The others are more clunky and might confuse readers. With "Minnesnowta" it's easy to tell the state name. I don't think I would have picked up what "Flooda" is referring to, and I definitely would not have gotten "Phurnace". And Arizona being arid really isn't a problem; Southern California is arid too, but the weather there is great because it's mild and it's right next to the ocean (the problem with SoCal is the LAPD and all the crime, not the weather). Arizona (the southern part, where Phoenix is) is a hellhole not just because it's arid, but more importantly because it's hot. Florida is a hellhole for the same reason, but it's not arid at all there. In North Dakota, as I understand it, snow isn't really that big a problem anyway; the main problem there is the -40 - -50 temperatures. Good luck cycling in that.
While I have a natural affinity and aptitude for computers science, mathematics, analysis and associated critical thinking skills, if I could turn back the clock I would have chosen another career rather than information technology.
Another problem I've seen in the engineering/IT/CS fields is people like you. (Please note I'm not criticizing you in any way; your opinion is valid and you have every right to express it, it just proves my point about the career not having prestige and workers not being treated that well.) In other careers, like medicine, if some kid comes up to a doctor and asks him if he likes his job, the doctor will evangelize the career. He'll talk about being able to help people, save their lives, how important the work is, maybe that he's paid really well, etc. Many professionals will do this if asked by children or high school students thinking about what to major in in college. But I can't tell you how many times I've read engineers say they've discouraged their kids from going into the field. People in these fields just don't evangelize it the way people in prestigious fields do with their careers. And for good reason too I think, but the effect is: kids get turned away from these fields, because we as a society don't value these careers that much, and employers don't treat people in these fields very well (cue recent Microsoft layoff of 15000 employees). Even when the pay is pretty good, the work conditions can be rather maddening, as seen in your own comments.
In the workplace I prefer female co-workers because they actually get the job done and contrary to popular mythology these women are not engaged in backstabbing and political machinations unlike many of my male co-workers. It only takes one political operative to destroy a team and jeopardise projects.
My wife disagrees with you. She hates women with a passion, because of her time in the legal field where women (esp. the lawyers) were mostly horrible, backstabbing, jezebel cunts.
I suspect this phenomenon varies largely with industry. I've worked with women in my software engineering jobs, and never had much trouble with them, and preferred working with them to men. (I'm a man BTW.) However, I imagine the women who are attracted to engineering careers are quite different from the women who go into legal work. So many of these generalizations ("women are backstabbers") are both true and false: they're false in the sense they're not true everywhere, but they're true for certain subsets of whatever population is being generalized. It's like the generalization that Christians are all homophobes; this is definitely true for some of them (thanks to WBC), probably for very many of them (evangelicals are usually homophobes), but not for all of them (there's some protestant sects which have openly gay ministers). The question is whether the generalization covers the majority of the group being generalized, or not, and that's very very hard to determine.
Seriously we need to make bicycle commuting a social norm in this country. You save gas. You save money. Instead you burn fat, which you normally pay to get rid of anyway (gym membership, diet counseling, etc)
That's not going to happen until we spend a ton of money and make safe bike lanes and roads, instead of expecting cyclists to share the road with idiot drivers in giant SUVs applying their makeup and texting while driving.
Worse, even if we did that, in many locales it still wouldn't be very popular because the weather is so lousy in North America. Sure, places like southern California, the Pacific Northwest coastal area, even much of the east coast during the three non-winter seasons would be perfectly nice for cycling, but think about places like North Dakota, Minnesnowta, Arizona, etc. You'd be lucky to have decent and safe weather half the year, if that. In Phoenix, it's over 100 degrees for at least half the year; it's actually unhealthy to ride in weather that hot. Florida probably isn't any better. And with global warming, summer temperatures are rising.
No, Slashdot needs to get with the times and allow editing of comments like Reddit does.
If people are worried about writers going back later and editing comments to make responders look bad or whatever, they could simply set it so you could only edit your comment within 5 minutes of posting, or until someone makes a response. The problem is it's easy to make a post, and then quickly notice you want to add something, or fix something, but can't because it's posted. There's a reason we stopped using typewriters and switched to word processors decades ago: we could correct errors easily. But for some reason Slashdot wants things set in stone.
