Switch every phone over to display dB directly and everyone in the world would understand it in 6 months, though some would bitch about it for years to come.
People don't need to know what the numbers MEAN, they need to know that at 100 it doesn't work, and at 96 just barely works, but 80 is golden, and they'll figure that out fairly quickly.
Of course in reality all people really want is the phone to give them a good reason why they lost their call, can't get calls or have shitty data rates, and that could more accurately be represented with a simple block of text when the users asks and a green or red light in place of the bars.
You simply have to ask for memory that doesn't have the NX bit set when requesting a memory allocation.
Translation: You don't call malloc(), you use VirtualAlloc with the right flags. Then you get a block of memory back that can be executed.
Either way, with interpreted languages, there is no requirement to be able to directly execute the memory. The interpreter is the executing code, reading and basing its execution path based on what the 'compiled' java byte code looks like. Java doesn't compile to native code so theres no reason to need memory without the NX bit.
Of course, it has become common practice to JIT compile the java byte code into native code for performance increases, and thats where you'll need memory that can be executed, but all you have to do is ask for it from the OS.
Emulators and x86 Hypervisors are a good example of uses of memory that needs to be allocated without the NX bit set so it can be directly executed because they try to run the code directly otherwise performance would suck ass.
Either way, the 'special mechanisms' that the CLR uses are available to everyone and have been since before the.NET runtime existed.
People have been able to 'do the right thing' in regards to DEP for at least the last 10 years in Windows.
As far as Java being 'safe from'. This is simply a side effect of the nature of Java. Some of it intentional and a good thing, some of the effects were unexpected, and some of those are good and some are not so good, but thats mostly an issue for debugging bugs in the JVM.
Guess you don't realize that when MS made that statement it was when most PC owners didn't have a PC with an MMU, so there truely wasn't anything the OS could do about it on the common hardware.
You need VMM support which requires a MMU (on chip or otherwise) in order to actually have protected memory.
Go ahead though, pretend you have a clue, no one will notice.
Every app can be forced to use DEP and ASLR. Its a Windows setting, not an app setting.
Apps can choose to make themselves fall into those categories or not for compatibility reasons, but the sys admin can most certainly force both on for all applications. Windows controls
Second whoever said 'flash can't do DEP' needs to stop injecting their ignorance into the conversation. Thats roughly the same as saying no web browsers can do DEP, and that the C#/VB/*.NET compilers can't produce DEP compatible output. The only thing even close to a problem is the scripting, which doesn't actually present a problem unless you're using crappy hacks from the 70s main frames in order to make it work a little faster. Of course, they could just use the right API call so they can dynamically allocate executable memory rather than just using malloc and saying it can't be done, but...
Who really expects Adobe to actually know what they are doing or do anything right anymore?
The problem is that the default configuration in the mainstream versions of Windows right now is not to default to 'on for all' for DEP and ASLR. If you give a developer two choices A) Easy and quick B) long and hard, but safer. Unless he/she is doing the code for free, you can assume their going to pick A over B. The only people who pick B are the ones doing it out of love, not a paycheck.
Until Windows forces them to pick B, most are going to pick A.
No, I haven't become what I hate. You don't see me supporting an abusive, shitty company so I can have a trendy, overpriced device. I don't slap Google stickers on my car and blindly claim my device is superior to all others.
With the exception of the stickers, I do see you supporting a shitty abusive company so you can have a trendy overpriced device.
You are a fanboy, so you don't think its a shitty abusive company or a trendy overpriced device, but that doesn't change the facts.
I love the fact that you are being preemptively defensive. If anything, its indicative of the fact that many iPhone users are emotionally attached to their overrated device and have an allegiance to a terrible company.
If I replaced iPhone with Android and directed it at you, this statement would still be true.
The difference between an Apple fanboy and a Android fanboy is simple. Apple fanboys are flamboyantly gay, Android fanboys are self loathing homophobes who haven't come out of the closet yet, otherwise they are the same.
Wired doesn't need to do anything to bring Wikileaks down, it'll do that on its own.
As has already been stated. Wikileaks isn't about the truth, its about 'fighting the man'. It does so by leaking information thats damaging to the man.
In principal this is fine as we get the information and make an intelligent decision and course based on that information.
The problem is, they aren't providing raw information, they are just providing information that supports their side of the story, and then further more they're sensationalizing things with spin that simply isn't true or would be considered even remotely possible of being true by a sane person.
