Every public distribution channel is amateur hour, open source or commercial.
This. If the download is compromised, it doesn't matter how secure the source is. Maybe what you thought was XCode is actually a CIA rootkit.
Why is there no gpg signature on Eclipse.org downloads? Why are the jars in the eclipse executable even signed if the signatures are not verified by default in Eclipse? Why does the Oracle Java 8 ppa:webupd8team for Ubuntu download and install from http sources just after I typed in sudo?
If you create encryption, it makes it harder for the American government to do its job -- while protecting civil liberties -- to make sure that evildoers arenâ(TM)t in our midst
That sounds like a threat... "If you make encryption, we won't bother with protecting civil liberties any more."
Client-side end-to-end encryption using perfect forward secrecy is the only thing we can "trust" now, sadly.
I believe that's only as secure as your PRNG. So I would go one step further and say that statement only applies on systems built from free open source software. Microsoft, Apple, and Google could remotely install/remove whatever they want on your hardware, behind your back, without you knowing it. All three are known "friends of NSA" and the OP makes a very good point. Most of what is being discussed is theater, and it is theater designed to rebuild trust in these traitors.
Funny. This is how Google plays the tax laws. They're perfectly okay with all the different national tax codes when it allows them to avoid paying taxes. Eric Schmidt has been very clear that Google is just obeying the law! Well Eric, this is the law in France. You should just obey it, yes?
Oh, I'm so sorry America. I just paid my legally required taxes in Ireland, so I don't owe you anything despite having made most of my revenue from your nation and hiring most of your programmers to do it for me. --Google
I'm just curious, why do you think their machine learning algorithms are "shoddy"?
You type in gorillas and you get pictures of things that definitely aren't gorillas. The fact that it's highly offensive is just icing on the cake.
Likewise, job ads, ideally, would be shown to the best candidates, not necessarily the users most likely to click them... as you have speculated. HR is drowning in bullshit resumes as it is. Ads that produce more bullshit resumes from unqualified candidates who click/submit on everything will not be worth much to any company.
Without your pure speculation that the click through is what is driving the difference, all you're left with is an insinuation by the output of Google's algorithm that men are six times more likely than women to be good candidates for highly paid jobs... Which, again, simply isn't true and again, highly offensive.
That's what I would ask him. "No secret messages? Then how do you feel about Manning leaking your secret messages then? And Snowden? You must be in favor of a full pardon for those guys, yes? How do you plan to explain the shutdown and/or hacking of every Internet web server in your entire country, because you've outlawed SSH? Also, were you born with brain damage or did you acquire that at some later point in life?":)
"Google has a gun pointed at my head. They haven't promised not to pull the trigger, but they haven't pull the trigger yet. So I've got that going for me." -- AI software developer
Well at least you explained why you thought those things were relevant.
False cause: I didn't speculate on cause. I noted effect. Fact: Google software called black people gorillas. Fact: Google software discriminated against women.
Appeal to emotion: I'm not asking anyone to act. In fact, I'm questioning why YOU are acting, by making excuses for Google. I did not speculate about that, since it would be ad hominem.
Slippery slope: I never implied Google will cause skynet. I asked where your personal limit to tolerate Google's shoddy machine learning algorithms is located. The extreme end of which, would be skynet.
What is it going to take before you no longer feel compelled to make excuses for them? Do they have to go skynet on everyone before you think that *maybe* they should be a little more careful with their AI algorithms? Or is it simpler than that? Maybe they just have to negatively impact a few white male programmers for you to get upset about it.
While this is true in many cases, the angel investor of today has generally got priority on returns from any sale of a startup today. It's very different from the publicly traded dot com bust according to articles I've read on the subject. If "the bubble" pops this time, some investors will be hurt if they can't sell the startup. However, if the startup is sold for what was invested, the people left holding the bag will be the employees working for little more that stock options and a dream of a big exit. Those people will have worked months/years and will get no return. Their shares will be effectively worthless.