And I wouldn't say that C++ adds much to maintainability -
Actually, it does, by giving you abstractions instead of you having to write them yourself as you do in C. In the embedded world, there's a term: "C with classes": this is when C++ is used on embedded systems, but only a small subset of C++. The code looks pretty much just like C, but there's classes and inheritance, but many other things are specifically omitted, such as exceptions. In aviation (DO-178), there's standards for using C++ in avionics systems, and here again, they specifically forbid the use of many C++ features which prevent determinism, such as exceptions.
If anyone's going to write a kernel in C++, they should just follow the FAA DO-178 standards.
How does that make any sense when all the tech giants have numbers of "minorities" greater than the industry mean. How can you both discriminate against under-represented people
No, they don't. Indians and Chinese are not considered "under-represented", only blacks and hispanics. Yes, they actually consider all these ethnic groups differently. For instance, if you're a black student wanting to go to college for CS, there's likely some scholarships for you. If you're Indian, forget it, there's no such scholarships, and being a minority nationwide doesn't get you the same perks that being black does.
I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but it sounds like you're trying to make it out that all minorities are the same, and they're not, nor are they treated the same as each other by the government or industry or anyone who tracks this stuff.
Finally someone standing up and going "The problem isn't discrimination, the problem is those people just aren't THERE to be hired!"
Except these code.org people are absolutely wrong, as usual. They're closer to the trail than the feminists and others who blame hiring practices, but they're still far from the root cause.
The real problem isn't the education pipeline. As TFS notes, only one male student in Mississippi bothered to take the AP CS exam. What most of these organizations don't seem to understand is that this is not the Soviet Union, and you can't force people to go into degree fields they're not interested in. The problem is our culture, plain and simple. No one wants to go into this field except a certain subset of the population which is almost 100% white and male, and also certain groups of non-Americans (or at least 2nd generation immigrants), namely Indians and also some Chinese. It's all about culture.
In American culture, being a developer or software engineer or whatever term you want to use is simply not seen as a prestigious career path. People in this career path are generally treated poorly and don't make that much money compared to career paths with similar educational requirements and difficulty, and the prestige is pathetic. Honestly, someone who starts a restaurant or a plumbing business has more social prestige and status than a software engineer. For the same education, you could get a degree in finance and work on Wall Street and have beautiful NYC women throwing themselves at you. You won't have that in the software field; women will run the other way when they find out what you do for a living (though they'll want to call you up when they have a computer problem, expecting you to come over and fix it for free).
As far as I'm concerned, there's simply no way to fix this. America has long been an anti-intellectual culture; just look at how many people still believe that vaccines cause autism. People here would rather believe a comedian who tells them this, rather than hordes of doctors and scientists who tell them it's bullshit. Think about this for a minute: the average American, looking for medical advice, will believe a comedian over a doctor or a medical researcher. What does that say about our culture?
I think we should just give up and accept that this is not going to change. You can't change culture with a government mandate.
The only answer is to vote 3rd party, otherwise you're just part of the problem by voting for a bad president. It doesn't matter if the 3rd-party candidate is destined to lose; it's that mentality that keeps the 3rd parties out of power, plus you can be held blameless for anything the president does if you didn't vote for him. If you vote for him and he's horrible, well you're to blame, and it's rather hypocritical to complain about him after-the-fact when you knew in the voting booth that he'd suck.
I didn't call you a liberal. My post was directed at all the Obama fans, not to you. Since you were bashing Obama, you obviously weren't much of an Obama fan or a tow-the-party-line liberal.
As for 2012, the answer is yes. Vote 3rd party. It's the only thing that makes sense, even if it's destined for failure. If you vote for a bad president, then you're partly responsible for all his actions. If you vote for someone else, you're not. Out of all these people complaining about Obama, if they actually voted for him, they're hypocrites, because they enabled him by voting for him. I voted for Johnson, so you can't blame me for any of Obama's messes. If more people had voted like me, we wouldn't be having so many problems.
