You don't need to detonated perfectly, just enough to make a pretty big boom. If you have a 10 megaton nuclear device, and you only manager to figure out how to make it have a.1 megaton explosion, you still have a pretty dangerous weapon.
How is anybody supposed to program anything with the way these patents are worded? I have no clue what they are even talking about. Each patent should be able to explain something in plain english as to what they are actually patenting.
If you don't trust entity B, then what's to stop them from just memorizing what they see and telling someone else? What's to stop them from taking photos of the computer screen? DRM doesn't and will never work, because it assumes that the recipient and attacker are the same person. If you only want B to read the document, then only send the document to B, and maybe he and you should both keep your copies encrypted on some TrueCrypt volume with a strong passphrase, but that is about as far as you can go. And if you only want final copies to be printed, maybe your software should support some kind of watermark (visible to the naked eye), that would be printed on the document until it's marked as final, possibly by some password, but even that probably isn't necessary. If someone is going to try and set the document as final, and then print out a copy purposefully, then you already have a problem. In the end, you still have to be able to trust the recipient of the file, because if somebody had a copy of the file, they could probably subvert whatever technology you throw at it to stop them.
Think about this, if it's open source, then couldn't somebody just acquire the source, change it so that the decrypted data is written out to disk, instead of stored in memory, and then recompiled? DRM is based on the premise that the user doesn't know some special secret, but the data always has to exist in memory unencrypted at some point in time for it to be processed, so it can never really work.
Exactly, if you don't trust the recipient, then you have a huge problem. Even if they have to resort to taking pictures of the screen, they will copy the design of your latest gadget. I'd say to make the design documents only available to those who really need it, and do what you can to ensure those people are trustworthy. Maybe make a double password (or even physical key) system so that two people have to be there for the design to be seen. This would require collusion on both their parts, and the risk of asking the other guy to go in on your plan might be too great.
Well, I started with QBasic back in highschool, because it was already on all the computers. I don't think I ended up that bad in the end. I don't think the problem is with what languages you learn, but how you learn to use them.
The hard part is determining the proper fine to fit the crime, if you try to factor in the probability of being caught, then that doesn't do much to stop the smarter than average crimnal. There's a lot of dumb criminals. So if you for instance, say that 20% of people get caught stealing, but then somebody sets up an organized crime unit, in which they only get caught 10% of the time, and only the lower members of the crime unit get caught, then the big kingpin has found an easy way to make money.
I think it's easy for ISPs to show people how many GB they have currently used. Just have a web page they can visit that shows them how much they have used for the current billing cycle, along with a nice graph showing how much they have used each day. Also, have an application that runs in the system try that queries their system every hour, or other predefined period in time to show how much they have used. You wouldn't even need to log in, because they could identify you by your IP Address. You wouldn't have to visit the webpage, or run this application to show your current usage, but then you couldn't complain that you didn't know you were over the limit.
Well, the punishment always has to be worse than what someone did, otherwise they may just keep on doing it. If someone steals $500, you can't just fine them $500. Because then they would just run around stealing $500 from everybody, and keeping the profit from those which they weren't caught from. No, you make the punishment $10,000 fine, or a month in jail (where they can't work so they lose money) so that it's too much risk for most people to do it
How many people are going to start up their computer to find a completely new browser that they never asked for? If you know it's going to be installed, you can stop it. But I think there's a whole lot of people who will have no idea that it's going to be installed.
I'm not sure why anyone thinks it's a good idea to use IE as an application platform. Sure standard HTML forms with CSS are fine, but why would you rely on IE specific features? You know that in a few years when MS reworks IE that you are going to have to rework your application to work on it. Also, there's a lot of other issues like limiting your user base.
I use hibernate every night to shut my computer down. I guess I'm one of the lucky ones. I've known a lot of computers where hibernate simply doesn't work. This lets me conserve power and come back to a computer that is just how I left it.
why would you want to give robots feelings? I mean the novelty would be great, but the whole point is to make robots that do our bidding, not ones that go around moping half the time. Tell the computer to render some 3d movie and having it tell you it doesn't feel like it today is not the way I want my computer to act.