Join a startup when times are good expecting times to stay good seems like a good way to get burned. (buy high, sell low) Joining a startup accepting that there is inherent risk in what you are doing is, as always, a gamble. (penny stocks) Joining a mid to large size company with a legacy code base that has to be maintained by some old master in a particular language/framework/architecture seems the safest route to steady income, but you'll never become really wealthy. (Bonds) Catching the hype wave and riding it into newer, higher paid positions has great returns until your wave turns out to be a dud. (Stocks) In 2005 it was web apps, in 2010 it was mobile apps, in 2015 it looks like machine learning. If you bet on HTML5 apps in 2010*, you struggled. Many did.
*Flame away HTML5 people. HTML5 didn't make $40000 a day on flappy birds and iFarts. I know those are exceptions, but employers eat that stuff up. Salary studies that I saw reflected this.
XCode is pwned. Android Developer Tools are unsigned. The Android SDK and tools are unsigned. That makes me sad because I work with these tools. I can assume my systems are all pwned at this point and act accordingly...
LOL, you didn't even read the specs did you? 6th gen intel processor. Not haswell. Not new 5th gen broadwell. 6th gen skylake. If anything, it's so cutting edge, I'd worry about it shipping in time for xmas given Intel's lousy track record with broadwell.
Also, 970m isn't going anywhere any time soon. It's going to be early/mid 2016 at the soonest before Pascal GPUs ship out of nvidia.
Also(!) Zotac tends to ship barebones systems in addition to full systems. Don't like the RAM/disk provided? Get a barebones and choose your own.
Linux desktop/gaming/etc. They don't just have linux games. They're going to be shipping linux hardware! Nice hardware. I'm excited to see titles like Dying Light treating Linux as first class citizens.
There are counter points to just about everything you've said.
1. Really? You don't know how to do html/css without javascript? Your SEO must be shit, m8.
2. All those 'rich' libraries are great until they don't work on IE8 or Chrome 37.0.20341. I especially love when stuff that worked fine years ago is broken today because browser updates changed the internal perfomance characteristics of the javascript vm. Simply put, doing too much on the client puts you at the mercy of client configuration changes which you have no control over.
3. Libraries, that was your argument in #2 wasn't it? Compare libraries available to Java vs Javascript on the server side. Best tool for the job, right? Sounds like you found yourself a golden hammer.
4. Can you really? How do you replicate the declaritive html5 form validation on the server? And is it really a good idea sharing your validation code, bugs and all, with the client? Sounds like a major security problem to me.
5. Let's see how your sorting goes on a table with a million rows client side.. if you're batshit crazy enough to even try that. Most of what you mentioned should and generally does get written in SQL, not JS.
6. lol, now that's just bait
Performance... you're funny. Tell me about your performance when your server falls over with memory problems and you don't have anything like visualvm to figure out why. Don't get me wrong, Java sucks in its own special ways, but I'd never choose Javascript as my primary language.
So, you've basically said that anything that relies on observations of nature is not a science.
What I'm saying is very simple. Science is the application of the scientific method. The scientific method is very well defined. Forming a hypothesis and then claiming your statistical model predicts what your hypothesis says is not an application of the scientific method. That misses several key steps.
Feel free to react with further hostility, logical fallacies, and sticking words in my mouth if you like.
Comparing it to the data, from 1967 on... looks like the experimental result matches the prediction.
Nice, an experiment. So if you could just show me where your control group is. You know, the control group that had no increase in CO2 and no increase in warming? Because, if you don't have one, how do I know some other factor didn't cause the warming you observed?
That's not science at all. That's little more than a statistical model. These guys believe they have their answer and are trying to fit all observations to it.
That's a description of deniers. That's not the way climate science is done.
The reason we believe that the model is more or less accurate is that there are terabytes of data confirming it. The reason we don't believe that alternative models are accurate is that there aren't any.
This is exactly what I pointing out. You feed data into a statistical model and call it science. You haven't conducted an experiment with a control group. You have no scientific proof. You have nothing but a statistical correlation.