For those of the same ideology, you'll hear stuff about blaming "the government", "the bureaucracy" / agency in question, or the individual announcing the policy - Holder in the case.
Yes, but Obama as the head of the executive branch is Holder's boss, and picked the guy out for the job. This is why it's a cop-out to avoid blaming Obama for his henchmen's actions, just like it was a cop-out to avoid blaming Bush for the actions of Ashcroft and friends.
But since you mention it, I have seen homes with big, thick bars over the windows that the fireman's ax wouldn't be able to cut through. It would take the jaws-of-life to pry them off.
I haven't seen those many times, but you're right, there are houses like that. Good luck breaking through those easily.
Still, even with a 1" throw, I can install a metal door and a metal frame bolted to my metal stud walls, all legally. No way they are just kicking that door down.
Actually, it's still easy to break down that door. The Achilles' Heel you're missing is the hinges. But first, are your metal stud walls the typical commercial steel studs? Those things are paper thin and easily bent; they're only meant for holding up drywall, not for any great strength. What's important is what the door framing is made of. Commercial-grade doors have heavy steel frames, and those would indeed be hard to bust through (regardless of what your wall is made of). However, again, the weak point is the hinges. You can get door-breaching rounds for a shotgun and shoot out the hinges with them. Or you can break down the door with a battering ram, by concentrating on the hinges side rather than the deadbolt side. The deadbolt is a thick, 1" long piece of steel, usually going into an anchor plate or pocket held in with some very long screws. The hinges, OTOH, are usually held in with some very short screws.
>Also, just to be precise, I believe the 1" limit depends on the jurisdiction - my state limits deadbolts to 1" but your mileage may vary.
I don't think I've seen any longer. It's very unlikely a big lock company like Kwikset or Schlage would bother making different-length deadbolts for sale in different states; it's much easier just to manufacture to the lowest common denominator. It's just like cars; once California makes something a mandate, all the automakers just adopt that for all cars sold nationwide.
for example deadbolts are legally limited to 1" in throw length so that they can be broken by emergency personnel if necessary, say when a fire occurs.
Wow, that seems like a ridiculous law. No one really needs to break through the front door of a house. If it's a true emergency, you can always break a window. I haven't seen a house yet that didn't have easily-broken windows. A fireman's axe should have no problem breaking through a window and quickly removing any dangerous shards.
Sorry to play devil's advocate, but cancer cells are just as much a part of your body as any of your other cells. However, if the rest of your body doesn't utilize its immune system cells to seek out and kill these cancer cells (which I guarantee you probably have a few of in your body somewhere as I write this), then you'll grow a malignant tumor and without serious foreign intervention (medical treatment) you'll die.
-- enacted Nixon's health care plan with the liberal parts stripped out.
What's really funny is how all the tofu-eating liberals will defend Obamacare to the death even though it's a right-wing corporatist scheme.
Obama is a case study in how to take the troublesome younger leftist activist types in society and turn them into ardent defenders of crony capitalism.
Also, SCREW YOU Obama Administation, for your big fat 'Fuck You' to the American public and their civil rights and constitutional rights.
Also, SCREW YOU to the liberal morons who voted for Obama, insisting that he'd be completely different from Bush, and then have come out in droves to defend Obama's policies which mirror Bush's.
the problem really comes down to this: NOBODY trusts the US gov'ment to actually hang on to that crap. It's just too easy to exploit.
Sure they do. The liberals would happily trust Obama and Holder with their encryption keys. And the Republicans would happily trust the Bush administration with their keys. The two groups just don't just the opposite administration.
I mean really, where do you see liberals bitching and demonstrating against Obama and his policies? They were happy to do so back in the Bush days, but now that their savior is doing it, they're just fine with this stuff.
I've seen news reports that call simple street vandalism and muggings "domestic terrorism".
To be fair, is it really inaccurate to call them that (at least the muggings, not the vandalism)? Were the mugging victims not scared for their lives? Just about any violent crime could be called "terrorism".
The whole "safety, safety, safety" bit has gotten so ridiculous and I am endlessly surprised by the fact that a majority of people haven't cried "bullshit" on it.
