so this guy is a designer, 3d modeller, programmer, system tester, hardware geek, seasoned basher and whatnot. and a writer. no wonder TFA didn't make any sense whatsoever.
Think it's in part because, prison rape/all rape is generally bad
a prisoner makes for a bad victim because he's already a stigmatized subject, a social reject. a femenine victim has much more emotional impact, even though the act is totally equivalent. also, you should note that these kind of jokes are mostly a male phenomenon, and that's basically just defensive projection of fear (of social rejection, mostly, maybe even self disorientation). sorry for taking away credit of "north american culture" for this, but this is basically a "macho" issue, which sadly is a pervasive trait in cultures all around the planet.
and I am also convinced that humor and jokes are the best path to criticism, discovery and knowledge, and that there should be no taboos. but sorry that's not the case with the average prison-rape or soap joke. there's no intelligent process nor reflection there to witness. it's just plain fear and social cliche.
Besides, quality is usually pretty unrelated to code (other than some cases of performance).
sorry, what?
if there's code to run in something, the quality of that code directly determines the quality of that, whatever it is. sure there's much more than just code to quality, but with shitty code you guarantee yourself have a shitty product for any reasonable(?) interpretation of quality.
what actually is often pretty unrelated to quality is commercial success.
The UK agencies taught the US agencies how to decode German messages
just as a sidenote, it was the royal navy, actually, who savaged enigma machines and codebooks from subs. prior to that the folks at BP were completely lost, they couldn't crack shit (obviously, because the crypto was actually quite imrpessing for the time) and were considered just a bunch of useless weird nerds by high command. from there on, with something to get started with, taken seriously and with proper funding, they started rolling things out.
there is some pararllelism in looting subs and seizing laptops. both are variations of the $5 wrench attack.
the difference, though, is that the raided subs were commanded by a terrorist and totalitarian state in open war, whereas the stolen laptop was the property of civillians trying to expose terrorist and totalitarian states. see now what has happened to our world?
Many packages have version 0.1, 0.5, 0.6, 0.8, 0.9, 0.91, 0.92... and so on. There's a reluctance to apply the "1.0" label because that means you have something that's really "done" in some sense.
that's just because open source folks usually don't have the need to lie about that... as opposed to marketeers.
but how exactly are minor version numbers an "historical problem"? i understand somebody might see this reluctance as excessively conservative, but i always thought the real problem was with x.0 big fanfare versions where the meaning of "really done" is just bullshit, and people buying into it like crazy just for the nice new version number and the shiny package and stuff.
then of course we also have the chronical beta disorder...
many employment contracts likely require minimum notice of termination as a condition which you must agree to
15 days is standard for any fixed position contract in spain. if you don't respect it they might sue you but there's little benefit in them for doing so.
but then, aren't we in the happy times of globalization already? i mean, corps can lay off anyone at will whith no warning and that is ok and it's nothing personal, just business. well, i'd be damned if i can see why this same criteria shouldn't apply in both directions. if you're done with your job and want to quit, do it with the timing and schedule that best suits you, the rest is your employers fucking problem. just business, boss, nothing personal. unless you have real human relationship with them and care about any mess you might be leaving behind. but then the OP wouldn't have to ask this question, right?
don't worry too much about references. HR departments are ever so global too, meaning that much detached from reality, they nowadays don't get into any such fine detail. they stick happily with any retarded scoring they can make up in minutes. you are definitely not burning any bridges by that. no HR will hire anybody twice anyway, that's not in their books. and in worst case you could always bluntly lie to your next HR moron about your "exit proc", but even that will seldom be necessary.
The principle objection I have with ads is that they slow down loading the pages that I really want.
this is offset by the general adoption of all sorts of cdns and caching, motivated in part because it was necessary to make this ubiquitous advertiser-in-the-middle scheme even viable.
the principal objection i have with ads is that i don't want any fucking ads, and even less i want anybody snooping on me. iab board of directors could have a very interesting experience of me just by sucking my dick. the level abuse the average internet user is currently subjected to is absolutely ridiculous. glad to see mozilla still capable of doing something right.
