for. What I think is stupid is adding an apostrophe to "Halloween" as if people regularly go around calling it "All Hallows' Evening". That's not what we call it, we call it Halloween. That's it. On November 1st people don't go around telling each other to have a happy All Hallows' Day, that part of the holiday has just not been carried forward in the cultures (or culture, I guess) that celebrate Halloween. We can keep the linguistic history of the word to dictionaries and encyclopedias rather than adding an apostrophe to remind us where the word came from.
It might be considered "acceptable", but it still manages to annoy me. I don't speak Gaelic dialects, you see, so I don't see a reason in English to stick a seemingly-random apostrophe in the middle of the word. They also completely leave out the word "all" and drop the "s". "Halloween" makes sense as an English word that can trace it roots to other words, but I don't see a reason to alter the spelling to necessarily reflect that. It seems pompous to insist on the apostrophe.
I don't think anyone said "the iOS7 update damaged your wifi hardware". Here's one post that got removed:
Before I have another post removed I urge all those affected with wifi issues to exercise your rights as I have done as published on apples vet own website.
There are far too many of us affected for this to be a coincidence or consumer caused problem, I had a 16gb white 4s purchased in July 2013 and wifi was completely greyed out no matter what fixes I was advised to try.
I have been successful in my claim and am now in receipt of a brand new iPhone 5, this was provided to me by the phone shop I signed my O2 contract with last year.
Good luck and persevere
Lessig went back to ask a question and found that the post had been deleted, so he re-posted it and that one got deleted also. It's not about spreading false information, Apple just doesn't want people to use the warranty route (for possibly a good reason, since they did end up replacing the above device and thereby possibly admitting that it's their problem).
I don't understand the business case for this particular brand of spying. I don't see how things like passwords and financial data are going to help them recover a computer that wasn't returned. I can understand the webcam used for taking pictures of who is using the computer, or screenshots for looking at things like their Facebook account to identify the person by name, but other than that it seems like a huge overreach with no legitimate business purpose.
obama is a puppet, he is owned by his handlers (military/industrial complex & wallstreet & federal reserve) and he does exactly what they want him to do
This is probably what he has the most in common with previous presidents. I'm sure that when he got into office after promising to repeal or reform the patriot act, the NSA and other people sat him down and told him the way it is, and that was that.
The answer is in the code for the Windows kernel, not on Slashdot or Coding Horror or wherever else. And damn, mods, I really don't think it's flamebait to point that out.
Find me one operating system that doesn't do things in the background all the time.
I wasn't trying to suggest that background processes are unique to Windows. I was trying to suggest that Windows runs background processes differently than other operating systems, and if someone wants to know the details then the answers are in the code for the Windows kernel, not some public website.
I understand that much, but man I really got hit with some flamebait mods for suggesting that it would be best to ask the people at Microsoft instead of the general public. The answer to this question is in the Windows kernel. We can see the symptoms, and test things out, but we can't get a definitive answer unless we're looking at the code.
Apparently the other OSes get by without all that idle activity, so why not windows.
You're asking the same question, so you get the same answer:
Instead of asking the general public what Windows is doing in the background, you need to ask the people who build Windows. No one here who is not actively developing the Windows OS can tell you what it is doing in the background.
So, linux and OSX aren't doing anything in the background too?
Sure they are. You can even look at the source for Linux to eventually figure out exactly what it's doing. You can't do that with Windows, hence my point that there is no reason to ask the question to anyone except the engineers building Windows. Only they can tell you exactly what Windows is doing in the background.
Microsoft is only organization who can answer that question. No amount of beating on it or guessing is going to provide the answer. There's no point in asking that question to anyone except the engineers building the software, that was my point.
I just wish somebody could explain to me and Anand why Windows is so awful at managing idle power.
OK, Jeff and Anand, listen up: it's because Windows is doing things in the background.
What is it doing? Ask the engineers that built it. But there's no reason to ask stupid vague questions like that when the general answer is so obvious. Windows does a lot of things in the background, all the time. It sounds like that carried over to the mobile version. If you want to know exactly what it's doing in the background (for academic purposes, I assume, since that knowledge isn't very useful) then feel free to ask the people who designed and wrote the software instead of the general public.
Yeah, we sure can. Can we afford to continue with the ridiculously over-inflated defense budget apparently designed to counter an enemy that doesn't exist? No, we need to cut that. Then we can afford to fund education, healthcare, and everything else that will improve society.
The ACA is not the problem with our spending. The defense budget is the problem.
