If you haven't grasped the quantum way of thinking, this next one is a great video. It doesn't get all technical and assumes some basic information, but the pictures should start you in the quantum direction.
I have what appears to be an apple, and you have what appears to be an identical apple. When I slice mine in half, half of my apple disappears, and half of your apple disappears. But not just any half - the way I cut my apple determines which half you get. If there is a bruise, it will be either on my half or on your half. Putting the halves together gives us exactly the apple that we appeared to have before it was sliced.
In quantum terms, it is much as the video above describes the double slit experiment - the photon or electron goes through both slits, so it is in 2 places at once. That is how we both appear to have the same apple in the beginning. Slice the apple, same as measuring the photon, and it collapses into the two halves.
We can create photons that are not entangled, and they do not behave the same way. What happens at detector 0 in the second video is inexplicable, currently, but that's entanglement.
You were clear. We are all looking forward to your implementation.
I'm taking issue with the idea that hashing a fingerprint is impossible in principle, I'm not saying it would practically work right now in realistic scenarios.
How about in unrealistic scenarios? Because half of the new and cool stuff mentioned on this website is rubbished because it's not practical in reality. And then someone refines it, so then it is realistic.
Are you talking about having an indicator for ridge A, with a radius relative to the whole finger of X percent? And a vector for the direction of whorl Y?
If so, you're going to have to establish one classification system to start with, and there are several. They can be exclusive systems, or inclusive. Just from Wikipedia, which I assume you read before posting your assertion:
The Henry Classification System is a method to classify fingerprints and exclude potential candidates. This system should NEVER be used for individualization.
So there is at least one classification system that you can't use to identify someone, but you can tell if someone is NOT a match.
So we get to feature extraction. Can you define a system of features where all existing and once-existing fingerprints can be uniquely identified? Because systems like AFIS have been trying to solve this problem for a while, and your contribution would reduce the search time greatly.
Some of the experts in the area are trying to invent the next generation fingerprinting system. I assume you are one of them? If not, either apply or shut the fuck up about things that "make sense to you". Because the world is not a thing that armchair philosophers can contribute to by simply asserting a truth.
"Hang out with" is really not even remotely the same as what I responded to. Try reading, for context.
Zero state and local reps hang out with my dad, my teacher, and my pastor (or religious equivalent).
Someone might have "talked to" my state rep, but they did not in any way pass on my sentiments. The people most likely to have "talked to" my state rep do not agree with my religious affiliation, political affiliation, or stances on at least 40% of everything. And I have a pretty narrow stance, for the record.
I have spoken with a number of local charity heads, and they have shaken hands with, but not had any way to actually speak with, representatives. Likewise everyone else.
Are you a rich, entitled, blinder-wearing asshole like the original asshole I replied to? Because yes, you are. Or maybe you don't live where I live, and therefore it would be impossible for you to understand that THAT'S NOT TRUE. Which, it isn't. Anything you and grandassholeparent seem to think, not true.
Read the source code. That's the benefit. Read it, understand it, reuse it, fork it...
I'm not sure you understand the value of source code. Just having it is potentially valuable, even if all you do is provide it to someone who wants or needs it.
There is only one thing keeping me from upgrading. A checkbox that configures the keyboard mappings so that the Windows key works and does what I expect. "Are you upgrading from Windows? Do you want your Windows key to work like it used to?"
I want to be able to hit the Windows key along with familiar combinations. It's a very common keyboard layout, and lots of Windows users have this muscle memory.
Sure, I could edit a bunch of settings for every distro I try, but I'm tired of it. I'm done, and I'm not trying another one. They're great, rock solid, and they just don't work the way I, as a Windows user, want them to.
Having said that, Mint is the place to start.
iOS users love their pointing and clicking, apparently. I spend time on the keyboard, and without a reason I don't want to touch the mouse. Is there a distro that does that well? Sure, if you're a Linux user, but I'm not.
But that would be an extraordinary coincidence, if that happened so recently, only a few millennia before humans developed the tech to loft a telescope into space. Thatâ(TM)s a narrow band of time, cosmically speaking.
And yet, the explanation has to be rare or coincidental. After all, this light pattern doesnâ(TM)t show up anywhere else, across 150,000 stars. We know that something strange is going on out there.
How many stars are in the galaxy? And we are comparing 150k out of that number? I would call that a non-representative sample.
