Most of the space was taken up by getting a good 3 tone palette, where the first was yellow, second orange, and the third red. All of which was discontinuous in the first derivative (thus meaning, you couldn't lump it into one single linear function)
Now, sure, if I wanted to make a crappy red only fire, then I could have gotten it much smaller, and if certain alternative palette setting methods had worked for me, I could have gotten it even more smaller.
But, this is the world I lived in. OBTW, using hand assembly, I could get 2 bytes out of the code that was machine assembled. I don't know exactly WHY... *shrug*
Jesus! You sound way too hard-core... I mean, I was doing some crazy stuff with Assembly, even up until the Pentium4 came out, but nothing like this timing stuff you're talking about.
I personally though, did write a fire program that fit into 220 bytes, and I've worked on the TI-86, which was crazy amounts of assembly.
You think x86 is register starved? Try only having one arithmatic register. *Shudder* well, still not as bad as the HC11, where you had really just 2 registers period.
... I'm talking specifically since World War 2, which is true. They run a very moderate country in general now.
Take the Iraqi war, they weren't for it, but when we presented our evidence (the nature of which after-the-fact is disputable) they were like, "Woah... um... ok... let's uh, see how we can do this the right way."
Unlike the Flaming French, the Ragging Russians, and the Chattering Chinese, who were basicly like, "We don't care WHAT evidence you have, you won't go in there."... Of course, we learn that they had huge oil investments in the old Iraqi regiem... Nah, that was just coincidence.
But anyways, I'm getting highly offtopic. For the most part the Grundgesetz of Germany has a similar protection from illegal search and seizure as the US, so I'm hoping (as I'll be there shortly, and for a few years) that they'll not be stupid.
Really, sometimes I wonder how I can have faith in things, and yet still be so cynical.
Hm... I'd have to say that yes, the described situation would be impersonating an officer. Because just because the items are "obviously" fake, if they are presented as authority of an officer, then they're real.
Like how you can get booked for selling Marajuana even if it's only oregano. (Because you were selling Marajuana, but you were cheating people and not giving them what they paid for)
Now, I'd like to say that it's possible to perform a raid without looking like a police officer. I suggest bright orange traffic vests, and that orange yellow camo that S&R uses. Come up to the door, and knock saying, "This is ____, we'd like to come in an see what you have in there." Then when the person shouts "No!" You shout back, "Pretty please, with sugar on top?"
I personally think it's important to have someone play the devil's paranoia. It gives you a nice outlook on "what-if" cases.
Like, what if the framers of the constitution went, "well, wait... if we leave no restrictions on arms, some crazy kid might eventually get his hands on a large stash of weapontry, and cause havoc, killing a lot of people."
Maybe we wouldn't have the 2nd amendment in that case. Not that that would necessarily be outright better... I'm not even certain if this country could have kept itself together without it.
I'd just like to point out to some degree that in general Germany's had a pretty good (or bad depending on which way you look at it) record for restricting the strength of ultra-right, and ultra-left.
First of all, look at the whole Scientology fiasco. They're all mad at Germany for not recognizing it as an acceptable religion, then they forget that the Germans were under the tyranny of an ultra-right facist government that just happened to catch the eye of the public long enough to get power.
They're generally not into letting that happen again. (As I'm sure they're aware that if they start WW3, there's going to be a whole lot of people that are gonna be PISSED).
But like you said, you're hyperbolizing for effect.
It would only be impersonation of a police officer if you actually claimed to be the police.
Now if they knock on your door and say, "We're with SCO, we'd like to see your harddrive." then they're not impersonating an officer. Doesn't mean it's any more legal, as it's tatemount to stealing, and theft.
Of course there's an imminent threat of destruction of evidence. Microsoft has a nice little button installed in Gates's room that automatically deletes every file that has had GPL-taint in the entire Microsoft campus.
So, you see, we need to be able to break into his office before he can even realize it, and keep him away from the magic button, so we can demonstrate to the courts that they've been using GPL code all along.
I think China does... but then, they don't exactly let corporations exist for the most part.
Of course, I'd probably settle for this daconian coporate environment where at least I get to choose which fast food joint I'm going to spend all my money at.
Yeah, I can see all your points... I was just saying that it's not enormously difficult to remove comments from code. The parent post of mine said nothing about removing trade-secret information from the code.
Now, I do like your idea of "open-safe" comments though. Good idea. Props++
Stripping out all sensitive comments to open-source the drivers is an insane amount of work.
Apparently someone has never heard of regular expressions. Seeing as how comments are very well defined elements of a program. (They have to be) One can easily hack up a lexx program to eliminate them:
GOD DAMN LAMENESS FILTER JUST WON'T LET ME POST THE LEXX CODE. Really, it's just 3 lines!