I should clarify in case this is the first reponse:
we already route all requests for files in the upload directory to a PHP script via htaccess to authenticate users before they can access the file, and there is also an option in the application whether or not to allow PHP execution in that directory (if disabled, it returns the file contents instead of including and executing the file).
What would be the alternative though? Is it possible to have the same functionality in a secure way? If my application needs to write to certain directories, and that is not an option or else the application would be useless, then how can those directories be protected? Any CMS that needs to upload images, for example, would be affected by that, right? It can be fairly trivial to protect in that case (put the upload directory outside of the web root and just return the file data), but what about an application where users need to upload arbitrary web-accessible content, which may contain PHP files? Other than trusting that your users aren't going to just upload a malicious PHP script through the interface (and they would have no reason to do so), what can be done in that situation?
A forum is a great learning exercise for people. I answer a lot of PHP and Javascript questions on the w3schools forum, and having a beginner design and develop a forum gives them exposure to a lot of skills (user authentication and management, form processing, file uploading, database design and API integration, ajax if they want to add it, etc). Something like a forum or photo gallery is a great beginner project to expose them to the majority of web programming skills that they'll use most often in a job.
But security is a completely separate topic. The OWASP site shows the breadth of application security as a topic. People often ask questions about what they need to do to make their site secure from hackers, and they ask about a function like mysqli::escape_string and think that that's all they need to know about security. It can be difficult to drill it into their head that security is an integral part about designing an application. Good programmers can make really obscure and really dangerous design decisions that could have a major impact on security, and unless you keep yourself aware of the breadth of vulnerabilities that you need to protect yourself from then it's certainly no surprise that exploits get found in major professional products from time to time. You don't need to be a poor programmer to make a design decision that has a very negative, if subtle, impact on security.
We've got your back. Don't negotiate with the Republican terrorists.
Stay Strong Conservatives, don't negotiate with the libtard fascists.
Yes, everyone just "stay strong" (a weird choice of speech, because you have to actually be strong in order to stay strong) and never negotiate! We don't need to negotiate! Negotiation accomplishes nothing!
I think the American people need to stay strong and kick out everyone in Washington who would rather hold the country hostage by refusing to negotiate instead of doing their actual jobs. Their job, by the way, is to negotiate.
Nothing quite like enhancing the scenery with 20 huge panels at roadside.
Why the hell are you driving around in the desert north of Gila Bend? You want a ton of land that is good for basically nothing except absorbing solar energy? Come out to Maricopa County, that's where it's at.
Also, you should look up the definition of "blight". Solar arrays are not a blight. Coal plants and strip mining are a blight.
Perhaps you should look into the numbers of female accusations and testimonies that turn out to be false in western courts. Perhaps the two women rule is to counter the fact that they seem to take a loose view of the definition of the word "truth."
You think this is only a problem with women, do you? Men lie all the time. So why is there no requirement that 2 men need to testify in order to be valid? There is nothing about women that makes them more likely than men to lie. In fact, in an Islamic society where men have all of the privilege and power and women have nothing, men have much more of a reason to lie in order to protect that privilege and power. Someone with nothing to lose has no reason to lie.
For a simple case of indecent exposure like this, you'll get a fine, maybe a few days in jail, and you'll probably have to register as a sex offender. That is a far cry from 10 years plus torture.
The example you linked to does not relate to the case in Saudi Arabia. He was not dancing naked on a car, he was a convicted rapist on parole masturbating in front of women in a park 3 different times. He should go back to jail, before he rapes someone again. His sentence is pretty ridiculous though, but that's why it's news.
A late term fetus is a small human being with the same right to life as you and me.
That is certainly one opinion, even if you want to state it as a fact. A fact is that we as a society do not assign an age to any fetus that has not been born, and they are not legally recognized as a person until they have been born. The birth certificate shows as much. The major exception to this is the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which goes out of its way to define a fetus as a legal person for the purpose of allowing it to be a victim of murder if the mother was killed. 36 states recognize a fetus as a crime victim for the purpose of homicide. The law also goes out of its way to specify that abortion is not murder.
Slashdot Mirror
When I said "middle of the word", I was referring to the specific word that we are talking about, not the usage of apostrophes in words in general. I realize what apostrophes are used for. What I think is stupid is adding an apostrophe to "Halloween" as if people regularly go around calling it "All Hallows' Evening". That's not what we call it, we call it Halloween. That's it. On November 1st people don't go around telling each other to have a happy All Hallows' Day, that part of the holiday has just not been carried forward in the cultures (or culture, I guess) that celebrate Halloween. We can keep the linguistic history of the word to dictionaries and encyclopedias rather than adding an apostrophe to remind us where the word came from.
