Easy! Everyone who's canonized racks up 2 or 3 miracles. They even have a whole scientific process:
1) Someone gets diagnosed with terminal cancer
2) Asks the deceased saint-in-waiting for intercession
3) Cancer goes into remission
4) The advocatus diaboli asks a medical doctor to explain this, the doctor shrugs and says "Beats me."
5) Whammo! Miracle!
(note: if you can spot a flaw in that logic, religion may not be for you)
Best part is that my - let's say "teasing" - tone does not detract from the fact that this is very literally what they do.
(other note: arguing about religion from an empirical standpoint is similarly ridiculous regardless of which side you pick)
You know, it's a little silly to use the word "own" to mean "exploit a vulnerability" when you are speaking in complete sentences, not substituting vaguely similar looking numbers for letters, and generally trying to sound like a grown-up.
Yeah, go figure, cheap stuff is built to lower standards than really high-end stuff.
A lot of businesses have few, if any, checks that would point out problems that could cost thousands of dollars because of a changed digit.
I would think it's extremely unlikely that such random corruption would happen on some byte somewhere which actually gets interpreted as a meaningful digit; much more likely to either corrupt some format or produce some noticeable garbage somewhere (not "wrong-yet-meaningful" data). Or just go completely unnoticed - I recently discovered (don't ask how) that you can write relatively large chunks of garbage to many parts of an excel file without producing any noticeable effect.
Why have we gone backwards in this area when compared to a mainframe system of fourty years ago?
You could ask that about almost anything: we've had some spectacular advances in audio quality, so why do we settle for lossy formats and the "passable-at-best" sound of ipods?
Due to Nyquists theorem, you are NOT copying the data, as it is not digital. You are approaching an infinite value (that of the broadcast).
I assume you are being disingenuous at this point. Copyright is a government granted monopoly on the copying and distribution of content; I can't see how it's possible to argue that recording broadcast content is not "copying". The system may be fabulously broken, but this part is pretty clear.
Also, I have a pretty hazy understanding of Nyquist's theorem, but doesn't it state that given enough bandwidth, an analog signal can be reproduced exactly from digital sampling? So, the opposite of what you seem to be implying.
The term for books is, I think "edition" rather than "version".
No, you don't understand, this one's 2.0 - it's totally, like, interweb-age and about the blagosphere... It's on the information SUPERHIGHWAY!!!
Seriously, I propose a new rule: Calling something "Foo 2.0", where "Foo" is not a piece of software, is an automatic punch in the face. (doesn't have to be hard even, just to make a point)
A DBA needs access to the machine that HR, Payroll or client data sits on, but that doesn't mean he has the right/permission/need to browse through that data at his leisure.
Not what the OP was saying - the TFS mentions "access[ing] another person's computer without permission", unless they are talking about hacking into random people's personal machines (which seems unlikely), they seem to be implying that the IT person would need a user's "permission" to access "their" PC, which is just not true. It's the company's machine, and the user is given permission to use it (in a more or less limited way, depending on the company).
Driving that point home is essential for protecting user privacy - it's not your machine, you have no expectation of privacy when using it, you don't want there to be an expectation of privacy, it's just not your machine.
Not to say it's not a dick move to go through people's stuff for fun, but they should be expecting no less from you.
(personally, I keep a ton of "personal" stuff on my work PC, but I would have no problem with every single person in the company reading every last word of it - there's nothing sensitive there)
Coders must have been gods back then to get any performance out of those machines. I miss those days! Sigh....
Unlikely, I haven't seen to many coders get any performance out of these machines recently. Whatever shape software engineering takes in the futures, I really doubt we'll be remembered as a Golden Age. (although Age of Mostly Incompetent Hacks does have a ring to it...)
So I am not holding my breath...in 20 years time, we will still have these 32-bit PCs, and a few people will have 64-bit computers and programs.
Are you serious? We've been running into the limitations of 32-bit machines for years. Almost all new servers coming out now are 64-bit, and in a couple of years virtually all desktop PCs will be as well.
Now, 64-bit might stick around for a while, yes, I am not repeating the mistakes of the past when I say that 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 bytes should be enough for anyone, for a while, at least (it's not like the progression is linear, and you do run into some physical limitations after a while).
But 32-bit machines in 20 years? That's just silly.
Slashdot Mirror
Gee, I sure hope you get to plug your fucking bead store a couple more times in this thread.
Plus the submitter managed to have a pretty good debate with himself right there in the summary - seriously, why involve us in this at all?
They had to put up with it as he was sticking by his contract and making them money.
Uh, yeah... he sure showed them!
Man, the Hall-Monitor Brigade sure is out in force today.
Hey, guess what? Fuck his label. That's a perfectly legitimate stance to take as well.
checking Torrent stats: 177GB in 1351 hours... If I was on Comcast I would barely be half-way to being banned - I feel so un-leet now.
OK, so you can only download 30 Kilosongs, 250 Kilopictures or 13 Megamails?
Megamale?
Show me a miracle!
