The one problem that I have is that it won't work with any secure (https) site. I haven't had a chance yet to investigate and find out if it's Mozilla not handling it properly, or just that the sites refuse the connection from a browser they don't recognize... but either way it effectively makes the browser unusable for such purposes. And a lot of what I do requires access to secure sites.
You need to install the PSM (personal security manager, IIRC). Go to Debug->Install PSM, scroll down the page, and click on the installation button. It will download the PSM, install it, and give you a status update.
This was contemplated, written, and subsequently discussed on bugtraq (but never released). Here's the original announcement of the benign trojan (called Antibody):
I'm tired of that argument. Anything can be accomplished in C++ as long as you play by the operator rules. In this case, the operand left of the + HAS to be a string object, otherwise it doesn't work.
This is completely, utterly wrong. The following code compiles and works correctly:
The problem comes when you try to define operator+ for your custom CString class. If you try to define a binary operator for a class when the class isn't the first argument, you should get an error, since you're asking the compiler to call a member function on an integer. However, if you define the operator+ as a non-member function, you can put the arguments in any order you wish.
BTW, if you're using gcc-3, you'd use stringstream instead of strstream for the conversion. This would also keep you from having to explicitly delete[] the char* from the call to ostrstream::str().
By the way, this was not flamebait this was just sad irony...
If your post wasn't flamebait, it had to be gross incompetence.
KDE moves to the GPL and they get flamed,
KDE has always been GPL.
It was Qt that switched licenses, from QPL to GPL.
RMS never once flamed KDE in his post.
Other than an unfortunate choice of words, RMS said nothing evil about or to either TrollTech or KDE. He thanked them for finally resolving this issue, so that GNOME and KDE could finally compete on technical merit alone. His comment on 'forgiveness' was an acknowledgement that the KDE group has done some nastiness in the past with the GPL, but in the same breath he absolved them for all violations regarding FSF code. The next sentence asked everyone else who'd been abused by KDE to do the same.
Granted, this does piss off the KDE developers, since they never cared about the licensing issues in the first place (and AFAIK have never acknowledged that they violated the GPL in the first place). But although RMS does care, he is willing to let it all go if this will all just be over.
now Pyhton is not compatible with the GPL
and people try to work a way to make them fit in.
People have been trying for years to resolve the KDE/Qt/QPL/GPL issue, RMS first and foremost. In fact, the very creation of the QPL was an earlier attempt to resolve this. It failed, though, because TrollTech couldn't resist throwing in an extra couple of clauses that violated the GPL.
It's not clear how coffee could be maintained at a point above boiling, assuming typical atmospheric pressure.
Umm... have you ever taken an intro chemistry class? Whenever you dissolve anything into water, you both raise the boiling point and lower the freezing point. It is thus possible to heat coffee well above the boiling point of water, which is what McDonalds was doing in this case.
I cite the example of the woman who sued McDonald's for $1 million after spilling hot coffee in her own lap. Her argument was that the coffee was not appropriately labeled as dangerously hot and therefore her burns were a direct result of McDonald's negligence. Now, we all know that the woman was a moron, but worse still, she skirted her responsibility for her actions. She played ignorant and refused to acknowledge that she was stupid to have put hot coffee between her legs.
It's amazing how frequently example is brought up as evidence of both society's lack of personal responibility and its propensity towards litigation. Hoever, I have yet to see someone cite this case who had the slightest clue as to what the case was actually about.
For those of you who think that McDonalds was sued for failing to label coffee as dangerous, you are badly mistaken. The suit was successful for several reasons.
McDonalds was serving their coffee at its boiling point (which, for those of you who lack basic chemistry knowledge, is significantly above that of pure water).
McDonalds had received a large number of reports about their superheated coffee causing serious burns to drivers who bought it through a drive through window.
McDonalds failed to stop serving this superheated coffee to drive through customers even after hearing these numerous reports.
McDonalds didn't tell its customers that it was serving coffee superheated.
It wasn't one person spilling her coffee that exposed McDonalds to liability here. It was McDonalds' failure to either change their policy or adequately label their product that allowed the woman to win her suit.
There may be some truly fucked up things about our judicial system, but product liability lawsuits aren't one of them. If a company knowingly sells a product that has a significant probability of causing harm, and fails to adequately warn consumers, then I think that company should be sued.
