The strong encryption has given us the means to lock things up so that even the government can't get them â" this part is new. Although they still have the right to read your data, they no longer have the ability to do it.
No, this part is not new. Encryption and one-time pads existed back then too, and safes that auto-destruct the contents upon tampering (like acid filled glass walls) are not new either. The writers of the constitution were well aware of encryption - they used it themselves. And did not authorize the government to break encryption. Instead, the fifth amendment was added to further protect people from being compelled to disclose what is hidden.
This goes against everything the constitution and its amendments stand for. It's interpreting the letter of the law and finding loopholes, and not in any way honoring the spirit of the law, which puts the individual's right to feel secure over the government's wishes to intrude.
But ultimately, I don't think breakable encryption (or backdoored encryption) is a viable long-term option, even if we were willing to live in a police state. The ability to break or circumvent encryption will inevitably fall into the hands of criminals.
And as well, the ability to have unbreakable encryption will inevitably fall into the hands of criminals. Then we get a situation where criminals can protect their data, while law-abiding people and companies cannot. I think it is better to have a situation where law-abiding people and companies aren't put at a disadvantage, and where law enforcement accepts that they cannot get to all data, and adjust their investigations correspondingly. Encryption isn't going to go away.
How many people that work in an Adidas factory could make a shoe from scratch? And yet our shoes are so much better than they were two hundred years ago and so plentiful and so cheap that we buy new ones every couple years instead of repairing the ones we have.
Adidas factory workers don't claim to be cordwainers. Code monkeys claim to be programmers.
I agree, but I think my definition of "programmer" may differ from yours.
Much like I don't consider a guy with a table saw and staple gun who cuts and assembles pieces of wood a "cabinet maker" if he doesn't know how to make dovetails or french polish, I don't consider someone who assembles pieces of code a "programmer" if he can't handle manual memory management, deterministic performance and pointer arithmetic.
There's a need for both people with staple guns and black box libraries, but there is also a need for those who can dive a bit deeper, and I don't think the former deserve six figure salaries.
Unless you have read the most basic C manuals, you usually don't need to know how strlen() and strcpy() is implemented.
Oh, I'd say that yes, you do. - How they can runaway. - I don't think I could count the times I've seen an overflow because programmers fail to realize that strcpy() also copies the trailing \0. - Why using strlen/strcpy on a string converted from Unicode with a library routine is perilous because the result might have \0 embedded, and thus not be just one string. - When you need a mutex to prevent the rug from being pulled from under you. - How strcpy/strlen deal with byte vs word vs longword alignment, and whether that makes the speed predictable or not.
For complex functions, I do not expect developers to understand the intrinsics, but for basic functions like these, yes, they should know and understand all caveats completely.
How are they faring compared to international competition, like the Japanese and Chinese? Isn't there a risk that the Falcon Heavy will be somewhat outdated before it gets past its first steps?
In Standard C, how do you find the least significant set bit of an integer type?
Is this a trick question? Something like this in a #define, I suppose? for (i=0;iwhy you would need to do that - chances are that you're complicating things when you don't need to, and just need an & operation. If you stumbled upon this when trying to do netmasks, be assured that the problem is already solved, and quite efficiently too. C is helpful in making you think and find simpler algorithms, which execute far more efficiently than bloated libraries and language intrinsics that have to deal with cases that can't occur.
No bounds checking, no type checking. In 2018. Get serious.
A halfway good programmer doesn't need to trust the language to do that for him and is capable of ensuring boundaries. The problem is that halfway good programmers have become scarce, and today's coders are content to leave critical parts to a compiler they don't understand and black box libraries they don't know what do behind the scenes. So they need the handholding.
Cancelling prescriptions? Causing epileptic attacks through blinking lights? Recording one partner having an affair, then playing it back later when the other partner is home? Calling 911 for a swat team?
The problem here isn't leaving out words, but an attempt to make the title more sensational by moving "Jupiter" closer to the front, while avoiding commas. Not only does it tell the reader that the moon is in Antarctica, but also that Jupiter only has one moon.