At one time, pop music *was* what the symphonic orchestras were playing.
Live music was either what you heard live, or played yourself. And what you played yourself was either traditional (folk) music, or something you heard. And most of what you heard was folk music, or a professional musician, or a knockoff of a pro.
When attendance declines, symphonies, theatre groups and other live performers retrench around their origins.
More likely, a contact's device is pwned. And their contact list is compromised. All of the e-mail or text data was probably consumed.
Statistically speaking, the likelihood of someone being compromised is small compared to a recipient being compromised.
Start sending purely nonsense, unrelated e-mails to made up addresses, and see if anything changes. If you like guns and motorcycles, ask about buying a Barbie doll collection, or vintage 8mm porn. If nothing changes, it's a contact.
Have you met anyone ever at all? Sure, you're a smart cookie, but do you feel that you are average?
I don't care what your answer is, and here's why. If you don't feel average, then you are not representative of the majority of voters. If you do feel average, then you are not, by definition, smart. You are average.
Money means paying people to research every video, every quote, every statement by your opponent, and make a montage of them being dishonest, or contradictory, or in some fashion the opposite of what voters seem to want. Oh, and being able to afford to show that montage when opponents bid up the advertising rate.
It's about controlling the message, to react quickly, to have ad slots bought that you can swap out for the latest narrative. It's about having the money to compete with the other people who also have the money.
You can call it blame passing if you don't understand anything about people, or politics, or marketing, or economics, or everything that is in play.
I get the point that you're making, but how many representatives can live near enough to their representative to be their neighbor? All 167,000 of them?
More likely is the city councilman being a relative of sorts. All 8,000 people being somehow related, somewhat less likely.
It sounds like you live in a very exclusive area, where most people don't have a chance to hob-nob. You had some sort of point, but I guess it was about how awesome it is to be connected politically, or about how much money you make to be able to afford a house where you live.
Lots of people have never met a Wall St banker. A state representative in New York maybe, but otherwise, what's your point? City councilman anywhere other than the 5 largest cities? Not likely.
I can't even start to explain how stupid your comment is, how unrelatable to anyone else completely at all.
Also, the correlating behind the scenes that happens when you access multiple websites that use either a CDN or something like ajax.google.com
Everyone hosting their JQuery on Google's servers basically allow Google to correlate visits, and build up a picture of which websites you visit. Combine that with direct access to GMail, Youtube, or Google searches, and they pretty much know what you do at least half the time on the internet.
You're going to have to wipe everything, including your IP address, in order to avoid the kind of correlation that Google does, or Verizon and AOL, or any number of big data providers.
Visit one website, no multitasking, torch everything, and start over. Best done via proxy. One that allocates IP addresses randomly. And switch proxies every time you visit another website.
Or, block everything and only visit bookmarks and don't allow JavaScript and never give any information and... yeah, there's a whole lot more behind the scenes that does not involve delivering information to your browser as the delivery mechanism.
It's clearly ASP.NET, and WebForms. The dump is the Request.ServerVariables collection, and if you need to debug issues it's fairly standard. If you need to put it in production code, though, you always put it on a server that your load balancer will skip, because that should not be seen, at all, by anyone.
But how would you get someone else's session? It's impossible.
Scott Hanselman has one suggestion as to how it might happen, and it's 100% code errors.
There's a comment there "You just found the famous TLS bug:)" So maybe not impossible. Windows uses Thread Local Storage to store things like static variables. The thread handling the request might change, and ASP.NET properly sets the.NET Thread data (and HttpContext data for MVC applications) every time it processes an event so it should all line up. But, static variables are thread-locked, so they can transfer between request handlers. That's the TLS Bug referenced there. It is possible to access someone else's session data if it is stored in TLS (static variable is one possibility).
So, this is not "a lot of crying over nothing" - it could be very serious. Having said all of that, it is very unlikely that you would see someone else's information consistently with that bug - it might show up once and go away.
Two weeks after I initially found this critical vulnerability, I took the time to find a way to report it to them (on August 26).
If this were replay data for load tests or unit tests, it's unlikely that the dates would be the same as when it was reported. The user admits altering some of the data, so we can't draw concrete conclusions there.
A security professional wouldn't draw attention to *possible* leakage of Basic Auth, because that's really unlikely at the SSL interface behind a username/password login. At least a knowledgeable one, I think.
