Your opinion is retarded. Not "different", just plain stupid. A child cannot consent, this is a societal law and a cultural one.
I think you should have the guts to stand by your opinion. Do you think it's OK for a "parent" to offer up their 5 year old child to be raped by some sick piece of shit as long as the 5 year old agrees to it?
Needs to be some line in the sand. Then leave it up to juries/judges to be the final deciders. I'd say 0-8 years old is bullet in the brainpan for rapists/pedos category, 9-13 is 20-life category, 14-15 is 1-5yrs category, 16-17 is 0-1 years. Anyway - the point is we as humans can make decisions at runtime. If some guy makes a video with a willing 15 year old who looks 18, I as a juror will probably let him off with little or no punishment. Conversely if a teacher grooms an innocent 15 year old over the course of a year and lures her into something then he should be in prison for a while.
Stupid. Instead, investigate all child porn which is found on the Internet. Trace it to the producer/consumer and throw them in prison, forever, assuming it can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt they produced/consumed intentionally and went out of their way to do so.
It is safer. I can use runtime and static analysis tools to check the source and destination sizes. I can even verify via tools if the two 'len' args refer to the same variable.
open, close, etc.. are not in ISO C++. Functions not in the spec (vendor-specific) are supposed to have an _ in front.
Any function you can think of (including strcpy) is "safe" if the developer specifies correct parameters. Whoopdy Do. That doesn't mean it's something that's easily verified by runtime checkers, static analysis, etc... That's why it's deprecated - it's easy to perform additional safety checks if you include both the source and destination sizes.
If a standard leads to poor quality code, insecure code, or other issues it's a bad standard. Adherence to the "standard" at all costs is the hobgoblin of little minds.
Microsoft is not removing anything. Their deprecation means they do not recommend its use. That's it. You can still use it. More than likely you'll be able to specifically disable just that warning.
Also, I don't think you understand the ISO standards. Adding functions to your compiler environment via headers or runtime implementation does not violate any standards.
Yeah, because Microsoft hires idiots for programmers. Joe Bloe "from the internet" is probably a more experienced, educated, and better developer.
I love your reality distortion field, you hate Microsoft ergo all their money couldn't possibly buy the best and brightest - they are instead all idiots.
It's because there are no clear laws. It's entirely up to a bunch of tendentious bureaucrats to interpret intentionally loose "laws" after the fact. It's entirely subjective.
So your post begs the question that they are "doing" anything or that they are taking any risks. They're not. It's ex post facto.
Intel broke no laws. The EU bureaucrats chose to interpret antitrust in a way such that Intel retroactively broke laws. Effectively, the law was "don't do bad stuff" and they decided Intel did "bad stuff".
AMD doesn't get any directly, but the jobs from the Dresden plant get protected, which is the main goal. The money is a secondary goal.
You mean that since Intel was first and made the right decisions to stick with x86 and got large because of it they got to enjoy the spoils of being first?! That's crazy!?! Atrocity! Atrocity!
European social democracies have been sitting there, giving their citizens a better quality of life than the US, for decades,
Lie. PewSome guy. Besides that, any EU countries that do come out ahead are tiny little pissant countries compared to US (300 million). Let's hand-pick some US states of similar population and see how you do. Next please.
and there's no reason at all to assume it won't continue.
Bad logic. What would it continue, because it's worked "OK" in the past? False identification of future performance with past performance. The EU did OK post-WW2, during Internet bubble, during worldwide credit bubble, etc... Do you think that means that entitlement policies will _always_ work? Sorry. Doesn't work that way.
As the EU and the world increases in population (poor people breed like rabbits), per-capita productivity will go down. Now tell me how that effects a system where per-capita costs will stay flat or actually rise?
Good luck with that.
(Given how your national debt's going, the US should be more worried about where it will be in five years.)
Agreed. The socialist policies we've implemented will be our doom, as will the military adventurism of the neocons.
How is that an argument _for_ EuroSocialism again?
And yes, the US deficit is growing too thanks to Dubya and Obama Inc and due in no small part to our own efforts including Medicare and Medicaid.
Really it's the same all around. Rising budget deficits. The EU has done OK during the recent bubbles, but it's going to be HI-LARIOUS watching them flounder when they figure out that past performance is not indicative of the future.
