My original intent was to refute the sweeping generalization that no human will ever work an hour in their life if UBI is available.
Oh. That's a stronger claim than was intended. If other people thought the same as you, no wonder they came back with such strange comments. I will have to be more clear next time.
It doesn't try to, it's a side-channel attack. So, ASLR pads elements with a random amount of free space, so a hacker doesn't know where to jump to. This attack figures out how big the free space is, by figuring out where the end of a cache line is. It figures out where the end of a cache line is by looking at the memory access times. So:
x = a[n];//runs in.5microseconds
x = a[n+1];//runs in 10 microseconds
You know you hit a cache miss on the second access, and the end of a cache line is right between a[n] and a[n+1]. Based on the offset from where the cache would normally be, you can figure out how big the ASLR padding is. Once you know the padding size, you can know exactly which address to jump to to when you inject your shell code (ie, your compiled assembly exploit).
There are other ways to defeat ASLR too, so I am not sure how useful this is, but the more techniques a hacker has, the better (from his perspective).
Actually I'd really like to see a nice codebase in C++. If I saw some really nice code, I would copy the style and start using it. I am definitely willing to be wrong in this case, because it would mean an upgrade in my knowledge and skill.
It's hard to figure out what exactly a contractor is in US law. The IRS uses a 20 factor test, for example, and even then, it's not always clear.
Trying to argue what the difference is between a contractor and an employee based on Brazil law, unless you speak Portuguese, is just foolhardy. Any argument will have no basis in reality ("reality" in this case meaning Brazilian law, which may or may not relate to actual reality).
That's possible, but consider the counter-argument: somehow they still built their light-bar onto the mac. The frequency of updates doesn't bother me as much as the lack of quality in the updates when they do come. It's really sad because I feel that the world is better off with a company like Apple in it, making good products.
By this point Apple is the expert at the "Fat Binary" transition and they can do it whenever they want. 68k>PPC>PPC64bit>x86>86x-64
Having gone through two of those, they both sucked, although the 68k to PPC sucked less than the PPC to x86. That one sucked hard because they didn't maintain backwards compatibility long at all.
If I have to do another transition, it's going to be a transition back to Linux.
Actually, I'm kind of interested why you want a standardized networking API. Is it for working in embedded? Or for the high-performance stuff where select() is too slow? For the most part, BSD networking APIs are so difficult to use that they get encapsulated into a function as soon as possible anyway. From that point, swapping out implementations usually doesn't take too long......
Once you finally reach some stage of enlightenment, you'll start to really like C++ and will start coding in it as it was supposed to be and designed to be.
Sure, show me some code that was written at that level of enlightenment.
Working hours are set because of synergy......when everyone else is working from 9-5, it's convenient for customer support reps to work 9-5 too, for example. All the jobs that allow flexible hours (like programmers) already tend to be flexible about when to work. It might be more expensive to get someone to work the late shift, that is true, but I don't really see basic income changing that.
Nah, I think the thing you're not seeing is that by convention, in C++, the caller allocates the memory. So if the size of the class changes, the caller needs to be recompiled. Check out the assembly output sometime, you'll see.
No, that's bad code, and it doesn't take advantage of modern C++ techniques, either. The code would be cleaner using auto in places, and some of the iterations would look much better replaced with range-for loops. The calls to new should be replaced with smartpointers. There is no doubt that modern C++ is an improvement. The code you linked to doesn't look clean to me at all. However, I've never seen a piece of code in modern C++ style that looks clean, either.
Maybe someday someone will figure out how to use C++ in a clean, nice looking style. Then I'll use it. Until then, I'm staying away.
ok, now you're going through two different things........first you admit that people mostly aren't going to work as much, which was my original assertion. So we're agreed on that point, good. Just to be clear, I will also state that some people will continue to still working.
Now the second point, you're saying that automation is going to take everyone's job. That's a completely different topic altogether...........
But really, C++ is much better with lamdas, you can get rid of functors for one thing, type deduction is working really well these days, generalized const exprs are really handy, etc etc.
I can link to half a dozen nice looking codebases in C. Can you link to even one in C++? The only ones I can think of that are any good limit themselves to a small subset of C++.
After working with C++11, and seeing where C++17 is going, I decided I don't want to do C++ anymore. It's still on my resume (just like C#), but I'm not taking any jobs in it. The language is usable, but C++ codebases tend to suck.
Slashdot Mirror
My original intent was to refute the sweeping generalization that no human will ever work an hour in their life if UBI is available.
Oh. That's a stronger claim than was intended. If other people thought the same as you, no wonder they came back with such strange comments. I will have to be more clear next time.
Hehe, now you changed the example when you learn you were wrong. Incidentally, I would never want to work with you.
heh.........so if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around, does it still make a sound? Or does it 'fall' up?
But at a higher level it's easy to see which direction time is moving. Why is that?