What country is the apostrophe common in, anyway?
Common? None of them.
It might be considered "acceptable", but it still manages to annoy me. I don't speak Gaelic dialects, you see, so I don't see a reason in English to stick a seemingly-random apostrophe in the middle of the word. They also completely leave out the word "all" and drop the "s". "Halloween" makes sense as an English word that can trace it roots to other words, but I don't see a reason to alter the spelling to necessarily reflect that. It seems pompous to insist on the apostrophe.
I don't think anyone said "the iOS7 update damaged your wifi hardware". Here's one post that got removed:
Before I have another post removed I urge all those affected with wifi issues to exercise your rights as I have done as published on apples vet own website.
http://www.apple.com/uk/legal/statutory-warranty/
There are far too many of us affected for this to be a coincidence or consumer caused problem, I had a 16gb white 4s purchased in July 2013 and wifi was completely greyed out no matter what fixes I was advised to try.
I have been successful in my claim and am now in receipt of a brand new iPhone 5, this was provided to me by the phone shop I signed my O2 contract with last year.
Good luck and persevere
Lessig went back to ask a question and found that the post had been deleted, so he re-posted it and that one got deleted also. It's not about spreading false information, Apple just doesn't want people to use the warranty route (for possibly a good reason, since they did end up replacing the above device and thereby possibly admitting that it's their problem).
One, he's joking. But two, he's also serious.
You just blew my mind.
On the upside, banner ads will be pretty easy to target to make never appear with plugins.
You're telling me, I had to disable Opera's content blocking to read the story and Slashdot comments because the URLs have "banner-ad" in them.
I don't understand the business case for this particular brand of spying. I don't see how things like passwords and financial data are going to help them recover a computer that wasn't returned. I can understand the webcam used for taking pictures of who is using the computer, or screenshots for looking at things like their Facebook account to identify the person by name, but other than that it seems like a huge overreach with no legitimate business purpose.
obama is a puppet, he is owned by his handlers (military/industrial complex & wallstreet & federal reserve) and he does exactly what they want him to do
This is probably what he has the most in common with previous presidents. I'm sure that when he got into office after promising to repeal or reform the patriot act, the NSA and other people sat him down and told him the way it is, and that was that.
The question is: why is Windows so bad at it?
The answer is in the code for the Windows kernel, not on Slashdot or Coding Horror or wherever else. And damn, mods, I really don't think it's flamebait to point that out.
Find me one operating system that doesn't do things in the background all the time.
I wasn't trying to suggest that background processes are unique to Windows. I was trying to suggest that Windows runs background processes differently than other operating systems, and if someone wants to know the details then the answers are in the code for the Windows kernel, not some public website.
Unfortunately it isn't easy to explain
I understand that much, but man I really got hit with some flamebait mods for suggesting that it would be best to ask the people at Microsoft instead of the general public. The answer to this question is in the Windows kernel. We can see the symptoms, and test things out, but we can't get a definitive answer unless we're looking at the code.
Apparently the other OSes get by without all that idle activity, so why not windows.
You're asking the same question, so you get the same answer:
Instead of asking the general public what Windows is doing in the background, you need to ask the people who build Windows. No one here who is not actively developing the Windows OS can tell you what it is doing in the background.
So, linux and OSX aren't doing anything in the background too?
Sure they are. You can even look at the source for Linux to eventually figure out exactly what it's doing. You can't do that with Windows, hence my point that there is no reason to ask the question to anyone except the engineers building Windows. Only they can tell you exactly what Windows is doing in the background.
Microsoft is only organization who can answer that question. No amount of beating on it or guessing is going to provide the answer. There's no point in asking that question to anyone except the engineers building the software, that was my point.
It really is a simple question.
I just wish somebody could explain to me and Anand why Windows is so awful at managing idle power.
OK, Jeff and Anand, listen up: it's because Windows is doing things in the background.
What is it doing? Ask the engineers that built it. But there's no reason to ask stupid vague questions like that when the general answer is so obvious. Windows does a lot of things in the background, all the time. It sounds like that carried over to the mobile version. If you want to know exactly what it's doing in the background (for academic purposes, I assume, since that knowledge isn't very useful) then feel free to ask the people who designed and wrote the software instead of the general public.
Can we afford ACA?
