Is this the result of the article from a while back (I don't have the link) where a guy redid the slashdot front page using proper (x?)html/css positioning?
It was well done and a good example on how to properly do something like this.
Remember it's not up to responsible parents anymore. According to the Senator its up to a responsible village. And by village it seems she means the federal government.
Not to mention the fact that installing the hack violates the license agreement. Technically you forfeit your rights to the software and may be in fact committing a crime by loading the hacked version (I'm no legal expert on EULAs of course).
And if you ask Hillary Clinton, government is a substitute for parenting, she even wrote a book about it:)
If it's a design flaw in PHP then it's a design flaw in many other languages, by your logic.
You want the language to pre-filter before it gets to the programmer? What happens when you want the raw text from the user?
In my bag of tricks library I use when developing PHP I have a few functions that I run text through depending on what I need. If the text is coming in from a large input box, I run it through a function that strips out as much XSS problems as possible. If it's coming from a check box and being stored in a DB as an integer, not a whole lot I'd like to do to it. I would hate for the language to just hijack what the users are inputing.
It's not a waste of programmer time. I've compiled the functions over months and years. How much time does it take me to type: $str = stripXSS($str); ?
With AJAX you have to do a check on how to instantiate an XMLHTTPRequest object. MS implements it via ActiveX (read: really stupid).
I've got money that says their "framework" starts like this: var req = new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP");... and doesn't even bother checking of window.XMLHttpRequest is a valid object (i.e. the correct way of doing things).
Of course there's any number MS only javascript methods that'll probably litter this "framework" as well.
I think he's talking about the constraints placed on the code by each license.
Take some code From a BSD into Linux and you just add a little BSD license to it that allows you to do a lot.
Take some code from Linux to BSD and now you have to attach the GPL which essentially overwrites the freedoms of the BSD license (unless there's some way users can choose not to use GPL code when building a BSD kernel, but that's a mess I bet most would not want to deal with).
Re:ASP was born in 1997 and...
on
A Decade of PHP
·
· Score: 1
And Zend has the same corporate machine to push it's products as MS?
Re:Actually I can argue with it
on
A Decade of PHP
·
· Score: 1
perl is probably the easiest language to write unreadable code in. I've personally never had problems creating clean and efficient data structures in it either.
There is probably equally if not greater monstrosities written in perl and other languages as PHP. It all comes down to who is writing the code. Even the authors of perl's famed CGI.pm don't "use strict" which is typically considered good practice.
Many warnings and errors are turned on in php.ini. It doesn't come preconfigured to show everything but you can turn a hell of a lot on. You can mix and match what types of warnings and/or errors are displayed depending on your environment (devel, testing, production).
Re:I get it, but I don't want it
on
A Decade of PHP
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
PHP 5 OO features are far from kludgy (it's modelled after Java). Perl's so called OO is 10x more a kludge.
What's wrong with the C string functions? They're fast, useful, and a lot of programmers know them. You're not limited to them. You can use split() or explode() to do what strtok does but get an array. Plus they are a hell of a lot better for dealing with strings than all of Java.
And last I checked PHP stands for: PHP Hypertext Preprocessor.
The tag line is a joke. Eric Idle wrote the thing, so he is essentially ripping off himself (and the other living Pythons). But they aren't getting ripped off because of the money being made.
Eric Idle wrote the book for it. Then he wrote the script. Then he and John DuPrez wrote the music and lyrics. Then Idle got the other Pythons to sign off on it (and they even offered to continue with their input and constructive criticism as the show took shape). Then John Cleese recorded the voice of God lines to be played in the show. Then Idle put a whitty sub-title about it being ripped off from the movie. Then the show made a lot of money. Then it won some Tony Awards.
Even if you aren't a Python fan this is worth seeing. If you found Holy Grail even mildy amusing you'll be rolling on the floor at Spamalot. While the humor is classic Python, it reaches a more broader audience.
If you are thinking about seeing it, don't listen to the cast recording first. It'll ruin some of the jokes that are much funnier in person.
Not really. I use svn for personal use and CVS at work.
