The parent is a fuckwit, despite an insightful analysis of the failure of this encryption. However, you are also a fuckwit for tossing arount the anti-semite buzzword. Here's something to think about - any person who decides that they need a special word for discrimination about THEM, as opposed to discrimination in general, is a person who is going to try to leverage victimhood. I find that almost as obnoxious as racism.
10 second scan of the claims notices alot of refrences to "distributed" and "web client". It looks like this just refrences the web services part of.NET, not the CLR itself. It doesn't neccesarily seem to apply to normal ASP.NET, either, and there's vast prior art there anyway. It's just XML based web services applications.
I don't actually see anything in the article that explicitly says it's IN the file - if, instead, it's just a serial number specifying a particular track (much like the IDs that identify CDs, used by CDDB), then it's an obvious, standardized way for outlets and streaming stations to report usage to whatever the name of that organization that pretends to pay royalties to artists is. On the other hand, if they specify that it is to be included in the file, it makes it easy to spot check web stations for licensing - if the GRId isn't in the stream header, then it's not a licensed stream. It could theoretically track the spread on p2p networks, but if, as I suspect, it's per track and not per retailer then it's useless for that, and it'd be trivially defeated by any real pirate anyway.
You don't need a license to use software, so refusing to agree with it loses you nothing. It's obviously a contract of sale, legal wranglings notwithstanding (this has been upheld by at least one court case in CA), just like you don't need any additional license to read a book you just purchased. The EULA would have to be presented and agreed upon at the time of purchasing to be legal, and, at least in the case of retail stores, it is not.
It worked fine for books for hundreds of yeras - software isn't substantially different than a book, as far as things like EULAs are concerned. In fact, books used to have em too, but they were tossed out for much the same reasons that people think software EULAs have no legal power. You already sold me what I wanted - once you've done that, you have no further power to get additional obligations from me.
Normal copyright law provides software companies with all the legal protection they need to sustain a buisness model, and provides users with all the rights they need to use the software. There's no need whatsoever for EULAs beyond the desire of companies for a greater level of control over you than copyright law allows for.
It's very much open to debate whether or not it's legal to use software without agreeing to license. Naturally, the BSA prefers the yes side of the debate.
Access actually does use a server (of sorts), it's reliant of the MS Jet SQL engine, which is part of the MDAC, and issues with different MDAC versions plague developers daily.
Microsoft Press publishes one of the most useful books I've ever seen - "Writing Secure Code", by a MS engineer. No, stop laughing, I'm serious. It's a great book. It even goes into great detail on how important it is to force secure coding practices onto the rest of the project team, and how you have to resist the temptation to add features or push up the release date at the expense of code review and good coding practices. It's usefullness is only enhanced by the delicious sense of irony you get when reading it.
Most recent benchmarks I've seen show that, even for apps traditionally better on Macs, like Photoshop filters, the new (equivilently priced) Xeon's are able to handily beat the G4s. Sometimes just throwing more horses at is IS the best solution.
I doubt they run the farm 24/7 at full capacity except when they're actually in final production, too, but who knows. 5k a month is still alot less than they pay for the admins on the boxes.
I don't normally do the me to thing, but I'm going to here. The religion surrounding Java drives me insane, and I actually have great hopes for.NET, which is like Java done right. If MS can resist the temptation to cripple it on non-Windows platforms, or to make changes that break Mono, and all the other crap they're known to do, then they've got a winner.
That's a pretty huge increase, although I'm not familiar with either of those STL implementations - I use STLport, generally, or MS's one when I don't want to distribute the STL port DLLs.
That said, I can see that for certain cases, although you probably could have gotten most of the same increase by re-working your code instead of switching to C style strings. But whatever works;)
I'd say that he apparently WAS special enough to change the hiring process, since they did. You just don't get it - employers (generally speaking) will push as far as they can until you push back - it's in thier best interest. That's the whole invisible hand thing. So you pushing back is EXACTLY the correct thing to do.