The 'murder' video was a perfect example of the true colors of Wikileaks. The fact that they tried so incredibly hard to spin it into 'evil soldiers' just let any clear minded person who wasn't already aware of it see how much propoganda they spew and how biased they are. Wikileaks is nothing but a tool in an agenda that is not at all 'for the good of the people' and entirely 'for what Mr Julian wants to see go down'.
The fact that it has backfired and show clear minded people what a douche he is and what a scam wikileaks is in general was just a side effect of his greed.
Protip: Not being a blind moron lets you realize any attempt Wired has done to hurt Wikileaks would be comparable to jumping up and down on an asteroid as it re-entered the Earths atmosphere in an attempt to make it go faster. Nothing wired can do will have much of an effect, the damage was most certainly self inflicted. Take your blinders off.
Sesame Street stop qualifying as good childrens programming with Oscar turned into a politically correct pussy who is afraid to upset anyone and the Count had his balls cut off. It used to be a good show when it was balanced. Now its just Barney with muppets instead of a fat gay version of Dino, effectively devoid of any nutritional value for children.
One problem is, the people who actually make the Internet work in the long term, not the guys who design social networking fads, are the ones who work on the lower level important bits such as html. They like to make standards that last several years, they aren't planning for an IPO, they are planning on retirement. They don't live in an instant/twitch based world. Thank god.
Another problem is, the committee is also partly made up of the various companies that are arguing over which way is better on things like the video format used. All the companies you see slinging comments around about flash and html5 are all in on the conversation so they aren't going to agree until they've win or its obvious they lost. They are going to argue until we pick.
And what 'open' standard doesn't have 'license fees' attached? You obviously define 'fees' as having to do with currency, but you're ignoring the other requirements of the license because they are not related to currency. Thats just dumb.
Lets define an open license: Anyone can implement it for whatever they want and there will be no discrimination against who licenses it or what they do with it... as long as they agree with the licenses constraints.
The entire mpeg group falls well within that definition. It only doesn't fall into that group when you add an additional specific constraint preventing a certain form of license constraint, relating to the transfer of currency.
You aren't bitching about open, you're bitching about free/ no cost licensing. Stop trying to confuse people by ranting about 'open' when you really mean 'no cost'.
It is brilliant if your just a service tech thats paid to 'fix the machine' and can't actually do anything to 'fix the machine'
As an example: Windows XP used for photo printing boths are various 1 hour photo places. They Joe the plumber plugin a flash device and print his pictures.
They are made by SomeBigCompany, but the phamacy down the street has one and needs it repaid, so JohnTheRepairMan comes to fix it. Can't fix the fact that it loads the autorun on flash devices even though its not supposed to because SomeBigCompany says no, and if he does it anyway, SomeBigCompany not continue to consider him an 'authorized repair man'.
John however is allowed to say 'its got a virus, reimage or repair'.
John just wants a way to speed up his 'reimage/repair' calls since he isn't actually allowed to do something to fix the problem.
John wins twice. A) He spends less time on a call that he gets paid a fixed price for anyway, so more profit and more importantly B) because SomeBigCompany doesn't care about the wasted cash, John gets to continue making a living.
John doesn't want it fixed. Its not his fault. He's not allowed to fix it. He is in the position to be the customers hero and have the customer thank him while he takes money from them for something he could actually make not happen again.
From Johns perspective... it is brilliant, and he's not even doing anything mildly wrong or immoral.
Sometimes your perspective on the problems you see here on slashdot is... incomplete at best.
Of course, if you're working in relation to the neighbor in the next office over, then its pretty easy to slip things in using this method.
Nanax doesn't profit, but Scamax next door does... and the people at Nanax seemed to have used Scamax for buying and selling their own stocks... odd...
Systems like this are a little more complex than that.
Unemployment has nothing to do with the stock market, true.
The unemployment rate is high because a lot of lazy people don't want to do actual work and want high pay, so immigrants have come in, willing to do actual work under the table for far less money.
The reason unemployment is high is because the economy isn't REALLY doing that bad, which is why these people can still manage to eat without actually doing anything to obtain lunch. When they 'unemployed' actually start having a real hard time, you'll see far more people on roofs and in gardens who speak english natively. People don't work because they want too, people work because they have too. When unemployed in America, you really don't have to work, you just have to find the right line to stand in for hand outs from those of us who do work.
So you mean that if I say buy 10k shares of IBM... I buy one share, then someone else buys all the remaining shares, before I go buy my next 1 share?
No.
I buy 10k shares at X price. Period.
