... he/she/it is already confused. This is just more confusion on its part. Perhaps it should learn some physics and try and figure out just how much energy and rocket power it would take to get a city destroying sized rock off the ground even in the moons 1/6 G assuming anything big and sturdy enough could be built on the moon to carry it.
Quite. The fact that there are so many idiots on here who not only didn't know this but didn't know how to find out is quite staggering. Ubuntu has a lot to answer for IMO.
Thanks for proving my point in my original post about ignorant fools with no clue about security.
Newsflash: claims only need supporting if there's no way for 3rd parties to independently verify them. But here, especially for dumb special needs kids like you who can't use a search engine:
So the chrome_sandbox binary being owned by root and having the setuid bit set is an "extraordinary claim" is it snowflake? No, its a fact. I don't need to cite anything. 5 seconds with google will tell you everything you need to know and if you're too bone idle to bother then thats your problem, not mine.
With morons like you people using linux now its no surprising exploits are increasing. Check the chrome_sandbox binary owner and setuid bit (know what that is? No? Look it up) then buy yourself a ticket on the cluetrain you clueless gimp.
Chrome requires its sandbox process to run as root. Well not on my systems it isn't. Won't run? Tough , I'll just use one of the many alternatives then.
Apparently google thinks is code is 100% exploit and bug free and don't see an issue with having a user application requiring superuser priviledges. Utter morons. And anyone who says to me "but its not the browser, its the sandbox" obviously know the square root of fuck all about security so don't even bother me with your ignorant opinions.
There will always be lazy people regardless of gender. However my wife has trouble carrying ONE of the shopping bags I bring back from the supermarket. I carry four of them at once.
No it isn't. I've seen their limits and they're not high. A lot of them can't even do a single pull up. Sure, some get a few muscles but usually they're for endurance, not strength. I doubt those women skiers would manage a particularly impressive squat.
I'd sooner have a few years less life due to testosterone than be as physically weak as most women are. Even the ones I see down the gym seem to have little more strength than I did when I was maybe 12 or 13. I can't imagine being that feeble all your life.
Its very easy to talk about money not mattering and wanting an interesting life when you don't have to worry about rent or bills. Part of being an adult is accepting responsibility for your own fate and - unless you want to live in a hut in the woods or a park bench - than means finding the money to pay the above.
The "gig" economy is just (usually rich) hipster talk for dead end park time McJobs thats been repackaged and remarketed for the latest gullible generation of 20 somethings who haven't yet wised up.
That ONLY applies if you're using the class in the main program, NOT if its just used in my library which is the whole point. Sorry, is recompiling when a header file changes such as advanced concept for you that you thought it required explicit confirmation? I'm afraid I thought I was having a discussion with someone who had a clue, clearly I was wrong.
As for getting some knowledge sonny, I've been doing unix systems programming in C & C++ for 2 decades , unlike I suspect you, who's probably dabbled for a few weeks or read a few chapters in Stevens and now you think you're an expert.
But anyway thanks for the entertainment. Like I said, your handle has been noted and we're all going to be watching for further of your "expert" pronouncements;) Over and out script kiddy and don't bother responding , I won't be reading this thread again.
How exactly did I change it? If the main program is using the class and the class definition changes in the.h file then obviously it'll need a recompile. Thats so fucking obvious I didn't think it even needed stating to a so called expert like you.
Apples and Oranges. Colour TV was a qualitative improvement on B&W. Musks idea isn't any sort of improvement on flying and in fact I can't imagine many people wanting to use in preference to flying or just taking a normal train. Sure, that might change in the future, but the Wright Brothers didn't spend the GBP of a large country creating their first aircraft hoping it would be an instant hit.
"The same dose of realism that told people that reusable rockets would never work ?"
I'm not saying it won't work, I'm saying the costs will be so ridiculously high for so little benefit that I just don't see the point. Rockets got man into space, somewhere he'd never been before. This gets man from A to B just like an airliner and at the same speed. And thats worth spending trillions on is it? I don't think so.
If he really wanted to improve US transportation he'd invest in some 200+mph railways that europe and japan have had for decades which have pretty much killed off a lot of short distance air routes.
"Even when the project fails, that knowledge can be used in other projects, either related or totally unrelated"
Possibly. But the chance of some useful niche tech as a side effect is hardly reason to blow the amount of money that this will cost.
"That is the great thing about having billionaires with the curiosity of engineers."
