This is the definition that I'd advocate. Otherwise the "zero-day" moniker loses pretty much any significant meaning. Being able to find and exploit a bug on the day that the software is released is a big deal. That would mean that the developer has left a pretty glaring hole in their software. Finding a bug 2 years later just isn't the same. Both are vulnerabilities, but one shows a higher level of inattention.
Ick. PDF doesn't reflow well. My ebook reader isn't exactly the screen dimensions as what the PDF was rendered in. PDF is good for rendering a _specific_ page. ePub, mobi, azw (and a bunch of others) are all ebook formats which deal well (or at least better) with different "page" sizes. They will reflow the text when I go from a Kindle 2 to a Kindle DX, to an iPad, to a desktop computer. PDF will probably look good on the desktop, probably reasonable on the iPad and Kindle DX, and lousy (more accurately, it will still look accurate, but will be cumbersome to read as you have to zoom and pan around each PDF page) on the Kindle 2.
And then Apple will probably turn around and point the incoming lawyers at the agreement with the developer which probably states something along the lines that the developer will defend, indemnify and hold harmless Apple over patents/copyrights/and any other licensing issue that may arise over the app. All that would happen is that the developer will get hammered, not Apple.
As with any programming, proper commenting can clear up misinterpretations and confusion.
I prefer some of the statements made by Fowler in his Refactoring book. To paraphrase, code sometimes has bad smells. There's two ways to fix it. First would be to refactor it into something that doesn't smell, or apply a liberal dose of deodorant known as comments. They don't fix the smells, they just hide them. Generally speaking it's better to rewrite the code into something that's understandable rather than commenting it. (and then later on, the code gets changed and the comments don't, and the world gets worse....)
Chances are if I didn't want to follow the link I clicked on immediately, I would have right-clicked on the link and selected the Open in New Tab menu item. Since normally I want to actually follow a link that I click on, that's the action I want it to take.
The customer is exactly where this bill should go. Google already pays their ISP to carry traffic. Why should they be paying their ISP _and_ yours (directly)? If more users download stuff from Google, then Google's bill to their ISP will go up, and Google has thus paid their part. If your ISP really wanted to get paid from somewhere and not increase the customer's bill, they should charge their peering partners more to carry the traffic originating from them.
But it's a bad summary. They missed the rather critical phrase "how to turn any NULL pointer dereference in the kernel into a root exploit". This isn't about any NULL pointer.
I strongly disagree. For starters, your third solution, "Steal", is not an acceptable solution in a school. Ever.
Second, a kid does not need to learn Brand X of a particular sort of software. They need to learn concepts, not specific implementations. So they should learn what a word processor is good for. Whether it's MS Word, or OpenOffice, or iWork (or pick some other word processor). Irrelevant. Learn what a word processor does. (Repeat for presentation software, spreadsheet, etc) It will make them more versatile in the real world. Additionally, the second option in there is free, thus solves the original problem of "we can't afford the licesnes". I have no idea what they need Creative Suite for. That's an even bigger sledgehammer than MS Office for putting in finishing nails.
Yet another advantage for OpenOffice, since it is free, the kid can easily take a copy home and use it for homework there too, and not inflict a large licensing cost on the family too.
You send letters through the postal service which is a network you don't own either but you still have an expectation of privacy in many cases. I'm not sure the logic of your argument is on solid footing there.
Flawed analogy. When you send your postal mail, you contracted with the postal service that they won't open your letter. Not so with most corporate computers and networks that I've heard of. Most corps that I know/heard of pretty much explicitly state they they can and will monitor their network.
I can't agree with you. IT's job is to keep the network and devices running. Not to be jerked around by the latest whims of the users. IT has responsibilities beyond making the users happy. If that can be accomplished while continuing to ensure the safety and security of the network, fine. But dropping a random device into the network is irresponsible.
And unencrypted IMAP may not be acceptable use to some companies. So it's more than "just ticking a checkbox".
Don't laugh too hard, I've actually had someone accuse me before that my C code looked "too Pascal-ish". What? Readable and maintainable? You say that like it's a bad thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Wait, doesn't the 2nd amendment let you guys carry arms... but it doesn't say that you can discharge them....
This is the definition that I'd advocate. Otherwise the "zero-day" moniker loses pretty much any significant meaning. Being able to find and exploit a bug on the day that the software is released is a big deal. That would mean that the developer has left a pretty glaring hole in their software. Finding a bug 2 years later just isn't the same. Both are vulnerabilities, but one shows a higher level of inattention.
There's 10 types of people in the world, those who understand trinary, those who don't, and those who mistake it for binary.
Another one rides the bus.
Wrong artist... that's Weird Al.
