I may be being slightly thick here, but isn't it checking that
EITHER
uid == 0 (the process was started by root)
OR
euid != 0 (the effective user id is not root)
Now, the euid!=0 check is presumably to check the program is not suid root, but, because it's an 'or', the check would also be passed if the program was not started by root and *not* suid root? Checking the euid!=0 doesn't tell me much - because it can be almost anything - unless we also check the uid and suid to give context.
If you understand the situation better and can see why the code is correct, then I'd genuinely appreciate an explanation of the above.
Presumably he doesn't think they are quite there yet. Certainly the ones I've used haven't been good enough (they printed on heat-paper, rather than created vector graphics and emailing the file to me).
I'd propose a small correction to what you say: the natural tendency of sexual reproduction is to produce creatures that are either (a)inviable, which typically miscarry or (b) similar or (c) better. This would be analogous to receiving two lots of bad code, one of each, or two lots of good code respectively.
AIUI a surprising number of the offspring of higher animals 'spontaneously' abort without the parent necessarily even knowing about it.
The thing about genetic algorithms to date is that they have only been permitted to evolve within parameters. Evolving better weightings for poker playing bots for example. This is a highly successful technique, analogous to the way the human brain sets itself up - highly structured programming (physical brain) with variable parameters (experience).
If you allow the code itself to evolve (typically achieved with Lisp or similar cos of the convenient tree structure of the code) then the likelihood is that you can write a better program than will evolve anyway, because so many of the evolved programs are utterly useless. This, of course, is the argument for Intelligent Design, except that the planet really does have unlimited time, and there aren't anti-virus companies constantly trying to sterilise the planet (as far as we know!;-)
Finally, most genetic algorithms require 'sex' type recombination to (randomly and hopefully) whittle away the useless code that has accumulated. This might be a little hard to implement in a cloaking virus - the one thing they don't want is to have any kind of signal that they are there!
All in all, I'll be surprised to see a truly genetic algorithm virus ever. The closest we might see are self tuning ones - eg ones that spot the user is using the machine and back off their spamming activities so that they aren't obvious.
The studios and labels know they won't be stopping anyone who wants to rip the off on a larger scale.
Indupitably.
If the pirates are looking at losing their revenue stream, they'll just wire a SCART cable to a parport cable and write a ripper. Even I could do that.
And if, one day, I find I can't play my legally bought CD in my car, or my computer, or on my next gen DVD player, then I for one will certainly be downloading the content, with no moral qualms whatsoever.
Intranets relevent, sure, but I bet even in those environments licences for Office outnumber licences for SharePoint by two orders of magnitude. Thus for the overwhelming majority, those collaboration features are simply irrelevent.
I can't believe I got modded troll for that incidentally! Ho hum.
Dumb question perhaps, but how many people do you think need/want/use that level of functionality?
I'm a contractor. I've worked in literally dozens of teams in about a dozen companies. I have never, never, never seen anyone bother with this level of interactivity for documentation. We generally have breakout discussions with a nominated individual to take notes write up afterwards. Sometimes this is a techy, sometimes not. It's just not needed.
For the remaining 99.5% of users, this is not an issue. It's not even a consideration.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps your 'Don't blame the US' line is every bit as much a knee-jerk reaction as you think the 'Blame the US' line is?
J.
"Wesa Luke Skywalker. Wesa here to rescue you!"
Sorry, in this modern world, you can't shoot *first* unless you're the baddy...
You'll have to wait till the SW fans try to shoot you and miss.
Justin.
The answer, however, even two years ago read, "Add /usr/local/lib to /etc/ld.so.conf and run ldconfig."
Mind you, the whole post is a cut and paste troll taken from some old web pages, so really I'd just ignore the dickhead.
Justin.
Smashing explanation - thanks.
Justin.
Lets try that again...
I may be being slightly thick here, but isn't it checking that
EITHER
uid == 0 (the process was started by root)
OR
euid != 0 (the effective user id is not root)
Now, the euid!=0 check is presumably to check the program is not suid root, but, because it's an 'or', the check would also be passed if the program was not started by root and *not* suid root? Checking the euid!=0 doesn't tell me much - because it can be almost anything - unless we also check the uid and suid to give context.
If you understand the situation better and can see why the code is correct, then I'd genuinely appreciate an explanation of the above.
Cheers,
Justin.
I don't think the Clever requires a helmet either. The photos show a demo model being driven with the panels removed.