If the IP address were a load balancer, the User agent should have matched what the user expected. Dynamic content hosted by a CDN/edge provider? If the data changed, it's probably dynamic. So, what is the conclusion?
I don't know, but it doesn't sound like something that can be dismissed so nonchalantly. If users were getting each others' sessions, we would likely have heard about it, since it happened for two weeks. That's the only thing I can conclude, but that supposes that the news would have made it to international press.
Is Apple a competitor? Just barely. Omit Sun because they are stupid. And IBM sold to Lenovo in 2005.
Apple sells hardware? Sure. HP, Dell, and IBM sold consumer hardware featuring Microsoft operating systems to consumers, and Apple didn't.
HP, Dell, and IBM sold commodity computers with little margin. Apple sold premium software on commodity hardware, with better margins and limited variability in hardware, limiting the cost of development and testing.
Apple is not something you want to include in a comparison unless you are an ignorant fool. Not just ignorant, and not just a fool.
So ignore Sun, they are obviously on the bottom of the chart anyway. HP was on the bottom briefly for about 4 months, and if you exclude Sun, was on the bottom but trending upwards when Fiorina left.
The trend lines are essentially the same, especially if you exclude Sun.
So...... I guess your point is I'm basically right? Or did someone miss the chance to mod you "funny but irrelevant"?
I compared their competitors. You propose unrelated companies. That's a shoddy argument.
HP and its competitors suffered basically the same problems, and had the same results. At this point, I'm going to point out that, as I said, the Compaq deal was stupid, and HP still managed to be in the range of its competitors. Meaning that perhaps Carly The Stupid managed to pull off something fairly amazing.
Now I feel dirty, having said that. You have the responsibility to explain why we should compare random tech companies instead of direct competitors.
Sarah seems rather talented, considering she (apparently) wrote and maintained the USB 3.0 code for Linux. And Matthew seems okay, having been awarded the 2013 FSF Free Software Award.
But the news here: A PNW Millennial and a Feminist do not agree with someone who is the architect of a giant, massively adopted project, and who has no time nor inclination to mentor people. It's going to be great in the next 5-10 years as the coddled Millennials meet the kind of international attitude where being overly polite is rude because it wastes time (German specifically, confirmed).
The Sarah Sharp thread shows her as a typical Social Justice Warrior who flies off the handle incomprehensibly. If she is a typical woman who saves everything up until it boils over (sorry for generalizing based on every woman I've ever met, minus two who do not fit the stereotype, but bear with me) then she may have a point that we just don't see in print. But we don't see it in print.
As for Matthew, This shows the reasoning behind Linus not adopting BSD style securelevels. Not that he refuses to listen - he clearly understands the limitations, and explained how he would accept an implementation of securelevels. In 1998.
And is it just a coincidence that he decided to fork after Sarah quit, and references that in his blog post? It doesn't matter, he's arguing a 17 year old point, and Linus has already said how he would accept the code.
For example, I would personally never be interested in using the BSD kind of securelevels: by design the BSD securelevels would prevent me from doing exactly the kinds of things I need to do (ie install a new kernel and reboot, which is a very obvious security risk). In short, to me the BSD securelevels are completely useless. Why should I support them, when there is something that is a _superset_ of the BSD behaviour, that I could actually find useful (ie I might well want to limit some people from doing specific things). Read my email again - I specifically said that if you want the bsd behaviour you can get it with the per-process-bitmap approach. I don't want to (I _cannot_) work in that kind of fascist setup, but it certainly works well enough.
... having to deal with interminable arguments over the naming of an interface because Linus has an undying hatred of BSD securelevel, or having my name forever associated with the deepthroating of Microsoft because Linus couldn't be bothered asking questions about the reasoning behind a design before trashing it.
Is that anything like the same thing?
Sarah Sharp - Portland State University BS, Computer Engineering 2002 â" 2007 Pacific Northwest Millennial
Matthew Garrett http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/... ".. I'm very aware of how different my life might have been if Hanna hadn't gone to the trouble of ensuring that I knew not to be a dick. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... "In October 2014, Garrett stated on his blog that he would no longer contribute Linux kernel changes relating to Intel hardware, in response to Intel pulling their ads from Gamasutra over the Gamergate controversy."