Malicious software can't read paper. End of argument.
it wouldn't have to if you were to actually use those keys.
if the platform is to be trusted the keys have to be secret, period. the only question is who needs this level of trust. there are plenty valid usecases for this, maybe even in the public interest, but all are closed, specific systems. it definitely has no place in general consumer devices. i can only think of 2 usecases for this: totalitarian control or good old vendor lock in going high, and fuck both.
i actually love this idea def-con puts out. as a former cyberpunk fan i started a proof of concept of "the matrix" myself, decades ago. didn't finish, of course. if i did it today i even might as well choose unity3d too (probably not, but it wouldn't be unreasonable). but what i certainly would not do is claim to be "educating people about dealing with vulnerabilities" while just shoving another major source of them in right their pants. epic fail.
we definitely need a fresh perspective on the way we interact in the network. we are already deep in the dark ages, or didn't you get the news about government agencies routinely spying on absolutely everyone? and as much as malware is actually a plage, general public blissful ignorance is the real problem. but opensource doesn't mean we all have to read the source before running it, or start growing beards. it simply means it is publicly auditable, which in itslef has far reaching implications. assuming "company x will do good" is simply not acceptable. in part because they have proven otherwise more often than not. but nobody expects the spanish inquisition!
A little research indicates that Unity is a 3D engine. It's used a lot for 3D games. http://unity3d.com/unity/
pretty overwhelming records show that third party browser plugins are a major source of vulnerabilities, even more so if they are closed source and maintenance restricted to private profit organizations whose due dilligence in the process simply cannot be assumed, or even have shown outright negligence. see sun, oracle, adobe, apple, microsoft...
this is not just ironic, it must be april fool's day in some random geeky tz somewhere.
And it's interesting that you actually innovated while you were learning. That's something that corporate America should consider.
he actually didn't say that. he just said he filed some patents. that's all corporate x really wants. and yes...
It's not necessarily the IP laws
... it's totally the IP laws. if it weren't you wouldn't have thrown in the word "corporate" while talking about innovation. innovation IS essentially a learning process. patenting is just about claiming property.
And what in the hell do you mean by "far more complicated than it needs to be?" I agree the protocol could be improved, but complicated? You enter the recipient's email address, or more likely just click it from your address book, type your message, and push "send". How much easier can it get?
i guess he means complexity of setup: to use an email client you have to point it to a mail server. for a vast majority of users this simple concept is one too much if they can simply log into gmail and not have to worry about shit.
My package manager is very capable, I want to use it for every piece of software on the system. Rubygems? Feline Herd? Gowhatever? Why do I need new cute names for doing the same damn thing my package manager already does...?
exactly, why? don't see the problem. if it's available in your package manager just go for it. if it is not... there is at least *some* package management available. these aren't simple apps. rubygems, emacs, eclipse, nodejs... are all extensible building tools where dependency management is a fundamental requirement. since they are also mostly platform-agnostic having its own dependency management system just makes sense, and it does in no way preclude your favorite package manager from maintaining it.
how a security breach where no sensitive data was compromised requires a total database rebuild?
That's some "How is babby formed" grade stupid right there. If you have a security breach, even if you know for a fact that no sensitive data was compromised, you don't ignore it. You fix it. Anything less would be irresponsible.
a "total database rebuild" is not a fix. why needs the entire database a total rebuild?
how do you "completely overhaul" a developer system just hours after being compromised?
You don't do it in mere hours? The site has been down for days, dumbass. Apple hasn't given a timeline for when it will be back up either.
days! i wasn't aware of that, thanks. so they also prove themselves incapable of fixing the issue and restoring the service. but why does the system need a "complete overhaul" to continue the service? sounds a lot like a totally broken system to me.
how long do you plan to work "around the clock" on that? half a year? because that's about the minimum such a system update would require, wild guess.
