Who the hell didn't know this already? I've been bleating about it for ages.
It's almost entirely caused by the "avoid peanuts during pregnancy" self-fulfilling prophecy (if you do so, chances are the next generation will be more allergic to peanuts).
When I was a kid, the kid who was "allergic" was rare, one-in-a-whole-school kind of event. Nowadays, working in schools, I see medical lists in schools where something like 20% of their roll lists are allergic to something-or-other.
Nuts figure heavily, as does kiwi - I can sort of understand kiwi. It's a rare fruit that you probably WON'T have contact with until later in life. But nuts? Those were in almost everything when I was a kid (peanut butter for a start).
Ladies should not avoid nuts in pregnancy. There's no reason to. In the womb, the baby won't be affected adversely by them anyway (unless the mother is also allergic - hence the growing problem), but it will seed their immune systems to cope with it.
I have a Linux smartphone in my pocket. I had a Linux GPS for the last 10 years. I have a Linux e-book reader at home. I have Linux-based devices on my network at work, they are considered industry standard for what they do. I have put 50 Linux netbooks into a school, they stayed there for 5+ years. I have put Linux desktops into several schools, they stayed there for many years. I have put Linux devices into schools. They happen to be the ones that made the news. I have put computer newbies on Linux to save them a Windows key on an old computer. They have stayed like that for several years and been perfectly happy.
The general feeling is that Linux is perfectly good for whatever you want to do.
The people not to listen to are those that make *market* predictions. Who would have guessed that a tiny e-book reader or smartphone would take off after DECADES of sub-par market penetration of Palm etc. devices? Who would have thought that Blackberry would be dead a few years ago and that Android (and Java, in a way!) would own the smartphone market?
The point is that there's nothing to STOP Linux on the desktop. Just don't give a date if you don't want to look like an idiot. And don't brush off a perfectly viable technology because a particular instance hs not got 51% of market penetration (hint: Windows XP Tablet Edition anyone?).
I have 600 games on Steam. About 100 of them already have a Linux version.
Things are certainly on the move, but there's some way to go yet, and yes - Steam is the biggest motivator out there. They don't care if they sell you the title on Linux, Mac or Windows - you paid them money and they don't have to do any more work. Good on them.
And, from a developer perspective, if you have a Windows version and a Mac version, then a Linux version doesn't take much. You can hand it off to a porter, or just get your development team familiar with similar tools and coding across. Any half-decent programmer will have code generic and modular enough to port quite easily for such uses. It's not like going from desktop to smartphone or similar, it's just changing the backend while keeping the same capabilities, facilities, screen sizes, etc.
I'm only "indie" programmer status, but it's easy enough for me to have one VM, Eclipse and GCC set up on it, and I can code and build versions for all three platforms with - after a day or so's setup of my dev environment - a click of a button. Sure, I have to test them and write specific code for them at times but compared to the overall size of any non-trivial project using libraries available on all three platforms, that's nothing.
Now there are no excuses. The driver issues are being quashed but I don't see a ton of Linux games struggling to keep up in terms of FPS where their Windows counterpart doesn't also struggle. The software libraries are all there. The cross-compilers are all there (my VM is Ubuntu - compiles Windows, Linux, 32 and 64-bits with a click and could do Mac if I could be bothered to own one. Hell, it can even compile C99 to Dalvik bytecode for Android if I bother to do it). The distribution channels are there. The money-making opportunity is there. The devices are there.
My question really now is: Where the hell are you, big games developers? And what's your excuse now?
If you're eating in any way sensibly, you should have no need of extraneous vitamin supplements anyway.
There are certain conditions (either genetic or self-imposed, like veganism) where you don't get all that's required - and then you need to get a nutritionist on the case, not just buy things in dosages you have no clue of and take 100% RDA of on top of your normal diet.
It's an RDA for a reason. Not only is it a suggested (not absolute) minimum, but also a suggested maximum too. People miss the fact that anything other that can potentially be damaging (there's not been much study into it, but if X amount of a certain vitamin shows that you're healthiest and "plateaus" around that usage, why would you need to take more?) in the same way as lack of it.
And, with stuff like vitamins, it's not instantaneous results, so you can't correlate it with whether you feel better or not or got sick or not directly. In the same way that it will take you time to notice you don't have enough (say) iron in your diet, it might take you longer to notice that you have too much.
Your body is a machine that's honed by evolution. Eat well, eat properly, eat what it has evolved to eat (which includes meat!) and the amount it has evolved to cope with. And then you'll be fine.
As the article hints at, they threw away their Presto rendering engine and lumped in with a Chrome-a-like base.
In doing so, they basically started the browser from scratch and in many of the versions released for it (including desktop versions) something like 75% of the features I use Opera for simply aren't there. They haven't got around to recreating them, or have publicly stated they have no intention of ever doing so. They have been several "stable" releases since then, and still no sign of a lot of basic functionality.
Ever since then, it's Chrome-with-knobs-on as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately, the knobs are the developers, not the features.
Stick with 12.14 until it no longer renders your sites of choice, if you're an Opera fan at all.
I'm sure he's really worried about another charge when he's holding a knife and demanding your money. And in any decent legal system, knife offences are all pretty similar in scale, from possession to actual stabbing - because you have NO reason to be carrying it around without it being you threatening to stab people.