If Obama were a Republican, you would be hearing a much bigger outcry (esp. in tech circles) about this bullshit. However, since he's a Democrat and he's the "savior", the liberals refuse to criticize him and will just back everything he does, even when it's exactly the same as what Bush did, or worse.
> This didn't protect against such scams either however, as people did things like manually redrawing bridges on chips to disabled cores and so on.
That's because they were doing things outside the chip packaging, such as putting SMD components (jumper resistors for instance) on the top of the package. It's not hard so solder simple SMD components with a soldering iron, though it is a little harder than reflashing some firmware.
If they make the modifications on the chip die, before packaging, that's going to prevent almost anyone from re-enabling features that were disabled at the factory. Cutting a chip open, making modifications at the microscopic level, then putting it back together so it isn't obvious that it's been tampered with, is not an easy task, or something that a guy in his garage can do.
It seems the real use for SQLite (besides teaching) is for cases where you simply don't have multiple processes accessing the same database, or if they do occasionally, performance isn't a big concern. One big example I can think of is storing configuration variables for applications. That's not something you want to have a full-blown database like PostgreSQL running for, but it can be handy to use SQLite so you have more power than you'd get with flat files.
AMD does this. Nvidia does this. Pretty much everyone making complex chips does this. It's massively uneconomical to throw away an entire chip over partial failures.
Then they need to stop doing this. Chips should be able to run any software you throw at them without having problems.
If there's bad cores on the chip, there's an easy solution: don't use software to turn off the cores, use hardware. When the chip is still unpackaged, it should be fairly easy to use a laser to disable the core permanently, maybe by setting some jumpers inside the chip or something. Mfgrs should make any mods to the hardware they need to while it's still in the factory; after it's out, it should be able to run any software.
This is what they get for trying to do everything with software.
Slashdot Mirror
The others are more clunky and might confuse readers. With "Minnesnowta" it's easy to tell the state name. I don't think I would have picked up what "Flooda" is referring to, and I definitely would not have gotten "Phurnace". And Arizona being arid really isn't a problem; Southern California is arid too, but the weather there is great because it's mild and it's right next to the ocean (the problem with SoCal is the LAPD and all the crime, not the weather). Arizona (the southern part, where Phoenix is) is a hellhole not just because it's arid, but more importantly because it's hot. Florida is a hellhole for the same reason, but it's not arid at all there. In North Dakota, as I understand it, snow isn't really that big a problem anyway; the main problem there is the -40 - -50 temperatures. Good luck cycling in that.
While I have a natural affinity and aptitude for computers science, mathematics, analysis and associated critical thinking skills, if I could turn back the clock I would have chosen another career rather than information technology.
Another problem I've seen in the engineering/IT/CS fields is people like you. (Please note I'm not criticizing you in any way; your opinion is valid and you have every right to express it, it just proves my point about the career not having prestige and workers not being treated that well.) In other careers, like medicine, if some kid comes up to a doctor and asks him if he likes his job, the doctor will evangelize the career. He'll talk about being able to help people, save their lives, how important the work is, maybe that he's paid really well, etc. Many professionals will do this if asked by children or high school students thinking about what to major in in college. But I can't tell you how many times I've read engineers say they've discouraged their kids from going into the field. People in these fields just don't evangelize it the way people in prestigious fields do with their careers. And for good reason too I think, but the effect is: kids get turned away from these fields, because we as a society don't value these careers that much, and employers don't treat people in these fields very well (cue recent Microsoft layoff of 15000 employees). Even when the pay is pretty good, the work conditions can be rather maddening, as seen in your own comments.
In the workplace I prefer female co-workers because they actually get the job done and contrary to popular mythology these women are not engaged in backstabbing and political machinations unlike many of my male co-workers. It only takes one political operative to destroy a team and jeopardise projects.
My wife disagrees with you. She hates women with a passion, because of her time in the legal field where women (esp. the lawyers) were mostly horrible, backstabbing, jezebel cunts.
