If you see a "frightened rant" here, then you are really not perceptive. You are correct that SJWs are a deeply conservative movement though. Not a new insight either.
I tend to agree. While I do not like the idea of licencing, it seems we cannot get the incompetent morons to stop messing with stuff where it hurts other in any other way.
Yea, all form, all surface, all appearances, all "save spaces". Actual facts, true communication and *gasp* honest evaluations of skill are not welcome. Google is just one victim of the cancer though, it spreads all through the industry at the moment. I predict that in the end this deeply conformist and authoritarian movement will fail and leave the industry stronger, if a lot smaller. SJWs cannot get things to work reliably, if at all. SJWs destroy communities that are critical. SJWs care about nothing and nobody but themselves and their short-term comfort. Hence they cannot learn, because getting out of their comfort-zones is anathema to them.
Lots of intelligence, but really limited real-world understanding at Google. What they have done here is known as the "Second System Effect", nicely described by Brooks in 1975. It is a sign of amateurs at the controls.
Not that I mind. Google has gotten far too evil, far too powerful and far too arrogant. Anything that speeds their demise is a good thing.
The fact of the matter is that all the low-hanging fruit has been picked and things are getting harder. That is expected and normal. It is also normal that continuing the efforts is highly advisable, as here are a lot of valuable things still to be discovered, it just takes longer.
Well, maybe one thing _is_ wrong: There is a lot of pseudo-science and really low quality science (look to the buzzword-density to recognize this) taking money and attention from actually worthwhile ventures.
First, this does not even identify the right problem: The problem is in the end-points, not the network. Second, "friction" will not solve it. It is the wrong idea in the wrong place. Third, does this person even know how the technology works he is talking about? Apparently not. Next: Even adding minutes of "friction" to software (malware) distribution, that would not help. I did some research in this area about 2 decades ago, you still can saturate the whole net and reach all vulnerable targets with significant delays. Analysis of malware takes days, so unless you propose to slow it down that much, this is just a very bad idea that stems from lack of understanding.
The actual issue is bad endpoint security and, if you want to blame the network, global direct reachability.
Google really seems to be in decline, if that is the level of insight they have to offer there.
What a despicable propaganda piece. No, I am not "evangelizing" C. It is a tool. It is not a question of faith. You seem to be caught so deep in the Rust-lies that you cannot see reality anymore.
Thanks and same to you. You seem to be unable to grasp the little problem that coders that produce buffer overflows in C and C++ will just produce other security vulnerabilities in other languages. In addition, buffer overflows are pretty simple to find with automated tools, while these other bugs are not. There is NO silver bullet. What has imposed the cost to the industry is hiring incompetent coders, not any use of a specific language.
Case in point: OWASP Top 10 does not even list buffer overflows in the top 10 vulnerabilities of web applications and has stopped doing so in 2007.
Now go away and let people with actual insight handle this discussion.
They are currently still learning how to handle the plasma. The whole thing looks pretty good though, they are making steady progress and have made so for a few decades. Expect 20-30 years until actual energy generation though. This is a _very_ long-term project, but one with no signs of failing. Will in the end probably take a bit longer than self-driving cars, which has been a research issue for something like 40 years as well and is now finally getting close to deliver.
Ah, the Rust fuckups. No wonder. They are shamelessly lying to push their fetish. OWASP Top 10 does currently not even list Buffer Overflows in the 10 worst security issues with web-applications.
shit coders => shit software, regardless of circumstances. You can easily write insecure web-applications in any language you can write web-applications in.
Slashdot Mirror
If you see a "frightened rant" here, then you are really not perceptive. You are correct that SJWs are a deeply conservative movement though. Not a new insight either.
There is now a price to pay. Not really a surprise.
I tend to agree. While I do not like the idea of licencing, it seems we cannot get the incompetent morons to stop messing with stuff where it hurts other in any other way.
Or some similar utter crap? I have been wondering where all that trash comes from...
It very much does.
Oh, damn. Now I did it myself! I am soooooo sorry!
Ah, the tried and true failure of "shooting the messenger". Yes, I can see that happening.