Mind you, I'm not certain. I just RTFA.
Justin.
Is this a quote? Or will we be seeing DVD Jon in a borderline illegal internment camp anytime soon?
J.
Speak for yourself, dickwad.
Justin@work.
PS: See?!
...should those drivers become part of 'Linux' or be only available as third party drivers as at present?
J.
Here's a simple rule: If, when you hear about something you think "I wish I'd thought of that" then it is probably non-obvious and yet simple.
Justin.
Presumably he doesn't think they are quite there yet. Certainly the ones I've used haven't been good enough (they printed on heat-paper, rather than created vector graphics and emailing the file to me).
J.
OOo spends time converting from .doc format to its own internal format. It's optimised to read odf instead.
Try saving as OOo format and then reopening. It's just as fast as MSO.
J.
I was going to join in modding you funny, but I thought I'd try and give you a clue in case you are wondering why mods think your post is funny:
Funny is what people mod when they would like to mod something "So wrong it's not even... funny".
You're either a really crap troll/shill or substantially misinformed about OOo.
Justin.
PS What does hemi-dramatically mean?
According to Random Acts of Reality recently, the term currently preferred by people with mental illness is 'mad'. You couldn't make this shit up!
Justin.
Thanks for that, interesting.
I'd propose a small correction to what you say: the natural tendency of sexual reproduction is to produce creatures that are either (a)inviable, which typically miscarry or (b) similar or (c) better. This would be analogous to receiving two lots of bad code, one of each, or two lots of good code respectively.
AIUI a surprising number of the offspring of higher animals 'spontaneously' abort without the parent necessarily even knowing about it.
Cheers,
Justin.
The thing about genetic algorithms to date is that they have only been permitted to evolve within parameters. Evolving better weightings for poker playing bots for example. This is a highly successful technique, analogous to the way the human brain sets itself up - highly structured programming (physical brain) with variable parameters (experience).
;-)
If you allow the code itself to evolve (typically achieved with Lisp or similar cos of the convenient tree structure of the code) then the likelihood is that you can write a better program than will evolve anyway, because so many of the evolved programs are utterly useless. This, of course, is the argument for Intelligent Design, except that the planet really does have unlimited time, and there aren't anti-virus companies constantly trying to sterilise the planet (as far as we know!
Finally, most genetic algorithms require 'sex' type recombination to (randomly and hopefully) whittle away the useless code that has accumulated. This might be a little hard to implement in a cloaking virus - the one thing they don't want is to have any kind of signal that they are there!
All in all, I'll be surprised to see a truly genetic algorithm virus ever. The closest we might see are self tuning ones - eg ones that spot the user is using the machine and back off their spamming activities so that they aren't obvious.
J.
I can't believe I can understand this. Worse, I think it's witty. God help me.
Justin.
Indupitably.
If the pirates are looking at losing their revenue stream, they'll just wire a SCART cable to a parport cable and write a ripper. Even I could do that.
And if, one day, I find I can't play my legally bought CD in my car, or my computer, or on my next gen DVD player, then I for one will certainly be downloading the content, with no moral qualms whatsoever.
Plug that!
Justin.
Yeah, cos just looking at my Program menu here "Excel", "Access", "Powerpoint", "Nero", "Real", "Rational Rose", "Acrobat" are all so intuitive.
J.
I meant site licences, as I'm sure was obvious given how few offices have a licence per seat, but what the hell.
J.
Intranets relevent, sure, but I bet even in those environments licences for Office outnumber licences for SharePoint by two orders of magnitude. Thus for the overwhelming majority, those collaboration features are simply irrelevent.
I can't believe I got modded troll for that incidentally! Ho hum.
J.
Indeed... but remarking about lack of functionality that is hardly used by the OVERWHELMING majority is just trolling IMO.
Mind you, your remarks about 'only edit with FrontPage' were interesting... talk about lack of public standards and lock-in!
J.
Dumb question perhaps, but how many people do you think need/want/use that level of functionality?
I'm a contractor. I've worked in literally dozens of teams in about a dozen companies. I have never, never, never seen anyone bother with this level of interactivity for documentation. We generally have breakout discussions with a nominated individual to take notes write up afterwards. Sometimes this is a techy, sometimes not. It's just not needed.
For the remaining 99.5% of users, this is not an issue. It's not even a consideration.
Justin.
Justin.