They keep loosing? Remind me, which party controls both the house and senate? Shall we look at the state by state map with regards to legislatures and governorships? Obama has actually done wonders for the GOP.
There not being native 64-bit version of Visual Studio is the beef... the backend build system (MSBuild) has long supported running native 64-bit toolchains.
I have a solution with a half dozen projects that can hit the memory wall in a couple days or so.
I find that when I drive my car for extended periods that things no longer work as well as they used to. I'm told I should check my fluids from time to time but never bother to get around to trying to figure out why pert goes down over time.
Perhaps it's that the IDE leaks memory badly, in which case 64-bit would let it leak worse.
Perhaps it's that OhPlz drowns kittens to get off.
Either way though, it needs to be addressed.
Agreed, we should do something about your hypothetical drowning of kittens.
Their response was completely lame
So you've actually read the MSDN article referenced in the story above? The reasons described are not unreasonable, and pretty well known who care about perf optimization.
They've done great things with C# and C++ lately which means they're putting money into the product, it's bizarre that they're passing on this
One thing does not follow from the other. C# & C++ are languages that work quite well from Visual Studio *AND* the command line. Visual Studio is simply the shell which loads oodles of MS built plugins to show the code. Improvements in the language do not automatically mean new VS tooling.
I'd take it even if some features were missing and were added back in as updates later on.
You seem to be in the minority on this, as while 3100 votes (not people) sounds like a lot, it's a drop in the bucket compared to the # of people who use Visual Studio.
It works, but there can be negative side effects... great example being the TPM.
If you've a TPM in use under 8.1 (at least), after upgrading to 10 it will be tweaked in such a way that it will only work in 10, even after a reset/reinstall of the OS to a lower version.
Worse, because of the changes, the 8.1 UI is unable to clear the TPM so you can re-take ownership of it. Even PS TPM Cmdlets fail you... only a non obvious WMI call can get you back to normal.
Source: I hit this on my personal SP3 after I ran screaming from 10 on it (though run it elsewhere in my home happily).
If you end up discovering a major vulnerability in an entire states electoral system which could be maliciously used to sway local or state wide elections, and be done from ones basement without any official support (though a campaign level org having even more money to dedicate to such trickery would be able to exploit it in an even wider way)... what do you do?
Report it? Given the political leanings in this state it would be dismissed, despite each individual component having been independently tested.
Use it for your own gain? I prefer to limit my exposure to jail time and felony convictions thank you very much.
Nothing short of an end to end demonstration is required, something that would break numerous state & federal laws... after all, the powers that be claim to be against you voting on behalf of other people... and simple reading of state law says that revealing the flaw would constitute election fraud.
What is the reason existing Iridium satellites, or geostationary communication satellites can't be used to provide a near continuous transmission of at least basic data (position, speed, etc.) at a modest update rate? I'd guess even if few kbs rate would be plenty.
Cost.
It's also part of ADS-B which will make it cheaper in future, however all things like this take time.
Here in Washington, we have perennial candidate (ands self described extraterrestrial) who manages to get onto the ballot just about every time, so clearly there is a way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There are many ways it can be done, per my reading of state law, I can't at this time share the method I've figured out (as part of a larger electoral flaw here).
So your 'enlightenment' is... a lengthy Wikipedia article?
Again, I'm claiming to be lazy, I want to campaign from my backyard for higher office and have the government pay for it... where exactly (at least link to an anchor section) which say I can't do that under the proposed systems?
It's a darn awful shame I never reveal my full hand when discussing thing such as these, it makes it far more fun later when the less informed opt to challenge me.
She often used the phone.
Phones, plural... and the iPad.
Anyhow, until somebody finds direct evidence of deletion, it's hearsay. Gaps are only curiosities, NOT direct evidence. You don't seem to know the diff.
It is acknowledged, a block of ~31,000 emails which Hillary directed to be deleted which she deemed as 'personal'. It is also acknowledged that she turned over some 55,000 pages of emails were turned over in printed form which were deemed 'work related'.
Even if we ignore the multiple demonstrably false statement she has made with regards to her server usage (most of which you ignored out right, and one you were wrong on (more on that later))... we need to trust that she was honest and turned over all work related emails.