Linus Benedict Torvalds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Linus Benedict Torvalds (born December 28, 1969) is a Finnish American He later became the chief architect of the Linux kernel
At an online chat with Finlandâ(TM)s Aalto University, Linus explained:
HP provided an installed based of iTunes users around 2005.
In comparison, Microsoft was under anti-trust monitoring until at least 2007, so there would be very little that Microsoft could do without attracting unwanted attention. "Willing to pay" maybe, but it would have at a minimum extended the monitoring. Which doesn't sound bad, unless you understand a little more about how business decisions were made during those times.
HP may not have lost anything, but it gave an awful lot to Apple when it could have gained something in exchange. To me, that's the failing. Trade for patents or tech, or something? Anything?
Compaq was a mistake, no question. The "learning from your mistakes" bullet point is more about acknowledging in public - she could have learned, but still puts on a front in public. Much of the rest of that is really just personal attack, for which Fiorina should be reviled, but this author trusted, or more about Compaq.
Certainly she's no saint, and has no reason leading any country. But there is so much in the way of skewed opinion that it's impossible to have a discussion about the real failings.
There is no better way to convince your debate opponent that they are right than to present a clearly shoddy argument. And that's what you linked to. If I liked her, I would continue to do so. If not, I would continue to not like her. There are all kinds of psychological tricks at work here, including the Backfire effect, certainly the Dunning-Kruger effect, and many others.
I continue to point out the flaws in arguments because I guess I expected better of "nerds".
The cost of getting fuel to the moon is a lot less in a two pilot heavy launch vehicle with no supplies. Compared to a mars destined ship with many people and months of supplies.
If the supply ship loses half its fuel to escape gravity, it can transfer the rest to replace what the travel ship lost.
I really don't see a problem with the math or logic. Arguing mars direct on its merits seems a better strategy.
There is an entire superset of psychology dedicated to understanding these choices. If it were as simple as one side winning the propaganda war, it would be a course in marketing.
Good thing we have all those eyeballs reading the chromium source to ensure this kind of shoddy QA doesn't make it out to patch Tuesday. Right?
It's a bug, obviously not intentional, and easily overlooked. Until someone verified the behavior.
I'm only commenting as a bookmark for when someone thinks open source has better quality. There are bugs everywhere, and being open does not fix them without people auditing the code. That exists, for a very small number of projects.
Slashdot Mirror
You're adorable. You think summaries should be accurate here. And more so, headlines. Just precious.
Meanwhile, various tools let me criticize the idiots without giving the retards at Dashslot any revenue. Precisely because of this nonsense.
I stopped caring, and voted with my wallet. Do the same, pp, and readers alike.
COPY AND PASTE you dildotron 6000. Cut and copy are not the same. Sure, blame OP, while I blame you for correcting everything but that.
I can't explain it like you're five, because you're not five and you have been indoctrinated into the classical world. But this video is pretty good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
"Quantum Entanglement & Spooky Action at a Distance "
If you haven't grasped the quantum way of thinking, this next one is a great video. It doesn't get all technical and assumes some basic information, but the pictures should start you in the quantum direction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
"Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment Explained"
I have what appears to be an apple, and you have what appears to be an identical apple. When I slice mine in half, half of my apple disappears, and half of your apple disappears. But not just any half - the way I cut my apple determines which half you get. If there is a bruise, it will be either on my half or on your half. Putting the halves together gives us exactly the apple that we appeared to have before it was sliced.
In quantum terms, it is much as the video above describes the double slit experiment - the photon or electron goes through both slits, so it is in 2 places at once. That is how we both appear to have the same apple in the beginning. Slice the apple, same as measuring the photon, and it collapses into the two halves.
We can create photons that are not entangled, and they do not behave the same way. What happens at detector 0 in the second video is inexplicable, currently, but that's entanglement.
You were clear. We are all looking forward to your implementation.
How about in unrealistic scenarios? Because half of the new and cool stuff mentioned on this website is rubbished because it's not practical in reality. And then someone refines it, so then it is realistic.
Are you talking about having an indicator for ridge A, with a radius relative to the whole finger of X percent? And a vector for the direction of whorl Y?
If so, you're going to have to establish one classification system to start with, and there are several. They can be exclusive systems, or inclusive. Just from Wikipedia, which I assume you read before posting your assertion:
So there is at least one classification system that you can't use to identify someone, but you can tell if someone is NOT a match.
