"I don't know how n9 is supposed to protect your privacy any better than a galaxy nexus. "
Because it's been designed to. The security framework has extended the concepts of UID/GID such that there's very tight partitioning of the user's data (and no "root" in use). Every program needs to request, at package building time, permission to access to the various data types and hardware devices (cellular, bluetooth, etc), and that's cryptographically signed. What's granted at run-time is the intersection of what you request, with filters based on things like where the app comes from (so official Nokia apps get what they ask for, but 3rd-party ones don't necessarily).
Whether it actually works as designed is yet to be really tested in the wild. I'd better not say anything more, this is my ${DAYJOB}. (And I have *plenty* more to say, it's a field I've spent a lot of time in.)
I would hope that he wouldn't just not grasp the concept, but would shun it for the nonsense that it is. Assuming he's not a touch typist, and makes an error about once every 30 characters, he'll very rarely be able to type your absurd suggestion correctly. Tough luck on those 3-failures and you're locked out sites.
And you apparently haven't got a clue about unicity distance - if someone shoulder-surfs a quarter of your phrase, there's a bloody good chance he'll be able to guess what the whole phrase is, as it's an incredibly-low entropy phrase. A quarter, 3 characters, from the shortened form would do little more than remove about 15 bits of entropy from it, rather than practically reducing the entropy to zero. All you'd need to see is "In the jung", and you're basically left with only about 6 more things to try.
I'm wondering if he thinks that as the odds become/greater/, they become/longer/, so representing something less likely. That would be a language fail, not a statistics one.
Better - pulp them into bricks that can be used as logs for a fire and burnt at your leisure in your weekend cottage. Paper burns slowly in bulk - turn that into a feature.
Nonsense. Did ${DAYJOB} create an account for me at LKML so that I could post my kernel patches, my work for hire, there? Of course not. Employees shouldn't need to be spoonfed like babies.
And I certainly don't expect ${DAYJOB} to forward linux-related mails Cc:d to my work address to me after I leave.
My work-related interface to the outside world is strictly ephemeral.
Apples and oranges. You aren't under a job contract, this guy is (and which almost certainly covers these things, and in the company's favour).
Just from what I read in the summary, I hope this guy gets slapped hard, he's clearly in the wrong. That twitter account was founded with a dependence on his employment in that company - it's theirs.
Absolutely. I requested anything to do with computational number theory and game theory to be excluded from the "we own yo azz" clause, and ${DAYJOB} were perfectly happy with that.
Alas, the work's kept me so busy I've made no progress at all on any of those home projects:-(
> > http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/The-Integer-Cache.aspx > It's a WTF. What, you never saw a C or C++ WTF?
I've seen C code WTFs, yes. However, read that article again - this particular WTF is a workaround for a *WTF in the language itself*. One I believe they kludged later (when the non-koolaid-drinkers had become aware of it), but if it takes you major 6 generations of a language before you're starting to be clear of WTFs (and I don't even know if that's true at all), then perhaps you were beating a dead horse to begin with.
If you know anything about C, you'll see that whoever wrote that page has serious problems in his knowledge of C. (At least from looking at the first 2 examples. I really didn't look any further, it was 2-strikes-and-you're-out, to be honest.)
No serious flaws? So you're too high on koolaid to remember http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/The-Integer-Cache.aspx And it seems that you need a string builder class to help you manipulate strings. Sorry, but that tells me that you're doing strings wrong.
But apart from the integers and the strings, everything's fine.
And clonal clusters have long survived not just the counter-hype, but the hype before that, the experiment before that, the industral era before that, the renaissance before that, and even the Greek formation of the foundations of modern scientific thought before that. And about 15000 years before that too.
That quote has convinced me to avoid the book at all costs.
If that's from 1952, then Pohl would have been in his 30s. Why does it look like it was written by someone in his tweens? I think I know why science fiction was treated with so much disdain in earlier times - simply because, if it's like the above, it's awful literature. The payload may be great, but the delivery is dreadful.
Same here. For over a decade I've lived on the coast of the baltic sea. I love baltic herring, in all its preparations. Unfortunately, I'm not so keen on the dioxins, mercury, and other heavy metals that Poland and Russia have been pumping into the baltic for decades. Baltic countries are now no longer allowed to export herring due to the toxin levels. (But yes, as you can tell from the wording, strangely they've been granted exceptions to eat it in their home markets.)
If that's the case, we've been using nuclear power for millennia too. That coal and oil you're burning - the carbon in it was created by nuclear fusion, wasn't it?
I had a 34020-powered card back in about 1992 (or at least access to one, it was on one of the work machines). Then the world got obsessed with 2D blitting, and 3D acceleration just got forgotten about. (Despite the fact that 3D was biiiig - but all being done by iD's guru asm code.)
Area is certainly useless as a factor when it comes to consumption. Squirrels do not consume our generated energy, and therefore are irrelevant. Humans do consume our generated energy, and therefore are relevant. Your equating of humans to squirrels shows the absurdity of your stance.
Area is relevant when it comes to capability for production, as its through natural resources that the energy is produced. However, it's consumption that's being argued about, not potential production.
Slashdot Mirror
"I don't know how n9 is supposed to protect your privacy any better than a galaxy nexus. "
Because it's been designed to. The security framework has extended the concepts of UID/GID such that there's very tight partitioning of the user's data (and no "root" in use). Every program needs to request, at package building time, permission to access to the various data types and hardware devices (cellular, bluetooth, etc), and that's cryptographically signed. What's granted at run-time is the intersection of what you request, with filters based on things like where the app comes from (so official Nokia apps get what they ask for, but 3rd-party ones don't necessarily).