Yes, but a dose of realism helps. His hyperloop would require the longest tunnel ever built by a significant margin, NASA spec pressure vessels and motors that can function in a vacuum and some as yet undecided method of evacuating people from shuttle in a vacuum. The cost alone will be so astromonically high that not even Musk could afford it on his own. It would in real terms probably be equivalent in cost to the moon landings and for what? Something in theory slightly more energy efficient than an airliner but with far less capacity than a similar air route.
Which bit of "but the main program isn't directly using the class thats been modified?" didn't you understand?
If the shared library is constructing the class to be used internally and the main programing isn't even #including the class prototype the main program DOES NOT need a recompilation since it would rather defeat the point of dlopen()! Perhaps you need a refresher in basic linking.
Also I would suggest remedial english courses since apparently comprehension isn't your strongpoint either.
Did you just google something about shared object files and slap it down in text hoping it would be some killer point?
So do tell me - why would one require a full recompilation when using dlopen() if a.so file has been updated because of a class update but the main program isn't directly using the class thats been modified?
Be specific, take your time...
(Just as an aside - you should have stayed AC, I'm going to email this thread to some friends of mine to have a laugh at and we'll all follow your further "insights" in the future now;)
I mean they're responsible for getting his daughter drunk right? They made that evil alcoholic brew she drank and so are totally liable. The fact that she willingly drank it is no excuse!
[/sarcasm]
Seriously, I wouldn't put it past him given that he seems to think lawsuits are a way to dull grief. I suppose it was too much to expect a lawyer to find anything approaching a conscience and quietly tell him to go home and grieve properly then get back to us if you still want to go through with it.
BS. If you want the updated code you have to recompile if the class is in an archive/static library. If its in a shared object library you don't. End of.
No, I'm actually someone who's worked in IT in the real world (unlike you 2 kids) for 25 years and knows exactly how decisions are made when it comes to companies deciding what software to use. You might think you're smart but as far as understanding business thought processes go you haven't got the first clue. When you've actually had some relevant experience in the commercial world get back to me. In the meantime you'd better hurry along, I think I can hear your school bell.
Slashdot Mirror
... he/she/it is already confused. This is just more confusion on its part. Perhaps it should learn some physics and try and figure out just how much energy and rocket power it would take to get a city destroying sized rock off the ground even in the moons 1/6 G assuming anything big and sturdy enough could be built on the moon to carry it.
Quite. The fact that there are so many idiots on here who not only didn't know this but didn't know how to find out is quite staggering. Ubuntu has a lot to answer for IMO.
Thanks for proving my point in my original post about ignorant fools with no clue about security.
Newsflash: claims only need supporting if there's no way for 3rd parties to independently verify them. But here, especially for dumb special needs kids like you who can't use a search engine:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=chrome_sa...
So the chrome_sandbox binary being owned by root and having the setuid bit set is an "extraordinary claim" is it snowflake? No, its a fact. I don't need to cite anything. 5 seconds with google will tell you everything you need to know and if you're too bone idle to bother then thats your problem, not mine.
With morons like you people using linux now its no surprising exploits are increasing. Check the chrome_sandbox binary owner and setuid bit (know what that is? No? Look it up) then buy yourself a ticket on the cluetrain you clueless gimp.
Apparently you're incapable of using google.
Chrome requires its sandbox process to run as root. Well not on my systems it isn't. Won't run? Tough , I'll just use one of the many alternatives then.
Apparently google thinks is code is 100% exploit and bug free and don't see an issue with having a user application requiring superuser priviledges. Utter morons. And anyone who says to me "but its not the browser, its the sandbox" obviously know the square root of fuck all about security so don't even bother me with your ignorant opinions.
There will always be lazy people regardless of gender. However my wife has trouble carrying ONE of the shopping bags I bring back from the supermarket. I carry four of them at once.
""Seem to have" is the operative keywords"
No it isn't. I've seen their limits and they're not high. A lot of them can't even do a single pull up. Sure, some get a few muscles but usually they're for endurance, not strength. I doubt those women skiers would manage a particularly impressive squat.
Yes. Not all of us are pasty faced gamers whose idea of recreation is sitting in front of an xbox.
I'd sooner have a few years less life due to testosterone than be as physically weak as most women are. Even the ones I see down the gym seem to have little more strength than I did when I was maybe 12 or 13. I can't imagine being that feeble all your life.
"moving out from underneath Mom and Dads roof;"
Its very easy to talk about money not mattering and wanting an interesting life when you don't have to worry about rent or bills. Part of being an adult is accepting responsibility for your own fate and - unless you want to live in a hut in the woods or a park bench - than means finding the money to pay the above.