And yes, my financial situation is nobodys buisness unless a) they're considering giving me money and/or services in expectation of being paid later, and they want to evaluate the risk of me doing that or b) I'm going to have a secured position (the kind that would involve a security clearance) and they need to evalaute how vulnerable I am to bribery. Other than that, there's no reason whatsoever for someone to know how much money I make, or how much money I owe.
That's totally aside from the obvious statements that bad credit does not neccesarily mean you can't manage your finances.
It was actually a follow up to an illegal helicopter fly-over (they aren't supposed to fly below X hundred feet (5?) but do anyway), but whatever, I wasn't really defending him:P. This was in the late 90s. 98, maybe. I remember distinctly that they didn't have a warrant for the infrared scan, and claimed they didn't need one, the rest of the details not so much:P
Theres a couple alternate compilers that work just by replacing cl.exe - turbo-something or other is one, it's marketed to game developers because it apparently has excellent speed optimization. Perhaps the Intel one could work the same way?
As I recall, this behavior was unspecified in early versions of the C++ spec, and a number of compilers implemented it the way MS does, because C programmers were used to it working like that. It's non-standard, but pretty common - I believe that VC.NET has an option to toggle the behavior.
What the hell are you smoking? Like the first responder said, those are platform dependent implementation details. They have nothing to do with C++. GCC and every other compiler has a similar set of extensions. A compiler that didn't have them wouldn't be able to compile code that ran on any modern operating system.
VC++ having them has NOTHING to do with the compiler (they actuall aren't compiler features, they're pre-processor and linker features) and it's implementation of C++. If you're going to say that the VC++ compiler (cl.exe) doesn't implement C++, then you need to either a) give examples of mandatory parts of the language it fails to implement or b) give examples of parts of the language it implements incorrectly. I'm not saying these don't exist. But muttering about declspec doesn't make a damn bit of sense.
Maybe MSs crappy STL implementation, althought I hear the one in VS.NET is better, but all the string classes I use aren't any slower than C style strings - the extra overhead is code bloat from all the functions you don't use, not speed issues.
Well, if you'd read the links, you'd know that this isn't a case of a rare browser not being allowed for (excusable behavior), but a specific fix targeted directly toward Opera - which doesn't need an extra stylesheet because it renders the IE specific one fine.
Slashdot Mirror
The parent is a fuckwit, despite an insightful analysis of the failure of this encryption. However, you are also a fuckwit for tossing arount the anti-semite buzzword. Here's something to think about - any person who decides that they need a special word for discrimination about THEM, as opposed to discrimination in general, is a person who is going to try to leverage victimhood. I find that almost as obnoxious as racism.
No, young Duke. They tried, and died.
10 second scan of the claims notices alot of refrences to "distributed" and "web client". It looks like this just refrences the web services part of .NET, not the CLR itself. It doesn't neccesarily seem to apply to normal ASP.NET, either, and there's vast prior art there anyway. It's just XML based web services applications.
Because he knows something about web browsers and the way the WWW works, which, apparently, you do not?
I don't actually see anything in the article that explicitly says it's IN the file - if, instead, it's just a serial number specifying a particular track (much like the IDs that identify CDs, used by CDDB), then it's an obvious, standardized way for outlets and streaming stations to report usage to whatever the name of that organization that pretends to pay royalties to artists is. On the other hand, if they specify that it is to be included in the file, it makes it easy to spot check web stations for licensing - if the GRId isn't in the stream header, then it's not a licensed stream. It could theoretically track the spread on p2p networks, but if, as I suspect, it's per track and not per retailer then it's useless for that, and it'd be trivially defeated by any real pirate anyway.
You don't need a license to use software, so refusing to agree with it loses you nothing. It's obviously a contract of sale, legal wranglings notwithstanding (this has been upheld by at least one court case in CA), just like you don't need any additional license to read a book you just purchased. The EULA would have to be presented and agreed upon at the time of purchasing to be legal, and, at least in the case of retail stores, it is not.
