I use PostgreSQL for my Toastmasters club hobby, letting people sign up for meeting roles online.
Only in a really twisted sense is keeping your comic book inventory on it overkill. You could just as easily say it's overkill to keep your physical comic books in your house if a locker would do. But if you have a house, keeping your comic books there is the most convenient thing. Same with a real database. Once you have it there are advantages to keeping everything there.
Where did you develop the illusion or delusion that a political base shrinks in power as it ages?
Apparently from the same place he got his polls saying Americans are getting less sympathetic to environmental groups. Like Bill O'Reilly, he just makes them up.
If 99% of security problems come from using external data without checking it, wouldn't it make sense to have a syntax that enumerated your external inputs like BRL has had for the past 6 years? Or better, one shows how each input is validated like BRL has had for 2 years with define-input?
This would have been a straightforward feature to copy/adapt into PHP if anyone were interested in making it a decent server-side web language.
Don't say "just like in any other language" when you're unaware of languages out there that are more suited to web applications.
To correct myself: I'm talking about the submitter's commentary, not the cited article. TinyURL does not enter into the aviation accident analogy, because TinyURL has not been demonstrated insecure here. By design TinyURL allows anonymous entry of information that becomes publicly readable. They are correct in waiting until there's an actual problem before building anything to "defend" against this filesystem hack.
In my analogy the programmer is the pilot and the programming language is the instrumentation. The goal is not to create an environment from which you cannot build an insecure application any more than instrumentation's goal is to make it impossible to crash the plane. The idea is to make it easy to see if you're at low altitude, or in the case of web apps, to see if you're not checking your inputs, for example.
The key to my own resizing script is the -pixels option to pnmscale. You can batch resize a lot of portrait, landscape, and variously cropped photos, making them all come out the same size.
These days I use gthumb to go through my photos to pick the best ones, crop and adjust brightness. The menu option for copying remembers multiple recent folders, so I can quickly sort them out into print-worthy ones (the topack folder used by my script) and web-worthy ones (toshrink). It's a smooth process.
The underlying message is that web application development is inherently difficult to secure, despite PHP's valiant attempts to protect programmers from themselves. This is the opposite of PHP bashing. It's PHP apologetics.
I disagree with the article's premise. It seems to me the same sort of mindset that attributes to "pilot error" aviation incidents that would better be attributed to poorly designed instrumentation.
If this is what "normal people" talk about I think I'd rather hang out with geeks.. at least we can have a conversation without backstabbing other people or thinking others are personally attacking us when they express their opinions.
That's exactly what I think. Maybe we can hang out some time...as long as you aren't a vi user.
Google "clinton disbarred" and you see it was for misleading testimony. At least they got him on something.
On the other hand, I'd take Clinton back in a heartbeat over the President who won't keep his promise to fire Karl Rove for blatant treason. At the risk of going back on topic, that's an intolerable security defect in this administration.
Under oath, Clinton was given a very specific definition of sexual relations, and according to that definition he didn't have sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. Where he did lie was to turn around and say the same thing to the American people. We didn't give him any such specific definition, so he should speak our language.
Without the normal DVD packaging, or after opening, you could still legally resell it, provided you don't keep any copies yourself. Unopened packaging may help you get a better price, but it isn't a legal requirement.
These companies whose only product is IP which they sell to other companies: Are they viewed as leeches in their fields, squatting on IP that would have been easily developed by others, or are they legitimate research institutions that provide a valuable oursourcing of expensive research and development?
No, not a lot of people are going to post about how the entire patent system needs to be thrown out. Some will, but most seem to be like me: not opinionated on the system as a whole, but against software patents in particular. If you look at the great innovations in software, those that have changed the world are unpatented.
Are there companies whose only assets are patents, say, in the mechanical engineering field? Pharmaceuticals? Aerospace? I wonder if this phenomenon happens only with software patents.
I don't know for sure that somewhere inside there's a bad connection between the built-in antenna and the built-in card, but I would think Apple would know how to connect them. I suspect the problem with my wife's model is that it's a 2005.
They are the vulnerabilities that you can always expect to be there. Other exploits, e.g. passing unescaped untrusted data to the shell or SQL, won't endlessly recur.
You may not have noticed this using a USB wireless network adapter, but the built-in ibook wireless doesn't get signal very well. I have an IBM thinkpad 600E with a Belkin PCMCIA wireless card. I get 80-90% signal in places where my wife's ibook get's none. I think Apple wants to sell lots of airport stations. (This is with a linksys B router).
Bugs and problems aren't always the same things as vulnerabilities. Apps that are programmable (e.g. with JavaScript) and apps compiled in a language vulnerable to buffer overflows will always have vulnerabilities. Other apps just have bugs.
Paul Begala pointed out in "Is Our Children Learning" that although Bush claims to have read the Bible, his inability to answer basic questions seems to indicate he never actually reads it himself. Likely his speechwriters do. Bush uses religious terms to pander to his base.
Such a contract is not a license. A license lets you do what you otherwise would not be allowed to do. In such a contract you agree to limit what you do. The ruling you cite hinges on a notice on the outside of the package, thus making it a pre-sale condition. Sellers have no more right to add post-sale conditions to contracts than buyers do.
