Maybe it could travel directly between two massive black holes that have the same gravitational pull, where the object travels along the line where the force from each black hole exactly counters the force from the other. Of course, the deceleration as the object moves away would also probably counteract the acceleration it got on the way in.
Maybe we could just put it in the LHC, surely that can blast a hole through the planet.
Well, I'm not sure what kind of force is required to penetrate through the entire planet, but I assume that the old P=MV comes into play. P is momentum, M is mass, and V is velocity. If you determined the mass of a 7-meter diameter object (you could assume it was made of iron and had a density of about 8000kg/m^3), and if you could determine the force required to penetrate through the earth, then you could calculate the velocity needed for an object with that mass to produce that amount of force. The force required to penetrate the earth would be pretty difficult to calculate, considering that the center is liquid iron and would really melt anything that hung around too long.
Since it claims objects that size impact Earth about once every 5 years, the damage would be the same that we see every time one of these impacts. If you can't think of the last time that happened or you can't think of a damage report about that, then that should be your answer.
The six cents I earned in January have "cleared," and I'm guessing the remaining $2080 will clear on schedule
This has nothing to do with trees falling, it's still fraud. He specifically intended to commit fraud, and he was successful at it. And what's more, he even confessed to it on his blog. There's not a lot of grey area here.
This is pretty clearly about disclosing a vulnerability, not "bragging" about defrauding a large corporation.
That doesn't change the fact that he did indeed defraud Microsoft and that he also intended to do it. That's something he could easily get convicted on. It doesn't really matter why he defrauded them, if he did so and intended to then he's guilty of the crime.
According to our idiotic U.S. law, you are guilty of hacking a computer service. It doesn't matter that you didn't actually do it - you are presumed guilty, and it's your job to prove innocence.
Nice troll, but that's not how it works. A confession tends to remove that whole notion of "presumed innocent". This guy confessed to exactly what he did. Frankly, he should be convicted and fined, at the very least this is fraud that he willfully perpetrated and then confessed to.
Probably not the most intelligent blog post he's ever made..
PayPal has a mechanism to send the transaction back to the originating server to verify that it actually took place on that site. And likewise, when your server receives a notification from PayPal you can send it back to PayPal to verify that they actually sent it.
Trying to run it in Linux. Think back to when you set up your system, I'm sure there's a good reason to have that WinXP partition there. But when you buy a game and try to run it on an OS that it wasn't built for, you can sort of expect as much..
So what should I do, every time I define a function or property I need to set a reference to it in the global window object? You know, there's a reason I use namespaces in my code (or at least as close as Javascript can get). Should I go through all 1MB+ of Javascript code for the application and rewrite everything just for the privilege of using Closure to minify everything? There are plenty of minifiers around that don't break my code.
Or is your web app more popular than gmail?
No, only a few hundred thousand users.
I am sure that 90% of *your* code is cruft given how quick you are to dismiss something of real value.
Again, there are plenty of minifiers out there. If my code doesn't have any unreachable functions it doesn't really matter if I'm using something that removes unreachable functions.
I do notice that you're more than willing to jump to unfounded conclusions yourself, though.
I suppose I could minify that first, minified it's down to about 450KB. But I was trying to determine if this does a better job minifying the code, so I guess the answer to that is no.
But yeah, that's the main admin interface file for my application. Gzipped it's down to only 50KB to download though, so it moves pretty quick.
If things start to base more and more in javascript, specially complex one, not only the old browsers will die (ok, killing IE6 for good is an obligation for the future of mankind, or at least internet), but also current/competitive browsers not so fast at the javascript arena will get a big hit too. Good enough will stop being enough when most internet need complex javascript and a blazing fast javascript engine to work.
It's not really that bad. I've been developing a pretty massive application based on ExtJS that runs surprisingly fast in IE6. In Chrome or Firefox it runs very fast. I'm talking about 450KB minified Javascript files here, doing things like laying out data in sortable filtering grids, tree structures, drag and drop, etc. I'm surprised at how well IE manages to use it.
These results are very impressive. I fed it a 445KB Javascript file for one of my applications and it was able to reduce that to only 9KB of code! Who knew that 90% of that code was just cruft? It even had the added bonus of randomly inserting subtraction operators in the middle of my identifier names and constants.
A terrible film, with a terrible plot, terrible portrayal of computer systems
Oh c'mon, it's not that bad. It's entirely believable that one would be able to download The Accumulated Wealth Of The World into a removable hard drive and abscond with apparently the only copy of it.
Both Microsoft and Ubuntu appear to rely on their customers to test new OS releases for them.
Right, the Windows 7 beta has been out for almost a year, so that's about 6 months of good beta testing that Microsoft got before they released it to the manufacturer in July, and then they had another 3 months to work on patches or whatever before it got released in October.