Both problems could easily have been prevented, e.g. by
NASA Tests Jupiter Moon Exploration Drone in Antarctica
Or even, given that this is Slashdot and not Twitter, and readers can be presumed to know what Europa is in the context of NASA and drones:
NASA Tests Europa Exploration Drone in Antarctica
But what do I know. English is only my third language.
Guess I'm sticking with my '77 olds. But I already get served ads in that too, the radio still works...
Depending on the country. Most have abandoned AM and some are turning off FM now. Some new cars don't have FM radios anymore. Between mobile phone streaming, satellite, digital broadcasts and good old USB sticks, analog radio is on the way out.
Any car that comes with ads will not be purchased by me.
They've come with ads for a long time now. Some GPS systems show the logo of nearby stores and restaurants if they pay the car manufacturer a fee. And service reminders taken over by an Amazing Offer to activate Sirius XM for FREE for two months.
I'm not sure how this would be more protective than a hard substance, if it hardens on impact. Is the point that it's more comfortable, at the cost of higher cost and weight?
Look at the number of children who die before their fifth birthday. Since 1990, that figure has been cut in half. That means 122 million children have been saved in a quarter-century, and countless families have been spared the heartbreak of losing a child."
Giving them prophylactics and education so they won't make children that die would also spare heartbreaks and help curb population growth. We're not an endangered species; we don't need as many child births as possible.
And, cynically, a small but significant number of children dying is helpful from an evolutionary point of view. Unless there is competition and culling, the gene pool will become less healthy over time. Make sterilization mandatory when saving a child's life, whether it's a rich child or a poor child.
Every government on Earth is composed entirely of humans.
Most state leaders have pets, usually at least a dog, which presumably helps calm the humans and reduces the risk of rash decisions. (Trump is the first US president in over a century that doesn't have a pooch. He hates them, like he hates anyone smarter than he is.)
Indeed it is. I think most of my systems are past that date, and work just fine:
grep -m2 -E 'name|bogomips'/proc/cpuinfo model name : Intel(R) Pentium(R) III CPU family 1133MHz bogomips : 2379.88 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q8300 @ 2.50GHz bogomips : 5000.22 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3-1230 V2 @ 3.30GHz bogomips : 6584.89 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz bogomips : 4191.52
Only the latter is within the five year mark.
Even the PIII is more than fast enough to handle smtp/dns/dhcp and other services without breaking a sweat, and is frugal enough to not even need a CPU fan. What benefit would I have by replacing it with something that's going to use 8x as much electricity doing nothing more?
While that may be an exception, it's not uncommon for companies to have a longer lifecycle for servers than five years.
Would people be pleased with a car or boiler that needs replacing every five years?
does that redhat update slow down AMD as well? or they are flagging AMD as safe?
I'm not sure, because that would be the kernel code, not the microcode. The kernel config differences are these three added flags: CONFIG_KAISER=y CONFIG_SPEC_CTRL=y CONFIG_ARCH_SPEC_CTRL=y
That might imply that they check for the arch before applying the spectre patches, but apply the KPTI fixes across the board.
Slashdot Mirror
The strong encryption has given us the means to lock things up so that even the government can't get them â" this part is new. Although they still have the right to read your data, they no longer have the ability to do it.
No, this part is not new. Encryption and one-time pads existed back then too, and safes that auto-destruct the contents upon tampering (like acid filled glass walls) are not new either.
The writers of the constitution were well aware of encryption - they used it themselves. And did not authorize the government to break encryption. Instead, the fifth amendment was added to further protect people from being compelled to disclose what is hidden.
This goes against everything the constitution and its amendments stand for. It's interpreting the letter of the law and finding loopholes, and not in any way honoring the spirit of the law, which puts the individual's right to feel secure over the government's wishes to intrude.
But ultimately, I don't think breakable encryption (or backdoored encryption) is a viable long-term option, even if we were willing to live in a police state. The ability to break or circumvent encryption will inevitably fall into the hands of criminals.
