As a gamer, I definitely want a high-res display. Sniping someone from across the map is a lot easier if they look like a person rather than a pixel.
The only reason I would consider running at less than 1920x1280 would be if I couldn't afford a video card capable of smooth framerates at that speed. Luckily, I have an IT job.
Software should not be released until it is ready.
That idea doesn't scale. When you are talking about thousands of pieces of software maintained by thousands of different people, you can't wait until the stars align. You must release at some point.
With Debian Stable I have to install lots of software from source because the supported versions are so pathetically outdated. This causes the system to be... less stable.
LTS release schedules are more stable and less work to maintain because they typically have all the software I need in their supported repositories.
Wouldn't surprise me. Perl is big and will have a long half-life. All I'm saying is that I don't see new projects being done in Perl. I don't see new start-ups building their businesses on Perl. I don't see big software companies using it as their go-to language. And I don't see college kids saying "I love this Perl syntax and want to specialize in this language."
It is certainly possible to make a career in Perl, and it will be for quite a while. Still, the language has peaked, while languages with identical functionality are growing quite rapidly.
Uh huh. Because you're Mr. Chromatic from Reddit. You're the guy writing a book on Perl 5. That makes you one of the most high-profile of a an endangered species. It's no surprise that *you* are contacted. For everyone else? That would be a surprise.
The bigger problem appears that CS programs now focus on teaching tools and how to Google as opposed to thinking or problem solving, in order to meet perceived industry demand.
What? Schools teach "googling?" Bullshit. They very much teach datastructures in school these days.
If you have to teach your new hires the basics, you suck at recruiting. Period. Quit hiring trade-school graduates and barely-passing cheaters for $50k/year. Offer real salaries to hire talented graduates from real universities.
There sure as hell wasn't a focus on "googling" at my university. It was math and algorithm analysis... probably too much of it. It was also assembly/machine language, computer architecture, and digital circuits. What they don't teach CS grads is "how to recruit talent." This is the class YOU need.
Whether you like Perl or not, you must admit that it is becoming a "legacy" language. Learning Perl today is gunning for a job as a maintenance programmer.
These days, "enterprise" software uses Java or C#; high-performance or hardware-intimate software (games, science, OS, microcontroller) uses C or C++; and general-purpose or web-development software uses Ruby, Python, or PHP. Perl has been squeezed out of its niche.
It's not just that: open source also limits your competitors.
Sun gives us Java/JRE, OpenOffice, NetBeans, MySQL, etc.. Without Sun, Microsoft's.NET/CLR, MS Office, VisualStudio, MS SQL Server, etc.. would be much more dominant, and so Microsoft could leverage that position to give even more boost to their own solution stack, eating further into Oracle/Sun's turf.
So even though they might not derive revenue directly from these projects, the existence of Sun's OSS prevents a competitor from leveraging further into the space they DO derive revenue from.
We are going to build a space ship to send men to asteroids and to moons of Mars, yet 90% of the comments are not about space exploration, but about political bullshit.
Fuck you all. Slashdot, you used to be cool. Now, you're about as insightful as Fox news.
> If someone actually tried to sue Google for not allowing SPAM into their own network, well...
Well, that's not what we are talking about here. Google is not blocking spam. Google is falsely marking all legitimate mail from a small business as spam. Google is providing no means for the small business to even talk to someone about Google's fuck-up. Google is destroying a business.
If Google were blocking unsolicited mail, there would be no legal question about it. Bug Google is blocking legitimate, solicited mail. Sounds like grounds for a lawsuit.
I've felt the pain of this battle myself. I moved to a new host, and Google rejected every message sent by my mail server as being spam. They redirected me to their "bulk email policy," which is absurd. My server has never sent anything even remotely similar to bulk email. I spent days jumping through Google's hoops (by enabling SPF, etc.) and their mail server started ACCEPTING mail from my server at least, but it still routes it all to the Spams folder in GMail.
The worst part is that Google doesn't even list a phone number I could contact to get their fuckup fixed.
The big mail operators, like Google, have the power to sabotage any small business or start-up, and we have no recourse. I can't wait to see the first lawsuits against Google or Microsoft for libel following false spam accusations like this causing real monetary damages to businesses.
You are overlooking the possibility of games eventually being so good that all humans become addicted. Forget your LCD and joystick; think about direct neural I/O to a VR world that is seems better in every way than the real world--a game designed specifically to match the human brain's desires precisely.
Despite "DIFFERENTIAL REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS," species have and will continue to go extinct. Humans could go extinct, too. This is just one possible mechanism.
Fact 2: the number of people addicted to video games is increasing
Fact 3: video games will continue to improve
Game addicts still do what they need to do to put food on the table, but they don't do so well with things like reproduction. Once games are so good that they are indistinguishable from reality (or are better than reality)... well, draw your own conclusion based on the facts above.
That's not at all far-fetched. Organized crime currently operates by attempting to get malware on machines in banks and businesses used for wire transfers, then wiring that money away. But to get the malware inside an organization in the first place, they have to trick the users into clicking something dumb (in email, IM, or web ads).
