I was about to give an example of a company that spends a lot on their team to find security bugs, Android, but then I realized Android is open source. So I don't know.
The real problem is that there are only one or two internet providers in many places, and network neutrality is only one symptom of that problem. You also have price gouging, slow speeds, etc. The solution is to allow competition, and there are places in America where internet is perfectly fine, but not in Silicon Valley.
No one ever said that open source was perfect. But consider that we are talking about one piece of malware......then notice how much malware has been found in the Apple store and the Android store.
I don't know how they can claim that the $3.5 trillion saved the market, but that withdrawing an even larger amount now will be done without causing the next crisis.
Maybe you should find out before predicting the future. It's not like the fed has kept the answers a secret, you could go find out if you weren't so busy with your conspiracy theories.
The other thought is, most of blockchain's utility is not in cryptocoins, and the future of digital currency is also probably not in cryptocoins. There is still a giant green field, with real use cases that are yet unserved
I haven't seen a single other usecase, though.
Blockchain is basically a slow database to be used when you don't trust anybody to keep the database. That sort of use case isn't very common.
There are strategies for divesting of this kind of speculative stuff. A normal way is, when the price goes up, sell part of it.
That's what I would have done: I would have sold some of my bitcoins to guarantee a profit, and kept some of them to take advantage if the price continued to go up.
All the analytics in the world won't justify the investments in online advertising if those ads don't ultimately turn into increased revenue for the company buying them. Once enough companies fail to get a good ROI on internet ads
Advertisers are always checking to make sure they get a good ROI. It's not something they will start doing, it's something they have been doing for decades. The answer is they do get a good ROI. So that's it. Advertisers pay a lot for ads because it works.
And I say that as someone who wishes advertising would go away: it is the bane of the internet.
. Today, however, many commercial software development shops use vulnerability scanning solutions and/or routinely conduct binary scans of resultant code.
These vulnerability scans are about as effective as using Lint (which is effective). AI vulnerability scanners are in research, but they have a long way to go.......
I have trouble with this industry-concept that software security should be put first -- it's an impossible business objective.
It would be kind of cool if people could follow basic security principles, like, "Don't use telnetd" or "don't release software with default passwords." You don't need perfect security, but think about it a little, at least.
In practice, Open Source seems to make more secure software. For example, plenty of devices are being released with guessable default passwords, or with the telnet port open (that's how Mirai spread). It's been decades since open source was commonly released with that kind of vulnerability.
And speaking from my own experience, if I have to use a closed source library, I pad my estimates because it's going to take a lot of extra time.
I will add to your post:
GOF patterns fail because they are not a good fit for most situations. Reality is more nuanced than a few patterns, so to be effective you need many more patterns than are in the book. Instead of memorizing patterns, it becomes easier to analyze the situation, and come up with something that fits the situation, rather than try to jam it into a pre-existing pattern.
Also, "Linus' law" was written before things like automatic bug reporting that every OS does these days. In other words, software companies noticed how useful it was, and started copying it.
Eventually the companies purchasing these ads will realize that this is all wasted money and the algorithms don't work.
No, I can see you've never worked with advertisers. Advertisers are very data driven. They always want to know how well their advertising campaigns have worked, and how much sales they've gotten from their advertising. If something isn't working, they stop doing it quickly because that's money wasted.
tl;dr internet advertising works, that's why it is still here.
No, the advertising bubble will not pop. That money has been coming in for a hundred years, and it will keep coming. As TV dies, more and more will come.
Yeah. There is always another chance to get rich. Right now, at this moment, there is a stock I could buy, that would make me rich by next week. The trick is figuring out which one, but instead of whining about the past, I'd be better off figuring out how to recognize that stock.
Slashdot Mirror
I was about to give an example of a company that spends a lot on their team to find security bugs, Android, but then I realized Android is open source. So I don't know.
A lot of this money has been coming from China: people who are afraid of their own country and don't want to invest money there.
Sounds reasonable. Thanks for going to read it.
The real problem is that there are only one or two internet providers in many places, and network neutrality is only one symptom of that problem. You also have price gouging, slow speeds, etc. The solution is to allow competition, and there are places in America where internet is perfectly fine, but not in Silicon Valley.