That's really weird that this appeared on Slashdot tonite, just as I was downloading the historical weather data for Canada. Still waiting for it to download. I was thinking that it would be a nice data set that would be interesting to work with. It's not a huge dataset by any means, only 200 MB zipped, but it's still bigger and more real than any of the stuff I got to use in university. And a lot larger than any real data set I could generate on my own. Does anybody else have any links to interesting open data sets?
That'll never happen. Scientists know that unions are for people who hate their job, and don't actually want to do any work. Scientists at least most that I've met, love their jobs, and love to actually work while at their job.
Yes, it would be ridiculous. It's not quite 30 inches, but it's still huge. Seriously I don't know why people buy these things. Buy a smaller laptop and hook it up to the big screen when you get to the office/home.
So basically if they were able to do the same thing with people, they would just be creating and exact duplicate of the person. Now that could be useful.
That's only if you think learning new things is actually not downtime. I personally find it very relaxing to read about some new technology, or try out some new thing, without having any specific project to complete.
The debugger is probably the most important tool I have encountered for programming. I'll often step through my own code on the first run just to make sure my logic is correct. This is especially true for.Net where you can notice logic errors before they happen, fix them, and keep right on running the code. Saves tons of time over build,run, crash, find bug, fix bug, start over. Now it's just build,run, fix bug,continue. You can even rewind from exceptions to before it was thrown. I find it amazing that I got through most of university without a debugger, and that none of my courses never mentioned the importance of using a debugger.
Why not just have the developer read the.Net MSDN docs for the.Net API. It's not like anything they are doing is extremely complicated. You should be able to get things almost identical by just reading the.Net API docs. Granted, there's a lot of functionality, and it would take quite an effort to code all that, especially considering Microsoft's tendency to continuously add to the API, but it's not something that you would need to see the source to implement.
What is wrong with VB.Net? It has exactly the same feature set as C#. I realize that it was bad in the past, but it's grown up quite a bit since the old days.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't need to detonated perfectly, just enough to make a pretty big boom. If you have a 10 megaton nuclear device, and you only manager to figure out how to make it have a .1 megaton explosion, you still have a pretty dangerous weapon.
How is anybody supposed to program anything with the way these patents are worded? I have no clue what they are even talking about. Each patent should be able to explain something in plain english as to what they are actually patenting.
If you don't trust entity B, then what's to stop them from just memorizing what they see and telling someone else? What's to stop them from taking photos of the computer screen? DRM doesn't and will never work, because it assumes that the recipient and attacker are the same person. If you only want B to read the document, then only send the document to B, and maybe he and you should both keep your copies encrypted on some TrueCrypt volume with a strong passphrase, but that is about as far as you can go. And if you only want final copies to be printed, maybe your software should support some kind of watermark (visible to the naked eye), that would be printed on the document until it's marked as final, possibly by some password, but even that probably isn't necessary. If someone is going to try and set the document as final, and then print out a copy purposefully, then you already have a problem. In the end, you still have to be able to trust the recipient of the file, because if somebody had a copy of the file, they could probably subvert whatever technology you throw at it to stop them.
Think about this, if it's open source, then couldn't somebody just acquire the source, change it so that the decrypted data is written out to disk, instead of stored in memory, and then recompiled? DRM is based on the premise that the user doesn't know some special secret, but the data always has to exist in memory unencrypted at some point in time for it to be processed, so it can never really work.
Exactly, if you don't trust the recipient, then you have a huge problem. Even if they have to resort to taking pictures of the screen, they will copy the design of your latest gadget. I'd say to make the design documents only available to those who really need it, and do what you can to ensure those people are trustworthy. Maybe make a double password (or even physical key) system so that two people have to be there for the design to be seen. This would require collusion on both their parts, and the risk of asking the other guy to go in on your plan might be too great.
Well, I started with QBasic back in highschool, because it was already on all the computers. I don't think I ended up that bad in the end. I don't think the problem is with what languages you learn, but how you learn to use them.
The hard part is determining the proper fine to fit the crime, if you try to factor in the probability of being caught, then that doesn't do much to stop the smarter than average crimnal. There's a lot of dumb criminals. So if you for instance, say that 20% of people get caught stealing, but then somebody sets up an organized crime unit, in which they only get caught 10% of the time, and only the lower members of the crime unit get caught, then the big kingpin has found an easy way to make money.