The fact is, you have no idea what his intentions are. He might well just be saving the time to search your body so he asks you first and always intends to stab you anyway. He's mugged you, the perfect way to stop you identifying him (if you're alone, pretty much the only way he'll get "caught") is to take you out of the equation.
Nobody's saying disarm him, you probably can't. But fuck him. Why help him get your wallet? Google your local area and "mugging stabbed" and see how many times the victim is stabbed ANYWAY, even after giving the money / phone / whatever.
If they grab you from behind, I agree, there's not much you can do. Fighting won't do much there. But why bother to help? They're going to kick the shit out of you anyway, and the more of them there are, the greater the chances of the fucking oddball who'll kill you for street cred is among the group.
I'm not saying resist, I'm saying don't help beyond what you need to. If they want your wallet, giving it to them or not isn't going to help you any because you can't trust them. But if they have your keys and demand you drive them to your house where your kids are, then it's a whole different (and more comparable to the situation) ball game. It's the same situation, scaled to the same extreme, and what fucking moron would go along with that if your kids aren't CURRENTLY under threat as they have no access to them / no idea where you live?
In that case, fuck 'em. Don't even have to be stroppy to them or fight back, just don't help them. Chances are, they have decided whether to stab you or not before you even know they are there. Your actions mean little.
And in this case, where nothing more than financial value is at stake, fuck them even more. The equivalent of "Hand over your bank account or I'll use your credit card?"... Fuck 'em.
This is like kidnap or a mugging. At no point do I have an actual incentive to give in to such a person's demands. "We won't hurt you / them / your website if you do X". I have *absolutely* no guarantee of that.
I *cannot* win. If I do everything you request, you could still trash my domain / stab me anyway / kill your hostage and there's nothing I can do to stop that.
As such, non-compliance is no different to compliance in such a situation. So why voluntarily give them MORE power over you / your assets?
As it is you would have to wipe servers, settings, email etc. and start again even if they did honout their agreement.
But then, you have to remember, this person is already committing a crime... what's in their conscience that will make them honourcan agreement concerning that crime.
Let them squirm, report them, regain control when you can, then purge their access from your systems.
Notice that most of the problems are associated with the lack of gravity (not generally a problem on a submarine), not a confined environment.
You don't get bone loss as a submariner. You don't get modified eyeball shapes as a submariner. You don't get extreme dizziness once you set foot on dry land as a submariner (an experienced one at least)
Sleep loss? Maybe. But saying you can't sleep on a tin box inside an ocean of resonant water where you have to keep absolutely silent is a bit different to a tin box travelling at thousand of miles per hour in the vacuum of space.
In fact, if anything, it's completely the OPPOSITE problem.
Hence why people at NASA don't see these problems coming.
I'm just thankful it's not something more serious and obviously debilitating (if you're going to spend your life in space, bone weakness isn't going to be much of an issue - it's only the return to Earth that's the problem) or the whole "let's life in space" program might have been dead before it began.
They are DLL's used by many programs which are compiled with a certain compiler. It's like saying a program comes bundled with msvcrtXX.dll.
The fact that you're even bothering about the names is much more important. What the hell makes you think that the filename is an indicator of its contents? That DLL could be named the same as a harmless file but contain the virus routines. The name is neither here nor there.
The interesting question is "what's the hash?" - is it an official copy of those files, which is innocent but required by the program because of the compiler used? Or is it just something malicious renamed to look like a common harmless file?
Filenames mean nothing. Service names mean nothing. Process names mean nothing. Registry entry names mean nothing. They can all be changed in seconds and have no correspondence to the CONTENT of those files (hell, you can load a DLL that's called fred.jpg, if you really want).
Well, yes, because you have to store and send the original password.
You can't send the hash to a remote FTP server as a login, they won't accept it. And the definition of a hash is basically to make it difficult to "work backwards" to a username from it.
So, somewhere, you either have to store in plaintext or in a file which the program encrypts and has full capabilities and permissions to read. About the only way to do this efficiently and safely is to have a "locked" wallet kind of affair that the user has to supply a global password too.
The problem here is NOT that the passwords are stored (FileZilla is an end-user tool, so the chances of some ISP "losing" thousands of passwords by using it is stupidity itself). It's that the program itself is malware and capable of doing anything that FileZilla has permission to do - e.g. read from the keyboard and connect to remote servers.
Either publish signed hashes of the good version or don't bother at all. If it takes more than a minute to change the filesize / filenames to something arbitrary of your choice as a malware author, I'll be amazed, especially when you could easily make it be the same size as the official one in this case by just padding with zeroes.
Please stop using these things are identifiers for malware. Same for "check for this registry entry". Any idiot with a copy of the virus can modify the strings in it to use a different reg entry / server / filename / filesize but what they CAN'T do easily is make a file with the same hash as something official.
And given that I couldn't even see a GPG key or hash value on the download page of FileZilla at all, pretty much this kind of thing is to be expected.
If you don't understand the words "Wrong Venue", then I can't help you more than that.
Slashdot isn't a place to announce every piece of software that pseudo-releases a pseudo-new version. Certainly not some niche re-make of an old, niche game. And certainly not without some real "news" to it. If this new version was a complete 3D remake, had caused controversy, forked the code, split the team, and we have links to all that... it would JUST about qualify for it.