No one ever said that open source was perfect. But consider that we are talking about one piece of malware......then notice how much malware has been found in the Apple store and the Android store.
Paypal doesn't seem to care about (or weirdly, suffer from) bad publicity.
I don't know how they can claim that the $3.5 trillion saved the market, but that withdrawing an even larger amount now will be done without causing the next crisis.
Maybe you should find out before predicting the future. It's not like the fed has kept the answers a secret, you could go find out if you weren't so busy with your conspiracy theories.
It might be that the system of finding that stock ends up having a higher average cost than just throwing a dart at a dartboard.
That might be true. Clearly there are systems that work, otherwise high-speed trading wouldn't be so profitable.
The other thought is, most of blockchain's utility is not in cryptocoins, and the future of digital currency is also probably not in cryptocoins. There is still a giant green field, with real use cases that are yet unserved
I haven't seen a single other usecase, though.
Blockchain is basically a slow database to be used when you don't trust anybody to keep the database. That sort of use case isn't very common.
Reddcoin is positioning itself as the social media currency.
I don't even know what that means.
There are strategies for divesting of this kind of speculative stuff. A normal way is, when the price goes up, sell part of it.
That's what I would have done: I would have sold some of my bitcoins to guarantee a profit, and kept some of them to take advantage if the price continued to go up.
All the analytics in the world won't justify the investments in online advertising if those ads don't ultimately turn into increased revenue for the company buying them. Once enough companies fail to get a good ROI on internet ads
Advertisers are always checking to make sure they get a good ROI. It's not something they will start doing, it's something they have been doing for decades. The answer is they do get a good ROI. So that's it. Advertisers pay a lot for ads because it works.
And I say that as someone who wishes advertising would go away: it is the bane of the internet.
. Today, however, many commercial software development shops use vulnerability scanning solutions and/or routinely conduct binary scans of resultant code.
These vulnerability scans are about as effective as using Lint (which is effective). AI vulnerability scanners are in research, but they have a long way to go.......
I have trouble with this industry-concept that software security should be put first -- it's an impossible business objective.
It would be kind of cool if people could follow basic security principles, like, "Don't use telnetd" or "don't release software with default passwords." You don't need perfect security, but think about it a little, at least.
See WordPress...... pretty good security.
No haha.
The last critical gap was closed after only 8000 websites had been infected, something like .0002% of the installbase or something.
If they would start using parameterized queries like the rest of the world, this would have been zero.
Do you consider Lucene bad? I was looking at the Elastic source recently, and it seemed fine.
In practice, Open Source seems to make more secure software. For example, plenty of devices are being released with guessable default passwords, or with the telnet port open (that's how Mirai spread). It's been decades since open source was commonly released with that kind of vulnerability.
And speaking from my own experience, if I have to use a closed source library, I pad my estimates because it's going to take a lot of extra time.
I will add to your post:
GOF patterns fail because they are not a good fit for most situations. Reality is more nuanced than a few patterns, so to be effective you need many more patterns than are in the book. Instead of memorizing patterns, it becomes easier to analyze the situation, and come up with something that fits the situation, rather than try to jam it into a pre-existing pattern.
Also, "Linus' law" was written before things like automatic bug reporting that every OS does these days. In other words, software companies noticed how useful it was, and started copying it.
In other words, the "cleanup" the computer makes are still noise, just as bad as any other noise, with the exception that it tricks the human eye.
Eventually the companies purchasing these ads will realize that this is all wasted money and the algorithms don't work.
No, I can see you've never worked with advertisers. Advertisers are very data driven. They always want to know how well their advertising campaigns have worked, and how much sales they've gotten from their advertising. If something isn't working, they stop doing it quickly because that's money wasted.
tl;dr internet advertising works, that's why it is still here.
No, the advertising bubble will not pop. That money has been coming in for a hundred years, and it will keep coming. As TV dies, more and more will come.
It didn't take much power to generate coins back then, either.
Yeah. There is always another chance to get rich. Right now, at this moment, there is a stock I could buy, that would make me rich by next week. The trick is figuring out which one, but instead of whining about the past, I'd be better off figuring out how to recognize that stock.
Calibrate your monitor.