It doesn't try to, it's a side-channel attack. So, ASLR pads elements with a random amount of free space, so a hacker doesn't know where to jump to. This attack figures out how big the free space is, by figuring out where the end of a cache line is. It figures out where the end of a cache line is by looking at the memory access times. So:
//runs in .5microseconds //runs in 10 microseconds
x = a[n];
x = a[n+1];
You know you hit a cache miss on the second access, and the end of a cache line is right between a[n] and a[n+1]. Based on the offset from where the cache would normally be, you can figure out how big the ASLR padding is. Once you know the padding size, you can know exactly which address to jump to to when you inject your shell code (ie, your compiled assembly exploit).
There are other ways to defeat ASLR too, so I am not sure how useful this is, but the more techniques a hacker has, the better (from his perspective).
If the MMU is lesser known to you, then the ALU is going to blow your mind. Just don't look at MMX, it's ugly.
lol I have no idea what you are saying there. The weather is nice, though.
Yeah, even a decent mac mini wouldn't take much effort, really, and would be really helpful.
Although if you really want to see a great, pointless fight of the type you are describing, I am currently involved in a delightful one over here. Complete with gratuitous insults and pointless comparisons.
Actually I'd really like to see a nice codebase in C++. If I saw some really nice code, I would copy the style and start using it. I am definitely willing to be wrong in this case, because it would mean an upgrade in my knowledge and skill.
It's hard to figure out what exactly a contractor is in US law. The IRS uses a 20 factor test, for example, and even then, it's not always clear.
Trying to argue what the difference is between a contractor and an employee based on Brazil law, unless you speak Portuguese, is just foolhardy. Any argument will have no basis in reality ("reality" in this case meaning Brazilian law, which may or may not relate to actual reality).
That's possible, but consider the counter-argument: somehow they still built their light-bar onto the mac. The frequency of updates doesn't bother me as much as the lack of quality in the updates when they do come. It's really sad because I feel that the world is better off with a company like Apple in it, making good products.
You don't hear about the thousands of people that toiled for years to make it into a polished product.
If you watched many Steve Jobs keynotes, then you did. He even brought some of them on stage from time to time.
By this point Apple is the expert at the "Fat Binary" transition and they can do it whenever they want. 68k>PPC>PPC64bit>x86>86x-64
Having gone through two of those, they both sucked, although the 68k to PPC sucked less than the PPC to x86. That one sucked hard because they didn't maintain backwards compatibility long at all.
If I have to do another transition, it's going to be a transition back to Linux.
What company is doing a good job in that field right now? I've seem enough security companies that are just hucksters, it's hard to find a good one.
Actually, I'm kind of interested why you want a standardized networking API. Is it for working in embedded? Or for the high-performance stuff where select() is too slow? For the most part, BSD networking APIs are so difficult to use that they get encapsulated into a function as soon as possible anyway. From that point, swapping out implementations usually doesn't take too long......
Once you finally reach some stage of enlightenment, you'll start to really like C++ and will start coding in it as it was supposed to be and designed to be.
Sure, show me some code that was written at that level of enlightenment.
Working hours are set because of synergy......when everyone else is working from 9-5, it's convenient for customer support reps to work 9-5 too, for example. All the jobs that allow flexible hours (like programmers) already tend to be flexible about when to work. It might be more expensive to get someone to work the late shift, that is true, but I don't really see basic income changing that.
Nah, I think the thing you're not seeing is that by convention, in C++, the caller allocates the memory. So if the size of the class changes, the caller needs to be recompiled. Check out the assembly output sometime, you'll see.
That sounds really amazing. Assuming one already has deep knowledge of software security, how does one get into that business?
No, that's bad code, and it doesn't take advantage of modern C++ techniques, either. The code would be cleaner using auto in places, and some of the iterations would look much better replaced with range-for loops. The calls to new should be replaced with smartpointers. There is no doubt that modern C++ is an improvement. The code you linked to doesn't look clean to me at all. However, I've never seen a piece of code in modern C++ style that looks clean, either.
Maybe someday someone will figure out how to use C++ in a clean, nice looking style. Then I'll use it. Until then, I'm staying away.
ok, now you're going through two different things........first you admit that people mostly aren't going to work as much, which was my original assertion. So we're agreed on that point, good. Just to be clear, I will also state that some people will continue to still working.
Now the second point, you're saying that automation is going to take everyone's job. That's a completely different topic altogether...........
Using strncat() has so many corner cases, I would recommend never using it. Too easy to make a mistake.
But really, C++ is much better with lamdas, you can get rid of functors for one thing, type deduction is working really well these days, generalized const exprs are really handy, etc etc.
I can link to half a dozen nice looking codebases in C. Can you link to even one in C++? The only ones I can think of that are any good limit themselves to a small subset of C++.
After working with C++11, and seeing where C++17 is going, I decided I don't want to do C++ anymore. It's still on my resume (just like C#), but I'm not taking any jobs in it. The language is usable, but C++ codebases tend to suck.