And, as it happens, I moved on from OpenTTD because the code-base stagnated. This version doesn't add much new either. I'm quite happy with my pre-1.3 version before the focus became minor tweaks in the handling of NewGRF's (hacked versions of the game graphics/data of the old DOS game that eventually standardised to become a plug-in architecture to extend the game).
There's fans of TTD and there's some seriously disturbed people who build Turing-capable machines using logic circuits build using trains arriving at stations. I'm the former, not the latter.
And my name is on OpenTTD's bugspray, a quick relevant Google finds a very old Wiki page for me on there, and a link to some of my early patches / saves / bug reports. That's just the first two links.
1.4 is non-news. 1.4 being not-released is non-news. A new-news un-release of a non-news release of a niche game that I enjoy, is not "news for nerds".
How long do the enzymes last? is probably the question at the front of my mind... related to life and charge cycles, sure, but if you don't "feed" it, do they deteriorate?
The bigger problem, I would think, is how practical is it to handle these? Last thing you want is ants getting into your 500Ah battery and blowing the crap out of it. Do they have to be "cleaned"? Do the enzymes have to be replenished (a nice little sideline for the battery company selling you replacement enzymes - until you fill it with cheap Chinese enzymes and then it stops working)? Does it have to be *cleaned*?
See, to me, the prevelance of a battery is highly dependent on its maintenance. Sure, we used to have to maintain lead-acids, but nowadays they are throw-and-replace or sealed anyway. All household batteries are maintenance-free, even the rechargeable. All coin batteries. All large batteries for UPS, car starters, solar systems, alarms, etc.
Hell, even "electric" cars have a maintenance-free battery that you have to swap out because the maintenance is ridiculous.
Honestly, I'd rather have a battery I can "recharge" with sugar that only does 5Ah instead of 500 and doesn't require any other maintenance (i.e. a fuel cell). But, ideally, I'd rather just have a battery that I don't ever have to do anything with but plug it in and then, years later, throw it away.
You can say that we have to be environmental etc. but lead-acid batteries can recycle extremely well. Until this gets close, it's not even worth an article.
And, sorry, but every battery technology that was ever succesful, I had never heard of it until I was holding one in my hand that came with a product (Ni-Cd, NiMH, Li-Ion, etc.). All the thousands of "new" batteries that make the news? I've yet to see a single one hit the stores in even the most limited fashion. As such, I ignore all battery technology until it's available for me to buy, preferably in 12V or AA versions.
Much as I love OpenTTD (and the original DOS version of TTD itself), hell, I've even got code inside it somewhere (nothing important), I don't see it as front-page news to have another version of it come out. Specially seeing as nothing "spectacular" is new in it.
Sorry, Slashdot, this is just trash... from someone who plays the game, loves the game, runs servers for the game, has code in the game, and played the original game.
Which is only a problem if you actively do NOT want to help proprietary software.
I don't want to hinder proprietary software. I want to boost open software. There's a difference.
Proprietary software has it's place and, in a free market, people will choose whatever is best for them.
As in many things (feminism, sexism, racism, etc.) there are always some people who will champion the cause right through equality and out the other side.
You know what? I don't mind that proprietary software could take something like LLVM, do stuff with it, and sell it. So long as they can't stop ***ME*** taking LLVM, and doing what I want with it.
Historically "Free" software was hard to find and so proprietary was your only choice. From there, I would prefer to have open software which proprietary people can take and use too if they want. Pretty much, nowadays, you can find an open equivalent of just about anything but the most locked-in of protocols/programs.
But what I don't want is to tell everyone in the world they are an idiot if they don't open-source everything. All that does is make people hate you, and think you're an idiot. Instead, let's lead the way and **IGNORE** proprietary software, and put the lobbying efforts towards the choice of freedom, and writing good code.
When their customers realise that there's better software out there, for free, they will have to up their game, or start rolling up their sleeves to help.
We don't have to go around actively attacking them for daring to be proprietary. And we certainly don't have to get all snotty because a piece of software can be used by anyone.
If you don't take account of relativistic effects, satellites tend to deorbit over time, and also it throws off your GPS like nobody's business.
The speed they are moving at in geostationary orbit is enough to notice relativistic effects. So much so that your satnav wouldn't work without them being "corrected" by some GR mathematics.
I was lucky enough to have a lecturer at university who was actively working on solving Go. Professor Wilfred Hodges at QMW, University of London.
It was his talk about the complexity of the game of Go on my induction day that convinced me to go to that university, and I was able to have him as a course lecturer for certain related courses later on (graph theory).
He is a typical, mad-haired, Einsteinian-looking sandals-in-winter professor, and he gave a marvellous intro to Go, complexity and the work he was doing.
All everyone else took away was that he showed photos of himself at a Go convention (on 35mm film). But I thought it was brilliant, and it made me teach myself Go.
I hope he's still working on it. Judging by the website I've found for him, he's busy with a LOT of other areas of mathematics than Game Theory, though.
But I'll never forget the mental "Woah" I got when he explained how much more complicated 19x19 Go was than Chess, even though the rules are vastly simpler.
Apparently there is no decent Go computer player in the world that can beat more than an average Go human player.