"Publish or perish" is one of the root-causes of meaningless but spectacular "research". It is about the most stupid policy you can have.
I do understand that. But I somewhat doubt the Google-Person does. It also does not help.
You are welcome. And I fully agree about their motivations.
Nobody? Then this is obviously perfectly acceptable and even negligence this extremely gross is not anything to worry about.
You specist ass! How dare you compare a nice pig to a repulsive human!
Yea, all form, all surface, all appearances, all "save spaces". Actual facts, true communication and *gasp* honest evaluations of skill are not welcome. Google is just one victim of the cancer though, it spreads all through the industry at the moment. I predict that in the end this deeply conformist and authoritarian movement will fail and leave the industry stronger, if a lot smaller. SJWs cannot get things to work reliably, if at all. SJWs destroy communities that are critical. SJWs care about nothing and nobody but themselves and their short-term comfort. Hence they cannot learn, because getting out of their comfort-zones is anathema to them.
Lots of intelligence, but really limited real-world understanding at Google. What they have done here is known as the "Second System Effect", nicely described by Brooks in 1975. It is a sign of amateurs at the controls.
Not that I mind. Google has gotten far too evil, far too powerful and far too arrogant. Anything that speeds their demise is a good thing.
Simple: Write it down. That elevates it above all the yet undiscovered theories, which are almost all wrong and uninteresting anyways.
The fact of the matter is that all the low-hanging fruit has been picked and things are getting harder. That is expected and normal. It is also normal that continuing the efforts is highly advisable, as here are a lot of valuable things still to be discovered, it just takes longer.
Well, maybe one thing _is_ wrong: There is a lot of pseudo-science and really low quality science (look to the buzzword-density to recognize this) taking money and attention from actually worthwhile ventures.
First, this does not even identify the right problem: The problem is in the end-points, not the network. Second, "friction" will not solve it. It is the wrong idea in the wrong place. Third, does this person even know how the technology works he is talking about? Apparently not. Next: Even adding minutes of "friction" to software (malware) distribution, that would not help. I did some research in this area about 2 decades ago, you still can saturate the whole net and reach all vulnerable targets with significant delays. Analysis of malware takes days, so unless you propose to slow it down that much, this is just a very bad idea that stems from lack of understanding.
The actual issue is bad endpoint security and, if you want to blame the network, global direct reachability.
Google really seems to be in decline, if that is the level of insight they have to offer there.
You are a fanatic. And deeply stupid, like all of them. I will ignore you now.
What a despicable propaganda piece. No, I am not "evangelizing" C. It is a tool. It is not a question of faith. You seem to be caught so deep in the Rust-lies that you cannot see reality anymore.
Thanks and same to you. You seem to be unable to grasp the little problem that coders that produce buffer overflows in C and C++ will just produce other security vulnerabilities in other languages. In addition, buffer overflows are pretty simple to find with automated tools, while these other bugs are not. There is NO silver bullet. What has imposed the cost to the industry is hiring incompetent coders, not any use of a specific language.
Case in point: OWASP Top 10 does not even list buffer overflows in the top 10 vulnerabilities of web applications and has stopped doing so in 2007.
Now go away and let people with actual insight handle this discussion.
You can write insecure web-apps in a functional language just fine. That is if it can handle the interaction.
And I do not care now that I have. The standards for "one of the most emotionally resonant pieces of technology today" seem to be pathetically low.
They are currently still learning how to handle the plasma. The whole thing looks pretty good though, they are making steady progress and have made so for a few decades. Expect 20-30 years until actual energy generation though. This is a _very_ long-term project, but one with no signs of failing. Will in the end probably take a bit longer than self-driving cars, which has been a research issue for something like 40 years as well and is now finally getting close to deliver.
Ah, the Rust fuckups. No wonder. They are shamelessly lying to push their fetish. OWASP Top 10 does currently not even list Buffer Overflows in the 10 worst security issues with web-applications.
shit coders => shit software, regardless of circumstances. You can easily write insecure web-applications in any language you can write web-applications in.