At the very least, that's perjury given she certified that she had turned over everything... worse if the FBI's recovery attempts turn up additional work related emails which she failed to turn over... something you or I don't have access to, but that available info is supportive of and you have federal felony charges under the Federal Records Act.
Are you that confident in your use of the delete key? I'm not when 10 years per document is the potential result.
There's been no direct evidence that her server was actually hacked during her tenure. Sorta kinda looked like is still sorta kinda. (Could have simply been a DOS or mass spam attack, based on some of the symptoms I've read about.)
Knowing for 100% sure that they were successfully hacked is not a requirement, only that it *may* have happened. Given the emails reported by the IG, again we see Clinton and her team were negligent with regards to not reporting the potential incident.
Re satellite photos, the articles from reliable sources merely say that information "obtained FROM satellite photos may have made it's way" into her emails. It's indirect and speculative.
Reliable sources not cited... seems to be a trend with you.
How much does being a Clinton shill pay? Because if you actually read up on the subject you'd know this was false, even a year ago.
Most seriously, the inspector general assessed that Clinton’s emails included information that was highly classified—yet mislabeled as unclassified. Worse, the information in question should have been classified up to the level of “TOP SECRET//SI//TK//NOFORN,” according to the inspector general’s report.
And that's just an early version of the report. Again, clearly you haven't read this weeks.
I guess I don't have common sense then.
Clearly not, you read as if you've spend quite a bit of time as an unsuccessful defense attorney, ie "isn't it perfectly PLAUSIBLE that my client was on the planet Mars at the time of the shooting?".
I've read her explanation of the "remove headers" event several times and it's a perfectly PLAUSIBLE explanation. We in the public don't have the actual "results" of that changed version yet, so I will give her the benefit of the doubt until it's directly proven she did someth
See the IG report, it echo something seen externally... there are large windows when there are simply no emails. Are we really to believe that she didn't send/receive any emails during periods she was known not to be on vacation in a location without cellular access?
The State Dept. server WAS hacked. They were BOTH Yugo's, so there.
And the State Department reported that hack, didn't they? Unlike Clinton. Again, one acted in conformance with law, the other didn't.
The "born classified" thing is contentious and nebulous. It's not clear-cut, like an SQL WHERE clause.
Only if you take your thinking cap off and try to find excuses. When it comes to NSA provided spy satellite photos, it's pretty clear cut.
That's the GOP's interpretation.
It's also the thinking of anyone using common sense.
She claims it was short-hand shop-talk that was misconstrued.
Yes, nothing anyone ever says on the left says what it means... it's always out of context.
Whether that's true or not we don't know yet; we only have 2 varying interpretations of a terse message.
Except Hillary's credibility on this subject keeps getting called into question. She says there was nothing classified on the server, turns out there was. She said there was nothing 'marked' classified, then we find out markings are irrelevant. She said the server was fully approved and ok with current law/rules, yet the IG says otherwise. She says she turned everything over, yet we know there are windows where there are no emails. She said she was fully willing to cooperate, yet she refused to meet with the IG.
With the exception of the claim that she shouldn't have used a private server... when has she said something on this subject which has turned out to be true?
Hell, she claimed she did it only for the simplicity of carrying one device... yet email footers show windows where she was sending from multiple devices during the same times.
Your bias is showing now.
Bias supported by facts.
Unlike most paid Hillary shills, I can read the applicable laws & reports and make an independent judgment as to just how illegal she has been... and in the coming weeks, hopefully the FBI will not be overruled by the DoJ and you will have no choice but to finally see.
You don't know how public financing of elections works, do you? You just typed what you thought would be a "real talk" comment without having a single clue as to the mechanism by which public financing of campaigns takes place.
Care to enlighten me then?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you are a Trump supporter.
Nope, not a fan. In fact I voted for Sanders on Tuesday (not that it matters in Washington)... come November Johnson or McAfee will get my vote (given how hard blue Washington is).
All you need to do is get enough existing people to believe in YOUR cause.
You misunderstand my desire to campaign... I don't want to have to spend time asking for money, I just want to 'campaign' in nice to be places... sometimes with other people around.
You mistakenly assume acquiring signatures is hard.
Even in a state like Washington where they keep on file your 'official' signature to validate your signature on a ballot or petition there are trivial ways around it.
