Without explicit writings stating what your rights are and aren't, the government will make them up as it goes along. And you won't have the power to stop them because the power is in their hands.
Government, by construction, is corruptible and imperfect.
Without explicit controls on corruption, or continuous effort to fix its imperfections, you will end up with a corrupt, decrepit government.
I.e., the governments we had for millennia until we invented democracy and put power over the government's composition into the hands of the people the government has power over.
Checks + Balances = Good idea.
The police have no right of privacy in the conduct of their work. They have too much power to be allowed such a thing. They are the pointy end of government, and their behavior must meet a high standard of integrity, or you're not governing, you're oppressing.
And then someone comes along saying they have a similar system and front-runs the panics they cause by claiming they foresee a bubble crashing tomorrow.
UAC in vista was more or less completely worthless because it was so intrusive that nearly everybody turned it off.
Only people who didn't read the directions turned it all the way off.
I turned it down so that it only pops up if I'm about to install something. Now it only pops up if I'm about to install something. Oboy, click this box to install; yeah, I meant to install that, thank you for checking. Like that's a big hassle. In general, because of the improved installation system, it's still a lot fewer clicks than it used to be.
But having to work harder at security and spend more on it doesn't mean you have it yet. It just means you have a bigger castle so you need a longer moat.
Does it mean it's harder for a hacker to create a malware that will infect my machine, or that I am less likely to get malware?
Because I have no doubt the former is true. Because Microsoft is a fat target with a billion users, it has had tens of thousands of exploits thrown at it and has had to beef up its standards to fend off similar attacks.
But I have no doubt the latter is false. Because Microsoft is a fat target with a billion users, it is still the target of choice for the vast majority of exploits.
However, any other OS that claims I won't get hacked while using its system is utterly full of shit. Apple is egregiously baiting hackers by constantly reminding them that the reason they haven't had to improve security is that they've been targeted less often. Which means hackers can turn and apply low-grade exploits that haven't worked on a Windows box in years, and expect a hit.
As for Linux, the black-hats can just put their exploit in the distro and let us install it as a feature.
Seriously, all of these lamers can quit pretending they have a clue how to write secure software.
We won the Revolution only because we had copious assistance from the French.
And despite what the militia fucktards think, armed insurrection is not going to topple the U.S. government if it gets out of hand. If you need to revolt, you're either going to need the military behind you (probably not the revolution you're looking for), or bring a tougher one. Hint: a tougher one don't exist.
No matter how wiped-out you are when the alarm goes off, or how much you stumble getting dressed or squint getting to the place of exertion, by the time you've hit your tenth rep/stroke/step, you're awake. And once you're habituated to exercise it doesn't make you tired, it makes you feel great all day.
And it burns off fat and cholesterol.
Okay, don't fuck the vitamins. Use them to plug holes in your diet and you'll probably stop craving foods just to satiate your chemical deficiencies. Consider protein a vitamin, here. Sugar, not.
And the most popular drink is spit, and the most popular song is "why won't this compiiiii-iiiile?" and the most popular slashdot reply is "Page Down".
A sign of any real application architecture is that it can't.
The problem isn't in the abstractions in the middle of the program. Those can generally be translated all over the place.
The problem is at the edges, where the program has to interface with the system (and via the system with the user and other peripherals).
Not many languages abstract those things in ways that allow applications to just drop in. Which is why everywhere you go someone has come up with the idea of an abstraction layer, so their goodies aren't strongly coupled to a platform in a way that prevents them from moving to a new platform.
This isn't limited to porting between languages. Even in one language, porting between systems gives you the idea to put in an abstraction layer, thinking all you'll have to do is reimplement that layer for the next system.
And the concept of an operating system is a successful example of such a layer, but of course nobody gets that, so they have to abstract a layer between the app and the OS as well.
I've made a good living working around those mistakes.
Slashdot Mirror
Wiretapping and eavesdropping relate to discussions done in secret, not violence done in public. There is no connection.
Case dismissed.
So what the police are telling you they need there isn't a ban on recording the police, it's a ban on recording private citizens.
But that's not what they're asking for, is it?
You trust them when they're trustworthy.
Government, by definition, has power over you.
Without explicit writings stating what your rights are and aren't, the government will make them up as it goes along. And you won't have the power to stop them because the power is in their hands.
Government, by construction, is corruptible and imperfect.
Without explicit controls on corruption, or continuous effort to fix its imperfections, you will end up with a corrupt, decrepit government.
I.e., the governments we had for millennia until we invented democracy and put power over the government's composition into the hands of the people the government has power over.
Checks + Balances = Good idea.
The police have no right of privacy in the conduct of their work. They have too much power to be allowed such a thing. They are the pointy end of government, and their behavior must meet a high standard of integrity, or you're not governing, you're oppressing.