Anything else is the result of automation, meaning if the broker or whatever system decides that it can get 20 shares for 10 cents and the rest for 15, so it makes two purchases then the problem was with the buyer, not the person taking advantage of it.
You're playing with paper, not reality, yet you keep trying to treat it as if you're buying real objects.
Its extremely efficient for the person making money using HFT, and not so much for the guy who tried to be greedy and split the purchase into two. If you're going to try and be greedy, be prepared to play with people WAY better at it than you.
The only reason that few microseconds matter is because both are playing the same game, trying to squeeze every last cent out of a system, some are just better at it than others.
Simple solution to the problem: Realize stocks are a gamble and that you rarely when in the short haul.
HFT is only inefficient if the electronic market is unable to keep up with the transaction rate, otherwise there isn't a loss, just another party to take a portion of the money exchanged. Its inefficient to the buyer, seller won't see much of an effect and the HFT party is rather efficient.
Again, simple solution, same as before... don't freaking gamble if you aren't able to deal with the loss.
Its always worth while to stand up on principal for something your fully aware will probably never effect you or anyone you ever know, especially when its something so important like what apps you can run on your phone, I mean how could they take away such freedoms, we've always been able to run any random app on our cell phones, this is such a new shift from the way its always been that it must be crushed.
So you go ahead and worry about such piss ant silly reasons that you don't own one and won't buy one, you keep fighting the man for me.
I'll keep using my iPhone and never being affected by whatever it is you're bitching about this week.
!'m an architect, and I've worked with paid software before, but I gotta tell you, the free applications are most of the time way better than the paid ones,
You do realize the second half of that sentence makes it clear the first half is a lie... right?
Why would that happen? People who buy Macs can afford the $99/year, why would they buy a mac then subject themselves to a crappier dev library and documentation rather than just paying $100 for the real thing?
You gotta stop thinking like people who buy Apple devices are poor and trying to get everything they can for 'free'. Its not Linux. Mac people actually just pay for stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
They don't know that right now.
Switch every phone over to display dB directly and everyone in the world would understand it in 6 months, though some would bitch about it for years to come.
People don't need to know what the numbers MEAN, they need to know that at 100 it doesn't work, and at 96 just barely works, but 80 is golden, and they'll figure that out fairly quickly.
Of course in reality all people really want is the phone to give them a good reason why they lost their call, can't get calls or have shitty data rates, and that could more accurately be represented with a simple block of text when the users asks and a green or red light in place of the bars.
You simply have to ask for memory that doesn't have the NX bit set when requesting a memory allocation.
Translation: You don't call malloc(), you use VirtualAlloc with the right flags. Then you get a block of memory back that can be executed.
Either way, with interpreted languages, there is no requirement to be able to directly execute the memory. The interpreter is the executing code, reading and basing its execution path based on what the 'compiled' java byte code looks like. Java doesn't compile to native code so theres no reason to need memory without the NX bit.
Of course, it has become common practice to JIT compile the java byte code into native code for performance increases, and thats where you'll need memory that can be executed, but all you have to do is ask for it from the OS.
Emulators and x86 Hypervisors are a good example of uses of memory that needs to be allocated without the NX bit set so it can be directly executed because they try to run the code directly otherwise performance would suck ass.
Either way, the 'special mechanisms' that the CLR uses are available to everyone and have been since before the .NET runtime existed.
People have been able to 'do the right thing' in regards to DEP for at least the last 10 years in Windows.
As far as Java being 'safe from'. This is simply a side effect of the nature of Java. Some of it intentional and a good thing, some of the effects were unexpected, and some of those are good and some are not so good, but thats mostly an issue for debugging bugs in the JVM.
Guess you don't realize that when MS made that statement it was when most PC owners didn't have a PC with an MMU, so there truely wasn't anything the OS could do about it on the common hardware.
You need VMM support which requires a MMU (on chip or otherwise) in order to actually have protected memory.
Go ahead though, pretend you have a clue, no one will notice.
Every app can be forced to use DEP and ASLR. Its a Windows setting, not an app setting.
Apps can choose to make themselves fall into those categories or not for compatibility reasons, but the sys admin can most certainly force both on for all applications. Windows controls
Second whoever said 'flash can't do DEP' needs to stop injecting their ignorance into the conversation. Thats roughly the same as saying no web browsers can do DEP, and that the C#/VB/*.NET compilers can't produce DEP compatible output. The only thing even close to a problem is the scripting, which doesn't actually present a problem unless you're using crappy hacks from the 70s main frames in order to make it work a little faster. Of course, they could just use the right API call so they can dynamically allocate executable memory rather than just using malloc and saying it can't be done, but ...
