Has there ever been a backdoor in Windows or other Microsoft products? No.
Yes, there have indeed been numerous opportunities to get complete access to Windows systems from outside. It appears that you simply prefer not to call them backdoors -- perhaps "vulnerabilites" is the first word to come to your mind. The difference is intent, and that is impossible to judge.
I applaud the tech companies for actually trying to disclose more.
I would have applauded too, had they tried to disclose before their complicity had become public. Post facto, it reeks too strongly of public relations damage control.
The battles the US military is engaged in involve hearts and minds, and drones are very bad from that perspective.
What you say is obviously true, but this shallow truth is shrouding the much more profound one that if you want to win "hearts and minds" you don't wage war in the first place.
... it is perfectly acceptable in polite society, politics and academia these days to demonize all Israelis without considering individuals
It's a pity you had to spoil your informative, insightful and interesting post with this stupid sweeping generalisation (which, ironically, accuses of making a stupid, sweeping generalisation).
It makes me really appreciate the Founders of the US. There were so many opportunities to turn this country into another Western Hemisphere dictatorship shithole and they didn't.
The irony being that the USA turned a lot of other countries into Western Hemisphere dictatorship shitholes. For example, Cuba, before Castro and his cronies 'liberated' it.
2) Untrue: a 44kHz *sampling rate* has a 44/2=22kHz Nyquist cutoff. Frequencies f>22kHz Nyquist limit "wrap around" to f-22kHz difference frequencies.
No matter how much you repeat this, it's not true. Look it up in any textbook.
Also, your allegations about the DFT allowing a perfectly sharp cutoff aren't realistic. A perfectly sharp cutoff implies an infinitely steep transition between passband and stopband, and this can only be achieved with an infinite number of points in the DFT.
a 25kHz tone sampled at 44kHz results in a spurious, highly audible (25-44/2)=3kHz aliasing signal
As another poster already said, no, it would result in a 19 kHz tone.
And this tone would not be audible, let alone highly audible, because the A/D conversion filter blocks frequency content above half the sample rate very effectively. (Unless you're using broken converters.)
You are advocating not questioning the cultural habits of your time and society, instead you seem to think it's alright for people to follow them blindly.
Besides, Lovecraft's merits are less literary than due to his wild imagination and his ability to let it flow.
... a lot of effort was put into highly optimized bresenham line algorithms, because traditional implementations implied a div operation per pixel,...
Which is worded poorly enough to be taken to mean, "traditional bresenham implementations require a division operation at each pixel".
I also posit that the quoted post is wrong about the division instruction: DIV still takes a lot of cycles to execute*, that's just the nature of the maths involved. Of course modern processors will try to do some clever code reordering that may make slow instructions appear to be executing a lot quicker, but the instruction dependency chain does not always afford this opportunity.
Slashdot Mirror
QuickPar on Windows is long-obsolete. MultiPar is the more modern variant.
Filesystem for the ages, eh?
You misspelled "Vogon".
stdio.h works just fine in C++.
So, what "extra include is necessary in C++ over C"? I write C++ and C all day and can't think of any.
Yes, there have indeed been numerous opportunities to get complete access to Windows systems from outside. It appears that you simply prefer not to call them backdoors -- perhaps "vulnerabilites" is the first word to come to your mind. The difference is intent, and that is impossible to judge.
Clearly, this boy is more worth loving than you have the strength to.
Trolls have achieved immortality already before, meet Herostratus.
I would have applauded too, had they tried to disclose before their complicity had become public. Post facto, it reeks too strongly of public relations damage control.
What you say is obviously true, but this shallow truth is shrouding the much more profound one that if you want to win "hearts and minds" you don't wage war in the first place.
At it again? Calm down and take your pills, Steve.
It's a pity you had to spoil your informative, insightful and interesting post with this stupid sweeping generalisation (which, ironically, accuses of making a stupid, sweeping generalisation).
Thanks for your post anyway.
The irony being that the USA turned a lot of other countries into Western Hemisphere dictatorship shitholes. For example, Cuba, before Castro and his cronies 'liberated' it.
"Why should I buy a boat when I already have a car?"
No matter how much you repeat this, it's not true. Look it up in any textbook.
Also, your allegations about the DFT allowing a perfectly sharp cutoff aren't realistic. A perfectly sharp cutoff implies an infinitely steep transition between passband and stopband, and this can only be achieved with an infinite number of points in the DFT.
As another poster already said, no, it would result in a 19 kHz tone.
And this tone would not be audible, let alone highly audible, because the A/D conversion filter blocks frequency content above half the sample rate very effectively. (Unless you're using broken converters.)
This particular association seems far more prevalent in the USA than anywhere else.
Actually, "Panzer" is the German word for "tank"; in fact, it is the best translation in this context.
You are advocating not questioning the cultural habits of your time and society, instead you seem to think it's alright for people to follow them blindly.
Besides, Lovecraft's merits are less literary than due to his wild imagination and his ability to let it flow.
At this point, I am fairly certain nothing will ever make Apple blush.
Your post and your sig do not rhyme, my friend.
Actually, that applies to both of them.
I guess most of us know what redundancy in this context is intended to convey, UK or not.
It's still a nice example of saying the opposite of what you mean because the convolutions of politically correct newspeak went over your head.
Don't you think it's a bit naive to rely on a company's promotional material to give you a true picture of their environmental impact and efforts?
Do you really believe facebook limits tracking via the "like" button to registered users?
From the original post in question:
Which is worded poorly enough to be taken to mean, "traditional bresenham implementations require a division operation at each pixel".
I also posit that the quoted post is wrong about the division instruction: DIV still takes a lot of cycles to execute*, that's just the nature of the maths involved. Of course modern processors will try to do some clever code reordering that may make slow instructions appear to be executing a lot quicker, but the instruction dependency chain does not always afford this opportunity.
* cf for example http://www.agner.org/optimize/instruction_tables.pdf