Android without a malicious telco is not outright bad. There's typically a bootloader and some minor parts that can't be reviewed, though -- and the phone really needs to be rooted and reloaded with some known-good build.
I'm not paranoid, but trusting people is good only if they have some incentive to be trustworthy. A closed app on the other hand gives them no benefits for being honest and plenty of opportunities to try to make additional dime at your cost.
In that case, I'd avoid the app in question like a plague. What I meant are projects with many commiters, only one of whom is bad. And even then, such review can be really hard.
There's a simple solution: never install programs from an untrusted source, such as an app store. A source that's trustworthy has the sources you can download and read -- and if any such a logic bomb is found, it can be removed immediately -- not that code with such a bomb should be really allowed back without a thorough review. This possibility makes such sabotage virtually absent in free software.
Let's get it right... no cell phones have a physical keyboard anymore, yet it's credit cards that get (limited) keyboards and display? Something is amiss...
Clang is in the order of 10 times faster than GCC (compilation speed) and the generated binary is 1% faster than GCC (so essentially the same but saves hours of compile-time per day on 50MB+ C-files).
Bullshit. It's compilation is at most 1/3 faster, and on most cases I checked, the result executes between 5-25% slower. The former seems to be pretty constant everywhere, the latter strongly depends on the code base in question, with huge outliers both ways.
Because you currently have the very worst president in your country's history. And with a bar set that high by his predecessor, that's really an achievement. The contender looks like he might try his strength in this competition, though.
And why the worst? Note what other US presidents commonly nominated as the worst did: spying on _one_ hotel rather than on the whole nation, underestimating an internal conflict, accepting bribes from a single minor oil operation. That's all peanuts compared with Dubya or Barrack Hussein.
You mean, there are any repair shops that will not refuse to service a machine without the hard drive, on warranty or not, even if the problem lies with, let's say, a broken laptop's hinge?
To the contrary, putting some crook in confinement for sixty years instead of letting him go quickly is quite cruel, and forcing all honest citizens to pay for that crook is theft. I'm proud that my country, Poland, did not ratify this part of the EU Charter, and sad that despite overwhelming public support, we do not actually use it.
You might say there's a risk of court errors. There's an easy solution: a criminal would be eligible for capital punishment only if there are no doubts he actually intentionally took part in the crime. This should not apply to any doubts as for legal qualification, such as jurisdiction issues, mental health, mental retardation, who dealt the death blow, etc. If two junkies cut someone with knives, kicked the victim and jumped on his head, it should not matter whose knife slashed the throat -- a notorious legal loophole that lets both crooks get off with a minor charge like battery. In this scheme, both would be eligible, even if for whatever reason they end up with a far lesser sentence, or, with our jokes for a court, even scot free.
This scheme risks us having to pay for the crook's shelter, food, TV and health if there's any shred of doubt -- like, if the conviction relied on DNA evidence that's usually good enough for a criminal case but leaves _some_ room of error -- but that's the price of reducing the risk of killing an innocent person. Not that I consider sitting in jail for the rest of the life to be better than death.
Another thing is, thirty years on the death row is both cruel and costly. If there's death penalty, it must be dealt swiftly. Under the scheme I just mentioned, there's at least no doubt as for guilt, and issues like "should someone with IQ of 75 be allowed to murder free?" are something in a dire need of reform.
And that's why people put effort in keeping code consistent. It's worth the time spent.
Not just formatting, but used techniques in general. Some refactoring might cost a bit right now but is beneficial in the long gain, if you want the codebase to stay maintenable.
There are copious non-scriptural references, too, to biblical writings, and from most any century. Most of the bible can be recreated just from them!
Er, what? There's nearly zero data that corroborates the Bible, and what there is, tends to contradict it. Egyptians kept pretty detailed records, and there is nothing about Israelites there -- and drowning a pharaoh with his troops would be pretty newsworthy. Or, how Abraham or Moses could worship Yahveh if this cult had been borrowed from Kanaan in early 10th century? Saul and David were said to eradicate the cult of Asherah -- yet surviving inscriptions have Asherah as Yahveh's consort all the way until 8th/7th century. Or, for the New Testament, they refer to a census that happened 10 years after Herod's death.