Seriously, does it take that much thought to figure out that as your population grows your country is fucked if you provide too many services as entitlements to said population? Seems kind of obvious. Any numbnuts can thing for 30 seconds and realize "shit, as population goes beyond some point per-capita productivity goes down." Extrapolate from there and you can see why EuroSocialism is bound to fail.
But hey, it's worked out alright for the last several decades, therefore it will always work out right, huh?
You miss the part about, well, "money". Like those bureaucrats are going to give up that much money.
This is all about "laws" which are subjectively interpreted and the money from said subjective interpretation goes to the organization doing the interpretation. Nice gig if you can get it.
It's also what's destroying them. Good riddance, too. It'll be fun to watch their socialist utopias crash down to Mother Reality over the next several years.
I'd say the prices will stay the same for Intel and AMD should finally be able to compete.
Yeah, because a bureaucrat can fix the fact that Intel is well ahead in manufacturing capacity and technology, and that Intel's chips are now superior across the board including AMD's last holdout the server market.
Going to be tough for AMD to compete with only the low-end market.
Whatever, hippy. Greed is what has driven the evolution of the human species. You go live in a commune and tune your Shakra, we'll be greedy and use that greed to drive us to, like, totally do stuff maaaan.
Yeah, Europeans are just so cool. Find me any group of European countries that comprise 300 million people, and tell me how much better off they are now. In 5 years, when EuroSocialism breaks down even further, come back and tell me again.
That's a good idea, if you're stupid. Let's open the borders more than they already are to a flood of poor people. It's not like importing tens of millions of poor people into a wealthier country will impact the standard of living in the wealthier country, right?
Conversely, you must be disappointed you can go to a "general mechanic" and not your car dealer's "certified" mechanic. You must also be disappointed you can cut your own lawn and don't have to hire a professional lawn cutter.
What I'm saying is your idea is stupid. Incredibly stupid. You must be European to want more government bullshit bureaucracy.
Slashdot Mirror
Your opinion is retarded. Not "different", just plain stupid. A child cannot consent, this is a societal law and a cultural one.
I think you should have the guts to stand by your opinion. Do you think it's OK for a "parent" to offer up their 5 year old child to be raped by some sick piece of shit as long as the 5 year old agrees to it?
Needs to be some line in the sand. Then leave it up to juries/judges to be the final deciders. I'd say 0-8 years old is bullet in the brainpan for rapists/pedos category, 9-13 is 20-life category, 14-15 is 1-5yrs category, 16-17 is 0-1 years. Anyway - the point is we as humans can make decisions at runtime. If some guy makes a video with a willing 15 year old who looks 18, I as a juror will probably let him off with little or no punishment. Conversely if a teacher grooms an innocent 15 year old over the course of a year and lures her into something then he should be in prison for a while.
Stupid. Instead, investigate all child porn which is found on the Internet. Trace it to the producer/consumer and throw them in prison, forever, assuming it can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt they produced/consumed intentionally and went out of their way to do so.
What in God's name are you talking about? Did you read the article and do you know anything about software or C++?
It is safer. I can use runtime and static analysis tools to check the source and destination sizes. I can even verify via tools if the two 'len' args refer to the same variable.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
open, close, etc.. are not in ISO C++. Functions not in the spec (vendor-specific) are supposed to have an _ in front.
Any function you can think of (including strcpy) is "safe" if the developer specifies correct parameters. Whoopdy Do. That doesn't mean it's something that's easily verified by runtime checkers, static analysis, etc... That's why it's deprecated - it's easy to perform additional safety checks if you include both the source and destination sizes.
Screw drama queens.
If a standard leads to poor quality code, insecure code, or other issues it's a bad standard. Adherence to the "standard" at all costs is the hobgoblin of little minds.
Microsoft is not removing anything. Their deprecation means they do not recommend its use. That's it. You can still use it. More than likely you'll be able to specifically disable just that warning.
Also, I don't think you understand the ISO standards. Adding functions to your compiler environment via headers or runtime implementation does not violate any standards.
Yeah, because Microsoft hires idiots for programmers. Joe Bloe "from the internet" is probably a more experienced, educated, and better developer.
I love your reality distortion field, you hate Microsoft ergo all their money couldn't possibly buy the best and brightest - they are instead all idiots.
I find your laughable inaccuracies and misunderstanding of, well, everything to be hilarious. Please continue on with your kook's rant.
