Nice troll. Since it's currently modded Insightful, I'll respond. Obviously, "No security through obscurity" is not simply an aphorism bandied around by slashbots. Instead, it is a concise way of saying that simply covering up your security flaws, rather than fixing them, is not a valid method of security. Anyone who has spent time working computer security knows that if you just hope no one will find out about your security vulnerabilities, and you brush them under the rug, they will come back to bite you on the ass.
In this case, though, the grandparent poster was not saying that Google should disclose the stats about the nature and extent of click fraud for the purpose of the community solving the problem for them, as you imply. Instead, these stats should be released for the sake of honest evaluation by companies who wish to use the service. Google makes the claim that they cannot divulge this information for security reasons, and the grandparent poster makes the case that this is BS, since the fraudsters are already well aware of how to take advantage of Google's program.
It sounds as though you are describing a user's manual, not a software design document. An SDD should be focused almost completely on code structure, not on UI.
How many, exactly, is enough? No offense, but I don't need to debate a single one (although I've debated many) to see that the actions of the Republican party, and especially the actions of its leader, have been pretty damn evil. I direct your attention to the ridiculous, bald-faced lying concerning our reasons for being in Iraq. I would hope no reasonable person would deny that we went to Iraq, initially, fueled on the FUD surrounding the events of 9/11/01, misled by our President and his Republican government into believing that Iraq somehow was connected to those events. Even now, when I ask random people "Why are we fighting a war in Iraq?" they invariably say something about "Al Qaeda." Please. More heinous than that, though, are the new lies. The lies that say we are in Iraq to "free them" from their evil regime. That's so preposterous I can't even comprehend the notion that someone would believe it. What about North Korea? Or Iran? Those are some pretty goddamn evil regimes, much more dangerous to our interests than Iraq ever was. But, we aren't world police, so what the hell are we doing "freeing" people in the first place? Let me break this down for you: we sent American men and women over to Iraq to DIE, not for defending our freedom, not for upholding the constitution, but to "free" some other country from its own government? That is completely and utterly ridiculous, insane, nonsensical, etc.
There may be individuals who are Republicans, who are not "vampires," as you say, but supporting an evil cause still makes one evil, and that bad reputation which you so gallantly try to dispel is quite deserved.
How much change is there in this movie from the "spirit" of the other Hitchhiker productions? To put it another way, how true to the original works will this movie be?
I'm not sure if I need even bother mentioning this, but I agree very strongly with you, and think the post to which you were replying is a bunch of gibberish.
Slightly Misleading
on
Mapping the Mind
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The review leaves one with the impression that this Rita Carter person explains more in this book than scientists actually know. Let me save everyone the suspense and say that no, she doesn't.
For instance, "explaining Alzheimer's" is an extremely misleading statement. She might explain what we currently know about Alzheimer's, but that is sadly little.
I'm not saying the book is no good (how should I know?), just that the review is a little misleading.
I have to go with Microsoft being WAY the greater of two evils in this situation. A giant, evil corporation using the legal system to totally destroy someone. As a libertarian, it doesn't get much more evil than that. I have a spam filter, I don't have a government filter.
So, unless you're completely a fascist, then yes, Microsoft is the greater of the two evils here.
It's not that IE has some other standard that people could just conform to. It has bugs that make it unpredictable and do not operate by the published standards.
Seriously, several people have pointed out that the guy was paid by LimeWire to do this research, followed quickly by "But he was completely honest!" I call BS. There are more ways to do a dishonest study then to actually fake the results. One of those ways is to be selective on your input. You'll notice many comments here along the lines of "But, where is my favorite P2P client X? It doesn't have malware either!" Connect the dots. This guy reviewed LimeWire (no malware!) and four other conveniently chosen P2P programs (malware!) for the specific reason of making LimeWire look good.
Slashdot Mirror
Nice troll. Since it's currently modded Insightful, I'll respond. Obviously, "No security through obscurity" is not simply an aphorism bandied around by slashbots. Instead, it is a concise way of saying that simply covering up your security flaws, rather than fixing them, is not a valid method of security. Anyone who has spent time working computer security knows that if you just hope no one will find out about your security vulnerabilities, and you brush them under the rug, they will come back to bite you on the ass.
:)
In this case, though, the grandparent poster was not saying that Google should disclose the stats about the nature and extent of click fraud for the purpose of the community solving the problem for them, as you imply. Instead, these stats should be released for the sake of honest evaluation by companies who wish to use the service. Google makes the claim that they cannot divulge this information for security reasons, and the grandparent poster makes the case that this is BS, since the fraudsters are already well aware of how to take advantage of Google's program.
