A lock can reduce casual theft, reducing the casual thieves work better.
This is no less true of cybersecurity. As long as most cybercriminals get away with it most of the time - we won't see a reduction in exploits.
Yeah I agree but good luck with that. Dark side of human nature means if you put lots of people in a small space, statistically there are going to be a few rotten apples.
That book may be considered a classic but is one of the poorest presentations of material I've ever seen to recommend to a beginner. It works better as a reference but even then thinking in those terms has a tendency to make you over engineer every damn thing unless you actively apply the KISS principle. A lot of the patterns covered are best shown to newbies with concrete examples rather than in generic theoretical form.
... the best security programmed in software can and will be breached by other means. This emphasis on security IMHO is misplaced, if you want something secure you don't hook it up to the outside world.
I know my front door can easily be breached by a determined attacker, yet I put a lock on it. Why bother? Insurance requires it for starters. It deters casual thieves for another. Abandoning security altogether is just as stupid as making what you're trying to secure unusable by over securing it. A bit of balance goes a long way.
...so you can spot the BS and hysterical religion when some idiot consultant comes up with their new XXX driven development or Agile methodology, or tries to replace on perfectly good framework, set of design patterns or tools with a new one that promises to be the best thing since sliced bread.
But seriously I think it's important to start kids young. My first books were on Apple IIe BASIC. In those days BASIC was what a lot of kids had access to. I saw LOGO later. I wouldn't change that. I'd change the books and systems I tried to use as a teenager and young adult though - MFC and Windows coding was such a waste of time given where my career went. And I never got far.
Agree with the previous AC about Mythical Man Month. Love the classic idea of a manager who needs a baby to meet a 1 month deadline throwing 9 women at the problem instead of one woman for 9 months. But I think you can get the gist without reading a whole book about it.
K&R is iconic, but not a good beginner's book at all, and while it does cover some things in great depth it does leave plenty out and is well dated now. Worth reading, but not first. It's good for understanding how the guts of the machine work but as C has been in decline for some time some of today's new coders will likely never use it.
I've never actually read Code Complete, but it sounds like a good introduction to a lot of ideas if you've not done a degree.
Your childish abuse and lack of manners in your post say it all really.
Have you paid tax on every cent of pocket money your parents gave you? You clearly don't understand the the meaning of the word "income" in this context. Something that is given to you by your parents posthumously is not taxable income - hence the need for a separate inheritance tax. Your confusion doesn't make me a moron, unintelligent or mean I don't understand the concepts in play. That means you're an abusive uneducated troll.
Tablets are going to be selling for $100 in 5 years anyway, and HP could have sold a LOT of them at a loss to make it into the market.
You mean like Palm OS devices have come down to $100 in the last 5 or 6 years? Oh wait, they're out of business and WebOS is the last shred of their actual product still being sold in some form.
When all of you are done arguing whether Bill Gates or Steve Jobs is the true Messiah, will you please wake up and join us adults in the real world? Both men are wildly successful because they knew how best to exploit others, were driven and hard working in doing that, and were lucky. Both men set aside morals and decorum throughout their career to behave badly. Both have a reputation for abusing staff who didn't perform. Both are happy to take credit and earn money from the work others have done. Both are happy to place restrictions on what their products can do and how useful they are to their customers in order to further their own goals.
Charity contributed by Bill Gates is a good thing - he did not have to do it, though obviously it serves his purposes. It doesn't change how he earnt his money in the first place.
Inheritance tax is not theft. It is a very progressive tax in that it serves to prevent the perpetuation of wealth, free of tax, in wealthy families and are “a certain corrective against the development of a race of idle rich”.
That money has already been taxed when the deceased earnt it (except for "old money").
Any money earnt from it is also taxed as earnings or capital gains.
It is not technically theft since that has very specific meaning, but it does mean the government is saying a portion of what you have earnt is theirs once you die.
I mean come on. Who doesn't know that cops lie all the time and that you don't believe one fucking word they say without written confirmation. Not only that but the Supreme court has ruled numerous times that Cops can lie all they want as long as they don't engage in the very specific situation of entrapment.
And then if they do have the warrant and you don't comply because you ask to see it first you get charged with resisting arrest and obstructing justice.
Some lies being told to a suspect, I'm fine with, but lying about having a warrant crosses the line.