If they could get backdoors in common internet-exposed applications (like apache or postifx, say), they would have immediate access into a large percentage of orgs without having to trick any users (and get by spam filters, web proxies, etc.). It makes perfect sense.
"Cyber" bank robbery accounted for more theft than in-person bank robbery last year. There is real, easy-to-demonstrate ROI in developing better attacks.
SHA-256 is, in theory, totally crackable for up to eight characters or so. The FRT project has SHA1 rainbow tables up to around that length. I was not able to find any SHA-256 tables, though. Anyone in the business of password cracking likely has private rainbow tables for all of the common hash algos.
See the currently-available public rainbow tables here:
In short: US investors have better business sense. Consider a Facebook app that costs $40k to develop and $2k per month to operate ($88k total cost). Over the two years following its release, this hypothetical app earns an average of $10k per month ($240k revenue). That's a 173% ROI in only two years.
Now consider a Japanese company that spends $4.5M to develop a neat humanoid robot with no commercial applications because it could never be manufactured at costs accessible to a consumer. That is a negative 100% ROI. But because Japanese companies are kept alive by government credit subsidies, they have to show SOMETHING neat to the politicians to keep the national malinvestment capital flowing.
Bonds pay a rate; shares pay a percentage of profits.
What you described is nothing more than privatizing NASA and selling shares to fund its operation.
This would result in the cessation of astronomical research. NASA would inevitably become just another aerospace engineering company under your "plan."
We need off-world colonization to ensure the survival of the human race. Knowing more about the atmospheric composition of Neptune is great, but the survival of the human race is greater.
Once we have a self-sustaining greenhouse going on the moon and or mars, we can throw more resources into robots.
Your post is an example of failing to understand information security.
Security practitioners have accepted the fact that it is infeasible to ever expect that all applications be free of security holes. It is also unwise to insist on the fantastically-higher expense of using dedicated hardware rather than virtualization for most applications. Because of this, we have adopted a strategy of "defense in depth" whereby we layer multiple countermeasures to reduce the probability of successful exploitation.
A security control which stops 99% of malware from taking hold, yet allows 1% to do so, is not considered "flawed," it is considered very successful. Layer such things together and the chance of a given attack working becomes 1% of 1% of 1% and so-on.
There will always be bugs. Accept reality and roll with the punches.
Slashdot Mirror
As a gamer, I definitely want a high-res display. Sniping someone from across the map is a lot easier if they look like a person rather than a pixel.
The only reason I would consider running at less than 1920x1280 would be if I couldn't afford a video card capable of smooth framerates at that speed. Luckily, I have an IT job.
That idea doesn't scale. When you are talking about thousands of pieces of software maintained by thousands of different people, you can't wait until the stars align. You must release at some point.
With Debian Stable I have to install lots of software from source because the supported versions are so pathetically outdated. This causes the system to be... less stable.
LTS release schedules are more stable and less work to maintain because they typically have all the software I need in their supported repositories.
Wouldn't surprise me. Perl is big and will have a long half-life. All I'm saying is that I don't see new projects being done in Perl. I don't see new start-ups building their businesses on Perl. I don't see big software companies using it as their go-to language. And I don't see college kids saying "I love this Perl syntax and want to specialize in this language."
It is certainly possible to make a career in Perl, and it will be for quite a while. Still, the language has peaked, while languages with identical functionality are growing quite rapidly.
Uh huh. Because you're Mr. Chromatic from Reddit. You're the guy writing a book on Perl 5. That makes you one of the most high-profile of a an endangered species. It's no surprise that *you* are contacted. For everyone else? That would be a surprise.
You recruit from schools with bad programs. Nobody forces you to do that.
What? Schools teach "googling?" Bullshit. They very much teach datastructures in school these days.
If you have to teach your new hires the basics, you suck at recruiting. Period. Quit hiring trade-school graduates and barely-passing cheaters for $50k/year. Offer real salaries to hire talented graduates from real universities.
There sure as hell wasn't a focus on "googling" at my university. It was math and algorithm analysis... probably too much of it. It was also assembly/machine language, computer architecture, and digital circuits. What they don't teach CS grads is "how to recruit talent." This is the class YOU need.
Whether you like Perl or not, you must admit that it is becoming a "legacy" language. Learning Perl today is gunning for a job as a maintenance programmer.
These days, "enterprise" software uses Java or C#; high-performance or hardware-intimate software (games, science, OS, microcontroller) uses C or C++; and general-purpose or web-development software uses Ruby, Python, or PHP. Perl has been squeezed out of its niche.
It's not just that: open source also limits your competitors.
Sun gives us Java/JRE, OpenOffice, NetBeans, MySQL, etc.. Without Sun, Microsoft's .NET/CLR, MS Office, VisualStudio, MS SQL Server, etc.. would be much more dominant, and so Microsoft could leverage that position to give even more boost to their own solution stack, eating further into Oracle/Sun's turf.
So even though they might not derive revenue directly from these projects, the existence of Sun's OSS prevents a competitor from leveraging further into the space they DO derive revenue from.
We are going to build a space ship to send men to asteroids and to moons of Mars, yet 90% of the comments are not about space exploration, but about political bullshit.