It seems a little weird that an upgrade from version 9.04 to 9.10 would have so many issues though. Maybe they try to conserve version numbers over at Canonical, but how much really changed between those versions?
You need to put that into perspective though. The market share of Windows 7 is already larger than the market share of Linux (more than 2x, according to hitslink.com). So the percentage of Windows 7 users that are experiencing problems seems to be pretty small (or else we'd be hearing about it here). Meanwhile...
They're in good company, as more than a fifth of people upgrading to Ubuntu 9.10 have reported issues they can't fix, according to an Ubuntuforums.org poll here. Only around 10 per cent of those upgrading or installing reported a completely flawless experience.
So over 20% of people are reporting unfixable issues, while about 10% are reporting no issues at all, with the remaining roughly 70% reporting issues that they are able to fix.
Yeah, all this work developing a useful feature since 2006 waiting for driver support that wasn't coming, might as well just get that out of the OS to stop everyone from using it and enjoying the feature.
Or, more likely, the first service pack will contain the necessary updates to enable this natively without needing the third party software.
This is not an exploit as in a vulnerability, this is exploiting a feature in the sense of taking advantage of and using it. The story is just that Microsoft released the OS without doing this themselves. It's entirely possible that Microsoft intended to release something down the road that enabled all of this, so it may make sense to ship the OS with most of the base code so that it doesn't need to be downloaded again later.
According to TFA the lower-level implementation code was there, but the driver-level code had not been finished because of an apparent lack of driver support. The company who finished this feature says that they realized that they already had all of the needed code in their other networking products.
But, let's be serious, you just wanted to write "M$", didn't you?
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe it could travel directly between two massive black holes that have the same gravitational pull, where the object travels along the line where the force from each black hole exactly counters the force from the other. Of course, the deceleration as the object moves away would also probably counteract the acceleration it got on the way in.
Maybe we could just put it in the LHC, surely that can blast a hole through the planet.
Well, I'm not sure what kind of force is required to penetrate through the entire planet, but I assume that the old P=MV comes into play. P is momentum, M is mass, and V is velocity. If you determined the mass of a 7-meter diameter object (you could assume it was made of iron and had a density of about 8000kg/m^3), and if you could determine the force required to penetrate through the earth, then you could calculate the velocity needed for an object with that mass to produce that amount of force. The force required to penetrate the earth would be pretty difficult to calculate, considering that the center is liquid iron and would really melt anything that hung around too long.
Since it claims objects that size impact Earth about once every 5 years, the damage would be the same that we see every time one of these impacts. If you can't think of the last time that happened or you can't think of a damage report about that, then that should be your answer.
The six cents I earned in January have "cleared," and I'm guessing the remaining $2080 will clear on schedule
This has nothing to do with trees falling, it's still fraud. He specifically intended to commit fraud, and he was successful at it. And what's more, he even confessed to it on his blog. There's not a lot of grey area here.
This is pretty clearly about disclosing a vulnerability, not "bragging" about defrauding a large corporation.
That doesn't change the fact that he did indeed defraud Microsoft and that he also intended to do it. That's something he could easily get convicted on. It doesn't really matter why he defrauded them, if he did so and intended to then he's guilty of the crime.
According to our idiotic U.S. law, you are guilty of hacking a computer service. It doesn't matter that you didn't actually do it - you are presumed guilty, and it's your job to prove innocence.
Nice troll, but that's not how it works. A confession tends to remove that whole notion of "presumed innocent". This guy confessed to exactly what he did. Frankly, he should be convicted and fined, at the very least this is fraud that he willfully perpetrated and then confessed to.
Probably not the most intelligent blog post he's ever made..
PayPal has a mechanism to send the transaction back to the originating server to verify that it actually took place on that site. And likewise, when your server receives a notification from PayPal you can send it back to PayPal to verify that they actually sent it.
Morrigan turned out all right..
In fact, half the NPC women in Redcliffe turned out all right.
So you're saying that the $7 Warden's Keep content is the difference between mediocre and fantastic?
It's also amusing that there's no Priest class, and all of the priests in the game tend to be rogues instead of mages.
Half a game? The game has, what, 80 hours of gameplay? It's a 20GB download, and you're bitching over an extra 4 or so hours worth of play time?
Wonder what I'm doing wrong.
Trying to run it in Linux. Think back to when you set up your system, I'm sure there's a good reason to have that WinXP partition there. But when you buy a game and try to run it on an OS that it wasn't built for, you can sort of expect as much..
You did buy it, right?
The advanced compression...
Not sure how that applies to my example of using the simple compression.
