Let's for the sake of argument say that the human genome is the blueprint for the human brain. The problem is inevitably that a blueprint on its own does not allow you to build anything. The idea that using the genome is conceptually trivial is utter bullshit. This is what happens a lot when people cross disciplines, they think that all of the stuff in the other discipline is trivial and they can do it all with the skill set they currently have... no need to learn anything new, I can just derive biology for my knowledge of quantum mechanics. This is the underlying problem that TFA points out. Having the blueprints to a skyscraper does not make building one, or simulating one trivial. You have to know about how it interacts with the world. Even finite element modeling will not tell you how it will work under all conditions. While the brain is a chemical computer, it is not trivial to build one in simulation since while we have the blueprints we have know idea how those blueprints turn into a working brain.
I am wondering, why OpenSolaris should even continue?, its not like there is no open UNIX available for x86, you have the BSD family, and even though its not a UNIX you have GNU/Linux. If you are running on Sparc hardware it may be worth it but methinks that oracle might have been interesting in Solaris as a way of getting away from linux.
You want me to see a bad movie where Megan Fox shows off her body fine, I mean its not like the transformers movie this summer was the same thing right? Right?????....
You want me to see a Bruce Willis movie where everyone is a robot with a plot that was originally a Twlight Zone episode remade 4 times then made into a movie 4 times and even has James Cromwell who was in I,Robot which was kind of like this movie ok I will do it......
Yes I will even buy a mac too, but in this case my only request is that you kill Justin Long.....
OK, can I see the House, M.D. episode or Family Guy, Oh you want me to watch The Big Bang Theory, followed by Numb3rs......
I am going to go to sleep
it was all too much, but at least I get to sleep now.
Let me point out that this has been well known in physics departments for years. The problem is string theory is nowhere near producing any prediction that can be tested, this means that it is not science, any more than mathematics is physics.
I just read the Fscking email and it says the opposite of what Stowell said. The email states directly that this entire scheme was concoted because executives cannot understand that simpling because two things work the same way it dosent mean that one thing is a copy of the other. This just makes them look more guilty of sock manipulation, this also brings into question there direct statements to the public. If an officer at a corporation lies to the public but didn't know it at the time then he or she made a mistake. If you lie to the public and you know its a lie, then that is fraud.
this memo clearly shows that SCO executives knew that there was no litteral copying in GNU/Linux, they then went out and made statements that they new were demonstrably false, i.e. Daryl's Line by Line copying comment. It is now very clear that SCO executives should at least be charged with fraud.
Why are we still having buffer overflows? There's a compile option in Visual C++ that allows automatic buffer overflow protection. Does GCC have this switch? If so, why not? And why are people not using this? We have enough processing power on a typical PC to spend on these security such as this. Performance is not an excuse.
The problem I have with this statement is that any checks that Visual C++ may have are at best a fig leaf. Buffer Overflow protection is something that has dogged not just programers but hardware manufactures for decades now. If security is of such great consern why not make the assembler do buffer checks?, why not the operating system? why not the processor?, why not create a ram infrasturcture called SDDR in which the RAM itself does not allow anything to be accessed without a secure hash? the answer to all of these questions is that for every solution, event the stupid one at the bottom, the buffer overflow might take on a new form or the security measures themselves may backfire.
Ultimatly the parent is IMHO over reacting, we are always going to have buffer overflows. This is not necissarily a problem so long as people are willing to disclose the vulnerability and work hard to get it patched before an exploit is out in the wild. This is the main argument as to why Microsoft software is insecure because often known vulnerabilites go months without being patched. They are getting better but they are nowhere near the transparancy displayed here. They made a mistake in coding, they are attempting to fix it but until all the vulnerable aplications are patched we need to be on guard for signs of malicious behavior from programs relying on zlib. In other words this is just a part of life in the world of computing.
As an academic in another field I foud his "bigoted rant" to be well informed. Since he not only points out the flaw, but why it is a flaw. The man basically invented the field that the reasarch was done in.
On a side note I have always found it odd that things like HTTP and the PC were invented not by systems enginers or computer scientist but people outside the field. Its not like Einstein was a chemist or marie cury was a psych major. Yet CS and CE people are continually upstaged in the histroy of computing by physists and mathematicians.
The fact of the matter is that WoW is innovative. Simple classes, a clean interface (or a dirty one if you want it), What is essentially a battelfield mode cleanly executed. It is a marvel of a game.
And it will never last.
Why?
Because of this issue. The fact is that this is the one area where Blizzard has not chosen to break with tradition. To swing the nerf bat is too simple a solution to a complex problem. The devs over at blizzard have clearly lost sight of the fact that the more frustrating an MMORPG is, the less people are going to want to play it.