Yeah, we sure can. Can we afford to continue with the ridiculously over-inflated defense budget apparently designed to counter an enemy that doesn't exist? No, we need to cut that. Then we can afford to fund education, healthcare, and everything else that will improve society.
The ACA is not the problem with our spending. The defense budget is the problem.
I should clarify in case this is the first reponse:
we already route all requests for files in the upload directory to a PHP script via htaccess to authenticate users before they can access the file, and there is also an option in the application whether or not to allow PHP execution in that directory (if disabled, it returns the file contents instead of including and executing the file).
Is that all that is necessary?
What would be the alternative though? Is it possible to have the same functionality in a secure way? If my application needs to write to certain directories, and that is not an option or else the application would be useless, then how can those directories be protected? Any CMS that needs to upload images, for example, would be affected by that, right? It can be fairly trivial to protect in that case (put the upload directory outside of the web root and just return the file data), but what about an application where users need to upload arbitrary web-accessible content, which may contain PHP files? Other than trusting that your users aren't going to just upload a malicious PHP script through the interface (and they would have no reason to do so), what can be done in that situation?
A forum is a great learning exercise for people. I answer a lot of PHP and Javascript questions on the w3schools forum, and having a beginner design and develop a forum gives them exposure to a lot of skills (user authentication and management, form processing, file uploading, database design and API integration, ajax if they want to add it, etc). Something like a forum or photo gallery is a great beginner project to expose them to the majority of web programming skills that they'll use most often in a job.
But security is a completely separate topic. The OWASP site shows the breadth of application security as a topic. People often ask questions about what they need to do to make their site secure from hackers, and they ask about a function like mysqli::escape_string and think that that's all they need to know about security. It can be difficult to drill it into their head that security is an integral part about designing an application. Good programmers can make really obscure and really dangerous design decisions that could have a major impact on security, and unless you keep yourself aware of the breadth of vulnerabilities that you need to protect yourself from then it's certainly no surprise that exploits get found in major professional products from time to time. You don't need to be a poor programmer to make a design decision that has a very negative, if subtle, impact on security.
We've got your back. Don't negotiate with the Republican terrorists.
Stay Strong Conservatives, don't negotiate with the libtard fascists.
Yes, everyone just "stay strong" (a weird choice of speech, because you have to actually be strong in order to stay strong) and never negotiate! We don't need to negotiate! Negotiation accomplishes nothing!
I think the American people need to stay strong and kick out everyone in Washington who would rather hold the country hostage by refusing to negotiate instead of doing their actual jobs. Their job, by the way, is to negotiate.
THere is a place for it but Senator Reid objects.
That's because it's a blight on the land.
Nothing quite like enhancing the scenery with 20 huge panels at roadside.
Why the hell are you driving around in the desert north of Gila Bend? You want a ton of land that is good for basically nothing except absorbing solar energy? Come out to Maricopa County, that's where it's at.
Also, you should look up the definition of "blight". Solar arrays are not a blight. Coal plants and strip mining are a blight.
Perhaps you should look into the numbers of female accusations and testimonies that turn out to be false in western courts. Perhaps the two women rule is to counter the fact that they seem to take a loose view of the definition of the word "truth."
You think this is only a problem with women, do you? Men lie all the time. So why is there no requirement that 2 men need to testify in order to be valid? There is nothing about women that makes them more likely than men to lie. In fact, in an Islamic society where men have all of the privilege and power and women have nothing, men have much more of a reason to lie in order to protect that privilege and power. Someone with nothing to lose has no reason to lie.
For a simple case of indecent exposure like this, you'll get a fine, maybe a few days in jail, and you'll probably have to register as a sex offender. That is a far cry from 10 years plus torture.
The example you linked to does not relate to the case in Saudi Arabia. He was not dancing naked on a car, he was a convicted rapist on parole masturbating in front of women in a park 3 different times. He should go back to jail, before he rapes someone again. His sentence is pretty ridiculous though, but that's why it's news.
A late term fetus is a small human being with the same right to life as you and me.
That is certainly one opinion, even if you want to state it as a fact. A fact is that we as a society do not assign an age to any fetus that has not been born, and they are not legally recognized as a person until they have been born. The birth certificate shows as much. The major exception to this is the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which goes out of its way to define a fetus as a legal person for the purpose of allowing it to be a victim of murder if the mother was killed. 36 states recognize a fetus as a crime victim for the purpose of homicide. The law also goes out of its way to specify that abortion is not murder.