And as well, the ability to have unbreakable encryption will inevitably fall into the hands of criminals. Then we get a situation where criminals can protect their data, while law-abiding people and companies cannot.
I think it is better to have a situation where law-abiding people and companies aren't put at a disadvantage, and where law enforcement accepts that they cannot get to all data, and adjust their investigations correspondingly. Encryption isn't going to go away.
How many people that work in an Adidas factory could make a shoe from scratch? And yet our shoes are so much better than they were two hundred years ago and so plentiful and so cheap that we buy new ones every couple years instead of repairing the ones we have.
Adidas factory workers don't claim to be cordwainers.
Code monkeys claim to be programmers.
I agree, but I think my definition of "programmer" may differ from yours.
Much like I don't consider a guy with a table saw and staple gun who cuts and assembles pieces of wood a "cabinet maker" if he doesn't know how to make dovetails or french polish, I don't consider someone who assembles pieces of code a "programmer" if he can't handle manual memory management, deterministic performance and pointer arithmetic.
There's a need for both people with staple guns and black box libraries, but there is also a need for those who can dive a bit deeper, and I don't think the former deserve six figure salaries.
Unless you have read the most basic C manuals, you usually don't need to know how strlen() and strcpy() is implemented.
Oh, I'd say that yes, you do.
- How they can runaway.
- I don't think I could count the times I've seen an overflow because programmers fail to realize that strcpy() also copies the trailing \0.
- Why using strlen/strcpy on a string converted from Unicode with a library routine is perilous because the result might have \0 embedded, and thus not be just one string.
- When you need a mutex to prevent the rug from being pulled from under you.
- How strcpy/strlen deal with byte vs word vs longword alignment, and whether that makes the speed predictable or not.
For complex functions, I do not expect developers to understand the intrinsics, but for basic functions like these, yes, they should know and understand all caveats completely.
How are they faring compared to international competition, like the Japanese and Chinese? Isn't there a risk that the Falcon Heavy will be somewhat outdated before it gets past its first steps?
Oops, forgot about slashdot parsing <
for (i=0;i<sizeof(var)<<8 && var % (1<<i); i++);
In Standard C, how do you find the least significant set bit of an integer type?
Is this a trick question? Something like this in a #define, I suppose?
for (i=0;iwhy you would need to do that - chances are that you're complicating things when you don't need to, and just need an & operation. If you stumbled upon this when trying to do netmasks, be assured that the problem is already solved, and quite efficiently too.
C is helpful in making you think and find simpler algorithms, which execute far more efficiently than bloated libraries and language intrinsics that have to deal with cases that can't occur.
No bounds checking, no type checking. In 2018. Get serious.
A halfway good programmer doesn't need to trust the language to do that for him and is capable of ensuring boundaries. The problem is that halfway good programmers have become scarce, and today's coders are content to leave critical parts to a compiler they don't understand and black box libraries they don't know what do behind the scenes. So they need the handholding.
The big loss is that Firefox and Chromium no longer work on pre SSE2 processors so you can't surf the modern web on old computers anymore.
This is simply not true. Firefox builds just fine on a PIII here, using gentoo. You just need an ffmpeg that's built without SSE2.
Chromium won't build on a PIII, but that's not because of SSE2, but because you need at least 2 GB RAM to link it.
Our "real" human visual algorithms are distracted by bright, shiny objects in a similar way. It's not just AI that can be fooled.
Not only bright shiny objects.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
They'll probably figure out a more generic solution.
Like they have figured out a generic solution instead of antivirus database updates?
Dream on.
Trying to confuse a self driving car is dangerous and stupid
Not necessarily. It could be useful for sabotage against other countries, or for stopping/disabling a car that has lost its mind, so to speak.
Cancelling prescriptions?
Causing epileptic attacks through blinking lights?
Recording one partner having an affair, then playing it back later when the other partner is home?
