The lady that does preventive teeth cleaning at my dentist's office charges $145 per hour. That's quite a bit of money for a job that's not much more complicated than cutting somebody's hair.
And it's a lot easier to keep that exploit hidden (i.e. available) when the source is closed
Having the source code allows you to find the really subtle exploits that can remain hidden for a long time. Also, people aren't as likely to audit old code that they and others have already looked at before.
Yes, and when you use "very" to qualify it, you're implying it is of minimal importance.
Not that it is of minimal importance, but very specific. Not only do you have to copy a peanut gene to a tomato, but you'd have to copy the very small part that encodes the specific proteins that result in allergies.
There's a fine line between passion and addiction which you likely crossed long ago. I won't even ask about work/life balance, because you don't have any, which is likely what all those who are "lacking" passion are doing; living their lives.
He's living his life too, but in a more meaningful way.
Depends. They probably have access to source code from plenty of American companies. I guess they'll have a much harder time getting the source code of non-friendly foreign companies. Given enough motivation, they may find ways to get it, but it won't be nearly as easy as downloading it from the interwebs somewhere.
I agree that NSA and friends manage to get the source code for many projects. But that proves my point that having the source code helps to find bugs, otherwise they wouldn't have to go through that much trouble. Entering invalid input is a great way to catch easy bugs, but some bugs may be much more subtle, and require various pieces of input to align accurately.
No I didn't know that. Can you give a reference ?
But that would be a perfect place for the law to step in, and explicitly allow products to carry such a label.
While it is true that we don't know the long term effects of GMO foods, we also don't know the long term effects of many traditionally bred crops, new pesticides/herbicides, additives, or novel combinations/treatments.
The biggest (and best known) killer is still the high calorie (fat and sugar) foods, and despite nutrition info on the package, people still eat them.
Despite the many eyeballs, serious bugs in open source software have been found before. The NSA doesn't have to insert their own backdoor, they can just dig through the existing code, and find a bug that allows them to get in.
There is no need for the law to get involved, because this problem can be solved perfectly well with a voluntary "does not contain GMO products" label.
It's not a specific case, it's an example of how and where GMO can become a major problem
An example is a specific case. Peanut allergies are caused by a couple of very specific seed storage proteins. Even if there was genetic material transferred from peanuts to tomatoes, people would not be transferring the genes for those specific proteins. In fact, it is conceivable that GMO techniques could be used to make a peanut that didn't cause allergies.
You might oppose the patenting of organisms, or the threat GMOs pose to biodiversity, or simply the companies that are involved.
I also might oppose a thousand other things that are not on the label. Also, non-GM organisms could be patented too, or threaten biodiversity, and the companies that you don't like may also produce non-GM crops that you'd want to avoid. This isn't something that the law needs to get involved with. If there's a sufficient demand for non-GMO products, or products that are ecologically sound, manufacturers can put their own label on the product. Some of these already exist. You can buy only foods from certain brand you trust and like, or buy in an organic store.
So, you're saying that there are no benefits to GMO foods? Nothing good Monsanto can say about them that might people want to buy and consume them? Good to know,
These are two different things. Even if there are benefits, then providing additional information can make people scared. Imagine if your local supermarket puts big blue stickers on their chicken products saying that "THESE CHICKENS HAVE BEEN FED DIHYDROGENMONOXIDE". Do you imagine that sales could drop, even though this information is correct and harmless ?
Slashdot Mirror
CS needs to form a union to push back at these assholes hard.
LOL. They'll just fire you all at the same time.
The lady that does preventive teeth cleaning at my dentist's office charges $145 per hour. That's quite a bit of money for a job that's not much more complicated than cutting somebody's hair.
+5 for this misogynist crap?
Sounds like a simple fact of his life. And now that I think of it, it's also been true in my career.
Did you ever consider the population had increased by 100,000,000 since the 1980s? There will be less workers... Ya right.
You can have a bigger population and less workers, especially talented ones. Kids these days are wasting a lot of time with games and social media.