Low end laptops often go on sale for $250-$300. It's completely possible that someone would sell a 2-3 year old low end laptop that requires repairs for $60.
I thought the standard was to sell it on Ebay as "slightly used".
In spite of everything, being stupid is not a crime no matter how much one wishes it was so.
For a crime to have been committed, there has to be mens rea, a guilty mind. That's up to the state to prove. Whatever the cop thought didn't matter.
If being stupid was a crime, everyone would be in jail.
-- BMO
Being stupid is not a crime, but (at least in Australia) keeping goods that a "reasonable man" would suspect stolen means you can be convicted of receiving stolen goods. Mens rea (Intent) is not an element of every crime and does not need to be proved in every crime. Consider man-slaughter.
I agree. If you take a nude picture of yourself it is DESTINED to end up on the Internet. Let's face it. If you take a nude picture of yourself your're an EXHIBITIONIST to a certain degree, and being (literally) EXPOSED as such should not be a surprising outcome.
Yes, and for the very same reason we should all have sex in the dark with our clothes on!
Don't be a narrow minded idiot. Capturing a picture does not mean you wish to share it publicly. No more so than removing your clothes to take a shower means you should expect everyone will eventually get to see you naked.
Aw, being gullible isn't a crime. She probably should have known it was shady (and maybe she did know it was shady), but the court let her off the hook. That part of the story is over.
I don't know the exact detail of the law in the US, but in Australia if the "reasonable man" would expect that something they received is stolen, and then keeps it, they can be charged with receiving stolen property. Likewise if someone finds money on the street or anything else of value and does not report it they can be charged with "stealing by finding". Adults, unless they have diminished capacity due to illness or the like, are responsible for their own actions under the law. (That is as it should be since no one else can be held responsible). Gullibility is not a defense.
I realize that people don't understand that, but this isn't any different than if a landlord puts a secret camera in an apartment. Just because it's your property doesn't mean that you get to wiretap it all you like.
The difference is the landlord rents the property to someone, and gives up some of his rights on his own property in exchange for the rent. She wasn't renting it. Her boyfriend wasn't renting it.
Actually it's more like a man with property puts a security camera on it, and catches someone partying (in a sexual way) at the property, then his security company gives the police the footage. Then that person, caught on the property illegally whines because she was invited to go there by her boyfriend.
In Australia you can be charged and convicted of receiving stolen goods if the average "reasonable man" would suspect it was stolen (low price, off back of truck etc.)
The police were however heavy handed and wrong to comment on the morality of private sex videos or how disgusting they or the defendant is. Personally I think they should be reprimanded and perhaps docked some pay, but that ain't going to happen. The woman should definitely be charged with receiving stolen goods.
Based on current trends, Australia and Britain will be the next to ban encryption, and then the United States will soon follow. Of course this ban will NOT include politicians, celebrities or the executives of large corporations.
Everybody else will have to submit to a virtual urine sample every time they use the Internet.
Hitting alt, then pressing the arrows works fine for me. You can also hit alt, then do ctrl-tab.
Hitting ctrl-thttp://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2403472&cid=37249556#ab only takes you through the items on that ribbon, it doesn't take you to the next one.
I have my own dream that someday we will end this copyright foolishness. That people will realize that ideals once expressed become part of our collective humanity, and not something to be enslaved forever to the false god of capitalistic profits. I see a day when all children have the chance to make beautiful music and that music not be shacked by men who make no art. Then if we the people enjoy that music, then those children can earn a comfortable living for themselves from their endeavors.
Yes, I have seen the promised land and it is Creative Commons! Thank God almighty we are free at least from US style Copyright!!!
Slashdot Mirror
A lock can reduce casual theft, reducing the casual thieves work better.
This is no less true of cybersecurity. As long as most cybercriminals get away with it most of the time - we won't see a reduction in exploits.
Yeah I agree but good luck with that. Dark side of human nature means if you put lots of people in a small space, statistically there are going to be a few rotten apples.
At this point? That happened nearly two decades ago.
Carly was only there from 1999-2005.
Great book on design patterns, Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software.
That book may be considered a classic but is one of the poorest presentations of material I've ever seen to recommend to a beginner. It works better as a reference but even then thinking in those terms has a tendency to make you over engineer every damn thing unless you actively apply the KISS principle. A lot of the patterns covered are best shown to newbies with concrete examples rather than in generic theoretical form.