Who really expects Adobe to actually know what they are doing or do anything right anymore?
The problem is that the default configuration in the mainstream versions of Windows right now is not to default to 'on for all' for DEP and ASLR. If you give a developer two choices A) Easy and quick B) long and hard, but safer. Unless he/she is doing the code for free, you can assume their going to pick A over B. The only people who pick B are the ones doing it out of love, not a paycheck.
Until Windows forces them to pick B, most are going to pick A.
With the exception of the stickers, I do see you supporting a shitty abusive company so you can have a trendy overpriced device.
You are a fanboy, so you don't think its a shitty abusive company or a trendy overpriced device, but that doesn't change the facts.
If I replaced iPhone with Android and directed it at you, this statement would still be true.
The difference between an Apple fanboy and a Android fanboy is simple. Apple fanboys are flamboyantly gay, Android fanboys are self loathing homophobes who haven't come out of the closet yet, otherwise they are the same.
The two statements are not directly related to each other except that they relate to the water.
Wired doesn't need to do anything to bring Wikileaks down, it'll do that on its own.
As has already been stated. Wikileaks isn't about the truth, its about 'fighting the man'. It does so by leaking information thats damaging to the man.
In principal this is fine as we get the information and make an intelligent decision and course based on that information.
The problem is, they aren't providing raw information, they are just providing information that supports their side of the story, and then further more they're sensationalizing things with spin that simply isn't true or would be considered even remotely possible of being true by a sane person.
The 'murder' video was a perfect example of the true colors of Wikileaks. The fact that they tried so incredibly hard to spin it into 'evil soldiers' just let any clear minded person who wasn't already aware of it see how much propoganda they spew and how biased they are. Wikileaks is nothing but a tool in an agenda that is not at all 'for the good of the people' and entirely 'for what Mr Julian wants to see go down'.
The fact that it has backfired and show clear minded people what a douche he is and what a scam wikileaks is in general was just a side effect of his greed.
Protip: Not being a blind moron lets you realize any attempt Wired has done to hurt Wikileaks would be comparable to jumping up and down on an asteroid as it re-entered the Earths atmosphere in an attempt to make it go faster. Nothing wired can do will have much of an effect, the damage was most certainly self inflicted. Take your blinders off.
He just posted a someone lengthy and slow ranting flame like pre-teens did in the BBS days without any common sense.
He's doing exactly what he's ranting about.
Sesame Street stop qualifying as good childrens programming with Oscar turned into a politically correct pussy who is afraid to upset anyone and the Count had his balls cut off. It used to be a good show when it was balanced. Now its just Barney with muppets instead of a fat gay version of Dino, effectively devoid of any nutritional value for children.
Why? None of them are actually monopolies in any area, Intel has AMD, and the other three in your list have each other to cover the rest.
One problem is, the people who actually make the Internet work in the long term, not the guys who design social networking fads, are the ones who work on the lower level important bits such as html. They like to make standards that last several years, they aren't planning for an IPO, they are planning on retirement. They don't live in an instant/twitch based world. Thank god.
Another problem is, the committee is also partly made up of the various companies that are arguing over which way is better on things like the video format used. All the companies you see slinging comments around about flash and html5 are all in on the conversation so they aren't going to agree until they've win or its obvious they lost. They are going to argue until we pick.
And what 'open' standard doesn't have 'license fees' attached? You obviously define 'fees' as having to do with currency, but you're ignoring the other requirements of the license because they are not related to currency. Thats just dumb.
Lets define an open license: ... as long as they agree with the licenses constraints.
Anyone can implement it for whatever they want and there will be no discrimination against who licenses it or what they do with it
The entire mpeg group falls well within that definition. It only doesn't fall into that group when you add an additional specific constraint preventing a certain form of license constraint, relating to the transfer of currency.
You aren't bitching about open, you're bitching about free/ no cost licensing. Stop trying to confuse people by ranting about 'open' when you really mean 'no cost'.
It is brilliant if your just a service tech thats paid to 'fix the machine' and can't actually do anything to 'fix the machine'
As an example: Windows XP used for photo printing boths are various 1 hour photo places. They Joe the plumber plugin a flash device and print his pictures.
They are made by SomeBigCompany, but the phamacy down the street has one and needs it repaid, so JohnTheRepairMan comes to fix it. Can't fix the fact that it loads the autorun on flash devices even though its not supposed to because SomeBigCompany says no, and if he does it anyway, SomeBigCompany not continue to consider him an 'authorized repair man'.