Like you'd have any fucking clue, you ignorant asswipe. Apple hasn't even specified what this "overhaul" entails. It's likely it's restricted to the portion of their system which got compromised, not the entire thing.
Or, at least, that's the conclusion you'd arrive at if you assume that they're reasonable people. If, on the other hand, you have an axe to grind and not too many brain cells, you end up like Slashdot poster "znrt", shitting out nonsense like this:
because they haven't specified anything at all. the whole statement is just braindead business babble. as you would naturally expect from any corporation, what else? when you fuck up in business you just don't admit it. you tell a fairy tale. ditto, lies. ok, not life-threatening lies. but lies. it's ugly. doesn't help confidence. unless you're a natural born apple customer, like you seem to be, of course.
we're completely overhauling our developer systems, updating our server software, and rebuilding our entire database.
how a security breach where no sensitive data was compromised requires a total database rebuild? how do you "completely overhaul" a developer system just hours after being compromised? how long do you plan to work "around the clock" on that? half a year? because that's about the minimum such a system update would require, wild guess.
and how do you want to keep customer confidence with such blatant and unnecessary lies? duh, apple...
Slashdot Mirror
so this guy is a designer, 3d modeller, programmer, system tester, hardware geek, seasoned basher and whatnot. and a writer.
no wonder TFA didn't make any sense whatsoever.
have modpoints, but can't find the "Wishful thinking" tag.
You can basically do encrypted file storage.
cool, because that's everything i would ever want do in the cloud.
all the useful features we have in a Gmail session need to awkwardly and inefficiently be re-implemented on the client side.
i'm lost. what features? and what's wrong with client side implementation of them?
well, seems science is converging with intuition. that's good news, we need both.
Think it's in part because, prison rape/all rape is generally bad
a prisoner makes for a bad victim because he's already a stigmatized subject, a social reject. a femenine victim has much more emotional impact, even though the act is totally equivalent. also, you should note that these kind of jokes are mostly a male phenomenon, and that's basically just defensive projection of fear (of social rejection, mostly, maybe even self disorientation). sorry for taking away credit of "north american culture" for this, but this is basically a "macho" issue, which sadly is a pervasive trait in cultures all around the planet.
and I am also convinced that humor and jokes are the best path to criticism, discovery and knowledge, and that there should be no taboos. but sorry that's not the case with the average prison-rape or soap joke. there's no intelligent process nor reflection there to witness. it's just plain fear and social cliche.
Besides, quality is usually pretty unrelated to code (other than some cases of performance).
sorry, what?
if there's code to run in something, the quality of that code directly determines the quality of that, whatever it is. sure there's much more than just code to quality, but with shitty code you guarantee yourself have a shitty product for any reasonable(?) interpretation of quality.
what actually is often pretty unrelated to quality is commercial success.
and i meant "salvaged" :)
The UK agencies taught the US agencies how to decode German messages
just as a sidenote, it was the royal navy, actually, who savaged enigma machines and codebooks from subs. prior to that the folks at BP were completely lost, they couldn't crack shit (obviously, because the crypto was actually quite imrpessing for the time) and were considered just a bunch of useless weird nerds by high command. from there on, with something to get started with, taken seriously and with proper funding, they started rolling things out.
there is some pararllelism in looting subs and seizing laptops. both are variations of the $5 wrench attack.
the difference, though, is that the raided subs were commanded by a terrorist and totalitarian state in open war, whereas the stolen laptop was the property of civillians trying to expose terrorist and totalitarian states. see now what has happened to our world?
why must you ridicule some irrelevant minion of big insect media to get your point across?
while moderating you as funny, hit overrated by mistake. this comment is undoing it.
it's still funny even if it didn't get your mod points.
why is the only solution to this problem equals to cancelling every mods done in this discussion ?
moderation is highly overrated. one easy solution is to ignore it altogether and read at -1. works for me.