Normal copyright law provides software companies with all the legal protection they need to sustain a buisness model, and provides users with all the rights they need to use the software. There's no need whatsoever for EULAs beyond the desire of companies for a greater level of control over you than copyright law allows for.
It's very much open to debate whether or not it's legal to use software without agreeing to license. Naturally, the BSA prefers the yes side of the debate.
Access actually does use a server (of sorts), it's reliant of the MS Jet SQL engine, which is part of the MDAC, and issues with different MDAC versions plague developers daily.
Microsoft Press publishes one of the most useful books I've ever seen - "Writing Secure Code", by a MS engineer. No, stop laughing, I'm serious. It's a great book. It even goes into great detail on how important it is to force secure coding practices onto the rest of the project team, and how you have to resist the temptation to add features or push up the release date at the expense of code review and good coding practices. It's usefullness is only enhanced by the delicious sense of irony you get when reading it.
Most recent benchmarks I've seen show that, even for apps traditionally better on Macs, like Photoshop filters, the new (equivilently priced) Xeon's are able to handily beat the G4s. Sometimes just throwing more horses at is IS the best solution.
I doubt they run the farm 24/7 at full capacity except when they're actually in final production, too, but who knows. 5k a month is still alot less than they pay for the admins on the boxes.
That said, I can see that for certain cases, although you probably could have gotten most of the same increase by re-working your code instead of switching to C style strings. But whatever works ;)
Right, that's code bloat, not performance bloat.
And yes, my financial situation is nobodys buisness unless a) they're considering giving me money and/or services in expectation of being paid later, and they want to evaluate the risk of me doing that or b) I'm going to have a secured position (the kind that would involve a security clearance) and they need to evalaute how vulnerable I am to bribery. Other than that, there's no reason whatsoever for someone to know how much money I make, or how much money I owe.
That's totally aside from the obvious statements that bad credit does not neccesarily mean you can't manage your finances.
It was actually a follow up to an illegal helicopter fly-over (they aren't supposed to fly below X hundred feet (5?) but do anyway), but whatever, I wasn't really defending him :P. This was in the late 90s. 98, maybe. I remember distinctly that they didn't have a warrant for the infrared scan, and claimed they didn't need one, the rest of the details not so much :P
You know that extensions are part of the C++ standard, right?
It's about the same age as VS 6.0, then, but I don't see anyone stopping ragging on it :P
Theres a couple alternate compilers that work just by replacing cl.exe - turbo-something or other is one, it's marketed to game developers because it apparently has excellent speed optimization. Perhaps the Intel one could work the same way?
As I recall, this behavior was unspecified in early versions of the C++ spec, and a number of compilers implemented it the way MS does, because C programmers were used to it working like that. It's non-standard, but pretty common - I believe that VC .NET has an option to toggle the behavior.
VC++ having them has NOTHING to do with the compiler (they actuall aren't compiler features, they're pre-processor and linker features) and it's implementation of C++. If you're going to say that the VC++ compiler (cl.exe) doesn't implement C++, then you need to either a) give examples of mandatory parts of the language it fails to implement or b) give examples of parts of the language it implements incorrectly. I'm not saying these don't exist. But muttering about declspec doesn't make a damn bit of sense.
Maybe MSs crappy STL implementation, althought I hear the one in VS .NET is better, but all the string classes I use aren't any slower than C style strings - the extra overhead is code bloat from all the functions you don't use, not speed issues.
Well, if you'd read the links, you'd know that this isn't a case of a rare browser not being allowed for (excusable behavior), but a specific fix targeted directly toward Opera - which doesn't need an extra stylesheet because it renders the IE specific one fine.
I personally know someone who was busted that way, without need for a warrant. Probably just his shitty public defender, but....