Take, for example, air bags. Once it became clear that air bags could kill small children who were sitting in the front seat of a car, car manufacturers had to put obvious warnings on cars thus equipped to alert consumers to this hazard. This absolves the manufacturer from liability, and allows them to keep selling cars with airbags. If McDonalds wanted to keep selling superheated coffee, then all they had to do was tell consumers that the coffee they were buying at a driver through window (which has a very high probability of being spilled on the driver) was much hotter than the driver thought.
How can people be so good with code, where the smallest errors can make the biggest difference, and still write so poorly?
Compilers. When you're used to having a constant spell/grammar checker, it's easy to let your writing get sloppy.
Re:bogon meter started to click and hum while read
on
Time Doesn't Exist
·
· Score: 1
First of all you'd need 12 numbers, not 10 to describe the location of 3 points in Newton's universe. Maybe he assumes that all 3 points exist at the same time. But he should state these assumptions, especially in an article about time.
In Newton's universe, there is absolute time. So if you're specifying the the state of the universe at a particular time, why would you want three separate times?
His rules for Triangle Land would sweep out a plane, not a pyramid. Maybe he's leaving some other assumptions out. It would be useful to see the diagram he refers to to find what defines the axis extending from his Alpha point.
You just failed to understand what he was saying. Okay, imagine a standard a set of standard xyz axes. The x axis is the distance between particles 1 and 2, the y axis is the distance between 1 and 3, and the z axis is the distance between 2 and 3.
So the point (x, y, z) is a point in Triangle land, for all positive x, y, z. Which means that Triangle land is composed of the entire first octant of a standard 3 dimensional space, with each point representing a possible state. The 'apex' is at (0, 0, 0), which is where all particles exist at the same point (or more specifically, where the distances between the particles are all zero).
His mention of a particle's spherical wave function misses the point that the function breaks down when observed. It then takes on a single value. The path taken by the Alpha particle sweeps out a sphere until you look. It then becomes a particular path. Schrodinger's Cat only exists as a wave function until you open the box. After that it's just an ordinary cat.
I don't think you understand the uncertainty principle very well. For a wave-particle, the product between the uncertainties of the position and the momentum can never be below a certain value. So the more you know about the position, the less you know about the momentum.
But a straight track in a cloud chamber imples that you are learning both position and momentum, since you can extrapolate the rest of the track from a small part of it. This is in direct contrast with the uncertainty principle.
Can you imagine the results of accidental cross-pollinization with 'Terminator' crops and regular???
It could've resulted in the accidental genocide of, say, corn.
This shows a complete and utter ignorance of natural selection. Think about what you just said. Organisms that win out in natural selection do so according to their darwinian fitness. For those of you who don't know what this is, darwinian fitness is defined as an organism's ability to pass on its genes.
Any plant that crossed with a terminator and inherited the terminator genes would be unable to reporduce. Period. That means that its darwinian fitness would be zero. Such a plant cannot pass on its genes, and therefore cannot compete against a plant that isn't sterile. For that matter, it can't compete at all.
The truly sad thing isn't that this guy doesn't understand ecology, it's that so many otherwise intelligent environmental organizations have put forth this same absurd argument.
"In a competitive market society, people are going to want to give their kids an edge," says the bioethicist.
Bioethicist? Freak-a-zoid is more like it. Hmmm how many people want to roll dice with their children's psyche?
What exactly do you think happens with normal sexual reproduction? I think 'roll the dice' is a very good description of it.
The entire point of this type of eugenic manipulation is to not roll the dice with our children's genes. If we have the technology to prevent our children from having genetic flaws, then it would seem foolhardy not to use it.
You're making the assumption that it is more dangerous to meddle with a child's DNA than it is to leave that child with a known genetic defect. This is an appallingly reactionary stance.
Who knows? Maybe all this technology will make humans so smart they'll be able to predict the future.
That's just silly. We can already predict the future, for a day or two. Beyond that things get ridiculous.
Can't you recognize some light-hearted sarcasm when you see it? The journalist was obviously referring to the fact that the entire article was based on speculation about an uncertain future. He was making fun of his own article, which is always refreshing to see.
What's less refreshing is a knee-jerk slashdot response to something the poster failed to understand.
I was allocated zero shares by e*trade. Nothing. Nada.
I confirmed my order this morning after the price was finalized, and I was told that the 'affinity' shares wouldn't be distributed until this afternoon. I received the first alert at 12:32, the next at 12:26, and the third at 1:18 (EDT). All three alerts told me that they were unable to allocate my shares, due to "high demand for shares".
What exactly is going on here? Based on what I've read over the past few weeks, only about 400 people had access to these shares, and the shares were to be randomly distributed in 100 share blocks. How is it that I could get nothing? Did RedHat reserve such a small number of shares that not everyone got even 1 block of 100?