How was that for a long winded post?
Perhaps you didn't read my comment. I said "focused on code structure" not "containing source code."
It sounds as though you are describing a user's manual, not a software design document. An SDD should be focused almost completely on code structure, not on UI.
Are you from Georgia or something?
"When you debate enough Republicans"
How many, exactly, is enough? No offense, but I don't need to debate a single one (although I've debated many) to see that the actions of the Republican party, and especially the actions of its leader, have been pretty damn evil. I direct your attention to the ridiculous, bald-faced lying concerning our reasons for being in Iraq. I would hope no reasonable person would deny that we went to Iraq, initially, fueled on the FUD surrounding the events of 9/11/01, misled by our President and his Republican government into believing that Iraq somehow was connected to those events. Even now, when I ask random people "Why are we fighting a war in Iraq?" they invariably say something about "Al Qaeda." Please. More heinous than that, though, are the new lies. The lies that say we are in Iraq to "free them" from their evil regime. That's so preposterous I can't even comprehend the notion that someone would believe it. What about North Korea? Or Iran? Those are some pretty goddamn evil regimes, much more dangerous to our interests than Iraq ever was. But, we aren't world police, so what the hell are we doing "freeing" people in the first place? Let me break this down for you: we sent American men and women over to Iraq to DIE, not for defending our freedom, not for upholding the constitution, but to "free" some other country from its own government? That is completely and utterly ridiculous, insane, nonsensical, etc.
There may be individuals who are Republicans, who are not "vampires," as you say, but supporting an evil cause still makes one evil, and that bad reputation which you so gallantly try to dispel is quite deserved.
How much change is there in this movie from the "spirit" of the other Hitchhiker productions? To put it another way, how true to the original works will this movie be?
I'm not sure if I need even bother mentioning this, but I agree very strongly with you, and think the post to which you were replying is a bunch of gibberish.
...on my PSP!
The review leaves one with the impression that this Rita Carter person explains more in this book than scientists actually know. Let me save everyone the suspense and say that no, she doesn't.
For instance, "explaining Alzheimer's" is an extremely misleading statement. She might explain what we currently know about Alzheimer's, but that is sadly little.
I'm not saying the book is no good (how should I know?), just that the review is a little misleading.
I wish I had mod points so I could mod you -1 Redundant (others have already pointed this out), and -1 No Sense of Humor.
To clarify, I don't mean "why don't we want spam in our inboxes," or "why is spam annoying," I mean "why should spamming be illegal?"
Will somenoe please explain to me why, exactly, spamming is wrong? Coherent, rational explanations only please, i.e. no appeals to emotion.
Sorry if it wasn't clear- my post was intended as a joke.
Haha, even better. After all, a nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat.
Shouldn't there be a "hint hint" or "cough cough" or something at the end of your post?
Err, Stewart, Steward, whatever. That scary lady that makes the cookies.
I think Martha Steward would like a word with you.
I do not believe the Google Infinity+1 storage plan is Google's April 1st prank. They usually only do one, and this appears to be it.
Unless you're completely irrational
Way to tear down that argument, man.
I have to go with Microsoft being WAY the greater of two evils in this situation. A giant, evil corporation using the legal system to totally destroy someone. As a libertarian, it doesn't get much more evil than that. I have a spam filter, I don't have a government filter.
So, unless you're completely a fascist, then yes, Microsoft is the greater of the two evils here.
Here's the link.
Driver support is not a "relatively minor part of an OS," driver support is the definition of OS. (OS stands for operating system, remember?)
Consult: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system
It's not that IE has some other standard that people could just conform to. It has bugs that make it unpredictable and do not operate by the published standards.
"Hovers indefinitely..." Snicker....
I said hovers indeterminately...
Does this mean that a cat with butter strapped to its back will no longer hover indeterminately?
Seriously, several people have pointed out that the guy was paid by LimeWire to do this research, followed quickly by "But he was completely honest!" I call BS. There are more ways to do a dishonest study then to actually fake the results. One of those ways is to be selective on your input. You'll notice many comments here along the lines of "But, where is my favorite P2P client X? It doesn't have malware either!" Connect the dots. This guy reviewed LimeWire (no malware!) and four other conveniently chosen P2P programs (malware!) for the specific reason of making LimeWire look good.
Give me a break.