after that coming with competing products against that company? that's not the microsoft I know... the microsoft I know would bundle the adCenter in all the versions of windows down to 3.1 and then pop ads in between any 2 key strokes from the user.
waiting for the next bunch of reviews from barry
on
Head Rush Ajax
·
· Score: 1
when the reviews for
1. allergy SOAP
2. mental block SOA
3. fractured XML cast XSL
4. on rails Ruby
?
how about running an application like it's a MUD? that would be fun.
multiply two matrices?
LOOK:
- you're on the row 12, column 32, the diagonal is under.
GO LEFT:
- you're on the row 12, column 33... aaa, sorry, 31.
ADD PREV:
- prev who? ...
well, usually managers and uppper levels OWN a lot of stocks in that company (so they'll be the first ones to pay the price - kind of, I admit that severance packages and all the clauses in the contracts make their fall a lot more pleasant, too pleasant).
about designing around security engineering, I don't think is possible, we have a past with cold war and cia spending like crazy with doubtful results (spies and lack of intelligence galore). do you think a company can ever come close to that kind of investment? I don't.
altogether since they allow now access thru internet... IMHO the degree of security of internet banking won't come close to the one of a vault (very complex systems vs rather simple - and because of that, verifiable - ones).
in order to get to fines/civil suits, several things must happen:
- the breach/data theft should happen and be recognized as such (I think a lot of times companies don't even realize)
- there should be a way to find the way it happened (not always possible)
- there should exist some sort of definition for "negligence in security practices" (good luck)
- there should be some damage on the customers side, provable that it was caused by the breach in the first place (well?)
add to this any kind of license agreement in the first place and then just forget it
in the first place, there are always consequences of loosing information. you don't have to regulate this, the customers will do it for you (at least in a normal market). take a look at the stock market and check how is it going for a company when something bad is happening. so no need for EXTRA punishment.
in the second place, because programs are written by people, they'll contain mistakes. if they are automatically generated in any way, then the generator is written by people, so it'll contain mistakes. and so on. and, in the end, even presuming a program is perfect (no holes whatsoever), then you have the social engineering to create a breach in security.
so, as I said, 100% security is not possible.
damn! And I can't patent BSOD either, it's not new, original or ornamental ("Design Patent - new, original or ornamental design for an article of manufacture granted to protect the appearance rather than the function of a product.")
"punish the companies!!!", "take bill gates glasses and give'm to the poor!!!". well, not quite there but close. Still, besides the tone of the comment, I can see you believe that a 100% unbreachable security is possible. Kind of naive, would'n you say? Do you really believe that all the latest breaches happened because of the lack of "database cryptography"? If you don't know the answer, I'll give you a hint: no. The software apps are extremely complex. It's impossible to verify all the paths thru an application (the number is equal - no more, no less:-) - to infinity).
So hold your horses, don't get too excited, back to earth
since the apps are too simple and encryption is needed on all layers, I do expect a book like the one in the subject. ONLY the persons allowed (with special glasses) will be able to understand the warped rays of light coming from the monitor, for everybody else will look like BSOD...
hey, you heard it here first
because of some "insightful" managers? of course you'll appologize to the future generations for the hack... this is what I was tought at least, at JayLeno's Fruitcake Lady (I'm not sure which one is the first name)...
1. there is no way to completely get rid of if/then statements. they'll be somewhere. What's good with CLIPS or so is that there is not much else than the if/thens of the rules, so you don't get lost in memory allocation and the rest of the bull. On the other hand, the rules (and facts) tend to be localized in the same file, you don't have to read 200 classes of assembler (:-)) files to find all of them
2. depending on the nature of dynamics of your rules , if you don't have that many rules (20-30???) you can use simple (or complicated) if-then statements as long as you DOCUMENT THEM WELL!!! so the next john (or yourself) can pick up the work from there. hmm, this kind'a makes me think
3. if the rules are VERY dynamic (or just too many of them), a more general approach will be needed. Welcome CLIPS or other rule-based expert system. I heard fairy-tales with systems with tens of thousands of rules, so probably it works.
4. How you store the rules, is completely your business, I don't see any problem storing them in a database, file or on a rice, written by a very old and pacient chinese.
5. from the practical standpoint, the problem with the rules is a very general one. how do you connect a lot of facts with a lot of rules? answer? algorithms - check RETE, check hashes, I'll stop here gasping for air short of ideas.
6. how do you apply the rules, in which order? this is another issue, related to the given problem. see the depth, width or jumpy:-) searches... all the rules based systems have this issue, again the answer will be depending on the problem.
7. another issue, thread safety, parallelism. how do you synchronize all of these?
and I think I forget something... hmmm... did I turn off the stove...?