Easy! Everyone who's canonized racks up 2 or 3 miracles. They even have a whole scientific process:
1) Someone gets diagnosed with terminal cancer
2) Asks the deceased saint-in-waiting for intercession
3) Cancer goes into remission
4) The advocatus diaboli asks a medical doctor to explain this, the doctor shrugs and says "Beats me."
5) Whammo! Miracle!
(note: if you can spot a flaw in that logic, religion may not be for you)
Best part is that my - let's say "teasing" - tone does not detract from the fact that this is very literally what they do.
(other note: arguing about religion from an empirical standpoint is similarly ridiculous regardless of which side you pick)
There have been many recent breeches
Well that's good to hear - I was afraid those things were going out of style!
You know, it's a little silly to use the word "own" to mean "exploit a vulnerability" when you are speaking in complete sentences, not substituting vaguely similar looking numbers for letters, and generally trying to sound like a grown-up.
I think this is a Wikipedia thing: the phrase "some people" automatically makes any opinion or belief valid.
Dude, that is some advanced logic acrobatics - I hope you didn't strain anything.
(PS if you sell something based on a claim, and that claim is bullshit, it's fraud)
They said many paths - MySQL is just the most common.
Yeah, go figure, cheap stuff is built to lower standards than really high-end stuff.
A lot of businesses have few, if any, checks that would point out problems that could cost thousands of dollars because of a changed digit.
I would think it's extremely unlikely that such random corruption would happen on some byte somewhere which actually gets interpreted as a meaningful digit; much more likely to either corrupt some format or produce some noticeable garbage somewhere (not "wrong-yet-meaningful" data). Or just go completely unnoticed - I recently discovered (don't ask how) that you can write relatively large chunks of garbage to many parts of an excel file without producing any noticeable effect.
Why have we gone backwards in this area when compared to a mainframe system of fourty years ago?
You could ask that about almost anything: we've had some spectacular advances in audio quality, so why do we settle for lossy formats and the "passable-at-best" sound of ipods?
Answer: It's Good Enough (TM).
Due to Nyquists theorem, you are NOT copying the data, as it is not digital. You are approaching an infinite value (that of the broadcast).
I assume you are being disingenuous at this point. Copyright is a government granted monopoly on the copying and distribution of content; I can't see how it's possible to argue that recording broadcast content is not "copying". The system may be fabulously broken, but this part is pretty clear.
Also, I have a pretty hazy understanding of Nyquist's theorem, but doesn't it state that given enough bandwidth, an analog signal can be reproduced exactly from digital sampling? So, the opposite of what you seem to be implying.
You are "copying" the show when you download it, that's why copyrights are involved (the waves have nothing to do with it).
Eh? Time to "steal" is expressed in minutes (if that).
Welcome to 3 years ago, I guess...
The term for books is, I think "edition" rather than "version".
No, you don't understand, this one's 2.0 - it's totally, like, interweb-age and about the blagosphere... It's on the information SUPERHIGHWAY!!!
Seriously, I propose a new rule: Calling something "Foo 2.0", where "Foo" is not a piece of software, is an automatic punch in the face. (doesn't have to be hard even, just to make a point)
Wait, SS2 without the creepy? That's like an FPS without the shooting - what's the point?
That was the standout thing about SS2 - how ridiculously creepy it was; other than that, it's just an average FPS.
A DBA needs access to the machine that HR, Payroll or client data sits on, but that doesn't mean he has the right/permission/need to browse through that data at his leisure.
Not what the OP was saying - the TFS mentions "access[ing] another person's computer without permission", unless they are talking about hacking into random people's personal machines (which seems unlikely), they seem to be implying that the IT person would need a user's "permission" to access "their" PC, which is just not true. It's the company's machine, and the user is given permission to use it (in a more or less limited way, depending on the company).
Driving that point home is essential for protecting user privacy - it's not your machine, you have no expectation of privacy when using it, you don't want there to be an expectation of privacy, it's just not your machine.
Not to say it's not a dick move to go through people's stuff for fun, but they should be expecting no less from you.
(personally, I keep a ton of "personal" stuff on my work PC, but I would have no problem with every single person in the company reading every last word of it - there's nothing sensitive there)
Coders must have been gods back then to get any performance out of those machines. I miss those days! Sigh....
Unlikely, I haven't seen to many coders get any performance out of these machines recently. Whatever shape software engineering takes in the futures, I really doubt we'll be remembered as a Golden Age. (although Age of Mostly Incompetent Hacks does have a ring to it...)
So I am not holding my breath...in 20 years time, we will still have these 32-bit PCs, and a few people will have 64-bit computers and programs.
Are you serious? We've been running into the limitations of 32-bit machines for years. Almost all new servers coming out now are 64-bit, and in a couple of years virtually all desktop PCs will be as well.
Now, 64-bit might stick around for a while, yes, I am not repeating the mistakes of the past when I say that 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 bytes should be enough for anyone, for a while, at least (it's not like the progression is linear, and you do run into some physical limitations after a while).
But 32-bit machines in 20 years? That's just silly.
You aren't the first to make that mistake.
Oh, so s/\$(\w+)/$b[$i]{$1}/ge; isn't good enough?
Kids these days...
This sounds pretty awesome, and I'm sure I'll be buying a lot of these.
I only have one question: what's a "CD"?