Contradictions with both parts of the Bible, obviously. Muhammad did not have first-hand knowledge of the Bible, and did not really care about it. I'm talking about the Koran having almost no contradictions with itself. You can take a look at Skeptic's Annotated Quran, it lists 32 such contradictions as opposed to 461 in the Bible, and I'd argue with most of them (numbers match the entries in SAQ): 1. [-] no one ELSE but Allah can change the text 2. [+] indeed, a contradiction (permissibility of alcohol) 3. [?] depends on exact wording, might be indeed a minor contradiction 4. [ -] being outside the Universe, this concept makes no sense. A programmer can alter a simulation in any way (ie: do anything) yet can't have a real child inside (at most can arbitrarily name some bits as one) 5. [-] plural form allows deputies 6. [-] a literary device; people then had no concept of infinity or of different flow of time 7. [-] making devils so disbelievers can choose, vs disbelievers doing the choosing -- all is ok IMO 8. [-] "when the drowning overtook him" -- ie, not a word about ultimately surviving or not 9. [?] this passage reinforces that Allah is supposed to be the god of Abraham; the fate of Christians and Jews is unclear 10. [-] the taxes go "to Allah" rather than to Muhammad. Yeah, right... a lie but not a contradiction. 11. [-] "forgive and be indulgent UNTIL Allah gives command", pretty clear 12. [-] "turned to heaven" makes sense only if it has already been created, I think the passage speaks about further refinement 13. [+] would make sense as "Allah forgives only once" but is so unclear I'll leave this as a contradiction 14. [-] nothing says it's the same battle; also a literary device 15. [-] the very next sentence (in 18:29) continues: infidels are free to disbelieve, which will put them into the Fire and under swords of believers 16. [-] whole job vs a part of it 17. [+] kind of a contradiction, unless angels and jinn are the same 18. [?] Allah is fair only to believers; unclear 19. [-] different ingredients don't exclude each other 20. [-] merciful for muslims, smites everyone else 21. [-] messengers are equal, reactions of recipients may differ 22. [-] Iblis will _try_ to put people astray, believers will stay on the "right" path 23. [+] there might be various degrees of being a true believer (as new revelation comes); I'd still count this a contradiction 24. [-] saved his household, not necessarily every single member 25. [+] a contradiction, common to all religions that try to claim their god is both all-powerful and good (aka the Epicurean paradox) 26. [+] a contradiction with no consequences, but still one 27. [-] "he sends angels with the spirit of commands" vs "we send not down the angels, save with the Fact" -- nothing wrong here 28. [-] "he does X" vs "if he wants, he does X" 29. [-] setting slaves free is a welcome charity, but slaves themselves need to behave whether they're freed or not 30. [-] same as 4, above: Allah may at most name someone created as a "son" 31. [-] you have to try, but you can't fully succeed; if shit happens despite trying, do X 32. [+] a contradiction, no consequences
So here, out of the 32 purported contradictions, there are only 7 left and 3 doubtful. I did not review all 641 contradictions Skeptic's Annotated Bible lists, but trying some at random, most seem to hold.
It's impossible to really observe the bible, as it's a big pile of various works that often contradict each other (or even themselves!) on core points, such as whether afterlife exists (Job), whether other gods exist, whether Yahveh is the highest god or merely a member of the "god of gods" court (Psalms -- compare translations closely, as they often try to wriggle away), whether you are even allowed to _not_ genocide your neighbours if they don't immediately surrender into slavery, etc, etc. All while claiming that every piece of past law is still in effect.
On the other hand, the Koran has hardly any contradictions -- usually they can be blamed on being literary devices; and even if it would contradict itself, there's an abrogation clause that says a commandment issued later overrides earlier ones. The very latest sura, 9 (they are not numbered in chronological order, remember!) is also the most bloodthirsty one.
Thus, it is pretty clear whether you follow the Koran or not.
Don't mistake good folks who pay only lip service to religion as Islam. You can't possibly be an observant muslim and a good person (as the holy book demands murdering infidels), but merely calling yourself a muslim does not preclude you from being fit for civilisation. You "just" need to disregard core articles of the faith -- fortunately, most do.
To FF10, since that's the stable version that upcoming distributions will ship. The glorified trunk snapshots you hear so much about are not supported (beyond "pull the newest snapshot"), so have no place on serious non-dev machines.
Slashdot Mirror
Debian is ------> that way. Go use it.
Android without a malicious telco is not outright bad. There's typically a bootloader and some minor parts that can't be reviewed, though -- and the phone really needs to be rooted and reloaded with some known-good build.
I'm not paranoid, but trusting people is good only if they have some incentive to be trustworthy. A closed app on the other hand gives them no benefits for being honest and plenty of opportunities to try to make additional dime at your cost.
In that case, I'd avoid the app in question like a plague. What I meant are projects with many commiters, only one of whom is bad. And even then, such review can be really hard.