My answer was pretty truthful (given the constraints of my memory, not introducing personal life into work, the fact I only had a few seconds to find an answer before it felt awkward, etc.). I take my system personally. If some fool comes up and says that "the system isn't working", I take them to task on it.
Your computer might not be working properly. Or you might not know how to do something. Or I might have STOPPED something working for you deliberately. But my systems are good, evidenced by external audits. If you criticise them, and especially if you BLAME them or try to imply I'm not doing my job properly, you damn well better be able to back it up.
I have had enough of "I can't do my job because the system doesn't work how I would like it" kind of colleagues (who, it turns out, haven't bothered to do any prep-work, testing, research, etc. to actually allow them to do that part of their job anyway, so they are just playing for time), especially when it gets escalated to senior management under the guise of "He's not doing his job".
Every single time, it has worked out the other way around (I don't know many professions where you have to record every single thing you do during the working day, where every request made of you and your response is recorded and auditable, and where the people in questions set up this kind of "helpdesk" system voluntarily on their first day of work if it doesn't already exist)
So, yes, I do take it personally. Don't bad-mouth my systems without going through the proper channels and knowing what you're doing. And that's a weakness of mine. But, also, it works to your advantage in the long run. You can't be proud of a system that's falling over all the time.
And what you'll get is someone who's good at avoiding the obvious and wastes lots of time dealing with idiots.
What you judges INTERVIEWS for determines what qualities your employees will have to have escaped through that filter.
Thus these interviews where they ask inane question that they expect you to make stuff up? You'll end up hiring people good at making stuff up to inane questions. If that's the job, fine. I doubt it is, though.
I was interviewed for a position at the BBC, back in the early days of digital TV, working on their digital "teletext" service (i.e. that pseudo-HTML stuff they shove down the DVB channels).
Application went fine, was asked to interview (from thousands of candidates). Went in, did some tests (technical, editorial, etc.). Seemed to all be going well. Went to interview where the panel were half-technical, half-management.
Was all going alright right up until the last question. It was so wrapped up in management-ese that honestly, even as a vaguely intelligent person, I could not understand what it meant (let alone provide an answer). It was literally that impenetrable, and not even something that made any sense whatsoever. I couldn't even begin to waffle some management-ese in reply, it was that bad.
So I told them. "I don't understand, sorry". They repeated it, word-for-word. "No, no, I heard. I don't understand what you're asking." This went on for several minutes. The management in the room looked quite annoyed. Meanwhile, the techies in the room were making a show of writing a large "tick" (check) symbol on my application in front of them and grinning inanely.
Sadly, I think the management overruled or outnumbered them, and I wasn't offered (though I was told that I still came quite close).
To this day, I still can't even remember what the question was (it was just random words strung together than didn't even seem to ask a question), let alone work out what kind of answer they wanted. And, surely, if someone doesn't understand something, what you want them to do is stop you and say "Sorry, no, I don't understand", not plough on regardless making up some rubbish?
Needless to say, I actually felt quite sympathetic for the people who DO have to work under that person all the time.
You can try to push the "bitcoin doesn't exist" angle as much as you like. You're just arguing over semantics, and in an nonsensical way.
How is the sale of a car not a conversion into dollars? Why is there nobody who "already owned US dollars" who wouldn't want to buy the car/bitcoins for them?
Where do you get the idea that they are "printing" anything? If they had 10m Euros and they "converted them" to US$, what makes you think that's not a "sale"? What makes you think that involves printing more US dollars just for that transaction rather than, as is really the case, giving someone existing commodities for their existing US dollars?
You can make up whatever bullshit you want, because it's a Bitcoin story so anything goes? No. They are SELLING / CONVERTING a virtual commodity (like they do every day, and like you and I can every day and do every time we go on holiday abroad) and receiving US dollars from a vendor to do so. We call it currency conversion. It doesn't involve some guy at the Travel Exchange knocking out freshly-printed dollar bills, in any way, shape or form.
Cars are seized all the time when they are the proceeds of crime.
They can hold onto those cars, forever and ever and ever (and pay storage, and maintenance, and god-knows-how-much-resources to protect it all) and never let anyone touch them, or - after conviction, seizure and failure of appeals - can sell them to put money back into policing / government services.
The Bitcoins here are just seized goods, not a direct currency in US eyes, but you bet if they found 1m Euros in a drug-dealer's house that he couldn't prove were legitimately earned, that they'd seize them, convert them to US$ and use them to reduce your tax bill slightly.
Same with cars. Drugs, guns, etc. have other problems with doing this, so it isn't done, but with something that's merely a legal commodity that you can sell for value, damn right they should be selling it.
And seizure laws date back CENTURIES in almost every jurisdiction. What else are you going to do with this stuff? Give it back to the criminals? Store it forever in the "ultimate target" warehouse alongside the rocket launchers and narcotics and pay to store it forever?
Seize. Then sell or destroy. It's the ONLY sensible option.
Slashdot Mirror
Who the hell didn't know this already? I've been bleating about it for ages.
It's almost entirely caused by the "avoid peanuts during pregnancy" self-fulfilling prophecy (if you do so, chances are the next generation will be more allergic to peanuts).