Also, I've had nothing but trouble with the e*trade website. Half the time I try to access my 'alerts', I get a message saying that I have to log in again. When I do, the system tells me that my username or password is invalid. But two minutes later, I can get back in. And right after getting the rejection letters, the entire 'Trading' and 'Account Services' sections were unavailable, for at least 20 minutes.
What about the rest of you? Was I just extremely unlucky, or did e*trade screw us all?
Slashdot Mirror
You need to install the PSM (personal security manager, IIRC). Go to Debug->Install PSM, scroll down the page, and click on the installation button. It will download the PSM, install it, and give you a status update.
Restart Mozilla and you're ready for https ;)
original post
Here's the bugtraq community collectively tearing this guy a new asshole:
tearing
This is completely, utterly wrong. The following code compiles and works correctly:
#include <string>
#include <strstream>
string operator+(int i,string s) {
ostrstream convert;
convert << i << ends;
string i2 = convert.str();
delete [] convert.str();
return (i2+s);
}
string operator+(string s,int i) {
ostrstream convert;
convert << i << ends;
string i2 = convert.str();
delete [] convert.str();
return (s+i2);
}
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
string hello = "hello";
cout << "\"hello\"+1 " <<(hello+1) <<endl;
cout << "1+\"hello\" = " << (1+hello)<<endl;
}
The problem comes when you try to define operator+ for your custom CString class. If you try to define a binary operator for a class when the class isn't the first argument, you should get an error, since you're asking the compiler to call a member function on an integer. However, if you define the operator+ as a non-member function, you can put the arguments in any order you wish.
BTW, if you're using gcc-3, you'd use stringstream instead of strstream for the conversion. This would also keep you from having to explicitly delete[] the char* from the call to ostrstream::str().
If your post wasn't flamebait, it had to be gross incompetence.
KDE moves to the GPL and they get flamed,
Other than an unfortunate choice of words, RMS said nothing evil about or to either TrollTech or KDE. He thanked them for finally resolving this issue, so that GNOME and KDE could finally compete on technical merit alone. His comment on 'forgiveness' was an acknowledgement that the KDE group has done some nastiness in the past with the GPL, but in the same breath he absolved them for all violations regarding FSF code. The next sentence asked everyone else who'd been abused by KDE to do the same.
Granted, this does piss off the KDE developers, since they never cared about the licensing issues in the first place (and AFAIK have never acknowledged that they violated the GPL in the first place). But although RMS does care, he is willing to let it all go if this will all just be over.
now Pyhton is not compatible with the GPL and people try to work a way to make them fit in.
People have been trying for years to resolve the KDE/Qt/QPL/GPL issue, RMS first and foremost. In fact, the very creation of the QPL was an earlier attempt to resolve this. It failed, though, because TrollTech couldn't resist throwing in an extra couple of clauses that violated the GPL.
Umm... have you ever taken an intro chemistry class? Whenever you dissolve anything into water, you both raise the boiling point and lower the freezing point. It is thus possible to heat coffee well above the boiling point of water, which is what McDonalds was doing in this case.
It's amazing how frequently example is brought up as evidence of both society's lack of personal responibility and its propensity towards litigation. Hoever, I have yet to see someone cite this case who had the slightest clue as to what the case was actually about.
For those of you who think that McDonalds was sued for failing to label coffee as dangerous, you are badly mistaken. The suit was successful for several reasons.
It wasn't one person spilling her coffee that exposed McDonalds to liability here. It was McDonalds' failure to either change their policy or adequately label their product that allowed the woman to win her suit.
There may be some truly fucked up things about our judicial system, but product liability lawsuits aren't one of them. If a company knowingly sells a product that has a significant probability of causing harm, and fails to adequately warn consumers, then I think that company should be sued.
Take, for example, air bags. Once it became clear that air bags could kill small children who were sitting in the front seat of a car, car manufacturers had to put obvious warnings on cars thus equipped to alert consumers to this hazard. This absolves the manufacturer from liability, and allows them to keep selling cars with airbags. If McDonalds wanted to keep selling superheated coffee, then all they had to do was tell consumers that the coffee they were buying at a driver through window (which has a very high probability of being spilled on the driver) was much hotter than the driver thought.
Who else would have the guts to name their protagonist "Protagonist"?
Don't forget that the character's first name was Hiro (~Hero).
How can people be so good with code, where the smallest errors can make the biggest difference, and still write so poorly?