Whether it actually works as designed is yet to be really tested in the wild. I'd better not say anything more, this is my ${DAYJOB}. (And I have *plenty* more to say, it's a field I've spent a lot of time in.)
I would hope that he wouldn't just not grasp the concept, but would shun it for the nonsense that it is. Assuming he's not a touch typist, and makes an error about once every 30 characters, he'll very rarely be able to type your absurd suggestion correctly. Tough luck on those 3-failures and you're locked out sites.
And you apparently haven't got a clue about unicity distance - if someone shoulder-surfs a quarter of your phrase, there's a bloody good chance he'll be able to guess what the whole phrase is, as it's an incredibly-low entropy phrase. A quarter, 3 characters, from the shortened form would do little more than remove about 15 bits of entropy from it, rather than practically reducing the entropy to zero. All you'd need to see is "In the jung", and you're basically left with only about 6 more things to try.
I'm wondering if he thinks that as the odds become /greater/, they become /longer/, so representing something less likely. That would be a language fail, not a statistics one.
Better - pulp them into bricks that can be used as logs for a fire and burnt at your leisure in your weekend cottage. Paper burns slowly in bulk - turn that into a feature.
Nonsense. Did ${DAYJOB} create an account for me at LKML so that I could post my kernel patches, my work for hire, there? Of course not. Employees shouldn't need to be spoonfed like babies.
And I certainly don't expect ${DAYJOB} to forward linux-related mails Cc:d to my work address to me after I leave.
My work-related interface to the outside world is strictly ephemeral.
Apples and oranges. You aren't under a job contract, this guy is (and which almost certainly covers these things, and in the company's favour).
Just from what I read in the summary, I hope this guy gets slapped hard, he's clearly in the wrong. That twitter account was founded with a dependence on his employment in that company - it's theirs.
Absolutely. I requested anything to do with computational number theory and game theory to be excluded from the "we own yo azz" clause, and ${DAYJOB} were perfectly happy with that.
:-(
Alas, the work's kept me so busy I've made no progress at all on any of those home projects
> > http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/The-Integer-Cache.aspx
> It's a WTF. What, you never saw a C or C++ WTF?
I've seen C code WTFs, yes. However, read that article again - this particular WTF is a workaround for a *WTF in the language itself*. One I believe they kludged later (when the non-koolaid-drinkers had become aware of it), but if it takes you major 6 generations of a language before you're starting to be clear of WTFs (and I don't even know if that's true at all), then perhaps you were beating a dead horse to begin with.
False, false, and false. You appear to be unable to distinguish an individual from the class it is a member of.
Don't try again, when it comes to logic and facts, past performance *is* a good indicator for the future.
Great - a Morris Woody! Who'd have thought that would take the track record?
Unfortunately, the ones that actually are going to go ahead with it are the ones less likely to send out the cries for help.
If you know anything about C, you'll see that whoever wrote that page has serious problems in his knowledge of C. (At least from looking at the first 2 examples. I really didn't look any further, it was 2-strikes-and-you're-out, to be honest.)
No serious flaws? So you're too high on koolaid to remember
http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/The-Integer-Cache.aspx
And it seems that you need a string builder class to help you manipulate strings. Sorry, but that tells me that you're doing strings wrong.
But apart from the integers and the strings, everything's fine.
wouldn't just putting their trotters in little pink booties be a simpler solution?
That problem's got a solution using millennia-old technology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durex
You know you're desperate when you're crowd-sourcing McDonalds.
And clonal clusters have long survived not just the counter-hype, but the hype before that, the experiment before that, the industral era before that, the renaissance before that, and even the Greek formation of the foundations of modern scientific thought before that. And about 15000 years before that too.
Brave New World was bang on too. I wouldn't expect the epsilons to understand that.
That quote has convinced me to avoid the book at all costs.
If that's from 1952, then Pohl would have been in his 30s. Why does it look like it was written by someone in his tweens? I think I know why science fiction was treated with so much disdain in earlier times - simply because, if it's like the above, it's awful literature. The payload may be great, but the delivery is dreadful.
Same here. For over a decade I've lived on the coast of the baltic sea. I love baltic herring, in all its preparations. Unfortunately, I'm not so keen on the dioxins, mercury, and other heavy metals that Poland and Russia have been pumping into the baltic for decades. Baltic countries are now no longer allowed to export herring due to the toxin levels. (But yes, as you can tell from the wording, strangely they've been granted exceptions to eat it in their home markets.)
You appear to be unable to distinguish selecting from modifying.
If I go to a bar and select a beer rather than a glass of wine, that doesn't make me a brewer.
If that's the case, we've been using nuclear power for millennia too. That coal and oil you're burning - the carbon in it was created by nuclear fusion, wasn't it?
Sounds like you need to put a dab of oil on the pivot of your irony meter.
I had a 34020-powered card back in about 1992 (or at least access to one, it was on one of the work machines). Then the world got obsessed with 2D blitting, and 3D acceleration just got forgotten about. (Despite the fact that 3D was biiiig - but all being done by iD's guru asm code.)
Economies are not measures in square kilometres.
Area is certainly useless as a factor when it comes to consumption. Squirrels do not consume our generated energy, and therefore are irrelevant. Humans do consume our generated energy, and therefore are relevant. Your equating of humans to squirrels shows the absurdity of your stance.
Area is relevant when it comes to capability for production, as its through natural resources that the energy is produced. However, it's consumption that's being argued about, not potential production.