There's a simple solution: never install programs from an untrusted source, such as an app store. A source that's trustworthy has the sources you can download and read -- and if any such a logic bomb is found, it can be removed immediately -- not that code with such a bomb should be really allowed back without a thorough review. This possibility makes such sabotage virtually absent in free software.
Let's get it right... no cell phones have a physical keyboard anymore, yet it's credit cards that get (limited) keyboards and display? Something is amiss...
In the rest of the world we call the US "liberal" ideology as "left-wing".
And this is a case of distorting the word "liberal". In the rest of the word, it means freedom both personal and economic.
Because if one state does it differently, you will have a majority of voters casting votes against the critter that gets elected.
Clang is in the order of 10 times faster than GCC (compilation speed) and the generated binary is 1% faster than GCC (so essentially the same but saves hours of compile-time per day on 50MB+ C-files).
Bullshit. It's compilation is at most 1/3 faster, and on most cases I checked, the result executes between 5-25% slower. The former seems to be pretty constant everywhere, the latter strongly depends on the code base in question, with huge outliers both ways.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
No he's not. At best he is a temporary taxtical asset.
Rule 29: The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. No more. No less.
-- The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates
Because you currently have the very worst president in your country's history. And with a bar set that high by his predecessor, that's really an achievement. The contender looks like he might try his strength in this competition, though.
And why the worst? Note what other US presidents commonly nominated as the worst did: spying on _one_ hotel rather than on the whole nation, underestimating an internal conflict, accepting bribes from a single minor oil operation. That's all peanuts compared with Dubya or Barrack Hussein.
You mean, there are any repair shops that will not refuse to service a machine without the hard drive, on warranty or not, even if the problem lies with, let's say, a broken laptop's hinge?
If that server is truly ancient, qemu might handle it at speeds comparable to your old hardware -- or perhaps even faster.
To the contrary, putting some crook in confinement for sixty years instead of letting him go quickly is quite cruel, and forcing all honest citizens to pay for that crook is theft. I'm proud that my country, Poland, did not ratify this part of the EU Charter, and sad that despite overwhelming public support, we do not actually use it.
You might say there's a risk of court errors. There's an easy solution: a criminal would be eligible for capital punishment only if there are no doubts he actually intentionally took part in the crime. This should not apply to any doubts as for legal qualification, such as jurisdiction issues, mental health, mental retardation, who dealt the death blow, etc. If two junkies cut someone with knives, kicked the victim and jumped on his head, it should not matter whose knife slashed the throat -- a notorious legal loophole that lets both crooks get off with a minor charge like battery. In this scheme, both would be eligible, even if for whatever reason they end up with a far lesser sentence, or, with our jokes for a court, even scot free.
This scheme risks us having to pay for the crook's shelter, food, TV and health if there's any shred of doubt -- like, if the conviction relied on DNA evidence that's usually good enough for a criminal case but leaves _some_ room of error -- but that's the price of reducing the risk of killing an innocent person. Not that I consider sitting in jail for the rest of the life to be better than death.
Another thing is, thirty years on the death row is both cruel and costly. If there's death penalty, it must be dealt swiftly. Under the scheme I just mentioned, there's at least no doubt as for guilt, and issues like "should someone with IQ of 75 be allowed to murder free?" are something in a dire need of reform.
And that's why people put effort in keeping code consistent. It's worth the time spent.
Not just formatting, but used techniques in general. Some refactoring might cost a bit right now but is beneficial in the long gain, if you want the codebase to stay maintenable.
An undressed 17 years old in a non-sexual pose tends to count as child pornography. So does photographing your 1 years old.
I have never been part of a project that did not enforce a given style of code formatting. If you mix them, stuff is really hard to read.
AMD is leading, when it comes to bang for the buck. So unless you need single core performance but nothing else, you'd better pick AMD.
With Windows forking into an ARM and x86 (or AMD64/IA64 whatever want to call it) versions
Windows dropped IA64 support, like it did PPC, Alpha and MIPS before.
Psalms 82:1, for one. The big boss is El, you can find more about him here.
It's 2am, apologies for not finding the rest of references today.
There are copious non-scriptural references, too, to biblical writings, and from most any century. Most of the bible can be recreated just from them!
Er, what? There's nearly zero data that corroborates the Bible, and what there is, tends to contradict it. Egyptians kept pretty detailed records, and there is nothing about Israelites there -- and drowning a pharaoh with his troops would be pretty newsworthy. Or, how Abraham or Moses could worship Yahveh if this cult had been borrowed from Kanaan in early 10th century? Saul and David were said to eradicate the cult of Asherah -- yet surviving inscriptions have Asherah as Yahveh's consort all the way until 8th/7th century. Or, for the New Testament, they refer to a census that happened 10 years after Herod's death.
