It would be a very interesting, very Republican and very unlikely experiment to roll back ALL the tax breaks.
There is a group of Republicans who want this, and are really in favor of fighting for it. There is another group of Republicans who want the tax breaks, and are happy to vote in more (and more spending too!)
Then there is a group of rational people who realize that if they roll back all tax breaks, they will get voted out of office by people who lost their mortgage interest deduction.
There's a large chunk of Americans who benefit from tax deductions.
I think you are right as far as that goes. The primary difficulty is easily outputting it in a way that the formatting is pretty and pleasing to the eye. Perl has some good utilities for that.
Still is the best language for that. I wish other languages wold take some of Perl's good ideas instead of focusing on functional nonsense (not saying that all functional programming is nonsense, but a lot of what people want is not particularly helpful).
The most common security exploits are XSS or sql injection. It's not easy to exploit a buffer overflow on a modern OS because of protections like ASLR, so truly exploitable remote exploits based on buffer overflows are relatively rare.
They do get a lot of attention though because things like OpenSSL are used on almost every website.
Hiring in technology is 80% personality and 20% skill. Sad but true.
It's the job of management to help disparate personalities all get along together, but tbh management these days is just a stick to make sure people are working.
Interviewer: "what are your qualifications?"
candidate: "Well, I won the Turing Award."
Interviewer: "That's cool. Ok, we're going to do white boarding. Can you write out fizz buzz on the board?"
That doesn't make sense: approving the drug doesn't mean anyone will use it, but if it is not approved, then no one will use it. We have experts, doctors trained for many years, to evaluate drugs and figure out which ones to use and not use.
Sometimes it's better to risk approving it a little early even though it might be a placebo, instead of not approving it when it could possibly save lives. Once it's shown to be relatively harmless, it seems alright to let the doctor decide whether to use it or not.
Oh that's really great, thanks. I didn't realize how much complexity there is in there. It's also fascinating that most of the complexity already there had the purpose of (and was successful at) making the chip go faster....and yet it can be optimized more.
btw SGX looks like a security nightmare, but MPX looks like it could be useful.
Oh that makes me so happy. Not only did you work around the problems created by bad bureaucracy, but you ended up making something really great. If there were a Diogenes looking for a man who cared about security, he could rest when he found you.
Again, you are reaching for propaganda because you lack understanding.
Because you are nice, I will teach you a logic lesson here. You have made several arguments by analogy here, but they are wrong: an argument by analogy needs two parts. The first is the analogy, and the second is an explanation that the analogy matches this situation.
I can show you why by giving you my own analogy: an antivirus is like poison: it brings vulnerabilities to your system that weren't there before, some of them very severe. So which analogy is right? Yours or mine?
Now you're just making up shit because you know you're wrong. A better argument would have been if you built a metric to figure out how much more safe you are with antivirus than without. But you didn't do that, because the answer is less safe.
I buy an antivirus because it half-works. And that half-works is enough to alert me to bigger problems, and usually minimize or stop the spread of any infection on the network.
And you right there are spouting marketing FUD. Antivirus makes your computer less secure. Do a search for "antivirus vuln."
Should have built your own open source anti-virus as a 'side' project. It could scan for a few signatures or something. It doesn't even have to work, that's not a requirement for anti-virus: all you need is a website that looks really snazzy.
No one buys anti-virus because it works, they buy it because of marketing.
Yeah, it's problematic. Waymo right now has a (relatively) limited AI, with some very good maps of some areas (Arizona is one of those areas, apparently). The interesting question will be whether that combination is good enough to do better than human drivers.
Apparently we're going to have a live experiment where we find out.
Yeah, from a logistical standpoint it seems completely impractical and uneconomical. But hey, I thought the same thing about Google maps with streetview in the first place, so who knows.
Slashdot Mirror
what makes ESET so great?
Good thing Symantec is secure and has no horrible remote exploits that give hackers top-level access to the system.
Just say no to Symantec, it can only make your system worse (they had a solid C compiler back in the 90s though).
It would be a very interesting, very Republican and very unlikely experiment to roll back ALL the tax breaks.
There is a group of Republicans who want this, and are really in favor of fighting for it. There is another group of Republicans who want the tax breaks, and are happy to vote in more (and more spending too!)