You can't choke someone over the internet, until now.
Of course you can! I've seen Darth Vader do it!
... the best security programmed in software can and will be breached by other means. This emphasis on security IMHO is misplaced, if you want something secure you don't hook it up to the outside world.
I know my front door can easily be breached by a determined attacker, yet I put a lock on it. Why bother? Insurance requires it for starters. It deters casual thieves for another. Abandoning security altogether is just as stupid as making what you're trying to secure unusable by over securing it. A bit of balance goes a long way.
...so you can spot the BS and hysterical religion when some idiot consultant comes up with their new XXX driven development or Agile methodology, or tries to replace on perfectly good framework, set of design patterns or tools with a new one that promises to be the best thing since sliced bread.
But seriously I think it's important to start kids young. My first books were on Apple IIe BASIC. In those days BASIC was what a lot of kids had access to. I saw LOGO later. I wouldn't change that. I'd change the books and systems I tried to use as a teenager and young adult though - MFC and Windows coding was such a waste of time given where my career went. And I never got far.
Agree with the previous AC about Mythical Man Month. Love the classic idea of a manager who needs a baby to meet a 1 month deadline throwing 9 women at the problem instead of one woman for 9 months. But I think you can get the gist without reading a whole book about it.
K&R is iconic, but not a good beginner's book at all, and while it does cover some things in great depth it does leave plenty out and is well dated now. Worth reading, but not first. It's good for understanding how the guts of the machine work but as C has been in decline for some time some of today's new coders will likely never use it.
I've never actually read Code Complete, but it sounds like a good introduction to a lot of ideas if you've not done a degree.
Unlike Apple, it can be side-loaded on Android.
So putting it back is back-side-loading? I'm pretty sure Apple have been doing that for years to their customers! I'm confused.
How old is 2nd grade?
Seven years old.
2nd grade is as old as the school system.
Oh the child? Depends on how stupid the child is ;-)
do TPSRepeatsReportsUntilYouWantToCry
Wouldn't it be quicker and easier to just pinch the child hard until he or she is sobbing and tell them that feeling is what coding is like?
The ignorant masses encourage oil companies to poison their air and water in exchange for a fictitious economic benefit.
The Department of Homeland Security should just call itself "Amaco" and pretend to drill for oil.
Throw in a deceptive advertising campaign and the masses will cheer them on as cancer rates climb.
I don't think you have to drill for stupid.
The coastguard?
I'm starting a new website, to be called 'Open-Wiki-Leaks-Leaks'.
...And then I'm going to start a website to publish the leaks on your website.
It's leaky turtles all the way down!!!
Your childish abuse and lack of manners in your post say it all really.
Have you paid tax on every cent of pocket money your parents gave you? You clearly don't understand the the meaning of the word "income" in this context. Something that is given to you by your parents posthumously is not taxable income - hence the need for a separate inheritance tax. Your confusion doesn't make me a moron, unintelligent or mean I don't understand the concepts in play. That means you're an abusive uneducated troll.
Tablets are going to be selling for $100 in 5 years anyway, and HP could have sold a LOT of them at a loss to make it into the market.
You mean like Palm OS devices have come down to $100 in the last 5 or 6 years? Oh wait, they're out of business and WebOS is the last shred of their actual product still being sold in some form.
When all of you are done arguing whether Bill Gates or Steve Jobs is the true Messiah, will you please wake up and join us adults in the real world? Both men are wildly successful because they knew how best to exploit others, were driven and hard working in doing that, and were lucky. Both men set aside morals and decorum throughout their career to behave badly. Both have a reputation for abusing staff who didn't perform. Both are happy to take credit and earn money from the work others have done. Both are happy to place restrictions on what their products can do and how useful they are to their customers in order to further their own goals.
Charity contributed by Bill Gates is a good thing - he did not have to do it, though obviously it serves his purposes. It doesn't change how he earnt his money in the first place.
Arguing who can walk on water best is purile.
Inheritance tax is not theft. It is a very progressive tax in that it serves to prevent the perpetuation of wealth, free of tax, in wealthy families and are “a certain corrective against the development of a race of idle rich”.
That money has already been taxed when the deceased earnt it (except for "old money").
Any money earnt from it is also taxed as earnings or capital gains.
It is not technically theft since that has very specific meaning, but it does mean the government is saying a portion of what you have earnt is theirs once you die.