I'm getting kind of sick of going into the office every day... instead under your system I think I will 'campaign' for public office... from the beach, from my back yard, from the local amusement park with my kid... and let you and the other tax payers pick up some good portion of the tab.
But also I can't allow such confident sounding bluster, so poorly sourced, and so poorly understood, to go go unchallenged. Seriously, even your quoting of the law that you seem to present as the official nail in the coffin of this issue is superficial and potentially irrelevant due to the definitions of the words -- words which I'm pretty sure, despite all her shortcomings, Hillary has parsed a lot more carefully than you, and your inadequate sources, have.
Yet you can offer no counter evidence other than Clinton campaign approved talking points... we will see in the next month or two who is right... and given the IG report you keep on ignoring, it's pretty clear the degree of illegality she has committed.
You imply she used her Pinto to transfer goods when she could have used the company's Lexus. BUT, the company car was a actually Yugo.
Regardless of names of containers used, some are approved for use, others are not. She made the conscious decision to use one that was not.
She also went on to delete emails which she did not have the right to destroy per the Federal Records Act and State Department rules which implement the law.
The implication that her decision put info at risk is false.
I've not made that implication, only that the content was in an unapproved location.
The fact that she and her staff did not report suspected hacking attacks though does suggest that the content may have been at risk (so there you go)... and they failed to report it as required.
Whether that actually happened is still an open question
The independent IG, appointed by Obama disagrees. You should try reading the report, it's pretty damning.
Much if not all of the reported classified stuff found was retroactively classified.
False. Documents which should have been labeled classified on day one, often items 'born classified' were not. We have at least one email asking a staffer to send a document in an insecure means.
I've never worked for government, nor have I ever had or sought a security clearance... yet even I know that an NSA provided satellite image starts off classified until they dither it down a bit wider distribution (so as not to show full capabilities).
You are saying Hillary Clinton, a person who was trained at least once on recognizing classified information, it's proper handling and signed a document certifying this knowledge and applicable criminal penalties... simply never knew?
Most, but you can still have fun with em from time to time if you really don't care about the T&C's.
I've a few apps on a less than popular app store, each of which have some boiler plate terms which I wrote ages ago, and still to this date gets the occasional happy or angry email about it:
This license agreement represents a contract, between the author of this program (*author name*), and the user of it (you), that both parties freely enter into for the use of this software (app name).
By installing and/or using this program you give your consent to this license and thus you agree to the following:
You will not:
Reverse engineer, sell, sublicense, or otherwise misappropriate this program or it's components except where otherwise agreed to between both parties.
Use this program in any unlawful manner.
Furthermore, you agree that:
Any allegations of abuse that arise as a result of this program are the sole responsibility of the user of the program and at no time will the author be in any way accountable except where forbidden by law.
You are not now, nor have ever been a member of the Communist Party.
Your use of this program is strictly voluntary and can, as such, end at any time at the sole or joint decision of you or the author.
*author name* is a cool and happening guy.
In the event this contract is terminated, your right to use the licensed software is also terminated.
All disputes resulting from the interpretation of this agreement shall be settled at the author's whim.
You will hold harmless and completely indemnify the author of this program (*author name*) from any civil or criminal liabilities related to the use, possession, transmission or thought about this program.
You will not donate to Obama for America, DCCC, DSCC, DNC, Jay Inslee in any way or any fund supporting Democrats running for any office during the 2012 campaign.
If any provision or provisions of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid, illegal, unenforceable or in conflict with the law of any jurisdiction, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby.
Slashdot Mirror
And yet they like many remain oddly silent on the long running accusations of UN Peace Keepers raping with impunity: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...
They keep loosing? Remind me, which party controls both the house and senate? Shall we look at the state by state map with regards to legislatures and governorships? Obama has actually done wonders for the GOP.
Surely systemd will soon have that missing functionality, then all will be well again.
Correct. Even more memory for the same project.
You must not have read even the summary.
There not being native 64-bit version of Visual Studio is the beef... the backend build system (MSBuild) has long supported running native 64-bit toolchains.
I find that when I drive my car for extended periods that things no longer work as well as they used to. I'm told I should check my fluids from time to time but never bother to get around to trying to figure out why pert goes down over time.
Perhaps it's that OhPlz drowns kittens to get off.
Agreed, we should do something about your hypothetical drowning of kittens.