When I was a kid, the kid who was "allergic" was rare, one-in-a-whole-school kind of event. Nowadays, working in schools, I see medical lists in schools where something like 20% of their roll lists are allergic to something-or-other.
Nuts figure heavily, as does kiwi - I can sort of understand kiwi. It's a rare fruit that you probably WON'T have contact with until later in life. But nuts? Those were in almost everything when I was a kid (peanut butter for a start).
Ladies should not avoid nuts in pregnancy. There's no reason to. In the womb, the baby won't be affected adversely by them anyway (unless the mother is also allergic - hence the growing problem), but it will seed their immune systems to cope with it.
I have a Linux smartphone in my pocket.
I had a Linux GPS for the last 10 years.
I have a Linux e-book reader at home.
I have Linux-based devices on my network at work, they are considered industry standard for what they do.
I have put 50 Linux netbooks into a school, they stayed there for 5+ years.
I have put Linux desktops into several schools, they stayed there for many years.
I have put Linux devices into schools. They happen to be the ones that made the news.
I have put computer newbies on Linux to save them a Windows key on an old computer. They have stayed like that for several years and been perfectly happy.
The general feeling is that Linux is perfectly good for whatever you want to do.
The people not to listen to are those that make *market* predictions. Who would have guessed that a tiny e-book reader or smartphone would take off after DECADES of sub-par market penetration of Palm etc. devices? Who would have thought that Blackberry would be dead a few years ago and that Android (and Java, in a way!) would own the smartphone market?
The point is that there's nothing to STOP Linux on the desktop. Just don't give a date if you don't want to look like an idiot. And don't brush off a perfectly viable technology because a particular instance hs not got 51% of market penetration (hint: Windows XP Tablet Edition anyone?).
I have 600 games on Steam. About 100 of them already have a Linux version.
Things are certainly on the move, but there's some way to go yet, and yes - Steam is the biggest motivator out there. They don't care if they sell you the title on Linux, Mac or Windows - you paid them money and they don't have to do any more work. Good on them.
And, from a developer perspective, if you have a Windows version and a Mac version, then a Linux version doesn't take much. You can hand it off to a porter, or just get your development team familiar with similar tools and coding across. Any half-decent programmer will have code generic and modular enough to port quite easily for such uses. It's not like going from desktop to smartphone or similar, it's just changing the backend while keeping the same capabilities, facilities, screen sizes, etc.
I'm only "indie" programmer status, but it's easy enough for me to have one VM, Eclipse and GCC set up on it, and I can code and build versions for all three platforms with - after a day or so's setup of my dev environment - a click of a button. Sure, I have to test them and write specific code for them at times but compared to the overall size of any non-trivial project using libraries available on all three platforms, that's nothing.
Now there are no excuses. The driver issues are being quashed but I don't see a ton of Linux games struggling to keep up in terms of FPS where their Windows counterpart doesn't also struggle. The software libraries are all there. The cross-compilers are all there (my VM is Ubuntu - compiles Windows, Linux, 32 and 64-bits with a click and could do Mac if I could be bothered to own one. Hell, it can even compile C99 to Dalvik bytecode for Android if I bother to do it). The distribution channels are there. The money-making opportunity is there. The devices are there.
My question really now is: Where the hell are you, big games developers? And what's your excuse now?
If you're eating in any way sensibly, you should have no need of extraneous vitamin supplements anyway.
There are certain conditions (either genetic or self-imposed, like veganism) where you don't get all that's required - and then you need to get a nutritionist on the case, not just buy things in dosages you have no clue of and take 100% RDA of on top of your normal diet.
It's an RDA for a reason. Not only is it a suggested (not absolute) minimum, but also a suggested maximum too. People miss the fact that anything other that can potentially be damaging (there's not been much study into it, but if X amount of a certain vitamin shows that you're healthiest and "plateaus" around that usage, why would you need to take more?) in the same way as lack of it.
And, with stuff like vitamins, it's not instantaneous results, so you can't correlate it with whether you feel better or not or got sick or not directly. In the same way that it will take you time to notice you don't have enough (say) iron in your diet, it might take you longer to notice that you have too much.
Your body is a machine that's honed by evolution. Eat well, eat properly, eat what it has evolved to eat (which includes meat!) and the amount it has evolved to cope with. And then you'll be fine.
That's because Opera isn't Opera any more.
As the article hints at, they threw away their Presto rendering engine and lumped in with a Chrome-a-like base.
In doing so, they basically started the browser from scratch and in many of the versions released for it (including desktop versions) something like 75% of the features I use Opera for simply aren't there. They haven't got around to recreating them, or have publicly stated they have no intention of ever doing so. They have been several "stable" releases since then, and still no sign of a lot of basic functionality.
Ever since then, it's Chrome-with-knobs-on as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately, the knobs are the developers, not the features.
Stick with 12.14 until it no longer renders your sites of choice, if you're an Opera fan at all.
I'm sure he's really worried about another charge when he's holding a knife and demanding your money. And in any decent legal system, knife offences are all pretty similar in scale, from possession to actual stabbing - because you have NO reason to be carrying it around without it being you threatening to stab people.
The fact is, you have no idea what his intentions are. He might well just be saving the time to search your body so he asks you first and always intends to stab you anyway. He's mugged you, the perfect way to stop you identifying him (if you're alone, pretty much the only way he'll get "caught") is to take you out of the equation.