It's because there are no clear laws. It's entirely up to a bunch of tendentious bureaucrats to interpret intentionally loose "laws" after the fact. It's entirely subjective.
So your post begs the question that they are "doing" anything or that they are taking any risks. They're not. It's ex post facto.
Intel broke no laws. The EU bureaucrats chose to interpret antitrust in a way such that Intel retroactively broke laws. Effectively, the law was "don't do bad stuff" and they decided Intel did "bad stuff".
AMD doesn't get any directly, but the jobs from the Dresden plant get protected, which is the main goal. The money is a secondary goal.
Your understanding is...flawed to put it nicely.
You are stupid. Microsoft's OS's are better at multi-threading than most Linux OS's. Linux is better at clones, however.
You mean that since Intel was first and made the right decisions to stick with x86 and got large because of it they got to enjoy the spoils of being first?! That's crazy!?! Atrocity! Atrocity!
European social democracies have been sitting there, giving their citizens a better quality of life than the US, for decades,
Lie. Pew Some guy. Besides that, any EU countries that do come out ahead are tiny little pissant countries compared to US (300 million). Let's hand-pick some US states of similar population and see how you do. Next please.
and there's no reason at all to assume it won't continue.
Bad logic. What would it continue, because it's worked "OK" in the past? False identification of future performance with past performance. The EU did OK post-WW2, during Internet bubble, during worldwide credit bubble, etc... Do you think that means that entitlement policies will _always_ work? Sorry. Doesn't work that way.
As the EU and the world increases in population (poor people breed like rabbits), per-capita productivity will go down. Now tell me how that effects a system where per-capita costs will stay flat or actually rise?
Good luck with that.
(Given how your national debt's going, the US should be more worried about where it will be in five years.)
Agreed. The socialist policies we've implemented will be our doom, as will the military adventurism of the neocons.
How is that an argument _for_ EuroSocialism again?
I get it - you're Enlightened American Guy and I'm Parochial Redneck Guy! Nice try, douche.
Let's see...
Britain
France
Germany
And yes, the US deficit is growing too thanks to Dubya and Obama Inc and due in no small part to our own efforts including Medicare and Medicaid.
Really it's the same all around. Rising budget deficits. The EU has done OK during the recent bubbles, but it's going to be HI-LARIOUS watching them flounder when they figure out that past performance is not indicative of the future.
Seriously, does it take that much thought to figure out that as your population grows your country is fucked if you provide too many services as entitlements to said population? Seems kind of obvious. Any numbnuts can thing for 30 seconds and realize "shit, as population goes beyond some point per-capita productivity goes down." Extrapolate from there and you can see why EuroSocialism is bound to fail.
But hey, it's worked out alright for the last several decades, therefore it will always work out right, huh?
You == stupid.
Those things haven't driven us. Our efforts to combat those things have driven us.
You miss the part about, well, "money". Like those bureaucrats are going to give up that much money.
This is all about "laws" which are subjectively interpreted and the money from said subjective interpretation goes to the organization doing the interpretation. Nice gig if you can get it.
It's also what's destroying them. Good riddance, too. It'll be fun to watch their socialist utopias crash down to Mother Reality over the next several years.
Good luck proving that Intel charging you less for processors hurt you. Good luck indeed.
I'd say the prices will stay the same for Intel and AMD should finally be able to compete.
Yeah, because a bureaucrat can fix the fact that Intel is well ahead in manufacturing capacity and technology, and that Intel's chips are now superior across the board including AMD's last holdout the server market.
Going to be tough for AMD to compete with only the low-end market.
Whatever, hippy. Greed is what has driven the evolution of the human species. You go live in a commune and tune your Shakra, we'll be greedy and use that greed to drive us to, like, totally do stuff maaaan.
Yeah, Europeans are just so cool. Find me any group of European countries that comprise 300 million people, and tell me how much better off they are now. In 5 years, when EuroSocialism breaks down even further, come back and tell me again.
That's a good idea, if you're stupid. Let's open the borders more than they already are to a flood of poor people. It's not like importing tens of millions of poor people into a wealthier country will impact the standard of living in the wealthier country, right?
Conversely, you must be disappointed you can go to a "general mechanic" and not your car dealer's "certified" mechanic. You must also be disappointed you can cut your own lawn and don't have to hire a professional lawn cutter.
What I'm saying is your idea is stupid. Incredibly stupid. You must be European to want more government bullshit bureaucracy.