An important thing to keep in mind is that these latest protests are pro-military, pro-monarchy and anti-democratic. And they actually do threaten the stability of the country and its lawfully elected government.
Basically the protesters don't like how the election turned out.
Not saying censorship is the solution, but its kind of hard to judge them as an outsider.
Well vocational education is a bit different I'd think. I'd be surprised if there was an accredation system for high school computer programming or networking, unless maybe its the AP CS class (which it probably isn't, since there are specific textbooks for that).
If your teaching a non-academic programming class, I don't really see the point in using a textbook. Decide on your language and find a good introductory book for it.
I liked the idea that got struck from the Viking mission. Put out a petri dish with some yummy organics, and drop some martian dust on it. See if anything grows.
IANAChemist, but seems like there should be some way to detect interesting organics other then a DNA test...
It seems outrageous to me that OOXML was approved as a standard despite not having more then one implementation to prove that it's possible for it to be a common format.
However it's freakin' hilarious/sad/odd that there actually isn't even ONE implementation of OOXML and it was approved. Doesn't the ISO have any standards for standards? Or is it just a matter of gaming the process? Maybe the ISO itself should be reconsidered...
Ah yep since I wrote the comment you replied to I read all this.
I think the point made by one of the comments on the bug report saying something like "let's not change stuff just to make it debug easier" is a valid point, and what happened demonstrates why. I think this is also an issue and that this POV was ignored shows a problem with Debian's patching policy in general.
You have to recompile your Java apps and library to work on Android, since they're using a different Java bytecode. They've also developed a whole new GUI toolkit apparently.
They do have some performance reason for the change, but it's hard not to suspect some politics.
While not a security argument, I would say that the main argument against the patch was that you shouldn't change runtime behavior just to make debugging easier. Which I think is a good idea, especially for downstream. If they had followed this idea, the patch would never have been committed.
Obviously some of the OpenSSL devs probably should've been like "zOMG, SITUATION FUBAR", but it wasn't a formal code review being requested, more of a "hey, what do you think of this and this?" and the patch was never submitted to upstream.
Says the first comment to the patch, in regards to what is being reversed: "What it's doing is adding uninitialised numbers to the pool to create random numbers."
OpenSSL having more-random numbers vs. Valgrind looking good. And Valgrind won?
The consensus in the bug report seems to be not to do it, but then someone adds the patch anyways.
I'm OK with people using the term "hack" to mean "crack."
But don't tell me I can't hack on my software. Hack isn't the first word to have multiple meanings, it's easy to tell what someone means by the context.
Government Auction vs eBay. On eBay lying, cheating , and manipulation of the system are banned to protect the consumer. In government auctions they don't give a damn about the consumer; so lying, cheating, and manipulation are the norm. and as a tax payer, I'm glad that they do. As in this case the "consumers" are large multibillion dollar corporations.
They aren't trying to play this off as altruistic. It's obviously in Google's interests to have wireless be more open, so that they can sell their devices to anyone regardless of their phone company. The entry says this.
Slashdot Mirror
The Democrats drafted the Patriot Act and jammed it through to a vote?
Blaming Democrats for "taking away freedoms left and right" seems like an old tired story after the last 8 years.
An important thing to keep in mind is that these latest protests are pro-military, pro-monarchy and anti-democratic. And they actually do threaten the stability of the country and its lawfully elected government.
Basically the protesters don't like how the election turned out.
Not saying censorship is the solution, but its kind of hard to judge them as an outsider.
Well vocational education is a bit different I'd think. I'd be surprised if there was an accredation system for high school computer programming or networking, unless maybe its the AP CS class (which it probably isn't, since there are specific textbooks for that).
If your teaching a non-academic programming class, I don't really see the point in using a textbook. Decide on your language and find a good introductory book for it.
I liked the idea that got struck from the Viking mission. Put out a petri dish with some yummy organics, and drop some martian dust on it. See if anything grows.
IANAChemist, but seems like there should be some way to detect interesting organics other then a DNA test...
Encfs stores all the file permission and date info and each file individually. Just FTP the encrypted version.
Its coming... and it will come out using KDE 4.1 likely. :)
Or you can just click on the RSS icon in the address bar when you're on the GMail site.
Does SABS have bigger problems though? I wouldn't think so.
:)
Way to not even read the article summary.
It seems outrageous to me that OOXML was approved as a standard despite not having more then one implementation to prove that it's possible for it to be a common format.
However it's freakin' hilarious/sad/odd that there actually isn't even ONE implementation of OOXML and it was approved. Doesn't the ISO have any standards for standards? Or is it just a matter of gaming the process? Maybe the ISO itself should be reconsidered...
magnatune.com has FLAC. :)
Ah yep since I wrote the comment you replied to I read all this.
I think the point made by one of the comments on the bug report saying something like "let's not change stuff just to make it debug easier" is a valid point, and what happened demonstrates why. I think this is also an issue and that this POV was ignored shows a problem with Debian's patching policy in general.
other biomass? Soylent fuel is made out of PEOPLE!!
You have to recompile your Java apps and library to work on Android, since they're using a different Java bytecode. They've also developed a whole new GUI toolkit apparently.
They do have some performance reason for the change, but it's hard not to suspect some politics.
They own it to. Just sayin'
While not a security argument, I would say that the main argument against the patch was that you shouldn't change runtime behavior just to make debugging easier. Which I think is a good idea, especially for downstream. If they had followed this idea, the patch would never have been committed.
Ben Laurie of OpenSSL/Apache puts it into some context:
http://www.links.org/?p=327#comment-176642
Obviously some of the OpenSSL devs probably should've been like "zOMG, SITUATION FUBAR", but it wasn't a formal code review being requested, more of a "hey, what do you think of this and this?" and the patch was never submitted to upstream.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=363516
Check out this bug report and tell me they weren't just being arrogant:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=363516
Says the first comment to the patch, in regards to what is being reversed:
"What it's doing is adding uninitialised numbers to the pool to create random numbers."
OpenSSL having more-random numbers vs. Valgrind looking good. And Valgrind won?
The consensus in the bug report seems to be not to do it, but then someone adds the patch anyways.
So you want the bots to take a test that a human would fail?
I'm OK with people using the term "hack" to mean "crack."
But don't tell me I can't hack on my software. Hack isn't the first word to have multiple meanings, it's easy to tell what someone means by the context.
According to your link, Google would've had to be working with the FCC for it to be shilling.
Why else would they push the FCC to add the openness rules? And then out-bid themselves?
Openness is in Googles self-interest (Android anyone?), I don't see anyone claiming it's out of the goodness of their hearts.
They aren't trying to play this off as altruistic. It's obviously in Google's interests to have wireless be more open, so that they can sell their devices to anyone regardless of their phone company. The entry says this.