So we get to feature extraction. Can you define a system of features where all existing and once-existing fingerprints can be uniquely identified? Because systems like AFIS have been trying to solve this problem for a while, and your contribution would reduce the search time greatly.
Some of the experts in the area are trying to invent the next generation fingerprinting system. I assume you are one of them? If not, either apply or shut the fuck up about things that "make sense to you". Because the world is not a thing that armchair philosophers can contribute to by simply asserting a truth.
"Hang out with" is really not even remotely the same as what I responded to. Try reading, for context.
Zero state and local reps hang out with my dad, my teacher, and my pastor (or religious equivalent).
Someone might have "talked to" my state rep, but they did not in any way pass on my sentiments. The people most likely to have "talked to" my state rep do not agree with my religious affiliation, political affiliation, or stances on at least 40% of everything. And I have a pretty narrow stance, for the record.
I have spoken with a number of local charity heads, and they have shaken hands with, but not had any way to actually speak with, representatives. Likewise everyone else.
Are you a rich, entitled, blinder-wearing asshole like the original asshole I replied to? Because yes, you are. Or maybe you don't live where I live, and therefore it would be impossible for you to understand that THAT'S NOT TRUE. Which, it isn't. Anything you and grandassholeparent seem to think, not true.
Read the source code. That's the benefit. Read it, understand it, reuse it, fork it...
I'm not sure you understand the value of source code. Just having it is potentially valuable, even if all you do is provide it to someone who wants or needs it.
There is only one thing keeping me from upgrading. A checkbox that configures the keyboard mappings so that the Windows key works and does what I expect. "Are you upgrading from Windows? Do you want your Windows key to work like it used to?"
I want to be able to hit the Windows key along with familiar combinations. It's a very common keyboard layout, and lots of Windows users have this muscle memory.
Sure, I could edit a bunch of settings for every distro I try, but I'm tired of it. I'm done, and I'm not trying another one. They're great, rock solid, and they just don't work the way I, as a Windows user, want them to.
Having said that, Mint is the place to start.
iOS users love their pointing and clicking, apparently. I spend time on the keyboard, and without a reason I don't want to touch the mouse. Is there a distro that does that well? Sure, if you're a Linux user, but I'm not.
How many stars are in the galaxy? And we are comparing 150k out of that number? I would call that a non-representative sample.
At one time, pop music *was* what the symphonic orchestras were playing.
Live music was either what you heard live, or played yourself. And what you played yourself was either traditional (folk) music, or something you heard. And most of what you heard was folk music, or a professional musician, or a knockoff of a pro.
When attendance declines, symphonies, theatre groups and other live performers retrench around their origins.
What chemical shitstorm? The article says plant extracts. Not chemically created plant-like extract imitations. It's stuff from plants.
Did you read something else?
Or better, did you read?
More likely, a contact's device is pwned. And their contact list is compromised. All of the e-mail or text data was probably consumed.
Statistically speaking, the likelihood of someone being compromised is small compared to a recipient being compromised.
Start sending purely nonsense, unrelated e-mails to made up addresses, and see if anything changes. If you like guns and motorcycles, ask about buying a Barbie doll collection, or vintage 8mm porn. If nothing changes, it's a contact.
So the other two confirmed debaters want the third to win? They support the coronation narrative in what way?
Have you met anyone ever at all? Sure, you're a smart cookie, but do you feel that you are average?
I don't care what your answer is, and here's why. If you don't feel average, then you are not representative of the majority of voters. If you do feel average, then you are not, by definition, smart. You are average.
Money means paying people to research every video, every quote, every statement by your opponent, and make a montage of them being dishonest, or contradictory, or in some fashion the opposite of what voters seem to want. Oh, and being able to afford to show that montage when opponents bid up the advertising rate.
It's about controlling the message, to react quickly, to have ad slots bought that you can swap out for the latest narrative. It's about having the money to compete with the other people who also have the money.
You can call it blame passing if you don't understand anything about people, or politics, or marketing, or economics, or everything that is in play.
I get the point that you're making, but how many representatives can live near enough to their representative to be their neighbor? All 167,000 of them?
More likely is the city councilman being a relative of sorts. All 8,000 people being somehow related, somewhat less likely.