I think it's easy for ISPs to show people how many GB they have currently used. Just have a web page they can visit that shows them how much they have used for the current billing cycle, along with a nice graph showing how much they have used each day. Also, have an application that runs in the system try that queries their system every hour, or other predefined period in time to show how much they have used. You wouldn't even need to log in, because they could identify you by your IP Address. You wouldn't have to visit the webpage, or run this application to show your current usage, but then you couldn't complain that you didn't know you were over the limit.
Well, the punishment always has to be worse than what someone did, otherwise they may just keep on doing it. If someone steals $500, you can't just fine them $500. Because then they would just run around stealing $500 from everybody, and keeping the profit from those which they weren't caught from. No, you make the punishment $10,000 fine, or a month in jail (where they can't work so they lose money) so that it's too much risk for most people to do it
How many people are going to start up their computer to find a completely new browser that they never asked for? If you know it's going to be installed, you can stop it. But I think there's a whole lot of people who will have no idea that it's going to be installed.
Wow, I'm a web developer, and I wasn't even aware there was a button element. Looks kind of useful, any information on which browsers support it?
I'm not sure why anyone thinks it's a good idea to use IE as an application platform. Sure standard HTML forms with CSS are fine, but why would you rely on IE specific features? You know that in a few years when MS reworks IE that you are going to have to rework your application to work on it. Also, there's a lot of other issues like limiting your user base.
I use hibernate every night to shut my computer down. I guess I'm one of the lucky ones. I've known a lot of computers where hibernate simply doesn't work. This lets me conserve power and come back to a computer that is just how I left it.
Microsoft seems to have figured it out. They shut down my computer for me quite often to do updates.
why would you want to give robots feelings? I mean the novelty would be great, but the whole point is to make robots that do our bidding, not ones that go around moping half the time. Tell the computer to render some 3d movie and having it tell you it doesn't feel like it today is not the way I want my computer to act.
That's really weird that this appeared on Slashdot tonite, just as I was downloading the historical weather data for Canada. Still waiting for it to download. I was thinking that it would be a nice data set that would be interesting to work with. It's not a huge dataset by any means, only 200 MB zipped, but it's still bigger and more real than any of the stuff I got to use in university. And a lot larger than any real data set I could generate on my own. Does anybody else have any links to interesting open data sets?
That'll never happen. Scientists know that unions are for people who hate their job, and don't actually want to do any work. Scientists at least most that I've met, love their jobs, and love to actually work while at their job.
Yes, it would be ridiculous. It's not quite 30 inches, but it's still huge. Seriously I don't know why people buy these things. Buy a smaller laptop and hook it up to the big screen when you get to the office/home.
So basically if they were able to do the same thing with people, they would just be creating and exact duplicate of the person. Now that could be useful.
That's only if you think learning new things is actually not downtime. I personally find it very relaxing to read about some new technology, or try out some new thing, without having any specific project to complete.
The debugger is probably the most important tool I have encountered for programming. I'll often step through my own code on the first run just to make sure my logic is correct. This is especially true for .Net where you can notice logic errors before they happen, fix them, and keep right on running the code. Saves tons of time over build,run, crash, find bug, fix bug, start over. Now it's just build,run, fix bug,continue. You can even rewind from exceptions to before it was thrown. I find it amazing that I got through most of university without a debugger, and that none of my courses never mentioned the importance of using a debugger.
What also makes no sense is the government trying to control how much Amazon can sell their products for.
Why not just have the developer read the .Net MSDN docs for the .Net API. It's not like anything they are doing is extremely complicated. You should be able to get things almost identical by just reading the .Net API docs. Granted, there's a lot of functionality, and it would take quite an effort to code all that, especially considering Microsoft's tendency to continuously add to the API, but it's not something that you would need to see the source to implement.
How long will it take somebody to sniff the protocol with Wireshark, and figure out how to download all the source code?
What is wrong with VB.Net? It has exactly the same feature set as C#. I realize that it was bad in the past, but it's grown up quite a bit since the old days.