I suspect this phenomenon varies largely with industry. I've worked with women in my software engineering jobs, and never had much trouble with them, and preferred working with them to men. (I'm a man BTW.) However, I imagine the women who are attracted to engineering careers are quite different from the women who go into legal work. So many of these generalizations ("women are backstabbers") are both true and false: they're false in the sense they're not true everywhere, but they're true for certain subsets of whatever population is being generalized. It's like the generalization that Christians are all homophobes; this is definitely true for some of them (thanks to WBC), probably for very many of them (evangelicals are usually homophobes), but not for all of them (there's some protestant sects which have openly gay ministers). The question is whether the generalization covers the majority of the group being generalized, or not, and that's very very hard to determine.
Seriously we need to make bicycle commuting a social norm in this country. You save gas. You save money. Instead you burn fat, which you normally pay to get rid of anyway (gym membership, diet counseling, etc)
That's not going to happen until we spend a ton of money and make safe bike lanes and roads, instead of expecting cyclists to share the road with idiot drivers in giant SUVs applying their makeup and texting while driving.
Worse, even if we did that, in many locales it still wouldn't be very popular because the weather is so lousy in North America. Sure, places like southern California, the Pacific Northwest coastal area, even much of the east coast during the three non-winter seasons would be perfectly nice for cycling, but think about places like North Dakota, Minnesnowta, Arizona, etc. You'd be lucky to have decent and safe weather half the year, if that. In Phoenix, it's over 100 degrees for at least half the year; it's actually unhealthy to ride in weather that hot. Florida probably isn't any better. And with global warming, summer temperatures are rising.
>If it can be done in a user space driver, it should be done there. USB devices, printers, etc. have no performance need to be in the kernel.
That's just stupid.
First, printers are already not in the kernel, they're handled by CUPS. Printers have never been in the Linux kernel that I"m aware of.
And USB does need to be in the kernel for performance reasons when you're dealing with USB3 and devices like hard drives.
Surely that could be avoided with either code review, or perhaps an automated syntax checker.
No, Slashdot needs to get with the times and allow editing of comments like Reddit does.
If people are worried about writers going back later and editing comments to make responders look bad or whatever, they could simply set it so you could only edit your comment within 5 minutes of posting, or until someone makes a response. The problem is it's easy to make a post, and then quickly notice you want to add something, or fix something, but can't because it's posted. There's a reason we stopped using typewriters and switched to word processors decades ago: we could correct errors easily. But for some reason Slashdot wants things set in stone.
And I wouldn't say that C++ adds much to maintainability -
Actually, it does, by giving you abstractions instead of you having to write them yourself as you do in C. In the embedded world, there's a term: "C with classes": this is when C++ is used on embedded systems, but only a small subset of C++. The code looks pretty much just like C, but there's classes and inheritance, but many other things are specifically omitted, such as exceptions. In aviation (DO-178), there's standards for using C++ in avionics systems, and here again, they specifically forbid the use of many C++ features which prevent determinism, such as exceptions.
If anyone's going to write a kernel in C++, they should just follow the FAA DO-178 standards.
How does that make any sense when all the tech giants have numbers of "minorities" greater than the industry mean. How can you both discriminate against under-represented people
No, they don't. Indians and Chinese are not considered "under-represented", only blacks and hispanics. Yes, they actually consider all these ethnic groups differently. For instance, if you're a black student wanting to go to college for CS, there's likely some scholarships for you. If you're Indian, forget it, there's no such scholarships, and being a minority nationwide doesn't get you the same perks that being black does.
I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but it sounds like you're trying to make it out that all minorities are the same, and they're not, nor are they treated the same as each other by the government or industry or anyone who tracks this stuff.
Or just pick up random underrepresented people and put them in prison so the numbers work out.
Finally someone standing up and going "The problem isn't discrimination, the problem is those people just aren't THERE to be hired!"
Except these code.org people are absolutely wrong, as usual. They're closer to the trail than the feminists and others who blame hiring practices, but they're still far from the root cause.