*requires* you to code in a particular style to use it
If it requires a specific coding style it's not really a "Javascript compiler", is it?
read the effing manual
I assume you're referring to this:
http://code.google.com/closure/compiler/docs/api-tutorial3.html
So what should I do, every time I define a function or property I need to set a reference to it in the global window object? You know, there's a reason I use namespaces in my code (or at least as close as Javascript can get). Should I go through all 1MB+ of Javascript code for the application and rewrite everything just for the privilege of using Closure to minify everything? There are plenty of minifiers around that don't break my code.
Or is your web app more popular than gmail?
No, only a few hundred thousand users.
I am sure that 90% of *your* code is cruft given how quick you are to dismiss something of real value.
Again, there are plenty of minifiers out there. If my code doesn't have any unreachable functions it doesn't really matter if I'm using something that removes unreachable functions.
I do notice that you're more than willing to jump to unfounded conclusions yourself, though.
Can you put peroxide in your ear?
Yes, unless its frozen.
Why would you freeze your ear?
I suppose I could minify that first, minified it's down to about 450KB. But I was trying to determine if this does a better job minifying the code, so I guess the answer to that is no.
But yeah, that's the main admin interface file for my application. Gzipped it's down to only 50KB to download though, so it moves pretty quick.
If things start to base more and more in javascript, specially complex one, not only the old browsers will die (ok, killing IE6 for good is an obligation for the future of mankind, or at least internet), but also current/competitive browsers not so fast at the javascript arena will get a big hit too. Good enough will stop being enough when most internet need complex javascript and a blazing fast javascript engine to work.
It's not really that bad. I've been developing a pretty massive application based on ExtJS that runs surprisingly fast in IE6. In Chrome or Firefox it runs very fast. I'm talking about 450KB minified Javascript files here, doing things like laying out data in sortable filtering grids, tree structures, drag and drop, etc. I'm surprised at how well IE manages to use it.
http://code.google.com/closure/library/
These results are very impressive. I fed it a 445KB Javascript file for one of my applications and it was able to reduce that to only 9KB of code! Who knew that 90% of that code was just cruft? It even had the added bonus of randomly inserting subtraction operators in the middle of my identifier names and constants.
closable:f-alse
suc-cess:function(){window.location.reload(true)}
I also gave it the URL of a 860KB JS file which it claimed was "unavailable", despite being able to load the 445KB file in the same directory.
Let me guess, Google: it's a beta.
A terrible film, with a terrible plot, terrible portrayal of computer systems
Oh c'mon, it's not that bad. It's entirely believable that one would be able to download The Accumulated Wealth Of The World into a removable hard drive and abscond with apparently the only copy of it.
Both Microsoft and Ubuntu appear to rely on their customers to test new OS releases for them.
Right, the Windows 7 beta has been out for almost a year, so that's about 6 months of good beta testing that Microsoft got before they released it to the manufacturer in July, and then they had another 3 months to work on patches or whatever before it got released in October.
It seems a little weird that an upgrade from version 9.04 to 9.10 would have so many issues though. Maybe they try to conserve version numbers over at Canonical, but how much really changed between those versions?
Works?
Is that a question, were you not sure whether or not it worked?
Actually works?
I don't know, does it? Why are you asking me? It's your computer!
Works...
Ah, a statement, but something seems to be left out...
You need to put that into perspective though. The market share of Windows 7 is already larger than the market share of Linux (more than 2x, according to hitslink.com). So the percentage of Windows 7 users that are experiencing problems seems to be pretty small (or else we'd be hearing about it here). Meanwhile...
They're in good company, as more than a fifth of people upgrading to Ubuntu 9.10 have reported issues they can't fix, according to an Ubuntuforums.org poll here. Only around 10 per cent of those upgrading or installing reported a completely flawless experience.
So over 20% of people are reporting unfixable issues, while about 10% are reporting no issues at all, with the remaining roughly 70% reporting issues that they are able to fix.
Yeah, those inactive services he was describing can be pretty dangerous.
Yeah, all this work developing a useful feature since 2006 waiting for driver support that wasn't coming, might as well just get that out of the OS to stop everyone from using it and enjoying the feature.
Or, more likely, the first service pack will contain the necessary updates to enable this natively without needing the third party software.
This is not an exploit as in a vulnerability, this is exploiting a feature in the sense of taking advantage of and using it. The story is just that Microsoft released the OS without doing this themselves. It's entirely possible that Microsoft intended to release something down the road that enabled all of this, so it may make sense to ship the OS with most of the base code so that it doesn't need to be downloaded again later.
According to TFA the lower-level implementation code was there, but the driver-level code had not been finished because of an apparent lack of driver support. The company who finished this feature says that they realized that they already had all of the needed code in their other networking products.
But, let's be serious, you just wanted to write "M$", didn't you?