Many packages have version 0.1, 0.5, 0.6, 0.8, 0.9, 0.91, 0.92... and so on. There's a reluctance to apply the "1.0" label because that means you have something that's really "done" in some sense.
that's just because open source folks usually don't have the need to lie about that ... as opposed to marketeers.
but how exactly are minor version numbers an "historical problem"? i understand somebody might see this reluctance as excessively conservative, but i always thought the real problem was with x.0 big fanfare versions where the meaning of "really done" is just bullshit, and people buying into it like crazy just for the nice new version number and the shiny package and stuff.
then of course we also have the chronical beta disorder ...
many employment contracts likely require minimum notice of termination as a condition which you must agree to
15 days is standard for any fixed position contract in spain. if you don't respect it they might sue you but there's little benefit in them for doing so.
but then, aren't we in the happy times of globalization already? i mean, corps can lay off anyone at will whith no warning and that is ok and it's nothing personal, just business. well, i'd be damned if i can see why this same criteria shouldn't apply in both directions. if you're done with your job and want to quit, do it with the timing and schedule that best suits you, the rest is your employers fucking problem. just business, boss, nothing personal. unless you have real human relationship with them and care about any mess you might be leaving behind. but then the OP wouldn't have to ask this question, right?
don't worry too much about references. HR departments are ever so global too, meaning that much detached from reality, they nowadays don't get into any such fine detail. they stick happily with any retarded scoring they can make up in minutes. you are definitely not burning any bridges by that. no HR will hire anybody twice anyway, that's not in their books. and in worst case you could always bluntly lie to your next HR moron about your "exit proc", but even that will seldom be necessary.
The principle objection I have with ads is that they slow down loading the pages that I really want.
this is offset by the general adoption of all sorts of cdns and caching, motivated in part because it was necessary to make this ubiquitous advertiser-in-the-middle scheme even viable.
the principal objection i have with ads is that i don't want any fucking ads, and even less i want anybody snooping on me. iab board of directors could have a very interesting experience of me just by sucking my dick. the level abuse the average internet user is currently subjected to is absolutely ridiculous. glad to see mozilla still capable of doing something right.
Malicious software can't read paper. End of argument.
it wouldn't have to if you were to actually use those keys.
if the platform is to be trusted the keys have to be secret, period. the only question is who needs this level of trust. there are plenty valid usecases for this, maybe even in the public interest, but all are closed, specific systems. it definitely has no place in general consumer devices. i can only think of 2 usecases for this: totalitarian control or good old vendor lock in going high, and fuck both.
i actually love this idea def-con puts out. as a former cyberpunk fan i started a proof of concept of "the matrix" myself, decades ago. didn't finish, of course. if i did it today i even might as well choose unity3d too (probably not, but it wouldn't be unreasonable). but what i certainly would not do is claim to be "educating people about dealing with vulnerabilities" while just shoving another major source of them in right their pants. epic fail.
we definitely need a fresh perspective on the way we interact in the network. we are already deep in the dark ages, or didn't you get the news about government agencies routinely spying on absolutely everyone? and as much as malware is actually a plage, general public blissful ignorance is the real problem. but opensource doesn't mean we all have to read the source before running it, or start growing beards. it simply means it is publicly auditable, which in itslef has far reaching implications. assuming "company x will do good" is simply not acceptable. in part because they have proven otherwise more often than not. but nobody expects the spanish inquisition!
A little research indicates that Unity is a 3D engine. It's used a lot for 3D games. http://unity3d.com/unity/
pretty overwhelming records show that third party browser plugins are a major source of vulnerabilities, even more so if they are closed source and maintenance restricted to private profit organizations whose due dilligence in the process simply cannot be assumed, or even have shown outright negligence. see sun, oracle, adobe, apple, microsoft ...
this is not just ironic, it must be april fool's day in some random geeky tz somewhere.