As it stands right now, the vast majority of players in WoW are rogues, or on the horde side Shaman. This is only going to get worse as other classes are ignored, then blizzard like the idiots at SWG are going to nerf the most popular classes in a bid to remain legitimate to users like myself, and presto the user base evaporates. Next come stupid commercialls featuring "real people" who play SW^h^h^h I mean WoW.
All MMO games follow the same curve, and its unfortunate since one of the posters here was correct in stating that the best way to bring down an overpowered class is to give a counter skill to an underpowered one.
I am a debian user but I think this site is way out of line. All of our distros have a following. I like debian because I really like the dpkg system and an apt based distro. Does this mean that other distros are lame? No. There are stupid people in the linux community who like to diss on distros, and promote there own. These fuckers miss the entire fucking point of Open Source.
Its not what distro you use. As I said I like debian. But stable is not a good desktop distro so I try out ubuntu and love it. Gentoo is awesome because it used one of the best things about BSD (source based distribution) to make linux better. OSS is more about a marketplace of ideas, where projects tinker. Just because someone likes gentoo dosent make them a performance whore, and just because someone likes distro X it dosent mean anything except that they are a member of the communtiy and are trying to do the best with the options that they are given. Lets not let our community be destroyed by idiots on websites or idiots on message boards.
Though it may have lost its hydrogen and helium burning capeability I would hypothesise that the thing is now an L or T dwarf that is to say it might be Duterium or Lithium burning, or its spectral profile might be very dusty or contain methane. In otherwords we might have just seen an L or T dwarf being made but I highly doubt this is a new class of star.
Microsoft was not going to listen to him anyway. As long as the majority of people cannot tell the diffrence between microsoft "security updates" and real security then microsoft has no reason to change unless they are emberased into changing, lets be clear there are serious bugs in MS word that they haven't fixed.
Buffer checking is one way to solve the problem. Another, non intrusive way of doing it is to include kernel level memory protection. On top of that you could add Users, Groups and privileges and not allow every program to have the run of the system. Buffer Overruns are as old as C and UNIX has built mechanisism to cope with it that do not put the onus on the programmer, since the memory monitoring is done in the kernel, this is also safer in the long run because it means that a program must break memory protection at the kernel level in order to become "root". Too bad microsoft has yet to come up with a mechanism that UNIX people have been using for years.
The article explains that whil SP2 is a step in the right direction it still does not implement the simplest in security steps. Like disabling NetBIOS connections. Also the woefull practice of relying on the RPC damon for interproces communication. SP2 provides some minor userland utilities that most users don't understand and probly wont know how to use without adressing the underlying problem, winodws is not insecure by programming, its insecure by default.
I think that most of us "in the know" will find that the step was not major, a major step would be to provide a locked down network configuration for XP and not rely on the user turning off services. Rely on the user to enable the services he or she needs, and force all users to run under unprivliged accounts. You are right that *nix is not more secure, its just more secure by default.
Thats because the ATI and Nvidia Hardware for PPC, ARM and SPARC (does anyone but Sun make GPUs for SPARC?) is of a completley different arch than x86 (sorry for being captain obvious) besides the fact is that the Linux PPC market is small (0.1% of the 2% of PCs that use Power Processors) Since ARM is mainly used in embeded applications its likely that such drivers would be custom since the GPU would interface into the embeded bus (I am not an embeded systems specialist so I don't know)The result is that ATI and Nvidia don't really care about these markets, or would partner with the company developing the embeded system. In the case that they did relase HW specs for SPARC(?) and PPC versions of there GPUs only a small number of developers would be interested.
I think that the Debian people are right on this one , however the FSF foundation is partly to blame because of the invariant sections in the FDL . (why glibc wont have documentation)
I think the solution, since non-free is being kept, should be to include the non-free repositories in the default "sources.list" file and allow tasksel to use non-free packages for documentation under a "Non-Free documentation" header, no non-free stuff should needed for the bootstrap installation(although binary kernel module won't be available by default). Thats the best comprimise, IMHO.
Could we stop the Microsoft, Debian, Gentoo and Fedora, and *BSD astroturfing please?
Ahmen
This guy wasn't around when one couldnt find a distro that did hardware autodetction. He wasn't around for the days of OSS drivers which sucked.(This was all two years ago mind you) I also think that having a VM wrapper is not necissarily a fair assesment of linux since the emulated hardware of a VM can be very hard to set up properly. Besids he was probibly trying Gentoo or Debian which are not the easiest distros for first timers to set up.
Also simply because its a sequil dosent mean that the result will be subpar. In fact Doom 3 has a lot going for it as ID spawed the modern first person shooter with Quake 2 and made it look beautiful with Quake 3. I am honestly tired of people bemoaning sequils before they come out.