John however is allowed to say 'its got a virus, reimage or repair'.
John just wants a way to speed up his 'reimage/repair' calls since he isn't actually allowed to do something to fix the problem.
John wins twice. A) He spends less time on a call that he gets paid a fixed price for anyway, so more profit and more importantly B) because SomeBigCompany doesn't care about the wasted cash, John gets to continue making a living.
John doesn't want it fixed. Its not his fault. He's not allowed to fix it. He is in the position to be the customers hero and have the customer thank him while he takes money from them for something he could actually make not happen again.
From Johns perspective ... it is brilliant, and he's not even doing anything mildly wrong or immoral.
Sometimes your perspective on the problems you see here on slashdot is ... incomplete at best.
Of course, if you're working in relation to the neighbor in the next office over, then its pretty easy to slip things in using this method.
Nanax doesn't profit, but Scamax next door does ... and the people at Nanax seemed to have used Scamax for buying and selling their own stocks ... odd ...
Systems like this are a little more complex than that.
Unemployment has nothing to do with the stock market, true.
The unemployment rate is high because a lot of lazy people don't want to do actual work and want high pay, so immigrants have come in, willing to do actual work under the table for far less money.
The reason unemployment is high is because the economy isn't REALLY doing that bad, which is why these people can still manage to eat without actually doing anything to obtain lunch. When they 'unemployed' actually start having a real hard time, you'll see far more people on roofs and in gardens who speak english natively. People don't work because they want too, people work because they have too. When unemployed in America, you really don't have to work, you just have to find the right line to stand in for hand outs from those of us who do work.
So you mean that if I say buy 10k shares of IBM ... I buy one share, then someone else buys all the remaining shares, before I go buy my next 1 share?
No.
I buy 10k shares at X price. Period.
Anything else is the result of automation, meaning if the broker or whatever system decides that it can get 20 shares for 10 cents and the rest for 15, so it makes two purchases then the problem was with the buyer, not the person taking advantage of it.
You're playing with paper, not reality, yet you keep trying to treat it as if you're buying real objects.
Its extremely efficient for the person making money using HFT, and not so much for the guy who tried to be greedy and split the purchase into two. If you're going to try and be greedy, be prepared to play with people WAY better at it than you.
The only reason that few microseconds matter is because both are playing the same game, trying to squeeze every last cent out of a system, some are just better at it than others.
Simple solution to the problem: Realize stocks are a gamble and that you rarely when in the short haul.
HFT is only inefficient if the electronic market is unable to keep up with the transaction rate, otherwise there isn't a loss, just another party to take a portion of the money exchanged. Its inefficient to the buyer, seller won't see much of an effect and the HFT party is rather efficient.
Again, simple solution, same as before ... don't freaking gamble if you aren't able to deal with the loss.
Its always worth while to stand up on principal for something your fully aware will probably never effect you or anyone you ever know, especially when its something so important like what apps you can run on your phone, I mean how could they take away such freedoms, we've always been able to run any random app on our cell phones, this is such a new shift from the way its always been that it must be crushed.
So you go ahead and worry about such piss ant silly reasons that you don't own one and won't buy one, you keep fighting the man for me.
I'll keep using my iPhone and never being affected by whatever it is you're bitching about this week.
If you're going to switch to a new OS, which doesn't run any of your existing apps anyway, why care about what processor its using?
ARM is far more power for the battery usage, using x86 without some paradigm shift would be taking a step backwards.
Just go buy a Droid or an iPhone rather than wait for some bad version of the existing technology to come around.
Seriously ... how does it end up costing multiple millions of dollars to accomplish such a trivial change?
You mean they spent 50k on the developers to update their systems and the rest on 'testing' right?
Seriously, theres nothing to this upgrade other than changes to the management systems from there end.
W T F?
You do realize that Glide was a subset of OpenGL ... right?
Its probably actually the books arthur spaming it all over.
You do realize the second half of that sentence makes it clear the first half is a lie ... right?
Why would that happen? People who buy Macs can afford the $99/year, why would they buy a mac then subject themselves to a crappier dev library and documentation rather than just paying $100 for the real thing?
You gotta stop thinking like people who buy Apple devices are poor and trying to get everything they can for 'free'. Its not Linux. Mac people actually just pay for stuff.
I support freedom of the responsible press.
I do not support this douche bag in the slightest, he's nothing more than an attention whore.
Only when you live in a fantasy world.