The real problem isn't the education pipeline. As TFS notes, only one male student in Mississippi bothered to take the AP CS exam. What most of these organizations don't seem to understand is that this is not the Soviet Union, and you can't force people to go into degree fields they're not interested in. The problem is our culture, plain and simple. No one wants to go into this field except a certain subset of the population which is almost 100% white and male, and also certain groups of non-Americans (or at least 2nd generation immigrants), namely Indians and also some Chinese. It's all about culture.
In American culture, being a developer or software engineer or whatever term you want to use is simply not seen as a prestigious career path. People in this career path are generally treated poorly and don't make that much money compared to career paths with similar educational requirements and difficulty, and the prestige is pathetic. Honestly, someone who starts a restaurant or a plumbing business has more social prestige and status than a software engineer. For the same education, you could get a degree in finance and work on Wall Street and have beautiful NYC women throwing themselves at you. You won't have that in the software field; women will run the other way when they find out what you do for a living (though they'll want to call you up when they have a computer problem, expecting you to come over and fix it for free).
As far as I'm concerned, there's simply no way to fix this. America has long been an anti-intellectual culture; just look at how many people still believe that vaccines cause autism. People here would rather believe a comedian who tells them this, rather than hordes of doctors and scientists who tell them it's bullshit. Think about this for a minute: the average American, looking for medical advice, will believe a comedian over a doctor or a medical researcher. What does that say about our culture?
I think we should just give up and accept that this is not going to change. You can't change culture with a government mandate.
The only answer is to vote 3rd party, otherwise you're just part of the problem by voting for a bad president. It doesn't matter if the 3rd-party candidate is destined to lose; it's that mentality that keeps the 3rd parties out of power, plus you can be held blameless for anything the president does if you didn't vote for him. If you vote for him and he's horrible, well you're to blame, and it's rather hypocritical to complain about him after-the-fact when you knew in the voting booth that he'd suck.
I didn't call you a liberal. My post was directed at all the Obama fans, not to you. Since you were bashing Obama, you obviously weren't much of an Obama fan or a tow-the-party-line liberal.
As for 2012, the answer is yes. Vote 3rd party. It's the only thing that makes sense, even if it's destined for failure. If you vote for a bad president, then you're partly responsible for all his actions. If you vote for someone else, you're not. Out of all these people complaining about Obama, if they actually voted for him, they're hypocrites, because they enabled him by voting for him. I voted for Johnson, so you can't blame me for any of Obama's messes. If more people had voted like me, we wouldn't be having so many problems.
For those of the same ideology, you'll hear stuff about blaming "the government", "the bureaucracy" / agency in question, or the individual announcing the policy - Holder in the case.
Yes, but Obama as the head of the executive branch is Holder's boss, and picked the guy out for the job. This is why it's a cop-out to avoid blaming Obama for his henchmen's actions, just like it was a cop-out to avoid blaming Bush for the actions of Ashcroft and friends.
But since you mention it, I have seen homes with big, thick bars over the windows that the fireman's ax wouldn't be able to cut through. It would take the jaws-of-life to pry them off.
I haven't seen those many times, but you're right, there are houses like that. Good luck breaking through those easily.
Still, even with a 1" throw, I can install a metal door and a metal frame bolted to my metal stud walls, all legally. No way they are just kicking that door down.
Actually, it's still easy to break down that door. The Achilles' Heel you're missing is the hinges. But first, are your metal stud walls the typical commercial steel studs? Those things are paper thin and easily bent; they're only meant for holding up drywall, not for any great strength. What's important is what the door framing is made of. Commercial-grade doors have heavy steel frames, and those would indeed be hard to bust through (regardless of what your wall is made of). However, again, the weak point is the hinges. You can get door-breaching rounds for a shotgun and shoot out the hinges with them. Or you can break down the door with a battering ram, by concentrating on the hinges side rather than the deadbolt side. The deadbolt is a thick, 1" long piece of steel, usually going into an anchor plate or pocket held in with some very long screws. The hinges, OTOH, are usually held in with some very short screws.
>Also, just to be precise, I believe the 1" limit depends on the jurisdiction - my state limits deadbolts to 1" but your mileage may vary.
