Conduit and those amazing javascript injected price checkers are killing the internet. I have had at least 10 family members, friends and work colleagues come to me the last year in order to remove conduit from their PC. And they varied widely in browser of choice: Chrome, IE and Firefox.
Conduit, Search protect, and price grabbers need to be put to court soon so they can stop making money from distributing malware and browser hijackers.
As Bill Hicks would put it: "If you work in advertising, kill yourself. It's the only way to save your fuckin soul." Despite backing up Bill's statement to it's fullest extent, I would like to take the chance to introduce some alternatively valid, tiny criticism to all this action being taken by advertisers, advertiser-backed companies and "advertisement enforcers":
TAKE THE FUCKIN HINT - If we use ad blockers, it's because we'd rather have your page fully messed up, your online game unplayable, your newspaper news unreadable, to abiding to deal with the consumerism-centered policies that brainwash us to pay for things we do not need. You want to make money out of the publicly available resource which the internet is since its creation? Provide me a better service by not using ads in the first place and I will be sure to drop some money on your premium services. And by premium I don't mean the ones without ads, I mean the ones where you actually had to work for, unlike whatever web-app reinventing the wheel you developed last Thursday and put ads on linked to your PayPal account.
This will be the perfect excuse for every situation the human being can't explain his moral decisions, like why do we act stupid when in love, why do some people chose to go to war and why did they sack Conan from the Tonight Show.
Just weeks ago we heard about Google thermostat prototypes. It wasn't enough to have so much in-house projects but now the policy is becoming "let's buy popular brands in emerging segments where we suck so we can be everywhere". This monopoly and diversity is bad for company focus and especially for the consumer. Android, Youtube, Motorola, Boston Dynamics, FlexyCore, and the list goes on and on. Up next: Oculus VR
Better than facing death sentence for actually doing a good thing, IMHO. The time of martyrs is long gone: we have attained a maturity level, as a species and a global society, which should prevent us from taking irrational action such as murdering people because they read the bible (North Korea) or they export an encryption algorithm to foreign countries (US). He just decided it was better to be labeled a false traitor than a dead one.
I believe the OP is asking the question with an underlying motive that most users aren't grasping - The manufacturer definitely has a way of estimating the gate "cost" from C++, as some experts on the matter have pointed out here, but for that he probably demanded source code, which the OP probably has no safe way of handing over without compromising his Intelectual Property. He doesn't want to lose the business contract or spend money blindly on a consultancy he doesn't even know which's name is, so the question makes FULL SENSE regardless of its child-like semantics.
You can probably bet the manufacturer is based and/or has legal safe-haven in a dodgy country, along the lines of having properties like:
An established electronics manufacturing industry;
Low respect and legislation for IP and the concept of royalties
(hint: China)...This makes the OP think twice about passing source around.
Now, my personal opinion regarding a possible answer is more business-focused - if such a kind of manufacturer is even remotely interested on your "product" as to ask that, then you have a very marketable piece of code on your hands and you need to do the following...
Find a "safer" buyer - something based on Europe (Germany?), Japan, or maybe the US if location is pinnacle over legislation. This nets you light IP protection
Spend on a good legal advisor to draft a nuke-proof NDA with special clauses like "if we give you the code for estimation of costs, you either buy it or refrain from implementing similar technology for at least N years" (N>10)
Despite all this, you still need an expert on electronic device manufacturing by your side, and I mean full-time. This also ensures you don't get robbed when they don't gain leverage on a final money deal with you by stating "it's too much gates! We can't pay more than XXXXX"
In alternative, find business angels, investors or waste a TON of money and do the hardware YOURSELF, under your own company's umbrella, or maybe some form of partnership. This is the stuff that makes you a millionaire, but also places a lot of risk on your side.
Unlike most here might think, this might actually be needed regulation (projects/companies need to have the people's money traced, or else failed project become easy robberies or even forms of money laundering), but not the added taxation. Reasons are varied but the best example: I don't think nice text and a youtube video are safe enough for proving a company will keep their word, and the money will actually be used for what they state. Most people on the web will trust blindly and pour money, so regulation is essential for funding credibility, just like quality control/warranty are essential for consumer protection.
Unfortunately such bureaucratic measures are usually associated with the thievery of the money pie that needs be passed around, because that's the democratic government way of telling you: "yes, we promote capitalism, but you only deserve to level up in society if you profit so much you can actually get past our taxes, since we also need to be a bit communist" (which is usually the fair thing to do).
BUT this "give and don't take" funding, where public interest is primordial for the project's launch (unlike, say, investments that seek return of some form or have indirect interests from large companies) must fall under full exemption categories, much like academic research, or, since the start-ups actually make money from their funded innovations, a new category where public interest and FAIR taxation meet halfway.
Re:Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon
on
King James Programming
·
· Score: 1
I have to self-reply to this since a mod decided this should be tagged offtopic. NEWSFLASH: that's a quote from the tumblr you dumblr mod!
Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon
on
King James Programming
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Also in the day of the LORD’s house, all the words of Alan Perlis, “Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon.”
So true, yet so moot. Let me use numbering to address some key discrepancies on your otherwise totally intuitive, yet irrelevant arguments:
1. You just discredited a system that has been successful protecting the majority of internet-bound critical use cases for years now. So I'm assuming you do absolutely no banking or social networking tasks on the WWW as you do not deem them safe enough?
2. You now tell me you perform such use-cases through TOR. Too bad you just discredited TOR with that weakest link of trust argument. But you are right on that one, according to the Snowden leaks and Silk Road events, it is also unsafe. So will be Bitcoin eventually.
3. A physical, "meat space" CA agreement is not going to solve all our problems, cuz' every sysop did not just gain immunity to social engineering. amiwrong? Physical CAs are definitely trustworthy because they don't abuse power either. Sure thing...
There is no such thing as perfect security, or perfect anything. There is good enough (for as long as it is deemed like that), and HTTPS enforcing is definitely BETTER than plain-text for now and forever. This is not like the Chrome "no keyring/no master password" argument: you do get bullet-proof security by mediated access, not nuke-proof, yet not everyone has nukes. That's why people bought kevlar+helmet on Counter-Strike.
So, without further metaphors: STOP CRITICIZING AN IMPROVEMENT
The real deal here is you are purchasing an APU for roughly less than half the price when compared to a mid-range Intel & discrete graphics solution, and getting double the performance. Apple knows this is the way to go for price-performance and that is why the new entry-level 15' MBPs lost discrete GPU. OEMs like Apple are forcing Intel to catch up with integrated GPU technology.
It's all about trade-offs: you place a less performing GPU in the same die as the CPU in order to get the best possible memory interface. While you won't reach enthusiast or prossumer performance levels without adding a high end GPU, you will definitely target the common user market.
Chinese and indian power companies could and did rely on US financing before, and now they won't be able to. New restrictions mean they will be forced to get more such big-ass loans from unrestricted sources, such as local banks or even state-owned banks. This effectively reduces such country's capacity for development, but in the long run might even be beneficial as interests circulating internally. Only time can tell.
Give me 10-year worth of the yearly extra spending on those "clean" alternatives and I will create a society-proof system that guara-f*ckin-tees no nuclear disaster will ever happen. With roughly a fraction of the predicted sum, measures such as the ones below are trivially attainable:
- Provide government co-funding for implementation of nuclear plants when it's not particularly lucrative for the project execution bidder
- Creation of an independent, hybrid nuclear energy committee/military/police body with simultaneous legislative, judicial and executive powers (think Judge Dredd with benefits)
- Effectively enable the death-penalty to anyone that threatens, to a certain degree, nuclear energy-related critical regulation;
... and, of course...
- Lobby the current government for the previous measures. And with that money, you can be sure even that one about death-penalty would pass, they already have death-penalty there
IMO South Korea is just, like many nations before it, admitting it CAN'T PREVENT CORRUPTION INSIDE ITS OWN SOCIO-CULTURAL BACKGROUND, and throwing the towel is usually the better option. Except in a scenario where the trade-off is going back 100 years, multiplying national the energy bill by 10 and the certainty that the environment will be polluted (as opposed to the casual, totally avoidable nuclear disaster).
Slashdot Mirror
Cracked version of Teamviewer from your favorite torrent tracker. Fight the powa!
Conduit and those amazing javascript injected price checkers are killing the internet. I have had at least 10 family members, friends and work colleagues come to me the last year in order to remove conduit from their PC. And they varied widely in browser of choice: Chrome, IE and Firefox.
Conduit, Search protect, and price grabbers need to be put to court soon so they can stop making money from distributing malware and browser hijackers.
As Bill Hicks would put it: "If you work in advertising, kill yourself. It's the only way to save your fuckin soul."
Despite backing up Bill's statement to it's fullest extent, I would like to take the chance to introduce some alternatively valid, tiny criticism to all this action being taken by advertisers, advertiser-backed companies and "advertisement enforcers":
TAKE THE FUCKIN HINT - If we use ad blockers, it's because we'd rather have your page fully messed up, your online game unplayable, your newspaper news unreadable, to abiding to deal with the consumerism-centered policies that brainwash us to pay for things we do not need. You want to make money out of the publicly available resource which the internet is since its creation? Provide me a better service by not using ads in the first place and I will be sure to drop some money on your premium services. And by premium I don't mean the ones without ads, I mean the ones where you actually had to work for, unlike whatever web-app reinventing the wheel you developed last Thursday and put ads on linked to your PayPal account.
This will be the perfect excuse for every situation the human being can't explain his moral decisions, like why do we act stupid when in love, why do some people chose to go to war and why did they sack Conan from the Tonight Show.