Slashdot Mirror
1600 bombs ... tens of thousands of strikes
Stopped reading. Bullshit detector went off. Questionable math. Lacking citation.
Yes, exactly. There is no market without a government first setting the rules. If the rules are rigged for an elite few, then everyone else is guaranteed to lose.
Every public distribution channel is amateur hour, open source or commercial.
This. If the download is compromised, it doesn't matter how secure the source is. Maybe what you thought was XCode is actually a CIA rootkit.
Why is there no gpg signature on Eclipse.org downloads? Why are the jars in the eclipse executable even signed if the signatures are not verified by default in Eclipse? Why does the Oracle Java 8 ppa:webupd8team for Ubuntu download and install from http sources just after I typed in sudo?
That sounds like a threat... "If you make encryption, we won't bother with protecting civil liberties any more."
Client-side end-to-end encryption using perfect forward secrecy is the only thing we can "trust" now, sadly.
I believe that's only as secure as your PRNG. So I would go one step further and say that statement only applies on systems built from free open source software. Microsoft, Apple, and Google could remotely install/remove whatever they want on your hardware, behind your back, without you knowing it. All three are known "friends of NSA" and the OP makes a very good point. Most of what is being discussed is theater, and it is theater designed to rebuild trust in these traitors.
Funny. This is how Google plays the tax laws. They're perfectly okay with all the different national tax codes when it allows them to avoid paying taxes. Eric Schmidt has been very clear that Google is just obeying the law! Well Eric, this is the law in France. You should just obey it, yes?
I'm just curious, why do you think their machine learning algorithms are "shoddy"?
You type in gorillas and you get pictures of things that definitely aren't gorillas. The fact that it's highly offensive is just icing on the cake.
Likewise, job ads, ideally, would be shown to the best candidates, not necessarily the users most likely to click them... as you have speculated. HR is drowning in bullshit resumes as it is. Ads that produce more bullshit resumes from unqualified candidates who click/submit on everything will not be worth much to any company.
Without your pure speculation that the click through is what is driving the difference, all you're left with is an insinuation by the output of Google's algorithm that men are six times more likely than women to be good candidates for highly paid jobs... Which, again, simply isn't true and again, highly offensive.
That's what I would ask him. "No secret messages? Then how do you feel about Manning leaking your secret messages then? And Snowden? You must be in favor of a full pardon for those guys, yes? How do you plan to explain the shutdown and/or hacking of every Internet web server in your entire country, because you've outlawed SSH? Also, were you born with brain damage or did you acquire that at some later point in life?" :)
"Google has a gun pointed at my head. They haven't promised not to pull the trigger, but they haven't pull the trigger yet. So I've got that going for me." -- AI software developer
Request for prior art on Google patent application. Don't let Google point a gun at our heads. Get their patent applications rejected with prior art.
Well at least you explained why you thought those things were relevant.
False cause: I didn't speculate on cause. I noted effect. Fact: Google software called black people gorillas. Fact: Google software discriminated against women.
Appeal to emotion: I'm not asking anyone to act. In fact, I'm questioning why YOU are acting, by making excuses for Google. I did not speculate about that, since it would be ad hominem.
Slippery slope: I never implied Google will cause skynet. I asked where your personal limit to tolerate Google's shoddy machine learning algorithms is located. The extreme end of which, would be skynet.
Thanks for sending three links that are not as relevant as you think they are. :)
However it happened, the end effect is the same. First Google called black people gorillas, now they discriminate against women.
What is it going to take before you no longer feel compelled to make excuses for them? Do they have to go skynet on everyone before you think that *maybe* they should be a little more careful with their AI algorithms? Or is it simpler than that? Maybe they just have to negatively impact a few white male programmers for you to get upset about it.
Since the Obj-C tools will not be maintained.
This. Got a large codebase in Obj-C? You'll be hung out to dry. Remember WebObjects? Of course you don't.