Oh, so you know of Sheriff Joe?
Put a tax on lying.
And then someone comes along saying they have a similar system and front-runs the panics they cause by claiming they foresee a bubble crashing tomorrow.
Hint: Your worst nightmares do not have open jovial dialogues with you.
No, but they do use irc, usenet, etc., etc., and Microsoft may or may not know how to use those things as well.
Know a lot of kids using OpenBSD?
UAC in vista was more or less completely worthless because it was so intrusive that nearly everybody turned it off.
Only people who didn't read the directions turned it all the way off.
I turned it down so that it only pops up if I'm about to install something. Now it only pops up if I'm about to install something. Oboy, click this box to install; yeah, I meant to install that, thank you for checking. Like that's a big hassle. In general, because of the improved installation system, it's still a lot fewer clicks than it used to be.
Nor was Mac.
Nor was Unix (file permissions are not a software-security system).
Not even Linux is pure.
No, they say it because it's true.
But having to work harder at security and spend more on it doesn't mean you have it yet. It just means you have a bigger castle so you need a longer moat.
Does it mean it's harder for a hacker to create a malware that will infect my machine, or that I am less likely to get malware?
Because I have no doubt the former is true. Because Microsoft is a fat target with a billion users, it has had tens of thousands of exploits thrown at it and has had to beef up its standards to fend off similar attacks.
But I have no doubt the latter is false. Because Microsoft is a fat target with a billion users, it is still the target of choice for the vast majority of exploits.
However, any other OS that claims I won't get hacked while using its system is utterly full of shit. Apple is egregiously baiting hackers by constantly reminding them that the reason they haven't had to improve security is that they've been targeted less often. Which means hackers can turn and apply low-grade exploits that haven't worked on a Windows box in years, and expect a hit.
As for Linux, the black-hats can just put their exploit in the distro and let us install it as a feature.
Seriously, all of these lamers can quit pretending they have a clue how to write secure software.
It's a shame, but it's not unprecedented.
We won the Revolution only because we had copious assistance from the French.
And despite what the militia fucktards think, armed insurrection is not going to topple the U.S. government if it gets out of hand. If you need to revolt, you're either going to need the military behind you (probably not the revolution you're looking for), or bring a tougher one. Hint: a tougher one don't exist.
Fuck vitamins.
Get used to getting up and exercising.
No matter how wiped-out you are when the alarm goes off, or how much you stumble getting dressed or squint getting to the place of exertion, by the time you've hit your tenth rep/stroke/step, you're awake. And once you're habituated to exercise it doesn't make you tired, it makes you feel great all day.
And it burns off fat and cholesterol.
Okay, don't fuck the vitamins. Use them to plug holes in your diet and you'll probably stop craving foods just to satiate your chemical deficiencies. Consider protein a vitamin, here. Sugar, not.
Same deal for alcohol.
It's also known to shift metabolic use of bodily stores of fuel from carbohydrates to fats.
Again, that's for non addicts.
coffee tax: 1 billion
Work.
alcohol tax: 3,5 billion
Play.
tabacco tax: 14,5 billion
Addiction.
I don't know what anyone else expected Obama to be, because he's 100% the guy I thought he was.
He's reasoning and diligent.
Something I expect of any president and hadn't seen for 8 years.
And the most popular drink is spit, and the most popular song is "why won't this compiiiii-iiiile?" and the most popular slashdot reply is "Page Down".
So next quarter's report will be slashdotted. Big whoop.
A sign of any real application architecture is that it can't.
The problem isn't in the abstractions in the middle of the program. Those can generally be translated all over the place.
The problem is at the edges, where the program has to interface with the system (and via the system with the user and other peripherals).
Not many languages abstract those things in ways that allow applications to just drop in. Which is why everywhere you go someone has come up with the idea of an abstraction layer, so their goodies aren't strongly coupled to a platform in a way that prevents them from moving to a new platform.
This isn't limited to porting between languages. Even in one language, porting between systems gives you the idea to put in an abstraction layer, thinking all you'll have to do is reimplement that layer for the next system.
And the concept of an operating system is a successful example of such a layer, but of course nobody gets that, so they have to abstract a layer between the app and the OS as well.
I've made a good living working around those mistakes.
C has limitations and is inefficient as a solution to many problems (though of course it is ideal for others).
If C is the only language you feel comfortable in, you need to get more practice with something else.
Honestly, if you haven't gotten enough exposure to C++ by now to be able to bluff your way into a gig, you've been slacking hard.
But they do count prime-time programming, which is always more popular than the other kinds.
You are confusing believing the bible with understanding how people reacted to it and built their societies.
Actually, yes, I have. It's the people listening to the truth who have the trouble accepting it who aren't having any success.