I don't think I've seen any longer. It's very unlikely a big lock company like Kwikset or Schlage would bother making different-length deadbolts for sale in different states; it's much easier just to manufacture to the lowest common denominator. It's just like cars; once California makes something a mandate, all the automakers just adopt that for all cars sold nationwide.
for example deadbolts are legally limited to 1" in throw length so that they can be broken by emergency personnel if necessary, say when a fire occurs.
Wow, that seems like a ridiculous law. No one really needs to break through the front door of a house. If it's a true emergency, you can always break a window. I haven't seen a house yet that didn't have easily-broken windows. A fireman's axe should have no problem breaking through a window and quickly removing any dangerous shards.
Sorry to play devil's advocate, but cancer cells are just as much a part of your body as any of your other cells. However, if the rest of your body doesn't utilize its immune system cells to seek out and kill these cancer cells (which I guarantee you probably have a few of in your body somewhere as I write this), then you'll grow a malignant tumor and without serious foreign intervention (medical treatment) you'll die.
-- enacted Nixon's health care plan with the liberal parts stripped out.
What's really funny is how all the tofu-eating liberals will defend Obamacare to the death even though it's a right-wing corporatist scheme.
Obama is a case study in how to take the troublesome younger leftist activist types in society and turn them into ardent defenders of crony capitalism.
Also, SCREW YOU Obama Administation, for your big fat 'Fuck You' to the American public and their civil rights and constitutional rights.
Also, SCREW YOU to the liberal morons who voted for Obama, insisting that he'd be completely different from Bush, and then have come out in droves to defend Obama's policies which mirror Bush's.
the problem really comes down to this: NOBODY trusts the US gov'ment to actually hang on to that crap. It's just too easy to exploit.
Sure they do. The liberals would happily trust Obama and Holder with their encryption keys. And the Republicans would happily trust the Bush administration with their keys. The two groups just don't just the opposite administration.
I mean really, where do you see liberals bitching and demonstrating against Obama and his policies? They were happy to do so back in the Bush days, but now that their savior is doing it, they're just fine with this stuff.
I've seen news reports that call simple street vandalism and muggings "domestic terrorism".
To be fair, is it really inaccurate to call them that (at least the muggings, not the vandalism)? Were the mugging victims not scared for their lives? Just about any violent crime could be called "terrorism".
The whole "safety, safety, safety" bit has gotten so ridiculous and I am endlessly surprised by the fact that a majority of people haven't cried "bullshit" on it.
If Obama were a Republican, you would be hearing a much bigger outcry (esp. in tech circles) about this bullshit. However, since he's a Democrat and he's the "savior", the liberals refuse to criticize him and will just back everything he does, even when it's exactly the same as what Bush did, or worse.
> This didn't protect against such scams either however, as people did things like manually redrawing bridges on chips to disabled cores and so on.
That's because they were doing things outside the chip packaging, such as putting SMD components (jumper resistors for instance) on the top of the package. It's not hard so solder simple SMD components with a soldering iron, though it is a little harder than reflashing some firmware.
If they make the modifications on the chip die, before packaging, that's going to prevent almost anyone from re-enabling features that were disabled at the factory. Cutting a chip open, making modifications at the microscopic level, then putting it back together so it isn't obvious that it's been tampered with, is not an easy task, or something that a guy in his garage can do.
It seems the real use for SQLite (besides teaching) is for cases where you simply don't have multiple processes accessing the same database, or if they do occasionally, performance isn't a big concern. One big example I can think of is storing configuration variables for applications. That's not something you want to have a full-blown database like PostgreSQL running for, but it can be handy to use SQLite so you have more power than you'd get with flat files.
AMD does this. Nvidia does this. Pretty much everyone making complex chips does this. It's massively uneconomical to throw away an entire chip over partial failures.
Then they need to stop doing this. Chips should be able to run any software you throw at them without having problems.
If there's bad cores on the chip, there's an easy solution: don't use software to turn off the cores, use hardware. When the chip is still unpackaged, it should be fairly easy to use a laser to disable the core permanently, maybe by setting some jumpers inside the chip or something. Mfgrs should make any mods to the hardware they need to while it's still in the factory; after it's out, it should be able to run any software.
This is what they get for trying to do everything with software.