Nobody's saying disarm him, you probably can't. But fuck him. Why help him get your wallet? Google your local area and "mugging stabbed" and see how many times the victim is stabbed ANYWAY, even after giving the money / phone / whatever.
If they grab you from behind, I agree, there's not much you can do. Fighting won't do much there. But why bother to help? They're going to kick the shit out of you anyway, and the more of them there are, the greater the chances of the fucking oddball who'll kill you for street cred is among the group.
I'm not saying resist, I'm saying don't help beyond what you need to. If they want your wallet, giving it to them or not isn't going to help you any because you can't trust them. But if they have your keys and demand you drive them to your house where your kids are, then it's a whole different (and more comparable to the situation) ball game. It's the same situation, scaled to the same extreme, and what fucking moron would go along with that if your kids aren't CURRENTLY under threat as they have no access to them / no idea where you live?
In that case, fuck 'em. Don't even have to be stroppy to them or fight back, just don't help them. Chances are, they have decided whether to stab you or not before you even know they are there. Your actions mean little.
And in this case, where nothing more than financial value is at stake, fuck them even more. The equivalent of "Hand over your bank account or I'll use your credit card?"... Fuck 'em.
This is like kidnap or a mugging. At no point do I have an actual incentive to give in to such a person's demands. "We won't hurt you / them / your website if you do X". I have *absolutely* no guarantee of that.
I *cannot* win. If I do everything you request, you could still trash my domain / stab me anyway / kill your hostage and there's nothing I can do to stop that.
As such, non-compliance is no different to compliance in such a situation. So why voluntarily give them MORE power over you / your assets?
As it is you would have to wipe servers, settings, email etc. and start again even if they did honout their agreement.
But then, you have to remember, this person is already committing a crime... what's in their conscience that will make them honourcan agreement concerning that crime.
Let them squirm, report them, regain control when you can, then purge their access from your systems.
Anything else is just stupid.
Er... they do.
Notice that most of the problems are associated with the lack of gravity (not generally a problem on a submarine), not a confined environment.
You don't get bone loss as a submariner.
You don't get modified eyeball shapes as a submariner.
You don't get extreme dizziness once you set foot on dry land as a submariner (an experienced one at least)
Sleep loss? Maybe. But saying you can't sleep on a tin box inside an ocean of resonant water where you have to keep absolutely silent is a bit different to a tin box travelling at thousand of miles per hour in the vacuum of space.
In fact, if anything, it's completely the OPPOSITE problem.
Hence why people at NASA don't see these problems coming.
I'm just thankful it's not something more serious and obviously debilitating (if you're going to spend your life in space, bone weakness isn't going to be much of an issue - it's only the return to Earth that's the problem) or the whole "let's life in space" program might have been dead before it began.
They are DLL's used by many programs which are compiled with a certain compiler. It's like saying a program comes bundled with msvcrtXX.dll.
The fact that you're even bothering about the names is much more important. What the hell makes you think that the filename is an indicator of its contents? That DLL could be named the same as a harmless file but contain the virus routines. The name is neither here nor there.
The interesting question is "what's the hash?" - is it an official copy of those files, which is innocent but required by the program because of the compiler used? Or is it just something malicious renamed to look like a common harmless file?
Filenames mean nothing. Service names mean nothing. Process names mean nothing. Registry entry names mean nothing. They can all be changed in seconds and have no correspondence to the CONTENT of those files (hell, you can load a DLL that's called fred.jpg, if you really want).
Well, yes, because you have to store and send the original password.
You can't send the hash to a remote FTP server as a login, they won't accept it. And the definition of a hash is basically to make it difficult to "work backwards" to a username from it.
So, somewhere, you either have to store in plaintext or in a file which the program encrypts and has full capabilities and permissions to read. About the only way to do this efficiently and safely is to have a "locked" wallet kind of affair that the user has to supply a global password too.
The problem here is NOT that the passwords are stored (FileZilla is an end-user tool, so the chances of some ISP "losing" thousands of passwords by using it is stupidity itself). It's that the program itself is malware and capable of doing anything that FileZilla has permission to do - e.g. read from the keyboard and connect to remote servers.
Stop all this filesize / filename nonsense.
Either publish signed hashes of the good version or don't bother at all. If it takes more than a minute to change the filesize / filenames to something arbitrary of your choice as a malware author, I'll be amazed, especially when you could easily make it be the same size as the official one in this case by just padding with zeroes.
Please stop using these things are identifiers for malware. Same for "check for this registry entry". Any idiot with a copy of the virus can modify the strings in it to use a different reg entry / server / filename / filesize but what they CAN'T do easily is make a file with the same hash as something official.
And given that I couldn't even see a GPG key or hash value on the download page of FileZilla at all, pretty much this kind of thing is to be expected.
If you don't understand the words "Wrong Venue", then I can't help you more than that.
Slashdot isn't a place to announce every piece of software that pseudo-releases a pseudo-new version. Certainly not some niche re-make of an old, niche game. And certainly not without some real "news" to it. If this new version was a complete 3D remake, had caused controversy, forked the code, split the team, and we have links to all that... it would JUST about qualify for it.