Ick. PDF doesn't reflow well. My ebook reader isn't exactly the screen dimensions as what the PDF was rendered in. PDF is good for rendering a _specific_ page. ePub, mobi, azw (and a bunch of others) are all ebook formats which deal well (or at least better) with different "page" sizes. They will reflow the text when I go from a Kindle 2 to a Kindle DX, to an iPad, to a desktop computer. PDF will probably look good on the desktop, probably reasonable on the iPad and Kindle DX, and lousy (more accurately, it will still look accurate, but will be cumbersome to read as you have to zoom and pan around each PDF page) on the Kindle 2.
Yep. My Kindle typically lasts about two weeks between charging. (Less if I leave the GSM radio running)
And how much bad press would come down on the GPL that due to the enforcement of the GPL, the hapless developer gets hammered?
And then Apple will probably turn around and point the incoming lawyers at the agreement with the developer which probably states something along the lines that the developer will defend, indemnify and hold harmless Apple over patents/copyrights/and any other licensing issue that may arise over the app. All that would happen is that the developer will get hammered, not Apple.
At least five of my friends have Android phones. Another one with an iPhone, A couple with Blackberries.
As with any programming, proper commenting can clear up misinterpretations and confusion.
I prefer some of the statements made by Fowler in his Refactoring book. To paraphrase, code sometimes has bad smells. There's two ways to fix it. First would be to refactor it into something that doesn't smell, or apply a liberal dose of deodorant known as comments. They don't fix the smells, they just hide them. Generally speaking it's better to rewrite the code into something that's understandable rather than commenting it. (and then later on, the code gets changed and the comments don't, and the world gets worse....)
Um, Fedora and Ubuntu are Linux as well. Haven't looked at MeeGo much, but offhand it looks like another Linux distro.
Chances are if I didn't want to follow the link I clicked on immediately, I would have right-clicked on the link and selected the Open in New Tab menu item. Since normally I want to actually follow a link that I click on, that's the action I want it to take.
The customer is exactly where this bill should go. Google already pays their ISP to carry traffic. Why should they be paying their ISP _and_ yours (directly)? If more users download stuff from Google, then Google's bill to their ISP will go up, and Google has thus paid their part. If your ISP really wanted to get paid from somewhere and not increase the customer's bill, they should charge their peering partners more to carry the traffic originating from them.
Haven't looked at the requirements for iPhone OS 4 ? Old HW isn't supported...
Put it this way - put the equation into C++ and compile and see how it comes out. if( 137/206 >= 2/3 ) votepass;
Nope. That will always evaluate true. (You're invoking integral division, not real numbers.) You wanted:
if (137.0 / 206.0 >= 2.0/3.0 ) votepass;
EG, NNTP may still be a huge amount of some ISPs traffic (eg, see this paper, http://www.icir.org/vern/papers/imc102-maier.pdf [icir.org] ) but it is almost ALL binary transfers.
Huge compared to the amount of spam email transiting their network?
But it's a bad summary. They missed the rather critical phrase "how to turn any NULL pointer dereference in the kernel into a root exploit". This isn't about any NULL pointer.
Second, a kid does not need to learn Brand X of a particular sort of software. They need to learn concepts, not specific implementations. So they should learn what a word processor is good for. Whether it's MS Word, or OpenOffice, or iWork (or pick some other word processor). Irrelevant. Learn what a word processor does. (Repeat for presentation software, spreadsheet, etc) It will make them more versatile in the real world. Additionally, the second option in there is free, thus solves the original problem of "we can't afford the licesnes". I have no idea what they need Creative Suite for. That's an even bigger sledgehammer than MS Office for putting in finishing nails.
Yet another advantage for OpenOffice, since it is free, the kid can easily take a copy home and use it for homework there too, and not inflict a large licensing cost on the family too.
Techincally it's only convertable to NULL..... no guarantees how it's actually represented in memory.
Forget acronyms... next up, l33t speak!
You send letters through the postal service which is a network you don't own either but you still have an expectation of privacy in many cases. I'm not sure the logic of your argument is on solid footing there.
Flawed analogy. When you send your postal mail, you contracted with the postal service that they won't open your letter. Not so with most corporate computers and networks that I've heard of. Most corps that I know/heard of pretty much explicitly state they they can and will monitor their network.
I can't agree with you. IT's job is to keep the network and devices running. Not to be jerked around by the latest whims of the users. IT has responsibilities beyond making the users happy. If that can be accomplished while continuing to ensure the safety and security of the network, fine. But dropping a random device into the network is irresponsible. And unencrypted IMAP may not be acceptable use to some companies. So it's more than "just ticking a checkbox".
The iPhone doesn't support tethering.
Ah, but it does... it's your carrier that doesn't support it. :)
Don't laugh too hard, I've actually had someone accuse me before that my C code looked "too Pascal-ish". What? Readable and maintainable? You say that like it's a bad thing.