So you've actually read the MSDN article referenced in the story above? The reasons described are not unreasonable, and pretty well known who care about perf optimization.
One thing does not follow from the other. C# & C++ are languages that work quite well from Visual Studio *AND* the command line. Visual Studio is simply the shell which loads oodles of MS built plugins to show the code. Improvements in the language do not automatically mean new VS tooling.
You seem to be in the minority on this, as while 3100 votes (not people) sounds like a lot, it's a drop in the bucket compared to the # of people who use Visual Studio.
It works, but there can be negative side effects... great example being the TPM.
If you've a TPM in use under 8.1 (at least), after upgrading to 10 it will be tweaked in such a way that it will only work in 10, even after a reset/reinstall of the OS to a lower version.
Worse, because of the changes, the 8.1 UI is unable to clear the TPM so you can re-take ownership of it. Even PS TPM Cmdlets fail you... only a non obvious WMI call can get you back to normal.
Source: I hit this on my personal SP3 after I ran screaming from 10 on it (though run it elsewhere in my home happily).
Alas many posts from many people are rather crazy, yet very few of their authors go shoot people.
How do you tell one from the other ahead of time?
But when the code is compiled the space savings disappear.
If you end up discovering a major vulnerability in an entire states electoral system which could be maliciously used to sway local or state wide elections, and be done from ones basement without any official support (though a campaign level org having even more money to dedicate to such trickery would be able to exploit it in an even wider way)... what do you do?
Report it? Given the political leanings in this state it would be dismissed, despite each individual component having been independently tested.
Use it for your own gain? I prefer to limit my exposure to jail time and felony convictions thank you very much.
Nothing short of an end to end demonstration is required, something that would break numerous state & federal laws... after all, the powers that be claim to be against you voting on behalf of other people... and simple reading of state law says that revealing the flaw would constitute election fraud.
Cost.
It's also part of ADS-B which will make it cheaper in future, however all things like this take time.
See my reply to another comment: https://slashdot.org/comments....
Here in Washington, we have perennial candidate (ands self described extraterrestrial) who manages to get onto the ballot just about every time, so clearly there is a way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There are many ways it can be done, per my reading of state law, I can't at this time share the method I've figured out (as part of a larger electoral flaw here).
So your 'enlightenment' is... a lengthy Wikipedia article?
Again, I'm claiming to be lazy, I want to campaign from my backyard for higher office and have the government pay for it... where exactly (at least link to an anchor section) which say I can't do that under the proposed systems?
It's a darn awful shame I never reveal my full hand when discussing thing such as these, it makes it far more fun later when the less informed opt to challenge me.
Phones, plural... and the iPad.
It is acknowledged, a block of ~31,000 emails which Hillary directed to be deleted which she deemed as 'personal'. It is also acknowledged that she turned over some 55,000 pages of emails were turned over in printed form which were deemed 'work related'.
Even if we ignore the multiple demonstrably false statement she has made with regards to her server usage (most of which you ignored out right, and one you were wrong on (more on that later))... we need to trust that she was honest and turned over all work related emails.
Did she?
Reports say no:
http://www.politico.com/story/...
http://www.theguardian.com/us-...
At the very least, that's perjury given she certified that she had turned over everything... worse if the FBI's recovery attempts turn up additional work related emails which she failed to turn over... something you or I don't have access to, but that available info is supportive of and you have federal felony charges under the Federal Records Act.
Are you that confident in your use of the delete key? I'm not when 10 years per document is the potential result.
Knowing for 100% sure that they were successfully hacked is not a requirement, only that it *may* have happened. Given the emails reported by the IG, again we see Clinton and her team were negligent with regards to not reporting the potential incident.
Reliable sources not cited... seems to be a trend with you.
How much does being a Clinton shill pay? Because if you actually read up on the subject you'd know this was false, even a year ago.
And that's just an early version of the report. Again, clearly you haven't read this weeks.
Clearly not, you read as if you've spend quite a bit of time as an unsuccessful defense attorney, ie "isn't it perfectly PLAUSIBLE that my client was on the planet Mars at the time of the shooting?".
See the IG report, it echo something seen externally... there are large windows when there are simply no emails. Are we really to believe that she didn't send/receive any emails during periods she was known not to be on vacation in a location without cellular access?