Slashdot Mirror
I would resign too, AMD is always the bridesmaid never the bride.
it is thiner than the server cluster computing each frame at the back end of this caned demo.
Let's for the sake of argument say that the human genome is the blueprint for the human brain. The problem is inevitably that a blueprint on its own does not allow you to build anything. The idea that using the genome is conceptually trivial is utter bullshit. This is what happens a lot when people cross disciplines, they think that all of the stuff in the other discipline is trivial and they can do it all with the skill set they currently have... no need to learn anything new, I can just derive biology for my knowledge of quantum mechanics. This is the underlying problem that TFA points out. Having the blueprints to a skyscraper does not make building one, or simulating one trivial. You have to know about how it interacts with the world. Even finite element modeling will not tell you how it will work under all conditions. While the brain is a chemical computer, it is not trivial to build one in simulation since while we have the blueprints we have know idea how those blueprints turn into a working brain.
I am wondering, why OpenSolaris should even continue?, its not like there is no open UNIX available for x86, you have the BSD family, and even though its not a UNIX you have GNU/Linux. If you are running on Sparc hardware it may be worth it but methinks that oracle might have been interesting in Solaris as a way of getting away from linux.
I am pretty sure that some of the problems at least will be Hilbert Problems that do not currently have a solution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert_problems
I know, there even in AZ now, I mean come on we all know that they have taken over the east coast, there just waiting.... watching
For those of you who don't read good he is referring to A Modest Proposal
It is a martini made by Microsoft after all.
So the ingredients are, what - Kool-aid and cheap tequila?
This sound like the ingredients for a cheap party I won't remember.
I give up, I will buy windows 7...
You want me to see a bad movie where Megan Fox shows off her body fine, I mean its not like the transformers movie this summer was the same thing right? Right?????....
You want me to see a Bruce Willis movie where everyone is a robot with a plot that was originally a Twlight Zone episode remade 4 times then made into a movie 4 times and even has James Cromwell who was in I,Robot which was kind of like this movie ok I will do it......
Yes I will even buy a mac too, but in this case my only request is that you kill Justin Long.....
OK, can I see the House, M.D. episode or Family Guy, Oh you want me to watch The Big Bang Theory, followed by Numb3rs......
I am going to go to sleep
it was all too much, but at least I get to sleep now.
Seriously this looks an awful lot like Microsoft doing MPI. In which case they should just drive a railroad spike through both testicles, or ovaries.
Let me point out that this has been well known in physics departments for years. The problem is string theory is nowhere near producing any prediction that can be tested, this means that it is not science, any more than mathematics is physics.
this memo clearly shows that SCO executives knew that there was no litteral copying in GNU/Linux, they then went out and made statements that they new were demonstrably false, i.e. Daryl's Line by Line copying comment. It is now very clear that SCO executives should at least be charged with fraud.
The problem I have with this statement is that any checks that Visual C++ may have are at best a fig leaf. Buffer Overflow protection is something that has dogged not just programers but hardware manufactures for decades now. If security is of such great consern why not make the assembler do buffer checks?, why not the operating system? why not the processor?, why not create a ram infrasturcture called SDDR in which the RAM itself does not allow anything to be accessed without a secure hash? the answer to all of these questions is that for every solution, event the stupid one at the bottom, the buffer overflow might take on a new form or the security measures themselves may backfire.
Ultimatly the parent is IMHO over reacting, we are always going to have buffer overflows. This is not necissarily a problem so long as people are willing to disclose the vulnerability and work hard to get it patched before an exploit is out in the wild. This is the main argument as to why Microsoft software is insecure because often known vulnerabilites go months without being patched. They are getting better but they are nowhere near the transparancy displayed here. They made a mistake in coding, they are attempting to fix it but until all the vulnerable aplications are patched we need to be on guard for signs of malicious behavior from programs relying on zlib. In other words this is just a part of life in the world of computing.
until Fox News or Talk radio say this netwrok has a bias towards left wing viruses?
On a side note I have always found it odd that things like HTTP and the PC were invented not by systems enginers or computer scientist but people outside the field. Its not like Einstein was a chemist or marie cury was a psych major. Yet CS and CE people are continually upstaged in the histroy of computing by physists and mathematicians.
I am a warlock, just putting that out there.
The fact of the matter is that WoW is innovative. Simple classes, a clean interface (or a dirty one if you want it), What is essentially a battelfield mode cleanly executed. It is a marvel of a game.
And it will never last.
Why?