And it's a lot easier to keep that exploit hidden (i.e. available) when the source is closed
Having the source code allows you to find the really subtle exploits that can remain hidden for a long time. Also, people aren't as likely to audit old code that they and others have already looked at before.
Yes, and when you use "very" to qualify it, you're implying it is of minimal importance.
Not that it is of minimal importance, but very specific. Not only do you have to copy a peanut gene to a tomato, but you'd have to copy the very small part that encodes the specific proteins that result in allergies.
There's a fine line between passion and addiction which you likely crossed long ago. I won't even ask about work/life balance, because you don't have any, which is likely what all those who are "lacking" passion are doing; living their lives.
He's living his life too, but in a more meaningful way.
Good to read that they won the case, at least, even though they had to add a disclaimer.
If you get a backdoor in through a legitimate developer, all copies will be compromised automatically.
Depends. They probably have access to source code from plenty of American companies. I guess they'll have a much harder time getting the source code of non-friendly foreign companies. Given enough motivation, they may find ways to get it, but it won't be nearly as easy as downloading it from the interwebs somewhere.
Nobody at all (except morons like you) claim OSS is bug-free
I didn't claim it either, moron.
I agree that NSA and friends manage to get the source code for many projects. But that proves my point that having the source code helps to find bugs, otherwise they wouldn't have to go through that much trouble. Entering invalid input is a great way to catch easy bugs, but some bugs may be much more subtle, and require various pieces of input to align accurately.
But it's impossible to audit the source code of closed source software if you don't have the source code.
Correct, but I think the NSA is much more motivated to find an exploit in millions of lines of code than other people are to audit the same.
No I didn't know that. Can you give a reference ? But that would be a perfect place for the law to step in, and explicitly allow products to carry such a label.
While it is true that we don't know the long term effects of GMO foods, we also don't know the long term effects of many traditionally bred crops, new pesticides/herbicides, additives, or novel combinations/treatments. The biggest (and best known) killer is still the high calorie (fat and sugar) foods, and despite nutrition info on the package, people still eat them.
And this applies to closed sores as well.
It's a lot easier to find the bug when you have the source code.
Despite the many eyeballs, serious bugs in open source software have been found before. The NSA doesn't have to insert their own backdoor, they can just dig through the existing code, and find a bug that allows them to get in.
There is no need for the law to get involved, because this problem can be solved perfectly well with a voluntary "does not contain GMO products" label.
It's not a specific case, it's an example of how and where GMO can become a major problem
An example is a specific case. Peanut allergies are caused by a couple of very specific seed storage proteins. Even if there was genetic material transferred from peanuts to tomatoes, people would not be transferring the genes for those specific proteins. In fact, it is conceivable that GMO techniques could be used to make a peanut that didn't cause allergies.
So because one company is evil, we should punish all of them ?
In that case, you should lobby for a 'farmed using a practice I hate' label, and not a GMO label, as those are two different things.
Shortwave is between 1.6 MHz and 30 MHz.
If they put peanut DNA into a tomato then people will die from eating tomatoes, not knowing it's actually part peanut
Sure, if the tomato is changed so that it becomes an allergen, there should be a warning about possible reactions. But that's a very specific case.
You might oppose the patenting of organisms, or the threat GMOs pose to biodiversity, or simply the companies that are involved.
I also might oppose a thousand other things that are not on the label. Also, non-GM organisms could be patented too, or threaten biodiversity, and the companies that you don't like may also produce non-GM crops that you'd want to avoid. This isn't something that the law needs to get involved with. If there's a sufficient demand for non-GMO products, or products that are ecologically sound, manufacturers can put their own label on the product. Some of these already exist. You can buy only foods from certain brand you trust and like, or buy in an organic store.
So, you're saying that there are no benefits to GMO foods? Nothing good Monsanto can say about them that might people want to buy and consume them? Good to know,
These are two different things. Even if there are benefits, then providing additional information can make people scared. Imagine if your local supermarket puts big blue stickers on their chicken products saying that "THESE CHICKENS HAVE BEEN FED DIHYDROGENMONOXIDE". Do you imagine that sales could drop, even though this information is correct and harmless ?