And the State Department reported that hack, didn't they? Unlike Clinton. Again, one acted in conformance with law, the other didn't.
Only if you take your thinking cap off and try to find excuses. When it comes to NSA provided spy satellite photos, it's pretty clear cut.
It's also the thinking of anyone using common sense.
Yes, nothing anyone ever says on the left says what it means... it's always out of context.
Except Hillary's credibility on this subject keeps getting called into question. She says there was nothing classified on the server, turns out there was. She said there was nothing 'marked' classified, then we find out markings are irrelevant. She said the server was fully approved and ok with current law/rules, yet the IG says otherwise. She says she turned everything over, yet we know there are windows where there are no emails. She said she was fully willing to cooperate, yet she refused to meet with the IG.
With the exception of the claim that she shouldn't have used a private server... when has she said something on this subject which has turned out to be true?
Hell, she claimed she did it only for the simplicity of carrying one device... yet email footers show windows where she was sending from multiple devices during the same times.
Bias supported by facts.
Unlike most paid Hillary shills, I can read the applicable laws & reports and make an independent judgment as to just how illegal she has been... and in the coming weeks, hopefully the FBI will not be overruled by the DoJ and you will have no choice but to finally see.
Care to enlighten me then?
Nope, not a fan. In fact I voted for Sanders on Tuesday (not that it matters in Washington)... come November Johnson or McAfee will get my vote (given how hard blue Washington is).
You misunderstand my desire to campaign... I don't want to have to spend time asking for money, I just want to 'campaign' in nice to be places... sometimes with other people around.
You mistakenly assume acquiring signatures is hard.
Even in a state like Washington where they keep on file your 'official' signature to validate your signature on a ballot or petition there are trivial ways around it.
I'm getting kind of sick of going into the office every day... instead under your system I think I will 'campaign' for public office... from the beach, from my back yard, from the local amusement park with my kid... and let you and the other tax payers pick up some good portion of the tab.
Sound good?
Somehow, I don't imagine this woman is a conservative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
From what we know of TrigglyPuff, she's not either: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
In some places in the middle-east for example? Sure... yet that's not where we usually hear screams of patriarchy from/about.
What then of the women supporting Sanders 'for the boys'?
Yet you can offer no counter evidence other than Clinton campaign approved talking points... we will see in the next month or two who is right... and given the IG report you keep on ignoring, it's pretty clear the degree of illegality she has committed.
Regardless of names of containers used, some are approved for use, others are not. She made the conscious decision to use one that was not.
She also went on to delete emails which she did not have the right to destroy per the Federal Records Act and State Department rules which implement the law.
I've not made that implication, only that the content was in an unapproved location.
The fact that she and her staff did not report suspected hacking attacks though does suggest that the content may have been at risk (so there you go)... and they failed to report it as required.
The independent IG, appointed by Obama disagrees. You should try reading the report, it's pretty damning.
False. Documents which should have been labeled classified on day one, often items 'born classified' were not. We have at least one email asking a staffer to send a document in an insecure means.
I've never worked for government, nor have I ever had or sought a security clearance... yet even I know that an NSA provided satellite image starts off classified until they dither it down a bit wider distribution (so as not to show full capabilities).
You are saying Hillary Clinton, a person who was trained at least once on recognizing classified information, it's proper handling and signed a document certifying this knowledge and applicable criminal penalties... simply never knew?
Shame for her, ignorance of the law is no excuse.
It's *current year*, and disagreeing with a women on the internet is the definition of misogyny, duh!
Why let facts or actual motivations get in the way of a good ole 2 minutes hate... which should have ended decades ago?
... and misogynistic, again proving the need for for to take gender studies degrees.
Clearly these women have deeply rooted cases of internalized misogyny thanks to the always present patriarchy.
Down with STEM!
Most, but you can still have fun with em from time to time if you really don't care about the T&C's.
I've a few apps on a less than popular app store, each of which have some boiler plate terms which I wrote ages ago, and still to this date gets the occasional happy or angry email about it:
This license agreement represents a contract, between the author of this program (*author name*), and the user of it (you), that both parties freely enter into for the use of this software (app name).
By installing and/or using this program you give your consent to this license and thus you agree to the following:
You will not:
Furthermore, you agree that: