It can be shown however, that humans can solve it in certain cases, which is still more than Turing Machines can do.
No, it's not. I can easily write a program that solves the halting problem for certain special cases, for instance for turing machines without "loops".
Worst. Analogy. Ever. Ok, maybe not. There's some pretty stiff competition there.
Anyway, I'm not saying the scammers shouldn't be punished. They should. I am saying that there must be something severely wrong with your mental capabilities if you fall for this particular scam.
We're not talking about an old lady that lets someone claiming to be from the gas company into her house. That is a mistake most people could make. I'm talking about someone who actually thinks that some random stranger wants their help to handle millions of dollars, and then actually SENDS THIS PERSON MONEY to do so.
There was this case of some professor who was actually participating in TWO scams at the same time: he wanted to pay the costs of the second one using the proceeds of the first. I'm sorry, I may not be the most sensitive person in the world, but I am completely and utterly incapable of having ANY compassion for such a "victim"
It has been marked as fixed for ages (well, since 2004-05-31) in Bugzilla. Of course, us mere mortals running precompiled releases instead of building our own state of the art browser directly from the source trunk, don't get to enjoy that fix.
Damn, that faq page is the funniest thing I've seen all day.
Some quotes:
The Hurd throws this historical garbage away. We think that we have found a more flexible solution called shadow filesystems. Unfortunately, support for shadowed filesystems is not yet implemented.
Eh? throw the (working) garbage away before the new solution is implemented?
You are using IRQ sharing; GNU Mach does not support this in the least.
Yeah, because that's such an uncommon thing for hardware to use.
GNU Mach does not support loadable kernel modules. Therefore, you will have to compile a new kernel and only activate those device drivers that you actually need.
So much for a microkernel then.
The Hurd will just as happily swap to any other raw disk space and overwrite anything it finds. So, be careful!
Thanks for the warning. That will make me want to install it on my machine.
This FAQ document was probably secretly written by Linus Torvalds to ridicule it, and promote his own views on software development.
"Oh, and here we take a local variable, which for brevity we called 'i', and let it iterate over a range from zero to the length of the array minus one (note that array indexes are zero-based here, so the last valid index is length minus one"
Yeah, I can see how that would help.:(
Don't comment lines that don't need explaining. Comment the functions they are in, what it does, under what circumstances, and why.
Leave the obfuscation to the marketing department. We have one who actually listed double-ROT13 encryption as a "feature" of our product. Ok, he asked me what encryption we supported by default, and I told him double-ROT13 not realizing just how dense he was. The story gets better! The marketing shpiel he put together was going to the IT security folks at the NSA! One of them called me up, in tears from laughing. He asked if I could implement quad-ROT13. I told him I could implement 2^n-ROT13, iff n>0.
Actually, I think you're the one who's dense, when you think someone from marketing who asks you a straightforward question about your product is supposed to understand a geek-joke.
It's not his job to check or even understand all the technical info. It's (presumably) yours.
As I am not in the business of testing or benchmarking either Slashdot or Mozilla, I merely notice that sometimes slashdot is unreadable using Firefox. It has been marked as a bug in bugzilla, but no matter how many times someone marks it as resolved, it does not seem to go away.
Slashdot Mirror
It can be shown however, that humans can solve it in certain cases, which is still more than Turing Machines can do.
No, it's not. I can easily write a program that solves the halting problem for certain special cases, for instance for turing machines without "loops".
ever heard of fusker?
Only because Amazon owns the patent for doing it in 3
You do know that common sense directly contradicts most modern physics, a lot of mathematics, and nearly all religious believes, don't you?
Let's keep common sense out of this.
Don't be absurd. We've always been at war with Iraq.
of course, everyone should be able to distinguish between a cyrillic "a" and a latin "a".
Hint: in some fonts, the glyph is exactly the same
You don't have to get back the original data. You just have to get back something that produces the same hash.