And, as it happens, I moved on from OpenTTD because the code-base stagnated. This version doesn't add much new either. I'm quite happy with my pre-1.3 version before the focus became minor tweaks in the handling of NewGRF's (hacked versions of the game graphics/data of the old DOS game that eventually standardised to become a plug-in architecture to extend the game).
There's fans of TTD and there's some seriously disturbed people who build Turing-capable machines using logic circuits build using trains arriving at stations. I'm the former, not the latter.
And my name is on OpenTTD's bugspray, a quick relevant Google finds a very old Wiki page for me on there, and a link to some of my early patches / saves / bug reports. That's just the first two links.
1.4 is non-news.
1.4 being not-released is non-news.
A new-news un-release of a non-news release of a niche game that I enjoy, is not "news for nerds".
How long do the enzymes last? is probably the question at the front of my mind... related to life and charge cycles, sure, but if you don't "feed" it, do they deteriorate?
The bigger problem, I would think, is how practical is it to handle these? Last thing you want is ants getting into your 500Ah battery and blowing the crap out of it. Do they have to be "cleaned"? Do the enzymes have to be replenished (a nice little sideline for the battery company selling you replacement enzymes - until you fill it with cheap Chinese enzymes and then it stops working)? Does it have to be *cleaned*?
See, to me, the prevelance of a battery is highly dependent on its maintenance. Sure, we used to have to maintain lead-acids, but nowadays they are throw-and-replace or sealed anyway. All household batteries are maintenance-free, even the rechargeable. All coin batteries. All large batteries for UPS, car starters, solar systems, alarms, etc.
Hell, even "electric" cars have a maintenance-free battery that you have to swap out because the maintenance is ridiculous.
Honestly, I'd rather have a battery I can "recharge" with sugar that only does 5Ah instead of 500 and doesn't require any other maintenance (i.e. a fuel cell). But, ideally, I'd rather just have a battery that I don't ever have to do anything with but plug it in and then, years later, throw it away.
You can say that we have to be environmental etc. but lead-acid batteries can recycle extremely well. Until this gets close, it's not even worth an article.
And, sorry, but every battery technology that was ever succesful, I had never heard of it until I was holding one in my hand that came with a product (Ni-Cd, NiMH, Li-Ion, etc.). All the thousands of "new" batteries that make the news? I've yet to see a single one hit the stores in even the most limited fashion. As such, I ignore all battery technology until it's available for me to buy, preferably in 12V or AA versions.
When the next story is "Irfanview new version available", then you can tolerate it and I'll be gone.
Much as I love OpenTTD (and the original DOS version of TTD itself), hell, I've even got code inside it somewhere (nothing important), I don't see it as front-page news to have another version of it come out. Specially seeing as nothing "spectacular" is new in it.
Sorry, Slashdot, this is just trash... from someone who plays the game, loves the game, runs servers for the game, has code in the game, and played the original game.
Which is only a problem if you actively do NOT want to help proprietary software.
I don't want to hinder proprietary software. I want to boost open software. There's a difference.
Proprietary software has it's place and, in a free market, people will choose whatever is best for them.
As in many things (feminism, sexism, racism, etc.) there are always some people who will champion the cause right through equality and out the other side.
You know what? I don't mind that proprietary software could take something like LLVM, do stuff with it, and sell it. So long as they can't stop ***ME*** taking LLVM, and doing what I want with it.
Historically "Free" software was hard to find and so proprietary was your only choice. From there, I would prefer to have open software which proprietary people can take and use too if they want. Pretty much, nowadays, you can find an open equivalent of just about anything but the most locked-in of protocols/programs.
But what I don't want is to tell everyone in the world they are an idiot if they don't open-source everything. All that does is make people hate you, and think you're an idiot. Instead, let's lead the way and **IGNORE** proprietary software, and put the lobbying efforts towards the choice of freedom, and writing good code.
When their customers realise that there's better software out there, for free, they will have to up their game, or start rolling up their sleeves to help.
We don't have to go around actively attacking them for daring to be proprietary. And we certainly don't have to get all snotty because a piece of software can be used by anyone.
Wrong again.
If you don't take account of relativistic effects, satellites tend to deorbit over time, and also it throws off your GPS like nobody's business.
The speed they are moving at in geostationary orbit is enough to notice relativistic effects. So much so that your satnav wouldn't work without them being "corrected" by some GR mathematics.
I was lucky enough to have a lecturer at university who was actively working on solving Go. Professor Wilfred Hodges at QMW, University of London.
It was his talk about the complexity of the game of Go on my induction day that convinced me to go to that university, and I was able to have him as a course lecturer for certain related courses later on (graph theory).
He is a typical, mad-haired, Einsteinian-looking sandals-in-winter professor, and he gave a marvellous intro to Go, complexity and the work he was doing.
All everyone else took away was that he showed photos of himself at a Go convention (on 35mm film). But I thought it was brilliant, and it made me teach myself Go.
I hope he's still working on it. Judging by the website I've found for him, he's busy with a LOT of other areas of mathematics than Game Theory, though.
But I'll never forget the mental "Woah" I got when he explained how much more complicated 19x19 Go was than Chess, even though the rules are vastly simpler.
Apparently there is no decent Go computer player in the world that can beat more than an average Go human player.