Cops Lie. News at 11.
I mean come on. Who doesn't know that cops lie all the time and that you don't believe one fucking word they say without written confirmation. Not only that but the Supreme court has ruled numerous times that Cops can lie all they want as long as they don't engage in the very specific situation of entrapment.
And then if they do have the warrant and you don't comply because you ask to see it first you get charged with resisting arrest and obstructing justice.
Some lies being told to a suspect, I'm fine with, but lying about having a warrant crosses the line.
Low end laptops often go on sale for $250-$300. It's completely possible that someone would sell a 2-3 year old low end laptop that requires repairs for $60.
I thought the standard was to sell it on Ebay as "slightly used".
In spite of everything, being stupid is not a crime no matter how much one wishes it was so.
For a crime to have been committed, there has to be mens rea, a guilty mind. That's up to the state to prove. Whatever the cop thought didn't matter.
If being stupid was a crime, everyone would be in jail.
--
BMO
Being stupid is not a crime, but (at least in Australia) keeping goods that a "reasonable man" would suspect stolen means you can be convicted of receiving stolen goods. Mens rea (Intent) is not an element of every crime and does not need to be proved in every crime. Consider man-slaughter.
I agree. If you take a nude picture of yourself it is DESTINED to end up on the Internet. Let's face it. If you take a nude picture of yourself your're an EXHIBITIONIST to a certain degree, and being (literally) EXPOSED as such should not be a surprising outcome.
Yes, and for the very same reason we should all have sex in the dark with our clothes on!
Don't be a narrow minded idiot. Capturing a picture does not mean you wish to share it publicly. No more so than removing your clothes to take a shower means you should expect everyone will eventually get to see you naked.
I guess I should cancel my order for that $99 TouchPad, then?
A touchpad that doesnt have any reasonable prospect of software being built for it. Yes you should cancel. It's not worth $99.
Aw, being gullible isn't a crime. She probably should have known it was shady (and maybe she did know it was shady), but the court let her off the hook. That part of the story is over.
I don't know the exact detail of the law in the US, but in Australia if the "reasonable man" would expect that something they received is stolen, and then keeps it, they can be charged with receiving stolen property. Likewise if someone finds money on the street or anything else of value and does not report it they can be charged with "stealing by finding". Adults, unless they have diminished capacity due to illness or the like, are responsible for their own actions under the law. (That is as it should be since no one else can be held responsible). Gullibility is not a defense.
I realize that people don't understand that, but this isn't any different than if a landlord puts a secret camera in an apartment. Just because it's your property doesn't mean that you get to wiretap it all you like.
The difference is the landlord rents the property to someone, and gives up some of his rights on his own property in exchange for the rent. She wasn't renting it. Her boyfriend wasn't renting it.
Actually it's more like a man with property puts a security camera on it, and catches someone partying (in a sexual way) at the property, then his security company gives the police the footage. Then that person, caught on the property illegally whines because she was invited to go there by her boyfriend.
In Australia you can be charged and convicted of receiving stolen goods if the average "reasonable man" would suspect it was stolen (low price, off back of truck etc.)
The police were however heavy handed and wrong to comment on the morality of private sex videos or how disgusting they or the defendant is. Personally I think they should be reprimanded and perhaps docked some pay, but that ain't going to happen. The woman should definitely be charged with receiving stolen goods.
Based on current trends, Australia and Britain will be the next to ban encryption, and then the United States will soon follow. Of course this ban will NOT include politicians, celebrities or the executives of large corporations.
Everybody else will have to submit to a virtual urine sample every time they use the Internet.
Well that just pisses me off!
Hitting alt, then pressing the arrows works fine for me. You can also hit alt, then do ctrl-tab.
Hitting ctrl-thttp://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2403472&cid=37249556#ab only takes you through the items on that ribbon, it doesn't take you to the next one.
I have my own dream that someday we will end this copyright foolishness. That people will realize that ideals once expressed become part of our collective humanity, and not something to be enslaved forever to the false god of capitalistic profits. I see a day when all children have the chance to make beautiful music and that music not be shacked by men who make no art. Then if we the people enjoy that music, then those children can earn a comfortable living for themselves from their endeavors.
Yes, I have seen the promised land and it is Creative Commons!
Thank God almighty we are free at least from US style Copyright!!!
Excellent speech! How much do you want for it? ;-)