Well, since it's at an altitude of 4km, air pressure is lower, so the sublimation temperature is probably lower than at sea level too.
So it is an arms race. Just not with the criminal, but with your neighbour.
Worst. Analogy. Ever. Ok, maybe not. There's some pretty stiff competition there. Anyway, I'm not saying the scammers shouldn't be punished. They should. I am saying that there must be something severely wrong with your mental capabilities if you fall for this particular scam. We're not talking about an old lady that lets someone claiming to be from the gas company into her house. That is a mistake most people could make. I'm talking about someone who actually thinks that some random stranger wants their help to handle millions of dollars, and then actually SENDS THIS PERSON MONEY to do so. There was this case of some professor who was actually participating in TWO scams at the same time: he wanted to pay the costs of the second one using the proceeds of the first. I'm sorry, I may not be the most sensitive person in the world, but I am completely and utterly incapable of having ANY compassion for such a "victim"
Uh.. yeah, I just live for karma or whatever.
419 scams are the montary equivalent of survival of the fittest.
Anyone who falls for this deserves to be stripped of all assets.
I guess you had to be there...
That would be hilarious if true. Source please?
Oh wait, memes don't have to be true. I keep forgetting.
It has been marked as fixed for ages (well, since 2004-05-31) in Bugzilla. Of course, us mere mortals running precompiled releases instead of building our own state of the art browser directly from the source trunk, don't get to enjoy that fix.
You have clearly failed the test.
Damn, that faq page is the funniest thing I've seen all day.
Some quotes:
The Hurd throws this historical garbage away. We think that we have found a more flexible solution called shadow filesystems. Unfortunately, support for shadowed filesystems is not yet implemented.
Eh? throw the (working) garbage away before the new solution is implemented?
You are using IRQ sharing; GNU Mach does not support this in the least.
Yeah, because that's such an uncommon thing for hardware to use.
GNU Mach does not support loadable kernel modules. Therefore, you will have to compile a new kernel and only activate those device drivers that you actually need.
So much for a microkernel then.
The Hurd will just as happily swap to any other raw disk space and overwrite anything it finds. So, be careful!
Thanks for the warning. That will make me want to install it on my machine.
This FAQ document was probably secretly written by Linus Torvalds to ridicule it, and promote his own views on software development.
Best quote: "But hey, I might be wrong. I haven't actually followed Hurd in any detail"
From that description, it doesn't seem very useful for exceptional Joe either, only for GNU/Joes developing Hurd.
"Oh, and here we take a local variable, which for brevity we called 'i', and let it iterate over a range from zero to the length of the array minus one (note that array indexes are zero-based here, so the last valid index is length minus one"
:(
Yeah, I can see how that would help.
Don't comment lines that don't need explaining. Comment the functions they are in, what it does, under what circumstances, and why.
Yes.
It is the first post.
It has "first post" as subject.
The only content in the post is "first post"
I think that qualifies as redundant.
Unless they own a patent for creating those glasses
*ducks*
Leave the obfuscation to the marketing department. We have one who actually listed double-ROT13 encryption as a "feature" of our product. Ok, he asked me what encryption we supported by default, and I told him double-ROT13 not realizing just how dense he was. The story gets better! The marketing shpiel he put together was going to the IT security folks at the NSA! One of them called me up, in tears from laughing. He asked if I could implement quad-ROT13. I told him I could implement 2^n-ROT13, iff n>0.
Actually, I think you're the one who's dense, when you think someone from marketing who asks you a straightforward question about your product is supposed to understand a geek-joke.
It's not his job to check or even understand all the technical info. It's (presumably) yours.
As I am not in the business of testing or benchmarking either Slashdot or Mozilla, I merely notice that sometimes slashdot is unreadable using Firefox. It has been marked as a bug in bugzilla, but no matter how many times someone marks it as resolved, it does not seem to go away.
If IE has tabbed browsing before Firefox knows how to render Slashdot correctly, it's back to IE for me.