Contradictions with both parts of the Bible, obviously. Muhammad did not have first-hand knowledge of the Bible, and did not really care about it. I'm talking about the Koran having almost no contradictions with itself. You can take a look at Skeptic's Annotated Quran, it lists 32 such contradictions as opposed to 461 in the Bible, and I'd argue with most of them (numbers match the entries in SAQ):
1. [-] no one ELSE but Allah can change the text
2. [+] indeed, a contradiction (permissibility of alcohol)
3. [?] depends on exact wording, might be indeed a minor contradiction
4. [ -] being outside the Universe, this concept makes no sense. A programmer can alter a simulation in any way (ie: do anything) yet can't have a real child inside (at most can arbitrarily name some bits as one)
5. [-] plural form allows deputies
6. [-] a literary device; people then had no concept of infinity or of different flow of time
7. [-] making devils so disbelievers can choose, vs disbelievers doing the choosing -- all is ok IMO
8. [-] "when the drowning overtook him" -- ie, not a word about ultimately surviving or not
9. [?] this passage reinforces that Allah is supposed to be the god of Abraham; the fate of Christians and Jews is unclear
10. [-] the taxes go "to Allah" rather than to Muhammad. Yeah, right... a lie but not a contradiction.
11. [-] "forgive and be indulgent UNTIL Allah gives command", pretty clear
12. [-] "turned to heaven" makes sense only if it has already been created, I think the passage speaks about further refinement
13. [+] would make sense as "Allah forgives only once" but is so unclear I'll leave this as a contradiction
14. [-] nothing says it's the same battle; also a literary device
15. [-] the very next sentence (in 18:29) continues: infidels are free to disbelieve, which will put them into the Fire and under swords of believers
16. [-] whole job vs a part of it
17. [+] kind of a contradiction, unless angels and jinn are the same
18. [?] Allah is fair only to believers; unclear
19. [-] different ingredients don't exclude each other
20. [-] merciful for muslims, smites everyone else
21. [-] messengers are equal, reactions of recipients may differ
22. [-] Iblis will _try_ to put people astray, believers will stay on the "right" path
23. [+] there might be various degrees of being a true believer (as new revelation comes); I'd still count this a contradiction
24. [-] saved his household, not necessarily every single member
25. [+] a contradiction, common to all religions that try to claim their god is both all-powerful and good (aka the Epicurean paradox)
26. [+] a contradiction with no consequences, but still one
27. [-] "he sends angels with the spirit of commands" vs "we send not down the angels, save with the Fact" -- nothing wrong here
28. [-] "he does X" vs "if he wants, he does X"
29. [-] setting slaves free is a welcome charity, but slaves themselves need to behave whether they're freed or not
30. [-] same as 4, above: Allah may at most name someone created as a "son"
31. [-] you have to try, but you can't fully succeed; if shit happens despite trying, do X
32. [+] a contradiction, no consequences
So here, out of the 32 purported contradictions, there are only 7 left and 3 doubtful. I did not review all 641 contradictions Skeptic's Annotated Bible lists, but trying some at random, most seem to hold.
It's impossible to really observe the bible, as it's a big pile of various works that often contradict each other (or even themselves!) on core points, such as whether afterlife exists (Job), whether other gods exist, whether Yahveh is the highest god or merely a member of the "god of gods" court (Psalms -- compare translations closely, as they often try to wriggle away), whether you are even allowed to _not_ genocide your neighbours if they don't immediately surrender into slavery, etc, etc. All while claiming that every piece of past law is still in effect.
On the other hand, the Koran has hardly any contradictions -- usually they can be blamed on being literary devices; and even if it would contradict itself, there's an abrogation clause that says a commandment issued later overrides earlier ones. The very latest sura, 9 (they are not numbered in chronological order, remember!) is also the most bloodthirsty one.
Thus, it is pretty clear whether you follow the Koran or not.
Don't mistake good folks who pay only lip service to religion as Islam. You can't possibly be an observant muslim and a good person (as the holy book demands murdering infidels), but merely calling yourself a muslim does not preclude you from being fit for civilisation. You "just" need to disregard core articles of the faith -- fortunately, most do.
User programs, not in-kernel drivers.
To FF10, since that's the stable version that upcoming distributions will ship. The glorified trunk snapshots you hear so much about are not supported (beyond "pull the newest snapshot"), so have no place on serious non-dev machines.