Fuck you all. Slashdot, you used to be cool. Now, you're about as insightful as Fox news.
> If someone actually tried to sue Google for not allowing SPAM into their own network, well...
Well, that's not what we are talking about here. Google is not blocking spam. Google is falsely marking all legitimate mail from a small business as spam. Google is providing no means for the small business to even talk to someone about Google's fuck-up. Google is destroying a business.
If Google were blocking unsolicited mail, there would be no legal question about it. Bug Google is blocking legitimate, solicited mail. Sounds like grounds for a lawsuit.
What is their agenda? (other than to promote lung health, which no reasonable person could criticize)
I am not sharing my IP address with anyone else. Google is inarguably falsely implicating my mail server as being a spam source.
I can't afford a lawyer yet, but it is only a matter of time until someone a little bigger runs into this problem.
I've felt the pain of this battle myself. I moved to a new host, and Google rejected every message sent by my mail server as being spam. They redirected me to their "bulk email policy," which is absurd. My server has never sent anything even remotely similar to bulk email. I spent days jumping through Google's hoops (by enabling SPF, etc.) and their mail server started ACCEPTING mail from my server at least, but it still routes it all to the Spams folder in GMail.
The worst part is that Google doesn't even list a phone number I could contact to get their fuckup fixed.
The big mail operators, like Google, have the power to sabotage any small business or start-up, and we have no recourse. I can't wait to see the first lawsuits against Google or Microsoft for libel following false spam accusations like this causing real monetary damages to businesses.
You are overlooking the possibility of games eventually being so good that all humans become addicted. Forget your LCD and joystick; think about direct neural I/O to a VR world that is seems better in every way than the real world--a game designed specifically to match the human brain's desires precisely.
Despite "DIFFERENTIAL REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS," species have and will continue to go extinct. Humans could go extinct, too. This is just one possible mechanism.
Game addicts still do what they need to do to put food on the table, but they don't do so well with things like reproduction. Once games are so good that they are indistinguishable from reality (or are better than reality)... well, draw your own conclusion based on the facts above.
That's not at all far-fetched. Organized crime currently operates by attempting to get malware on machines in banks and businesses used for wire transfers, then wiring that money away. But to get the malware inside an organization in the first place, they have to trick the users into clicking something dumb (in email, IM, or web ads).
If they could get backdoors in common internet-exposed applications (like apache or postifx, say), they would have immediate access into a large percentage of orgs without having to trick any users (and get by spam filters, web proxies, etc.). It makes perfect sense.
"Cyber" bank robbery accounted for more theft than in-person bank robbery last year. There is real, easy-to-demonstrate ROI in developing better attacks.
SHA-256 is, in theory, totally crackable for up to eight characters or so. The FRT project has SHA1 rainbow tables up to around that length. I was not able to find any SHA-256 tables, though. Anyone in the business of password cracking likely has private rainbow tables for all of the common hash algos.
See the currently-available public rainbow tables here:
http://freerainbowtables.mirror.garr.it/mirrors/freerainbowtables/
I would assume it to me a function of several things, radius and gravity being among the most important.
Why don't very small bodies have thick atmospheres?
Hm? Wouldn't one expect a star to have a much denser atmosphere due to the high gravity?
The fastest probe we've ever launched went about 1/1000 c, not 1/10c. You're off by two orders of magnitude.
If we had the ability to go that fast, we would already have a probe on its way to alpha proxima.
In short: US investors have better business sense. Consider a Facebook app that costs $40k to develop and $2k per month to operate ($88k total cost). Over the two years following its release, this hypothetical app earns an average of $10k per month ($240k revenue). That's a 173% ROI in only two years.
Now consider a Japanese company that spends $4.5M to develop a neat humanoid robot with no commercial applications because it could never be manufactured at costs accessible to a consumer. That is a negative 100% ROI. But because Japanese companies are kept alive by government credit subsidies, they have to show SOMETHING neat to the politicians to keep the national malinvestment capital flowing.
Bonds pay a rate; shares pay a percentage of profits.
What you described is nothing more than privatizing NASA and selling shares to fund its operation.
This would result in the cessation of astronomical research. NASA would inevitably become just another aerospace engineering company under your "plan."
We need off-world colonization to ensure the survival of the human race. Knowing more about the atmospheric composition of Neptune is great, but the survival of the human race is greater.
Once we have a self-sustaining greenhouse going on the moon and or mars, we can throw more resources into robots.
Your post is an example of failing to understand information security.
Security practitioners have accepted the fact that it is infeasible to ever expect that all applications be free of security holes. It is also unwise to insist on the fantastically-higher expense of using dedicated hardware rather than virtualization for most applications. Because of this, we have adopted a strategy of "defense in depth" whereby we layer multiple countermeasures to reduce the probability of successful exploitation.
A security control which stops 99% of malware from taking hold, yet allows 1% to do so, is not considered "flawed," it is considered very successful. Layer such things together and the chance of a given attack working becomes 1% of 1% of 1% and so-on.
There will always be bugs. Accept reality and roll with the punches.