Just weeks ago we heard about Google thermostat prototypes. It wasn't enough to have so much in-house projects but now the policy is becoming "let's buy popular brands in emerging segments where we suck so we can be everywhere". This monopoly and diversity is bad for company focus and especially for the consumer. Android, Youtube, Motorola, Boston Dynamics, FlexyCore, and the list goes on and on. Up next: Oculus VR
We are the biped evolution of bees. It's a fact now
Better than facing death sentence for actually doing a good thing, IMHO. The time of martyrs is long gone: we have attained a maturity level, as a species and a global society, which should prevent us from taking irrational action such as murdering people because they read the bible (North Korea) or they export an encryption algorithm to foreign countries (US). He just decided it was better to be labeled a false traitor than a dead one.
About time more americans started acting snowde-like. As in ballsy
I believe the OP is asking the question with an underlying motive that most users aren't grasping - The manufacturer definitely has a way of estimating the gate "cost" from C++, as some experts on the matter have pointed out here, but for that he probably demanded source code, which the OP probably has no safe way of handing over without compromising his Intelectual Property. He doesn't want to lose the business contract or spend money blindly on a consultancy he doesn't even know which's name is, so the question makes FULL SENSE regardless of its child-like semantics.
You can probably bet the manufacturer is based and/or has legal safe-haven in a dodgy country, along the lines of having properties like:
(hint: China) ...This makes the OP think twice about passing source around.
Now, my personal opinion regarding a possible answer is more business-focused - if such a kind of manufacturer is even remotely interested on your "product" as to ask that, then you have a very marketable piece of code on your hands and you need to do the following...
Give him bitcoins instead :D /. article this year so far.
This is definitely my favorite
Unlike most here might think, this might actually be needed regulation (projects/companies need to have the people's money traced, or else failed project become easy robberies or even forms of money laundering), but not the added taxation. Reasons are varied but the best example: I don't think nice text and a youtube video are safe enough for proving a company will keep their word, and the money will actually be used for what they state. Most people on the web will trust blindly and pour money, so regulation is essential for funding credibility, just like quality control/warranty are essential for consumer protection.
Unfortunately such bureaucratic measures are usually associated with the thievery of the money pie that needs be passed around, because that's the democratic government way of telling you: "yes, we promote capitalism, but you only deserve to level up in society if you profit so much you can actually get past our taxes, since we also need to be a bit communist" (which is usually the fair thing to do).
BUT this "give and don't take" funding, where public interest is primordial for the project's launch (unlike, say, investments that seek return of some form or have indirect interests from large companies) must fall under full exemption categories, much like academic research, or, since the start-ups actually make money from their funded innovations, a new category where public interest and FAIR taxation meet halfway.
I have to self-reply to this since a mod decided this should be tagged offtopic. NEWSFLASH: that's a quote from the tumblr you dumblr mod!
Also in the day of the LORD’s house, all the words of Alan Perlis, “Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon.”
For PC components/misc: www.anandtech.com;
For tablets: all of above and also www.engadget.com, www.techcrunch.com, popular newspapers;
For laptops: www.notebookreview.com, www.notebookcheck.net for amazingly up2date CPU/GPU benchmark lists;
For professional software: anywhere but developer-affiliated websites
There is no such thing as perfect security, or perfect anything. There is good enough (for as long as it is deemed like that), and HTTPS enforcing is definitely BETTER than plain-text for now and forever. This is not like the Chrome "no keyring/no master password" argument: you do get bullet-proof security by mediated access, not nuke-proof, yet not everyone has nukes. That's why people bought kevlar+helmet on Counter-Strike.
So, without further metaphors: STOP CRITICIZING AN IMPROVEMENT
So this must be how Chinese smartphone manufacturers are sniffing cell data...
The real deal here is you are purchasing an APU for roughly less than half the price when compared to a mid-range Intel & discrete graphics solution, and getting double the performance. Apple knows this is the way to go for price-performance and that is why the new entry-level 15' MBPs lost discrete GPU. OEMs like Apple are forcing Intel to catch up with integrated GPU technology. It's all about trade-offs: you place a less performing GPU in the same die as the CPU in order to get the best possible memory interface. While you won't reach enthusiast or prossumer performance levels without adding a high end GPU, you will definitely target the common user market.
To me, that's something out of COD: Black Ops 2. Right before I see some stoners get shot to the sound of Skrillex.
Chinese and indian power companies could and did rely on US financing before, and now they won't be able to. New restrictions mean they will be forced to get more such big-ass loans from unrestricted sources, such as local banks or even state-owned banks. This effectively reduces such country's capacity for development, but in the long run might even be beneficial as interests circulating internally. Only time can tell.
IMO South Korea is just, like many nations before it, admitting it CAN'T PREVENT CORRUPTION INSIDE ITS OWN SOCIO-CULTURAL BACKGROUND, and throwing the towel is usually the better option. Except in a scenario where the trade-off is going back 100 years, multiplying national the energy bill by 10 and the certainty that the environment will be polluted (as opposed to the casual, totally avoidable nuclear disaster).