Compilers. When you're used to having a constant spell/grammar checker, it's easy to let your writing get sloppy.
First of all you'd need 12 numbers, not 10 to describe the location of 3 points in Newton's universe. Maybe he assumes that all 3 points exist at the same time. But he should state these assumptions, especially in an article about time.
In Newton's universe, there is absolute time. So if you're specifying the the state of the universe at a particular time, why would you want three separate times?
His rules for Triangle Land would sweep out a plane, not a pyramid. Maybe he's leaving some other assumptions out. It would be useful to see the diagram he refers to to find what defines the axis extending from his Alpha point.
You just failed to understand what he was saying. Okay, imagine a standard a set of standard xyz axes. The x axis is the distance between particles 1 and 2, the y axis is the distance between 1 and 3, and the z axis is the distance between 2 and 3.
So the point (x, y, z) is a point in Triangle land, for all positive x, y, z. Which means that Triangle land is composed of the entire first octant of a standard 3 dimensional space, with each point representing a possible state. The 'apex' is at (0, 0, 0), which is where all particles exist at the same point (or more specifically, where the distances between the particles are all zero).
His mention of a particle's spherical wave function misses the point that the function breaks down when observed. It then takes on a single value. The path taken by the Alpha particle sweeps out a sphere until you look. It then becomes a particular path. Schrodinger's Cat only exists as a wave function until you open the box. After that it's just an ordinary cat.
I don't think you understand the uncertainty principle very well. For a wave-particle, the product between the uncertainties of the position and the momentum can never be below a certain value. So the more you know about the position, the less you know about the momentum.
But a straight track in a cloud chamber imples that you are learning both position and momentum, since you can extrapolate the rest of the track from a small part of it. This is in direct contrast with the uncertainty principle.
Can you imagine the results of accidental cross-pollinization with 'Terminator' crops and regular???
It could've resulted in the accidental genocide of, say, corn.
This shows a complete and utter ignorance of natural selection. Think about what you just said. Organisms that win out in natural selection do so according to their darwinian fitness. For those of you who don't know what this is, darwinian fitness is defined as an organism's ability to pass on its genes.
Any plant that crossed with a terminator and inherited the terminator genes would be unable to reporduce. Period. That means that its darwinian fitness would be zero. Such a plant cannot pass on its genes, and therefore cannot compete against a plant that isn't sterile. For that matter, it can't compete at all.
The truly sad thing isn't that this guy doesn't understand ecology, it's that so many otherwise intelligent environmental organizations have put forth this same absurd argument.
"In a competitive market society, people are going to want to give their kids an edge," says the bioethicist.
Bioethicist? Freak-a-zoid is more like it. Hmmm how many people want to roll dice with their children's psyche?
What exactly do you think happens with normal sexual reproduction? I think 'roll the dice' is a very good description of it.
The entire point of this type of eugenic manipulation is to not roll the dice with our children's genes. If we have the technology to prevent our children from having genetic flaws, then it would seem foolhardy not to use it.
You're making the assumption that it is more dangerous to meddle with a child's DNA than it is to leave that child with a known genetic defect. This is an appallingly reactionary stance.
Who knows? Maybe all this technology will make humans so smart they'll be able to predict the future.
That's just silly. We can already predict the future, for a day or two. Beyond that things get ridiculous.
Can't you recognize some light-hearted sarcasm when you see it? The journalist was obviously referring to the fact that the entire article was based on speculation about an uncertain future. He was making fun of his own article, which is always refreshing to see.
What's less refreshing is a knee-jerk slashdot response to something the poster failed to understand.
I was allocated zero shares by e*trade. Nothing. Nada.
I confirmed my order this morning after the price was finalized, and I was told that the 'affinity' shares wouldn't be distributed until this afternoon. I received the first alert at 12:32, the next at 12:26, and the third at 1:18 (EDT). All three alerts told me that they were unable to allocate my shares, due to "high demand for shares".
What exactly is going on here? Based on what I've read over the past few weeks, only about 400 people had access to these shares, and the shares were to be randomly distributed in 100 share blocks. How is it that I could get nothing? Did RedHat reserve such a small number of shares that not everyone got even 1 block of 100?
Also, I've had nothing but trouble with the e*trade website. Half the time I try to access my 'alerts', I get a message saying that I have to log in again. When I do, the system tells me that my username or password is invalid. But two minutes later, I can get back in. And right after getting the rejection letters, the entire 'Trading' and 'Account Services' sections were unavailable, for at least 20 minutes.
What about the rest of you? Was I just extremely unlucky, or did e*trade screw us all?