MS technically holds rights to break anyones license for any reason. (Come on, I'm sure it's in their EULA somewhere)
Now, assuming that's true. Yes, they could.
Even if they didn't, they could retroactively apply a new EULA to all their software explicitely saying, "Yo! RMS, you can't use our software." (in a more more legal tone, of course)
Boom, skip the whole process of cracking/etc/shadow.
On the local machine the root password is actually pretty useless, since it will generally be easier to find a bypass than the root password.
I follow this policy, by disabling the root account on any machine that I can, and using "sudo" to do my root work. My friend demonstrates this by having a very stupid and simple password for root.
True, it's possible someone might be able to "accidentally" grab the/etc/shadow file, but it's probably easier to find a hole elsewhere that will get you root without a password than to grab/etc/shadow and crack the password. Even if it's easy.
Again, same friend's computer, another friend got on it, booted up to grub, entered the right commands to get the system to start up in single-user mode, and grabbed his/etc/shadow, and cracked his root password. He then laughed at my friend who had made the pasword saying, "I thought you were so smart about security, but you used a password that falls to a very simple dictionary attack?" And he just responded, "You already had root to get the password, so who cares what the password was?"
Now, the real truth is password reuse... you're right on the button there, and need to protect the passwords of users, who may be contacting your computer from elsewhere. This is how many script kiddies "walk" their way into high-security areas. Coincidence, and password reuse.
I've taken to using a set of passwords, where each is a seperate level of access to my life. One password is used for websites, where I cannot guarentee that they're even using something other than plain text passwords, so generally all my slashdot/macslash/signine passwords are all the same. Then on my home computers, my passwords are the same, but different from webpages, and my school passwords are all the same/related but only used there.
At least I feel safe, but I had someone hack me before, without the root password.
Slashdot Mirror
The Woz scares me...
Most of the space was taken up by getting a good 3 tone palette, where the first was yellow, second orange, and the third red. All of which was discontinuous in the first derivative (thus meaning, you couldn't lump it into one single linear function)
Now, sure, if I wanted to make a crappy red only fire, then I could have gotten it much smaller, and if certain alternative palette setting methods had worked for me, I could have gotten it even more smaller.
But, this is the world I lived in. OBTW, using hand assembly, I could get 2 bytes out of the code that was machine assembled. I don't know exactly WHY... *shrug*
Jesus! You sound way too hard-core... I mean, I was doing some crazy stuff with Assembly, even up until the Pentium4 came out, but nothing like this timing stuff you're talking about.
I personally though, did write a fire program that fit into 220 bytes, and I've worked on the TI-86, which was crazy amounts of assembly.
You think x86 is register starved? Try only having one arithmatic register. *Shudder* well, still not as bad as the HC11, where you had really just 2 registers period.
I wonder if they'll give out sign-on bonuses.
All my friends know I could easily get in to learn Arabic, along with the languages I already know, and then with my IT background.
Shit, the only way I could be more desirable to the military is if I had a health-care background.
Then I'd be CHOICE draft material... shia....
Hm... what happens when the first command in your catch says
rm datafile
With no -f? This is a failure condition if the condition is false, thus it would throw the code into an infinite failure loop until the timeout.
Like you're saying though, if it's a programming error, it won't get fixed, and in someways, even worse, it adds new dimensions to think about.
... I'm talking specifically since World War 2, which is true. They run a very moderate country in general now.
... Of course, we learn that they had huge oil investments in the old Iraqi regiem... Nah, that was just coincidence.
Take the Iraqi war, they weren't for it, but when we presented our evidence (the nature of which after-the-fact is disputable) they were like, "Woah... um... ok... let's uh, see how we can do this the right way."
Unlike the Flaming French, the Ragging Russians, and the Chattering Chinese, who were basicly like, "We don't care WHAT evidence you have, you won't go in there."
But anyways, I'm getting highly offtopic. For the most part the Grundgesetz of Germany has a similar protection from illegal search and seizure as the US, so I'm hoping (as I'll be there shortly, and for a few years) that they'll not be stupid.
Really, sometimes I wonder how I can have faith in things, and yet still be so cynical.
Hm... I'd have to say that yes, the described situation would be impersonating an officer. Because just because the items are "obviously" fake, if they are presented as authority of an officer, then they're real.
Like how you can get booked for selling Marajuana even if it's only oregano. (Because you were selling Marajuana, but you were cheating people and not giving them what they paid for)
Now, I'd like to say that it's possible to perform a raid without looking like a police officer. I suggest bright orange traffic vests, and that orange yellow camo that S&R uses. Come up to the door, and knock saying, "This is ____, we'd like to come in an see what you have in there." Then when the person shouts "No!" You shout back, "Pretty please, with sugar on top?"
