The EU is working pretty well? Where? When? How? All I see is a means for governments to get laws (or binding directives, same shit different pile) passed on the EU level that they'd never get through their own legislature, at least not without friction. This way, they'll shamelessly deny ever having known about this and blame everything on the EU, the unfathomable hydra of beaurocracy. I guess in that respect, it works. For some.
If someone is hell-bent on writing shitty, unreadable code, it doesn't matter what language they're writing it in. Sure, C++ will give you a few extra tools to commit crimes with, but just using C's preprocessor, you can so massively obfuscate your code so as to make it entirely incomprehensible even without malicious templates and impishly overloaded operators.
Is any of that the fault of the language, or are you just blaming it for offering many powerful tools? And have you ever tried debugging or understanding a messy java project with 5000 files that does little more than a properly written C++ project with 20 files? I have. The language doens't matter.
In conclusion: blame idiotic programmers, not their tools.
Or they could ask those crazy guys from Finland. Their CGI in such movies as Star Wreck and Iron Sky looks pretty damn convincing, and as I understand it, their budget was pretty small, compared to the result. And for the former, they actually did B5 CGI...
An alternative to restoring the bundle is for each user of the "big party line" to "recognize the voice" of those who can give it instructions - and have a list of what instructions each can give it. I won't go into details, but there is ample room for design here. An interloper would be reduced to trying to "mimic the voice" of a talker with enough authority to command the action, or DOSing by "shouting over" legitimate commands.
Not with CAN. CAN has no concept of a sender address. It is thus impossible to determine where a CAN telegram originated.
Calm down, Rumpelstiltskin. Otherwise, someone will probably come and repeatedly kick you in the ass until such time that you agree that every crime should be punished regardless of how it relates to what some Wallstreet assholes did or do.
It's a problem because it requires programmers to concern themselves with low-level tedious details that the compiler could handle for them
So basically your statement can be reduced to is "If you're lazy and stupid, don't use C". I'm fine with that. But I'd like to add that if you're lazy and stupid, don't program at all, become a manager.
C is especially bad because the language doesn't even have a way to talk about the size of an array. When you pass an array to a function, all size info is lost. This sucks.
How is that a problem? Pass the size in a separate variable. Put the array in a struct and add a member for the size. Or add a function to your struct that returns the size. Whatever. The possibilities are there. If you don't use them because programming in C is less cushy than in other languages, the fault is entirely yours. There is nothing in C preventing you from writing proper code. You just have to do it, with the understanding that it will be more work. But it's hardly impossible.
That's exactly the problem. If you think to add features first, security later you have already made a fundamental mistake. Writing secure code is not a matter of adding extra checking later. It means writing good, proper code right from the start. One of the most obvious consequences of that is not to use functions like sprintf at all, but use substitutes that allow and in fact demand proper length checking.
My $0.05: Of course managers never see a business case for adding security checking later. There is no obvious way it will make the company more money, so something "more important" will take precedent. But on the other hand, not writing secure code right from the start also means the programmer is not making a habit of writing good code. It shows a serious problem with their attitude toward their own work. That is not to say that there won't still be mistakes made, but a lot of them can be prevented right from the start.
Then you are an incompetent idiot. I even said HIPAA (properly spelled) in the post you referred to. HIPAA When you can spell it correctly, we might have considered you "familiar" with it. When you can't even spell it correctly in reply to a post that used it spelled correctly, I find it quite hard to believe anything else you say. You obviously rate your skills higher than you can demonstrate.
I have absolutely no knowledge or opinion on this whole matter, but seeing you argue like and presenting a spelling error as your main argument makes me think you are the idiot:)
For me it is the fact that I don't want to babysit another computer. My telephone should allow me to send and receive messages and calls. Everything else, to me, is superfluous. Is that such a big deal?
Slashdot Mirror
The EU is working pretty well? Where? When? How? All I see is a means for governments to get laws (or binding directives, same shit different pile) passed on the EU level that they'd never get through their own legislature, at least not without friction. This way, they'll shamelessly deny ever having known about this and blame everything on the EU, the unfathomable hydra of beaurocracy. I guess in that respect, it works. For some.