I find it confusing when working on two files that are the same version of our software and one says 11.2 and the other is 11.8. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me personally.
I find the repository wide revision numbers to be more intuitive to me.
Maybe I'd be on the same wavelength as you if I had learned CVS before SVN.
Last I checked Boeing has a widebody that carries lots of passengers and a large chunk of air freight that's been flying for a while (with modifications as times and roles changed) that doesn't require super large airports or modification to them. And they've sold over 1300 of them.
Regardless of that, I thought Airbus had actually overtaken Boeing in market share. Even still, adding the 150 orders for the A380 won't count for much in the market.
I don't think Americans are dwelling on the past market. We've been there. I think most are looking to the future where air travel is more accessible. You won't be driving 2 hours to the nearest hub to wait 2 hours to board for a 3 hour flight. You'll drive 20-30 minutes to fly on a 787 to your final destination or to an international hub (ie BWI, Philly, JFK, LAX) and then possibly board the A380 (or 747, 777, etc).
The hub and spoke system is coming up in small or developing countries simply because they're behind in the evolution of air travel. It's a necessary step to get to where we are headed.
This goes on the assumption that the A380 will be popular enough for airports like Allentown, PA and the like to do invest in the upgrade.
I would bet though that the new 787 Dreamliner from Boeing will be much more likely to completely dominate the P2P market as opposed to even a smaller A380 since this is what it was designed for.
The A380 is designed for the behemoth airlines who live in the hub and spoke system. How many of them are not either in bankrupcy or in danger of being there? That fact alone would scare me if I were Airbus.
Don't get me wrong, it's a nice plane but it's about 20 years too late.
I've seen this before many times on TV where it's actually been done in a lab. So they've patented experiments other people have already done?
The History Channel had a show on UFOs where they used techniques excatly like this to show that various magnetic fields on the brain can induce strange hallucinations.
Slashdot Mirror
It was supposed to be a joke.
Since no one wants to buy our products, let's just sue!
Is this the result of the article from a while back (I don't have the link) where a guy redid the slashdot front page using proper (x?)html/css positioning?
It was well done and a good example on how to properly do something like this.
Remember it's not up to responsible parents anymore. According to the Senator its up to a responsible village. And by village it seems she means the federal government.
Not to mention the fact that installing the hack violates the license agreement. Technically you forfeit your rights to the software and may be in fact committing a crime by loading the hacked version (I'm no legal expert on EULAs of course).
:)
And if you ask Hillary Clinton, government is a substitute for parenting, she even wrote a book about it
If it's a design flaw in PHP then it's a design flaw in many other languages, by your logic.
You want the language to pre-filter before it gets to the programmer? What happens when you want the raw text from the user?
In my bag of tricks library I use when developing PHP I have a few functions that I run text through depending on what I need. If the text is coming in from a large input box, I run it through a function that strips out as much XSS problems as possible. If it's coming from a check box and being stored in a DB as an integer, not a whole lot I'd like to do to it. I would hate for the language to just hijack what the users are inputing.
It's not a waste of programmer time. I've compiled the functions over months and years. How much time does it take me to type: $str = stripXSS($str); ?
With AJAX you have to do a check on how to instantiate an XMLHTTPRequest object. MS implements it via ActiveX (read: really stupid).
... and doesn't even bother checking of window.XMLHttpRequest is a valid object (i.e. the correct way of doing things).
I've got money that says their "framework" starts like this:
var req = new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP");
Of course there's any number MS only javascript methods that'll probably litter this "framework" as well.
I think he's talking about the constraints placed on the code by each license.
Take some code From a BSD into Linux and you just add a little BSD license to it that allows you to do a lot.
Take some code from Linux to BSD and now you have to attach the GPL which essentially overwrites the freedoms of the BSD license (unless there's some way users can choose not to use GPL code when building a BSD kernel, but that's a mess I bet most would not want to deal with).
And Zend has the same corporate machine to push it's products as MS?
perl is probably the easiest language to write unreadable code in. I've personally never had problems creating clean and efficient data structures in it either.