What's insightful about realizing that one can use disease-causing parasites to model disease-causing parasites?
maybe you overlooked this:
The similarities in tradeoffs faced by both bacteria and humans during investment are actually quite similar.
can you imagine? similarities are similar!
And it's interesting that you actually innovated while you were learning. That's something that corporate America should consider.
he actually didn't say that. he just said he filed some patents. that's all corporate x really wants. and yes ...
It's not necessarily the IP laws
... it's totally the IP laws. if it weren't you wouldn't have thrown in the word "corporate" while talking about innovation. innovation IS essentially a learning process. patenting is just about claiming property.
should we forget about copyright already? sure enough.
breaking news, sky is blue.
And what in the hell do you mean by "far more complicated than it needs to be?" I agree the protocol could be improved, but complicated? You enter the recipient's email address, or more likely just click it from your address book, type your message, and push "send". How much easier can it get?
i guess he means complexity of setup: to use an email client you have to point it to a mail server. for a vast majority of users this simple concept is one too much if they can simply log into gmail and not have to worry about shit.
I used to feel that way, until I saw the government reaction to the spying leaks. That's malice.
it's fear, really.
of course not fear of terrorist attacks, but fear of loosing power. control, that is.
"malice" is just a moral tag, as such useless confetti in any rational discussion. what you see as malice is just an animal reaction to fear.
My package manager is very capable, I want to use it for every piece of software on the system. Rubygems? Feline Herd? Gowhatever? Why do I need new cute names for doing the same damn thing my package manager already does ...?
exactly, why? don't see the problem. if it's available in your package manager just go for it. if it is not ... there is at least *some* package management available. these aren't simple apps. rubygems, emacs, eclipse, nodejs ... are all extensible building tools where dependency management is a fundamental requirement. since they are also mostly platform-agnostic having its own dependency management system just makes sense, and it does in no way preclude your favorite package manager from maintaining it.
how a security breach where no sensitive data was compromised requires a total database rebuild?
That's some "How is babby formed" grade stupid right there. If you have a security breach, even if you know for a fact that no sensitive data was compromised, you don't ignore it. You fix it. Anything less would be irresponsible.
a "total database rebuild" is not a fix. why needs the entire database a total rebuild?
how do you "completely overhaul" a developer system just hours after being compromised?
You don't do it in mere hours? The site has been down for days, dumbass. Apple hasn't given a timeline for when it will be back up either.
days! i wasn't aware of that, thanks. so they also prove themselves incapable of fixing the issue and restoring the service. but why does the system need a "complete overhaul" to continue the service? sounds a lot like a totally broken system to me.
how long do you plan to work "around the clock" on that? half a year? because that's about the minimum such a system update would require, wild guess.
Like you'd have any fucking clue, you ignorant asswipe. Apple hasn't even specified what this "overhaul" entails. It's likely it's restricted to the portion of their system which got compromised, not the entire thing.
Or, at least, that's the conclusion you'd arrive at if you assume that they're reasonable people. If, on the other hand, you have an axe to grind and not too many brain cells, you end up like Slashdot poster "znrt", shitting out nonsense like this:
because they haven't specified anything at all. the whole statement is just braindead business babble. as you would naturally expect from any corporation, what else? when you fuck up in business you just don't admit it. you tell a fairy tale. ditto, lies. ok, not life-threatening lies. but lies. it's ugly. doesn't help confidence. unless you're a natural born apple customer, like you seem to be, of course.
we're completely overhauling our developer systems, updating our server software, and rebuilding our entire database.
how a security breach where no sensitive data was compromised requires a total database rebuild?
how do you "completely overhaul" a developer system just hours after being compromised?
how long do you plan to work "around the clock" on that? half a year? because that's about the minimum such a system update would require, wild guess.
and how do you want to keep customer confidence with such blatant and unnecessary lies? ...
duh, apple