Because of this issue. The fact is that this is the one area where Blizzard has not chosen to break with tradition. To swing the nerf bat is too simple a solution to a complex problem. The devs over at blizzard have clearly lost sight of the fact that the more frustrating an MMORPG is, the less people are going to want to play it.
As it stands right now, the vast majority of players in WoW are rogues, or on the horde side Shaman. This is only going to get worse as other classes are ignored, then blizzard like the idiots at SWG are going to nerf the most popular classes in a bid to remain legitimate to users like myself, and presto the user base evaporates. Next come stupid commercialls featuring "real people" who play SW^h^h^h I mean WoW.
All MMO games follow the same curve, and its unfortunate since one of the posters here was correct in stating that the best way to bring down an overpowered class is to give a counter skill to an underpowered one.
Its not what distro you use. As I said I like debian. But stable is not a good desktop distro so I try out ubuntu and love it. Gentoo is awesome because it used one of the best things about BSD (source based distribution) to make linux better. OSS is more about a marketplace of ideas, where projects tinker. Just because someone likes gentoo dosent make them a performance whore, and just because someone likes distro X it dosent mean anything except that they are a member of the communtiy and are trying to do the best with the options that they are given. Lets not let our community be destroyed by idiots on websites or idiots on message boards.
Though it may have lost its hydrogen and helium burning capeability I would hypothesise that the thing is now an L or T dwarf that is to say it might be Duterium or Lithium burning, or its spectral profile might be very dusty or contain methane. In otherwords we might have just seen an L or T dwarf being made but I highly doubt this is a new class of star.
Microsoft was not going to listen to him anyway. As long as the majority of people cannot tell the diffrence between microsoft "security updates" and real security then microsoft has no reason to change unless they are emberased into changing, lets be clear there are serious bugs in MS word that they haven't fixed.
Buffer checking is one way to solve the problem.
Another, non intrusive way of doing it is to include kernel level memory protection. On top of that you could add Users, Groups and privileges and not allow every program to have the run of the system.
Buffer Overruns are as old as C and UNIX has built mechanisism to cope with it that do not put the onus on the programmer, since the memory monitoring is done in the kernel, this is also safer in the long run because it means that a program must break memory protection at the kernel level in order to become "root". Too bad microsoft has yet to come up with a mechanism that UNIX people have been using for years.
The article explains that whil SP2 is a step in the right direction it still does not implement the simplest in security steps. Like disabling NetBIOS connections. Also the woefull practice of relying on the RPC damon for interproces communication. SP2 provides some minor userland utilities that most users don't understand and probly wont know how to use without adressing the underlying problem, winodws is not insecure by programming, its insecure by default.
I think that most of us "in the know" will find that the step was not major, a major step would be to provide a locked down network configuration for XP and not rely on the user turning off services. Rely on the user to enable the services he or she needs, and force all users to run under unprivliged accounts. You are right that *nix is not more secure, its just more secure by default.
Thats because the ATI and Nvidia Hardware for PPC, ARM and SPARC (does anyone but Sun make GPUs for SPARC?) is of a completley different arch than x86 (sorry for being captain obvious) besides the fact is that the Linux PPC market is small (0.1% of the 2% of PCs that use Power Processors) Since ARM is mainly used in embeded applications its likely that such drivers would be custom since the GPU would interface into the embeded bus (I am not an embeded systems specialist so I don't know)The result is that ATI and Nvidia don't really care about these markets, or would partner with the company developing the embeded system. In the case that they did relase HW specs for SPARC(?) and PPC versions of there GPUs only a small number of developers would be interested.
I think that the Debian people are right on this one , however the FSF foundation is partly to blame because of the invariant sections in the FDL . (why glibc wont have documentation)
I think the solution, since non-free is being kept, should be to include the non-free repositories in the default "sources.list" file and allow tasksel to use non-free packages for documentation under a "Non-Free documentation" header, no non-free stuff should needed for the bootstrap installation(although binary kernel module won't be available by default). Thats the best comprimise, IMHO.
Could we stop the Microsoft, Debian, Gentoo and Fedora, and *BSD astroturfing please?
Ahmen
This guy wasn't around when one couldnt find a distro that did hardware autodetction. He wasn't around for the days of OSS drivers which sucked.(This was all two years ago mind you) I also think that having a VM wrapper is not necissarily a fair assesment of linux since the emulated hardware of a VM can be very hard to set up properly. Besids he was probibly trying Gentoo or Debian which are not the easiest distros for first timers to set up.
Painkiller
FarCry
Also simply because its a sequil dosent mean that the result will be subpar. In fact Doom 3 has a lot going for it as ID spawed the modern first person shooter with Quake 2 and made it look beautiful with Quake 3. I am honestly tired of people bemoaning sequils before they come out.