SteamBox for you, then?
Had it. For a network management position.
My answer was pretty truthful (given the constraints of my memory, not introducing personal life into work, the fact I only had a few seconds to find an answer before it felt awkward, etc.). I take my system personally. If some fool comes up and says that "the system isn't working", I take them to task on it.
Your computer might not be working properly. Or you might not know how to do something. Or I might have STOPPED something working for you deliberately. But my systems are good, evidenced by external audits. If you criticise them, and especially if you BLAME them or try to imply I'm not doing my job properly, you damn well better be able to back it up.
I have had enough of "I can't do my job because the system doesn't work how I would like it" kind of colleagues (who, it turns out, haven't bothered to do any prep-work, testing, research, etc. to actually allow them to do that part of their job anyway, so they are just playing for time), especially when it gets escalated to senior management under the guise of "He's not doing his job".
Every single time, it has worked out the other way around (I don't know many professions where you have to record every single thing you do during the working day, where every request made of you and your response is recorded and auditable, and where the people in questions set up this kind of "helpdesk" system voluntarily on their first day of work if it doesn't already exist)
So, yes, I do take it personally. Don't bad-mouth my systems without going through the proper channels and knowing what you're doing. And that's a weakness of mine. But, also, it works to your advantage in the long run. You can't be proud of a system that's falling over all the time.
And what you'll get is someone who's good at avoiding the obvious and wastes lots of time dealing with idiots.
What you judges INTERVIEWS for determines what qualities your employees will have to have escaped through that filter.
Thus these interviews where they ask inane question that they expect you to make stuff up? You'll end up hiring people good at making stuff up to inane questions. If that's the job, fine. I doubt it is, though.
I was interviewed for a position at the BBC, back in the early days of digital TV, working on their digital "teletext" service (i.e. that pseudo-HTML stuff they shove down the DVB channels).
Application went fine, was asked to interview (from thousands of candidates). Went in, did some tests (technical, editorial, etc.). Seemed to all be going well. Went to interview where the panel were half-technical, half-management.
Was all going alright right up until the last question. It was so wrapped up in management-ese that honestly, even as a vaguely intelligent person, I could not understand what it meant (let alone provide an answer). It was literally that impenetrable, and not even something that made any sense whatsoever. I couldn't even begin to waffle some management-ese in reply, it was that bad.
So I told them. "I don't understand, sorry". They repeated it, word-for-word. "No, no, I heard. I don't understand what you're asking." This went on for several minutes. The management in the room looked quite annoyed. Meanwhile, the techies in the room were making a show of writing a large "tick" (check) symbol on my application in front of them and grinning inanely.
Sadly, I think the management overruled or outnumbered them, and I wasn't offered (though I was told that I still came quite close).
To this day, I still can't even remember what the question was (it was just random words strung together than didn't even seem to ask a question), let alone work out what kind of answer they wanted. And, surely, if someone doesn't understand something, what you want them to do is stop you and say "Sorry, no, I don't understand", not plough on regardless making up some rubbish?
Needless to say, I actually felt quite sympathetic for the people who DO have to work under that person all the time.
One was a theoretically-exploitable, but extremely difficult to do so, obscure security bug that was almost invisible,
The other brought even top-of-the-line machines to a grinding halt constantly without reason.
Despite my own priorities, one of those is obviously going to get a LOT more attention.
You can try to push the "bitcoin doesn't exist" angle as much as you like. You're just arguing over semantics, and in an nonsensical way.
How is the sale of a car not a conversion into dollars? Why is there nobody who "already owned US dollars" who wouldn't want to buy the car/bitcoins for them?
Where do you get the idea that they are "printing" anything? If they had 10m Euros and they "converted them" to US$, what makes you think that's not a "sale"? What makes you think that involves printing more US dollars just for that transaction rather than, as is really the case, giving someone existing commodities for their existing US dollars?
You can make up whatever bullshit you want, because it's a Bitcoin story so anything goes? No. They are SELLING / CONVERTING a virtual commodity (like they do every day, and like you and I can every day and do every time we go on holiday abroad) and receiving US dollars from a vendor to do so. We call it currency conversion. It doesn't involve some guy at the Travel Exchange knocking out freshly-printed dollar bills, in any way, shape or form.
If in doubt, use a car analogy.
Cars are seized all the time when they are the proceeds of crime.
They can hold onto those cars, forever and ever and ever (and pay storage, and maintenance, and god-knows-how-much-resources to protect it all) and never let anyone touch them, or - after conviction, seizure and failure of appeals - can sell them to put money back into policing / government services.
The Bitcoins here are just seized goods, not a direct currency in US eyes, but you bet if they found 1m Euros in a drug-dealer's house that he couldn't prove were legitimately earned, that they'd seize them, convert them to US$ and use them to reduce your tax bill slightly.
Same with cars. Drugs, guns, etc. have other problems with doing this, so it isn't done, but with something that's merely a legal commodity that you can sell for value, damn right they should be selling it.
And seizure laws date back CENTURIES in almost every jurisdiction. What else are you going to do with this stuff? Give it back to the criminals? Store it forever in the "ultimate target" warehouse alongside the rocket launchers and narcotics and pay to store it forever?
Seize. Then sell or destroy. It's the ONLY sensible option.