If someone is hell-bent on writing shitty, unreadable code, it doesn't matter what language they're writing it in. Sure, C++ will give you a few extra tools to commit crimes with, but just using C's preprocessor, you can so massively obfuscate your code so as to make it entirely incomprehensible even without malicious templates and impishly overloaded operators. Is any of that the fault of the language, or are you just blaming it for offering many powerful tools? And have you ever tried debugging or understanding a messy java project with 5000 files that does little more than a properly written C++ project with 20 files? I have. The language doens't matter. In conclusion: blame idiotic programmers, not their tools.
Or they could ask those crazy guys from Finland. Their CGI in such movies as Star Wreck and Iron Sky looks pretty damn convincing, and as I understand it, their budget was pretty small, compared to the result. And for the former, they actually did B5 CGI...
Even after all those years I still hear the voices of the actors in my head as I read that. That's true love 3
Bro, do you even RTFA?
Bro, this is slashdot - do you even have to ask?
An alternative to restoring the bundle is for each user of the "big party line" to "recognize the voice" of those who can give it instructions - and have a list of what instructions each can give it. I won't go into details, but there is ample room for design here. An interloper would be reduced to trying to "mimic the voice" of a talker with enough authority to command the action, or DOSing by "shouting over" legitimate commands.
Not with CAN. CAN has no concept of a sender address. It is thus impossible to determine where a CAN telegram originated.
That would have been so impressive if at least one of your links worked ;]
The problem is, every time a problem is solved, the definition of true AI changes.
Did the turing test change recently? Hadn't noticed. Did someone inform Marvin Minsky?
viruses not virii. You sound like an idiot.
The problem is, you break doesn't machines much finer then you do the human brain.
Please stop! I can't take any more of this!
Calm down, Rumpelstiltskin. Otherwise, someone will probably come and repeatedly kick you in the ass until such time that you agree that every crime should be punished regardless of how it relates to what some Wallstreet assholes did or do.
No true scotsman would read that.
No, that's what's wrong with people claiming to use agile methods and in reality just acting without plan and reason :)
It's a problem because it requires programmers to concern themselves with low-level tedious details that the compiler could handle for them
So basically your statement can be reduced to is "If you're lazy and stupid, don't use C". I'm fine with that. But I'd like to add that if you're lazy and stupid, don't program at all, become a manager.
Perhaps "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" :>
C is especially bad because the language doesn't even have a way to talk about the size of an array. When you pass an array to a function, all size info is lost. This sucks.
How is that a problem? Pass the size in a separate variable. Put the array in a struct and add a member for the size. Or add a function to your struct that returns the size. Whatever. The possibilities are there. If you don't use them because programming in C is less cushy than in other languages, the fault is entirely yours. There is nothing in C preventing you from writing proper code. You just have to do it, with the understanding that it will be more work. But it's hardly impossible.
That's exactly the problem. If you think to add features first, security later you have already made a fundamental mistake. Writing secure code is not a matter of adding extra checking later. It means writing good, proper code right from the start. One of the most obvious consequences of that is not to use functions like sprintf at all, but use substitutes that allow and in fact demand proper length checking.
My $0.05: Of course managers never see a business case for adding security checking later. There is no obvious way it will make the company more money, so something "more important" will take precedent. But on the other hand, not writing secure code right from the start also means the programmer is not making a habit of writing good code. It shows a serious problem with their attitude toward their own work. That is not to say that there won't still be mistakes made, but a lot of them can be prevented right from the start.
Perhaps to save you from your own stupidity? After all, one of the responsibilities of any government is to protect its citizens.
More research required! To the fapmobile!
If you have ads on your fridge.. and it runs android... You'd have apps, right? But an app on a fridge - wouldn't it keep freezing? :O
It is a socialist country you know.
I really wonder what you're smoking :)
Then you are an incompetent idiot. I even said HIPAA (properly spelled) in the post you referred to. HIPAA When you can spell it correctly, we might have considered you "familiar" with it. When you can't even spell it correctly in reply to a post that used it spelled correctly, I find it quite hard to believe anything else you say. You obviously rate your skills higher than you can demonstrate.
I have absolutely no knowledge or opinion on this whole matter, but seeing you argue like and presenting a spelling error as your main argument makes me think you are the idiot :)
Probably the same...
I see what you did there. Nice strawman.
Oh you can still get a super dumb phone that can only do calls. It's those phones with huge keys and an emergency button for elderly people!
For me it is the fact that I don't want to babysit another computer. My telephone should allow me to send and receive messages and calls. Everything else, to me, is superfluous. Is that such a big deal?