Calling 911 for a swat team?
The problem here isn't leaving out words, but an attempt to make the title more sensational by moving "Jupiter" closer to the front, while avoiding commas. Not only does it tell the reader that the moon is in Antarctica, but also that Jupiter only has one moon.
Both problems could easily have been prevented, e.g. by
NASA Tests Jupiter Moon Exploration Drone in Antarctica
Or even, given that this is Slashdot and not Twitter, and readers can be presumed to know what Europa is in the context of NASA and drones:
NASA Tests Europa Exploration Drone in Antarctica
But what do I know. English is only my third language.
*Perhaps* for self-driving cars, but car manufacturers are SUPER paranoid about driver distraction
Is that why they project stuff on your windshield now?
Personally, I find that very distracting.
To say nothing about non-red/amber lights. Some newer cars make you feel you're sitting in a christmas tree.
Guess I'm sticking with my '77 olds. But I already get served ads in that too, the radio still works...
Depending on the country. Most have abandoned AM and some are turning off FM now. Some new cars don't have FM radios anymore. Between mobile phone streaming, satellite, digital broadcasts and good old USB sticks, analog radio is on the way out.
Any car that comes with ads will not be purchased by me.
They've come with ads for a long time now. Some GPS systems show the logo of nearby stores and restaurants if they pay the car manufacturer a fee.
And service reminders taken over by an Amazing Offer to activate Sirius XM for FREE for two months.
I'm not sure how this would be more protective than a hard substance, if it hardens on impact. Is the point that it's more comfortable, at the cost of higher cost and weight?
Look at the number of children who die before their fifth birthday. Since 1990, that figure has been cut in half. That means 122 million children have been saved in a quarter-century, and countless families have been spared the heartbreak of losing a child."
Giving them prophylactics and education so they won't make children that die would also spare heartbreaks and help curb population growth. We're not an endangered species; we don't need as many child births as possible.
And, cynically, a small but significant number of children dying is helpful from an evolutionary point of view. Unless there is competition and culling, the gene pool will become less healthy over time. Make sterilization mandatory when saving a child's life, whether it's a rich child or a poor child.
Perhaps the same could be said about fiat currencies, since they're not backed by gold reserves anymore.
They're backed by governments with the means to enforce the currency being honoured.
Cryptocurrency is backed by hope.
Every government on Earth is composed entirely of humans.
Most state leaders have pets, usually at least a dog, which presumably helps calm the humans and reduces the risk of rash decisions.
(Trump is the first US president in over a century that doesn't have a pooch. He hates them, like he hates anyone smarter than he is.)
Indeed it is. I think most of my systems are past that date, and work just fine:
grep -m2 -E 'name|bogomips' /proc/cpuinfo
model name : Intel(R) Pentium(R) III CPU family 1133MHz
bogomips : 2379.88
model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q8300 @ 2.50GHz
bogomips : 5000.22
model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3-1230 V2 @ 3.30GHz
bogomips : 6584.89
model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
bogomips : 4191.52
Only the latter is within the five year mark.
Even the PIII is more than fast enough to handle smtp/dns/dhcp and other services without breaking a sweat, and is frugal enough to not even need a CPU fan. What benefit would I have by replacing it with something that's going to use 8x as much electricity doing nothing more?
While that may be an exception, it's not uncommon for companies to have a longer lifecycle for servers than five years.
Would people be pleased with a car or boiler that needs replacing every five years?
Does EVERYTHING have to be in a bold font?
It's just the front page, no?
And it would make some people's posts slightly less obnoxious, as you won't see when they abuse the bold tag.
does that redhat update slow down AMD as well? or they are flagging AMD as safe?
I'm not sure, because that would be the kernel code, not the microcode.
The kernel config differences are these three added flags:
CONFIG_KAISER=y
CONFIG_SPEC_CTRL=y
CONFIG_ARCH_SPEC_CTRL=y
That might imply that they check for the arch before applying the spectre patches, but apply the KPTI fixes across the board.