It sounds like you live in a very exclusive area, where most people don't have a chance to hob-nob. You had some sort of point, but I guess it was about how awesome it is to be connected politically, or about how much money you make to be able to afford a house where you live.
Lots of people have never met a Wall St banker. A state representative in New York maybe, but otherwise, what's your point? City councilman anywhere other than the 5 largest cities? Not likely.
I can't even start to explain how stupid your comment is, how unrelatable to anyone else completely at all.
Also, the correlating behind the scenes that happens when you access multiple websites that use either a CDN or something like ajax.google.com
Everyone hosting their JQuery on Google's servers basically allow Google to correlate visits, and build up a picture of which websites you visit. Combine that with direct access to GMail, Youtube, or Google searches, and they pretty much know what you do at least half the time on the internet.
You're going to have to wipe everything, including your IP address, in order to avoid the kind of correlation that Google does, or Verizon and AOL, or any number of big data providers.
Visit one website, no multitasking, torch everything, and start over. Best done via proxy. One that allocates IP addresses randomly. And switch proxies every time you visit another website.
Or, block everything and only visit bookmarks and don't allow JavaScript and never give any information and... yeah, there's a whole lot more behind the scenes that does not involve delivering information to your browser as the delivery mechanism.
That page does not list these two cookies:
It's clearly ASP.NET, and WebForms. The dump is the Request.ServerVariables collection, and if you need to debug issues it's fairly standard. If you need to put it in production code, though, you always put it on a server that your load balancer will skip, because that should not be seen, at all, by anyone.
But how would you get someone else's session? It's impossible.
Scott Hanselman has one suggestion as to how it might happen, and it's 100% code errors.
There's a comment there "You just found the famous TLS bug :)" So maybe not impossible. Windows uses Thread Local Storage to store things like static variables. The thread handling the request might change, and ASP.NET properly sets the .NET Thread data (and HttpContext data for MVC applications) every time it processes an event so it should all line up. But, static variables are thread-locked, so they can transfer between request handlers. That's the TLS Bug referenced there. It is possible to access someone else's session data if it is stored in TLS (static variable is one possibility).
So, this is not "a lot of crying over nothing" - it could be very serious. Having said all of that, it is very unlikely that you would see someone else's information consistently with that bug - it might show up once and go away.
If this were replay data for load tests or unit tests, it's unlikely that the dates would be the same as when it was reported. The user admits altering some of the data, so we can't draw concrete conclusions there.
A security professional wouldn't draw attention to *possible* leakage of Basic Auth, because that's really unlikely at the SSL interface behind a username/password login. At least a knowledgeable one, I think.
If the IP address were a load balancer, the User agent should have matched what the user expected. Dynamic content hosted by a CDN/edge provider? If the data changed, it's probably dynamic. So, what is the conclusion?
I don't know, but it doesn't sound like something that can be dismissed so nonchalantly. If users were getting each others' sessions, we would likely have heard about it, since it happened for two weeks. That's the only thing I can conclude, but that supposes that the news would have made it to international press.
Is Apple a competitor? Just barely. Omit Sun because they are stupid. And IBM sold to Lenovo in 2005.
Apple sells hardware? Sure. HP, Dell, and IBM sold consumer hardware featuring Microsoft operating systems to consumers, and Apple didn't.
HP, Dell, and IBM sold commodity computers with little margin. Apple sold premium software on commodity hardware, with better margins and limited variability in hardware, limiting the cost of development and testing.
Apple is not something you want to include in a comparison unless you are an ignorant fool. Not just ignorant, and not just a fool.
So ignore Sun, they are obviously on the bottom of the chart anyway. HP was on the bottom briefly for about 4 months, and if you exclude Sun, was on the bottom but trending upwards when Fiorina left.
The trend lines are essentially the same, especially if you exclude Sun.
So...... I guess your point is I'm basically right? Or did someone miss the chance to mod you "funny but irrelevant"?
I compared their competitors. You propose unrelated companies. That's a shoddy argument.
HP and its competitors suffered basically the same problems, and had the same results. At this point, I'm going to point out that, as I said, the Compaq deal was stupid, and HP still managed to be in the range of its competitors. Meaning that perhaps Carly The Stupid managed to pull off something fairly amazing.
Now I feel dirty, having said that. You have the responsibility to explain why we should compare random tech companies instead of direct competitors.