While this is true in many cases, the angel investor of today has generally got priority on returns from any sale of a startup today. It's very different from the publicly traded dot com bust according to articles I've read on the subject. If "the bubble" pops this time, some investors will be hurt if they can't sell the startup. However, if the startup is sold for what was invested, the people left holding the bag will be the employees working for little more that stock options and a dream of a big exit. Those people will have worked months/years and will get no return. Their shares will be effectively worthless.
Join a startup when times are good expecting times to stay good seems like a good way to get burned. (buy high, sell low) Joining a startup accepting that there is inherent risk in what you are doing is, as always, a gamble. (penny stocks) Joining a mid to large size company with a legacy code base that has to be maintained by some old master in a particular language/framework/architecture seems the safest route to steady income, but you'll never become really wealthy. (Bonds) Catching the hype wave and riding it into newer, higher paid positions has great returns until your wave turns out to be a dud. (Stocks) In 2005 it was web apps, in 2010 it was mobile apps, in 2015 it looks like machine learning. If you bet on HTML5 apps in 2010*, you struggled. Many did.
*Flame away HTML5 people. HTML5 didn't make $40000 a day on flappy birds and iFarts. I know those are exceptions, but employers eat that stuff up. Salary studies that I saw reflected this.
Me too. Car, house, mailbox. We should probably add a yubikey though.
XCode is pwned. Android Developer Tools are unsigned. The Android SDK and tools are unsigned. That makes me sad because I work with these tools. I can assume my systems are all pwned at this point and act accordingly...
outdated by November 2015
LOL, you didn't even read the specs did you? 6th gen intel processor. Not haswell. Not new 5th gen broadwell. 6th gen skylake. If anything, it's so cutting edge, I'd worry about it shipping in time for xmas given Intel's lousy track record with broadwell.
Also, 970m isn't going anywhere any time soon. It's going to be early/mid 2016 at the soonest before Pascal GPUs ship out of nvidia.
Also(!) Zotac tends to ship barebones systems in addition to full systems. Don't like the RAM/disk provided? Get a barebones and choose your own.
n/t
Linux desktop/gaming/etc. They don't just have linux games. They're going to be shipping linux hardware! Nice hardware. I'm excited to see titles like Dying Light treating Linux as first class citizens.
Uber has something others have too... employees. They just don't want to admit it.
Java on the client has been dead for a very long time already. When the FBI wants to pwn you, they use Javascript security flaws. about:config javascript.enabled=false
Performance... you're funny. Tell me about your performance when your server falls over with memory problems and you don't have anything like visualvm to figure out why. Don't get me wrong, Java sucks in its own special ways, but I'd never choose Javascript as my primary language.
So, you've basically said that anything that relies on observations of nature is not a science.
What I'm saying is very simple. Science is the application of the scientific method. The scientific method is very well defined. Forming a hypothesis and then claiming your statistical model predicts what your hypothesis says is not an application of the scientific method. That misses several key steps.
Feel free to react with further hostility, logical fallacies, and sticking words in my mouth if you like.
You are talking about one small vein of climate science -- and creating and testing models is actually science.
Nope. It is statistics. Science involves experimentation with a control group. Building statistical models is not science.
Comparing it to the data, from 1967 on... looks like the experimental result matches the prediction.
Nice, an experiment. So if you could just show me where your control group is. You know, the control group that had no increase in CO2 and no increase in warming? Because, if you don't have one, how do I know some other factor didn't cause the warming you observed?
That's not science at all. That's little more than a statistical model. These guys believe they have their answer and are trying to fit all observations to it.
That's a description of deniers. That's not the way climate science is done.
The reason we believe that the model is more or less accurate is that there are terabytes of data confirming it. The reason we don't believe that alternative models are accurate is that there aren't any.
This is exactly what I pointing out. You feed data into a statistical model and call it science. You haven't conducted an experiment with a control group. You have no scientific proof. You have nothing but a statistical correlation.