Copyright does not grant copyright holders exclusive rights to run a program. A license is for copiers, redistributors, and modifiers of the code. The GPL explains this, but it applies to all licenses.
Interesting post, but where's the part about the Java language having an advantage?
The Java class library and the Java language are two distinct things. You can use one without the other.
Slashdot Mirror
I use PostgreSQL for my Toastmasters club hobby, letting people sign up for meeting roles online.
Only in a really twisted sense is keeping your comic book inventory on it overkill. You could just as easily say it's overkill to keep your physical comic books in your house if a locker would do. But if you have a house, keeping your comic books there is the most convenient thing. Same with a real database. Once you have it there are advantages to keeping everything there.
This would have been a straightforward feature to copy/adapt into PHP if anyone were interested in making it a decent server-side web language.
Don't say "just like in any other language" when you're unaware of languages out there that are more suited to web applications.
In my analogy the programmer is the pilot and the programming language is the instrumentation. The goal is not to create an environment from which you cannot build an insecure application any more than instrumentation's goal is to make it impossible to crash the plane. The idea is to make it easy to see if you're at low altitude, or in the case of web apps, to see if you're not checking your inputs, for example.
The key to my own resizing script is the -pixels option to pnmscale. You can batch resize a lot of portrait, landscape, and variously cropped photos, making them all come out the same size.
These days I use gthumb to go through my photos to pick the best ones, crop and adjust brightness. The menu option for copying remembers multiple recent folders, so I can quickly sort them out into print-worthy ones (the topack folder used by my script) and web-worthy ones (toshrink). It's a smooth process.
The underlying message is that web application development is inherently difficult to secure, despite PHP's valiant attempts to protect programmers from themselves. This is the opposite of PHP bashing. It's PHP apologetics.
I disagree with the article's premise. It seems to me the same sort of mindset that attributes to "pilot error" aviation incidents that would better be attributed to poorly designed instrumentation.
Would you mind posting a pointer to the polls you refer to? I'm interested as to how they were conducted.
Google "clinton disbarred" and you see it was for misleading testimony. At least they got him on something.
On the other hand, I'd take Clinton back in a heartbeat over the President who won't keep his promise to fire Karl Rove for blatant treason. At the risk of going back on topic, that's an intolerable security defect in this administration.
When I get the kind of specific warnings the Bush administration got before 9/11, I'll gladly let myself be held liable for my own security issues.
Under oath, Clinton was given a very specific definition of sexual relations, and according to that definition he didn't have sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. Where he did lie was to turn around and say the same thing to the American people. We didn't give him any such specific definition, so he should speak our language.
Without the normal DVD packaging, or after opening, you could still legally resell it, provided you don't keep any copies yourself. Unopened packaging may help you get a better price, but it isn't a legal requirement.
These companies whose only product is IP which they sell to other companies: Are they viewed as leeches in their fields, squatting on IP that would have been easily developed by others, or are they legitimate research institutions that provide a valuable oursourcing of expensive research and development?
No, not a lot of people are going to post about how the entire patent system needs to be thrown out. Some will, but most seem to be like me: not opinionated on the system as a whole, but against software patents in particular. If you look at the great innovations in software, those that have changed the world are unpatented.
Are there companies whose only assets are patents, say, in the mechanical engineering field? Pharmaceuticals? Aerospace? I wonder if this phenomenon happens only with software patents.
Are "P2P users buy more CDs" assertions any better or do they use the exact same fallacy?
I don't know for sure that somewhere inside there's a bad connection between the built-in antenna and the built-in card, but I would think Apple would know how to connect them. I suspect the problem with my wife's model is that it's a 2005.
They are the vulnerabilities that you can always expect to be there. Other exploits, e.g. passing unescaped untrusted data to the shell or SQL, won't endlessly recur.
You may not have noticed this using a USB wireless network adapter, but the built-in ibook wireless doesn't get signal very well. I have an IBM thinkpad 600E with a Belkin PCMCIA wireless card. I get 80-90% signal in places where my wife's ibook get's none. I think Apple wants to sell lots of airport stations. (This is with a linksys B router).
Bugs and problems aren't always the same things as vulnerabilities. Apps that are programmable (e.g. with JavaScript) and apps compiled in a language vulnerable to buffer overflows will always have vulnerabilities. Other apps just have bugs.
Paul Begala pointed out in "Is Our Children Learning" that although Bush claims to have read the Bible, his inability to answer basic questions seems to indicate he never actually reads it himself. Likely his speechwriters do. Bush uses religious terms to pander to his base.
Such a contract is not a license. A license lets you do what you otherwise would not be allowed to do. In such a contract you agree to limit what you do. The ruling you cite hinges on a notice on the outside of the package, thus making it a pre-sale condition. Sellers have no more right to add post-sale conditions to contracts than buyers do.
Copyright does not grant copyright holders exclusive rights to run a program. A license is for copiers, redistributors, and modifiers of the code. The GPL explains this, but it applies to all licenses.
Interesting post, but where's the part about the Java language having an advantage? The Java class library and the Java language are two distinct things. You can use one without the other.
When I went from MIT to another employer, I succeeded at being able to GPL code I wrote here using my essay about Solving the Buy vs Build Dilemma.