Sarah seems rather talented, considering she (apparently) wrote and maintained the USB 3.0 code for Linux. And Matthew seems okay, having been awarded the 2013 FSF Free Software Award.
But the news here: A PNW Millennial and a Feminist do not agree with someone who is the architect of a giant, massively adopted project, and who has no time nor inclination to mentor people. It's going to be great in the next 5-10 years as the coddled Millennials meet the kind of international attitude where being overly polite is rude because it wastes time (German specifically, confirmed).
The Sarah Sharp thread shows her as a typical Social Justice Warrior who flies off the handle incomprehensibly. If she is a typical woman who saves everything up until it boils over (sorry for generalizing based on every woman I've ever met, minus two who do not fit the stereotype, but bear with me) then she may have a point that we just don't see in print. But we don't see it in print.
As for Matthew, This shows the reasoning behind Linus not adopting BSD style securelevels. Not that he refuses to listen - he clearly understands the limitations, and explained how he would accept an implementation of securelevels. In 1998.
And is it just a coincidence that he decided to fork after Sarah quit, and references that in his blog post? It doesn't matter, he's arguing a 17 year old point, and Linus has already said how he would accept the code.
More:
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/LGNET/...
Matthew characterized is this way:
Is that anything like the same thing?
Sarah Sharp - Portland State University
BS, Computer Engineering
2002 â" 2007
Pacific Northwest Millennial
Matthew Garrett
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/...
".. I'm very aware of how different my life might have been if Hanna hadn't gone to the trouble of ensuring that I knew not to be a dick. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"In October 2014, Garrett stated on his blog that he would no longer contribute Linux kernel changes relating to Intel hardware, in response to Intel pulling their ads from Gamasutra over the Gamergate controversy."
Linus Benedict Torvalds
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Linus Benedict Torvalds (born December 28, 1969) is a Finnish American
He later became the chief architect of the Linux kernel
At an online chat with Finlandâ(TM)s Aalto University, Linus explained:
"Iâ(TM)d like to be a nice person and curse les
HP provided an installed based of iTunes users around 2005.
In comparison, Microsoft was under anti-trust monitoring until at least 2007, so there would be very little that Microsoft could do without attracting unwanted attention. "Willing to pay" maybe, but it would have at a minimum extended the monitoring. Which doesn't sound bad, unless you understand a little more about how business decisions were made during those times.
HP may not have lost anything, but it gave an awful lot to Apple when it could have gained something in exchange. To me, that's the failing. Trade for patents or tech, or something? Anything?
Comparing HP, a single company, to the tech index, or to "other tech companies" is basically a lie in broad daylight. How about to competitors?
Oh, there it is
Compaq was a mistake, no question. The "learning from your mistakes" bullet point is more about acknowledging in public - she could have learned, but still puts on a front in public. Much of the rest of that is really just personal attack, for which Fiorina should be reviled, but this author trusted, or more about Compaq.
Certainly she's no saint, and has no reason leading any country. But there is so much in the way of skewed opinion that it's impossible to have a discussion about the real failings.
There is no better way to convince your debate opponent that they are right than to present a clearly shoddy argument. And that's what you linked to. If I liked her, I would continue to do so. If not, I would continue to not like her. There are all kinds of psychological tricks at work here, including the Backfire effect, certainly the Dunning-Kruger effect, and many others.
I continue to point out the flaws in arguments because I guess I expected better of "nerds".
The cost of getting fuel to the moon is a lot less in a two pilot heavy launch vehicle with no supplies. Compared to a mars destined ship with many people and months of supplies.
If the supply ship loses half its fuel to escape gravity, it can transfer the rest to replace what the travel ship lost.
I really don't see a problem with the math or logic. Arguing mars direct on its merits seems a better strategy.
There is an entire superset of psychology dedicated to understanding these choices. If it were as simple as one side winning the propaganda war, it would be a course in marketing.
This is complex stuff. Start here
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
Good thing we have all those eyeballs reading the chromium source to ensure this kind of shoddy QA doesn't make it out to patch Tuesday. Right?
It's a bug, obviously not intentional, and easily overlooked. Until someone verified the behavior.
I'm only commenting as a bookmark for when someone thinks open source has better quality. There are bugs everywhere, and being open does not fix them without people auditing the code. That exists, for a very small number of projects.