Slashdot Mirror
after that coming with competing products against that company? that's not the microsoft I know... the microsoft I know would bundle the adCenter in all the versions of windows down to 3.1 and then pop ads in between any 2 key strokes from the user.
when the reviews for
1. allergy SOAP
2. mental block SOA
3. fractured XML cast XSL
4. on rails Ruby
?
if your playing was 2 years ago, then the patent is correct
how about running an application like it's a MUD? that would be fun.
...
multiply two matrices?
LOOK:
- you're on the row 12, column 32, the diagonal is under.
GO LEFT:
- you're on the row 12, column 33... aaa, sorry, 31.
ADD PREV:
- prev who?
regardless of how they intrude - phone calls, at the door, or thru ./
to lazy to write a full comment
well, usually managers and uppper levels OWN a lot of stocks in that company (so they'll be the first ones to pay the price - kind of, I admit that severance packages and all the clauses in the contracts make their fall a lot more pleasant, too pleasant).
about designing around security engineering, I don't think is possible, we have a past with cold war and cia spending like crazy with doubtful results (spies and lack of intelligence galore). do you think a company can ever come close to that kind of investment? I don't.
altogether since they allow now access thru internet... IMHO the degree of security of internet banking won't come close to the one of a vault (very complex systems vs rather simple - and because of that, verifiable - ones).
in order to get to fines/civil suits, several things must happen:
- the breach/data theft should happen and be recognized as such (I think a lot of times companies don't even realize)
- there should be a way to find the way it happened (not always possible)
- there should exist some sort of definition for "negligence in security practices" (good luck)
- there should be some damage on the customers side, provable that it was caused by the breach in the first place (well?)
add to this any kind of license agreement in the first place and then just forget it
in the first place, there are always consequences of loosing information. you don't have to regulate this, the customers will do it for you (at least in a normal market). take a look at the stock market and check how is it going for a company when something bad is happening. so no need for EXTRA punishment. in the second place, because programs are written by people, they'll contain mistakes. if they are automatically generated in any way, then the generator is written by people, so it'll contain mistakes. and so on. and, in the end, even presuming a program is perfect (no holes whatsoever), then you have the social engineering to create a breach in security. so, as I said, 100% security is not possible.
damn! And I can't patent BSOD either, it's not new, original or ornamental ("Design Patent - new, original or ornamental design for an article of manufacture granted to protect the appearance rather than the function of a product.")
"punish the companies!!!", "take bill gates glasses and give'm to the poor!!!". well, not quite there but close. Still, besides the tone of the comment, I can see you believe that a 100% unbreachable security is possible. Kind of naive, would'n you say? Do you really believe that all the latest breaches happened because of the lack of "database cryptography"? If you don't know the answer, I'll give you a hint: no. The software apps are extremely complex. It's impossible to verify all the paths thru an application (the number is equal - no more, no less :-) - to infinity).
So hold your horses, don't get too excited, back to earth
since the apps are too simple and encryption is needed on all layers, I do expect a book like the one in the subject. ONLY the persons allowed (with special glasses) will be able to understand the warped rays of light coming from the monitor, for everybody else will look like BSOD...
hey, you heard it here first
Content without crap? Does such thing exist? Who's law was the "90% of everything is crap"...?
because of some "insightful" managers? of course you'll appologize to the future generations for the hack... this is what I was tought at least, at JayLeno's Fruitcake Lady (I'm not sure which one is the first name)...
I'll keep it short.
:-) searches... all the rules based systems have this issue, again the answer will be depending on the problem.
1. there is no way to completely get rid of if/then statements. they'll be somewhere. What's good with CLIPS or so is that there is not much else than the if/thens of the rules, so you don't get lost in memory allocation and the rest of the bull. On the other hand, the rules (and facts) tend to be localized in the same file, you don't have to read 200 classes of assembler (:-)) files to find all of them
2. depending on the nature of dynamics of your rules , if you don't have that many rules (20-30???) you can use simple (or complicated) if-then statements as long as you DOCUMENT THEM WELL!!! so the next john (or yourself) can pick up the work from there. hmm, this kind'a makes me think
3. if the rules are VERY dynamic (or just too many of them), a more general approach will be needed. Welcome CLIPS or other rule-based expert system. I heard fairy-tales with systems with tens of thousands of rules, so probably it works.
4. How you store the rules, is completely your business, I don't see any problem storing them in a database, file or on a rice, written by a very old and pacient chinese.
5. from the practical standpoint, the problem with the rules is a very general one. how do you connect a lot of facts with a lot of rules? answer? algorithms - check RETE, check hashes, I'll stop here gasping for air short of ideas.
6. how do you apply the rules, in which order? this is another issue, related to the given problem. see the depth, width or jumpy
7. another issue, thread safety, parallelism. how do you synchronize all of these?
and I think I forget something... hmmm... did I turn off the stove...?