Then there is a group of rational people who realize that if they roll back all tax breaks, they will get voted out of office by people who lost their mortgage interest deduction.
There's a large chunk of Americans who benefit from tax deductions.
If we could get an "ion-drive" to get us there in a month, that will cut down the the bone loss, and exposure to radiation.
Does Mars provide any real protection against radiation?
I think you are right as far as that goes. The primary difficulty is easily outputting it in a way that the formatting is pretty and pleasing to the eye. Perl has some good utilities for that.
Unless we get a hold on this stupidity, the next step will be calling for the death of the others.
It's basically already happening.
Still is the best language for that. I wish other languages wold take some of Perl's good ideas instead of focusing on functional nonsense (not saying that all functional programming is nonsense, but a lot of what people want is not particularly helpful).
At this point, basically all the good features from Python3 have been backported to Python2, so there's no real motivation to upgrade anymore.
The most common security exploits are XSS or sql injection. It's not easy to exploit a buffer overflow on a modern OS because of protections like ASLR, so truly exploitable remote exploits based on buffer overflows are relatively rare.
They do get a lot of attention though because things like OpenSSL are used on almost every website.
Hiring in technology is 80% personality and 20% skill. Sad but true.
It's the job of management to help disparate personalities all get along together, but tbh management these days is just a stick to make sure people are working.
There's the Swedish National Bank's Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel[sic].
Hey, thanks for clarifying that.
You know what, since that's kind of long, why don't we just call it the "Nobel prize in economics" for short?
Interviewer: "what are your qualifications?"
candidate: "Well, I won the Turing Award."
Interviewer: "That's cool. Ok, we're going to do white boarding. Can you write out fizz buzz on the board?"
That's how it goes.
That doesn't make sense: approving the drug doesn't mean anyone will use it, but if it is not approved, then no one will use it. We have experts, doctors trained for many years, to evaluate drugs and figure out which ones to use and not use.
Sometimes it's better to risk approving it a little early even though it might be a placebo, instead of not approving it when it could possibly save lives. Once it's shown to be relatively harmless, it seems alright to let the doctor decide whether to use it or not.
Oh that's really great, thanks. I didn't realize how much complexity there is in there. It's also fascinating that most of the complexity already there had the purpose of (and was successful at) making the chip go faster....and yet it can be optimized more.
btw SGX looks like a security nightmare, but MPX looks like it could be useful.
It's about 50% faster in both single...... threaded benchmarks with only 20% higher clock speed.
How did they do that? Serious question.
Oh that makes me so happy. Not only did you work around the problems created by bad bureaucracy, but you ended up making something really great. If there were a Diogenes looking for a man who cared about security, he could rest when he found you.
Again, you are reaching for propaganda because you lack understanding.
Because you are nice, I will teach you a logic lesson here. You have made several arguments by analogy here, but they are wrong: an argument by analogy needs two parts. The first is the analogy, and the second is an explanation that the analogy matches this situation.
I can show you why by giving you my own analogy: an antivirus is like poison: it brings vulnerabilities to your system that weren't there before, some of them very severe. So which analogy is right? Yours or mine?
Everything is a vulnerability.
Now you're just making up shit because you know you're wrong. A better argument would have been if you built a metric to figure out how much more safe you are with antivirus than without. But you didn't do that, because the answer is less safe.
I buy an antivirus because it half-works. And that half-works is enough to alert me to bigger problems, and usually minimize or stop the spread of any infection on the network.
And you right there are spouting marketing FUD.
Antivirus makes your computer less secure. Do a search for "antivirus vuln."
Should have built your own open source anti-virus as a 'side' project. It could scan for a few signatures or something. It doesn't even have to work, that's not a requirement for anti-virus: all you need is a website that looks really snazzy.
No one buys anti-virus because it works, they buy it because of marketing.
Yeah, it's problematic. Waymo right now has a (relatively) limited AI, with some very good maps of some areas (Arizona is one of those areas, apparently). The interesting question will be whether that combination is good enough to do better than human drivers.
Apparently we're going to have a live experiment where we find out.
Yeah, from a logistical standpoint it seems completely impractical and uneconomical. But hey, I thought the same thing about Google maps with streetview in the first place, so who knows.
I didn't expect this to become relevant so quickly
How will they keep the cars from being trashed?