I'm not entirely certain myself, as I've never been arrested.
But generally the "one phonecall" is to get ahold of someone who can bail you out, so you can contact a lawyer outside of jail.
I personally think it's important to have someone play the devil's paranoia. It gives you a nice outlook on "what-if" cases.
Like, what if the framers of the constitution went, "well, wait... if we leave no restrictions on arms, some crazy kid might eventually get his hands on a large stash of weapontry, and cause havoc, killing a lot of people."
Maybe we wouldn't have the 2nd amendment in that case. Not that that would necessarily be outright better... I'm not even certain if this country could have kept itself together without it.
I'd just like to point out to some degree that in general Germany's had a pretty good (or bad depending on which way you look at it) record for restricting the strength of ultra-right, and ultra-left.
First of all, look at the whole Scientology fiasco. They're all mad at Germany for not recognizing it as an acceptable religion, then they forget that the Germans were under the tyranny of an ultra-right facist government that just happened to catch the eye of the public long enough to get power.
They're generally not into letting that happen again. (As I'm sure they're aware that if they start WW3, there's going to be a whole lot of people that are gonna be PISSED).
But like you said, you're hyperbolizing for effect.
It would only be impersonation of a police officer if you actually claimed to be the police.
Now if they knock on your door and say, "We're with SCO, we'd like to see your harddrive." then they're not impersonating an officer. Doesn't mean it's any more legal, as it's tatemount to stealing, and theft.
But it's definately not impersonating an officer.
Of course there's an imminent threat of destruction of evidence. Microsoft has a nice little button installed in Gates's room that automatically deletes every file that has had GPL-taint in the entire Microsoft campus.
So, you see, we need to be able to break into his office before he can even realize it, and keep him away from the magic button, so we can demonstrate to the courts that they've been using GPL code all along.
Crap! I guess I didn't read all his post... Oh well...
I think China does... but then, they don't exactly let corporations exist for the most part.
Of course, I'd probably settle for this daconian coporate environment where at least I get to choose which fast food joint I'm going to spend all my money at.
My lazy clicking finger thanks you.
It looks like this wouldn't be Germany, as German courts have been ruling in very anti-sco^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hignorancially-challenged descisions.
*knock knock knock*
Who's there?
Goons... Hired goons.
Yeah, I can see all your points... I was just saying that it's not enormously difficult to remove comments from code. The parent post of mine said nothing about removing trade-secret information from the code.
Now, I do like your idea of "open-safe" comments though. Good idea. Props++
Apparently someone has never heard of regular expressions. Seeing as how comments are very well defined elements of a program. (They have to be) One can easily hack up a lexx program to eliminate them:OOoo.... eliminating comments is SO hard!
Ah yes... that would be a problem.
:P
I hate dealing with that kind of stuff
It could just use a PRE tag.
MS technically holds rights to break anyones license for any reason. (Come on, I'm sure it's in their EULA somewhere)
Now, assuming that's true. Yes, they could.
Even if they didn't, they could retroactively apply a new EULA to all their software explicitely saying, "Yo! RMS, you can't use our software." (in a more more legal tone, of course)
I'm no stranger to sarcasm, sir.
!me.believe(you);
Ok();
this = C++;
you.still(get(my.intention));
1. Insert bootdisk
/etc/shadow.
/etc/shadow file, but it's probably easier to find a hole elsewhere that will get you root without a password than to grab /etc/shadow and crack the password. Even if it's easy.
/etc/shadow, and cracked his root password. He then laughed at my friend who had made the pasword saying, "I thought you were so smart about security, but you used a password that falls to a very simple dictionary attack?" And he just responded, "You already had root to get the password, so who cares what the password was?"
2. install rootkit
Boom, skip the whole process of cracking
On the local machine the root password is actually pretty useless, since it will generally be easier to find a bypass than the root password.
I follow this policy, by disabling the root account on any machine that I can, and using "sudo" to do my root work. My friend demonstrates this by having a very stupid and simple password for root.
True, it's possible someone might be able to "accidentally" grab the
Again, same friend's computer, another friend got on it, booted up to grub, entered the right commands to get the system to start up in single-user mode, and grabbed his
Now, the real truth is password reuse... you're right on the button there, and need to protect the passwords of users, who may be contacting your computer from elsewhere. This is how many script kiddies "walk" their way into high-security areas. Coincidence, and password reuse.
I've taken to using a set of passwords, where each is a seperate level of access to my life. One password is used for websites, where I cannot guarentee that they're even using something other than plain text passwords, so generally all my slashdot/macslash/signine passwords are all the same. Then on my home computers, my passwords are the same, but different from webpages, and my school passwords are all the same/related but only used there.
At least I feel safe, but I had someone hack me before, without the root password.