There is probably equally if not greater monstrosities written in perl and other languages as PHP. It all comes down to who is writing the code. Even the authors of perl's famed CGI.pm don't "use strict" which is typically considered good practice.
Many warnings and errors are turned on in php.ini. It doesn't come preconfigured to show everything but you can turn a hell of a lot on. You can mix and match what types of warnings and/or errors are displayed depending on your environment (devel, testing, production).
PHP 5 OO features are far from kludgy (it's modelled after Java). Perl's so called OO is 10x more a kludge.
What's wrong with the C string functions? They're fast, useful, and a lot of programmers know them. You're not limited to them. You can use split() or explode() to do what strtok does but get an array. Plus they are a hell of a lot better for dealing with strings than all of Java.
And last I checked PHP stands for: PHP Hypertext Preprocessor.
The tag line is a joke. Eric Idle wrote the thing, so he is essentially ripping off himself (and the other living Pythons). But they aren't getting ripped off because of the money being made.
Not sure why this got moderated up as insightful.
Eric Idle wrote the book for it. Then he wrote the script. Then he and John DuPrez wrote the music and lyrics. Then Idle got the other Pythons to sign off on it (and they even offered to continue with their input and constructive criticism as the show took shape). Then John Cleese recorded the voice of God lines to be played in the show. Then Idle put a whitty sub-title about it being ripped off from the movie. Then the show made a lot of money. Then it won some Tony Awards.
He is so fired
Doesn't red hat sell support?
When I bought my Dell laptop it came with McAffee. What I didn't know was the license was only for 3 months. I think I have 2 days left to renew it.
I bet it'll boot NetBSD!
Even if you aren't a Python fan this is worth seeing. If you found Holy Grail even mildy amusing you'll be rolling on the floor at Spamalot. While the humor is classic Python, it reaches a more broader audience.
If you are thinking about seeing it, don't listen to the cast recording first. It'll ruin some of the jokes that are much funnier in person.
Not really. I use svn for personal use and CVS at work.
I find it confusing when working on two files that are the same version of our software and one says 11.2 and the other is 11.8. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me personally.
I find the repository wide revision numbers to be more intuitive to me.
Maybe I'd be on the same wavelength as you if I had learned CVS before SVN.
Boeing doesn't compete?
Last I checked Boeing has a widebody that carries lots of passengers and a large chunk of air freight that's been flying for a while (with modifications as times and roles changed) that doesn't require super large airports or modification to them. And they've sold over 1300 of them.
Regardless of that, I thought Airbus had actually overtaken Boeing in market share. Even still, adding the 150 orders for the A380 won't count for much in the market.
I don't think Americans are dwelling on the past market. We've been there. I think most are looking to the future where air travel is more accessible. You won't be driving 2 hours to the nearest hub to wait 2 hours to board for a 3 hour flight. You'll drive 20-30 minutes to fly on a 787 to your final destination or to an international hub (ie BWI, Philly, JFK, LAX) and then possibly board the A380 (or 747, 777, etc).
The hub and spoke system is coming up in small or developing countries simply because they're behind in the evolution of air travel. It's a necessary step to get to where we are headed.
I have a vewy good fwiend in Wome named Biggus Dickus!
This goes on the assumption that the A380 will be popular enough for airports like Allentown, PA and the like to do invest in the upgrade.
I would bet though that the new 787 Dreamliner from Boeing will be much more likely to completely dominate the P2P market as opposed to even a smaller A380 since this is what it was designed for.
The A380 is designed for the behemoth airlines who live in the hub and spoke system. How many of them are not either in bankrupcy or in danger of being there? That fact alone would scare me if I were Airbus.
Don't get me wrong, it's a nice plane but it's about 20 years too late.
Prefix your search in the address bar with "google".
i.e. to search google for foo bar try: google foo bar
Firefox actually comes with a few more of these quick searches set up and it's easy to create your own (they are a special bookmark).
www.duke-sucks.com ?
I've seen this before many times on TV where it's actually been done in a lab. So they've patented experiments other people have already done?
The History Channel had a show on UFOs where they used techniques excatly like this to show that various magnetic fields on the brain can induce strange hallucinations.