The "gig" economy is just (usually rich) hipster talk for dead end park time McJobs thats been repackaged and remarketed for the latest gullible generation of 20 somethings who haven't yet wised up.
That ONLY applies if you're using the class in the main program, NOT if its just used in my library which is the whole point. Sorry, is recompiling when a header file changes such as advanced concept for you that you thought it required explicit confirmation? I'm afraid I thought I was having a discussion with someone who had a clue, clearly I was wrong.
As for getting some knowledge sonny, I've been doing unix systems programming in C & C++ for 2 decades , unlike I suspect you, who's probably dabbled for a few weeks or read a few chapters in Stevens and now you think you're an expert.
But anyway thanks for the entertainment. Like I said, your handle has been noted and we're all going to be watching for further of your "expert" pronouncements ;) Over and out script kiddy and don't bother responding , I won't be reading this thread again.
How exactly did I change it? If the main program is using the class and the class definition changes in the .h file then obviously it'll need a recompile. Thats so fucking obvious I didn't think it even needed stating to a so called expert like you.
Apples and Oranges. Colour TV was a qualitative improvement on B&W. Musks idea isn't any sort of improvement on flying and in fact I can't imagine many people wanting to use in preference to flying or just taking a normal train. Sure, that might change in the future, but the Wright Brothers didn't spend the GBP of a large country creating their first aircraft hoping it would be an instant hit.
"The same dose of realism that told people that reusable rockets would never work ?"
I'm not saying it won't work, I'm saying the costs will be so ridiculously high for so little benefit that I just don't see the point. Rockets got man into space, somewhere he'd never been before. This gets man from A to B just like an airliner and at the same speed. And thats worth spending trillions on is it? I don't think so.
If he really wanted to improve US transportation he'd invest in some 200+mph railways that europe and japan have had for decades which have pretty much killed off a lot of short distance air routes.
"Even when the project fails, that knowledge can be used in other projects, either related or totally unrelated"
Possibly. But the chance of some useful niche tech as a side effect is hardly reason to blow the amount of money that this will cost.
"That is the great thing about having billionaires with the curiosity of engineers."
Yes, but a dose of realism helps. His hyperloop would require the longest tunnel ever built by a significant margin, NASA spec pressure vessels and motors that can function in a vacuum and some as yet undecided method of evacuating people from shuttle in a vacuum. The cost alone will be so astromonically high that not even Musk could afford it on his own. It would in real terms probably be equivalent in cost to the moon landings and for what? Something in theory slightly more energy efficient than an airliner but with far less capacity than a similar air route.
Which bit of "but the main program isn't directly using the class thats been modified?" didn't you understand?
If the shared library is constructing the class to be used internally and the main programing isn't even #including the class prototype the main program DOES NOT need a recompilation since it would rather defeat the point of dlopen()! Perhaps you need a refresher in basic linking.
Also I would suggest remedial english courses since apparently comprehension isn't your strongpoint either.
Did you just google something about shared object files and slap it down in text hoping it would be some killer point?
So do tell me - why would one require a full recompilation when using dlopen() if a .so file has been updated because of a class update but the main program isn't directly using the class thats been modified?
Be specific, take your time...
(Just as an aside - you should have stayed AC, I'm going to email this thread to some friends of mine to have a laugh at and we'll all follow your further "insights" in the future now ;)
I mean they're responsible for getting his daughter drunk right? They made that evil alcoholic brew she drank and so are totally liable. The fact that she willingly drank it is no excuse!
[/sarcasm]
Seriously, I wouldn't put it past him given that he seems to think lawsuits are a way to dull grief. I suppose it was too much to expect a lawyer to find anything approaching a conscience and quietly tell him to go home and grieve properly then get back to us if you still want to go through with it.
BS. If you want the updated code you have to recompile if the class is in an archive/static library. If its in a shared object library you don't. End of.
No, I'm actually someone who's worked in IT in the real world (unlike you 2 kids) for 25 years and knows exactly how decisions are made when it comes to companies deciding what software to use. You might think you're smart but as far as understanding business thought processes go you haven't got the first clue. When you've actually had some relevant experience in the commercial world get back to me. In the meantime you'd better hurry along, I think I can hear your school bell.
Ah, you've got to chapter 2 I see! :)
Straight from the 4chan Insult Guide for kiddies.
Grow up and get a clue you stupid little child.