So you think making level 5 DFD's and showing the clients is good for business? Did it help in securing the network enabled parts to be any safer? NOPE!
People are now coming UP from security by obscurity. This means that they're becoming security conscious. 2002-2005 witnessed the rise of spyware and spyware awareness together. Even MS, Symantec and McAfee call it a legitimate threat.
With the customers and users becoming more security conscious and aware, both developers and vendors turn a blind eye.
what was the last time someone actually TRIED to foolproof his code? Even if it was a bittorrent client...
NO developers pay ANY attention to this aspect, whether while coding, or while designing, or even when learning. (I can crash 100% of all programs created inside my univ. by first to third year students, within an hour... TC++ on DOS)
Vendors on the other hand, it has been correctly mentioned, that pay no attention to code security, stability, testing...
Result? Crappy code that dies on you.
Let's get Micro$oft bashing on..
It's partly the fault of compiler vendors like MS and borland too... NO tools are popularised to enhance stability, efficiency or security... It's ALWAYS new features this, connectivity that,.NET here, MSSQL there, J2EE over there...
So you think making level 5 DFD's and showing the clients is good for business?
Did it help in securing the network enabled parts to be any safer? NOPE!
People are now coming UP from security by obscurity. This means that they're becoming security conscious. 2002-2005 witnessed the rise of spyware and spyware awareness together. Even MS, Symantec and McAfee call it a legitimate threat.
With the customers and users becoming more security conscious and aware, both developers and vendors turn a blind eye.
So you think making level 5 DFD's and showing the clients is good for business?
Did it help in securing the network enabled parts to be any safer? NOPE!
People are now coming UP from security by obscurity. This means that they're becoming security conscious. 2002-2005 witnessed the rise of spyware and spyware awareness together. Even MS, Symantec and McAfee call it a legitimate threat.
With the cusSo you think making level 5 DFD's and showing the clients is good for business?
Did it help in securing the network enabled parts to be any safer? NOPE!
People are now coming UP from security by obscurity. This means that they're becoming security conscious. 2002-2005 witnessed the rise of spyware and spyware awareness together. Even MS, Symantec and McAfee call it a legitimate threat.
With the cus
what was the last time someone actually TRIED to foolproof his code? Even if it was a bittorrent client...
NO developers pay ANY attention to this aspect, whether while coding, or while designing, or even when learning. (I can crash 100% of all programs created inside my univ. by first to third year students, within an hour... TC++ on DOS)
Vendors on the other hand, it has been correctly mentioned, that pay no attention to code security, stability, testing...
Result? Crappy code that dies on you.
Let's get Micro$oft bashing on..
It's partly the fault of compiler vendors like MS and borland too... NO tools are popularised to enhance stability, efficiency or security... It's ALWAYS new features this, connectivity that,.NET here, MSSQL there, J2EE over there...
You CAN'T. That's because old legacy code such as that of Win Xp's "NT Virtual DOS Machine" (ntvdm.exe), TC++, MSDOS and others, don't support the extended character set for direct input AFAICT...
Also... keyboards are designed for the "common" man.. you think Jackie Thommpson emailing his mommy about how he tricked the San Andreas police into arresting a cartoonist in a dream, will EVER use the proposed '!=' key? In his life?
but if they keep it free and don't meddle with the core and shell, I'm happy. MySQL 4.1 looks awesome, and even a JV should lead to things like PL/SQL and inter-database connectivity (PL/SQL rips the proposed procedural extensions to MySQL v5 Beta, at least in my beginner opinion).
As a student programmer, it would gladden my DOS based Turbo Heart++ to see it stay free, and match the international enterprise standards that Oracle now represents.
"On a trip to school, a several years ago, I caught a television broadcast signal on my radio (like, they were transmitting the tv sounds onto the radio), and they were playing the sounds to Casper -- that one with the fat ghost and the smelly ghost and stuff."
this happens 'coz the "old-school" or "normal" TV signals are, well broadcast over AM!
yep. The video feed goes over AM, while audio feed goes over FM... at least that's how it's transmitted over the coax cable.
That's how some of those radios that became fanous, used to catch TV's audio.
won't work for most PPV channels: cable or satellite, for obvious reasons (the frequency band is different, as is the modulation (crudely put: encryption for efficiency's sake) )
I use brackets inside brackets... GRRR!
Am I 1337 yet?
Slashdot Mirror
So you think making level 5 DFD's and showing the clients is good for business? Did it help in securing the network enabled parts to be any safer? NOPE!
.NET here, MSSQL there, J2EE over there...
People are now coming UP from security by obscurity. This means that they're becoming security conscious. 2002-2005 witnessed the rise of spyware and spyware awareness together. Even MS, Symantec and McAfee call it a legitimate threat.
With the customers and users becoming more security conscious and aware, both developers and vendors turn a blind eye.
what was the last time someone actually TRIED to foolproof his code? Even if it was a bittorrent client...
NO developers pay ANY attention to this aspect, whether while coding, or while designing, or even when learning. (I can crash 100% of all programs created inside my univ. by first to third year students, within an hour... TC++ on DOS)
Vendors on the other hand, it has been correctly mentioned, that pay no attention to code security, stability, testing...
Result? Crappy code that dies on you.
Let's get Micro$oft bashing on..
It's partly the fault of compiler vendors like MS and borland too... NO tools are popularised to enhance stability, efficiency or security... It's ALWAYS new features this, connectivity that,
damnit
:(
stupid clipboard... sticky keys.
I'm really sorry...
WHY can't we edit our own comments, BTW?
So you think making level 5 DFD's and showing the clients is good for business? Did it help in securing the network enabled parts to be any safer? NOPE!
.NET here, MSSQL there, J2EE over there...
People are now coming UP from security by obscurity. This means that they're becoming security conscious. 2002-2005 witnessed the rise of spyware and spyware awareness together. Even MS, Symantec and McAfee call it a legitimate threat.
With the customers and users becoming more security conscious and aware, both developers and vendors turn a blind eye. So you think making level 5 DFD's and showing the clients is good for business? Did it help in securing the network enabled parts to be any safer? NOPE!
People are now coming UP from security by obscurity. This means that they're becoming security conscious. 2002-2005 witnessed the rise of spyware and spyware awareness together. Even MS, Symantec and McAfee call it a legitimate threat.
With the cusSo you think making level 5 DFD's and showing the clients is good for business? Did it help in securing the network enabled parts to be any safer? NOPE!
People are now coming UP from security by obscurity. This means that they're becoming security conscious. 2002-2005 witnessed the rise of spyware and spyware awareness together. Even MS, Symantec and McAfee call it a legitimate threat.
With the cus what was the last time someone actually TRIED to foolproof his code? Even if it was a bittorrent client...
NO developers pay ANY attention to this aspect, whether while coding, or while designing, or even when learning. (I can crash 100% of all programs created inside my univ. by first to third year students, within an hour... TC++ on DOS)
Vendors on the other hand, it has been correctly mentioned, that pay no attention to code security, stability, testing...
Result? Crappy code that dies on you.
Let's get Micro$oft bashing on..
It's partly the fault of compiler vendors like MS and borland too... NO tools are popularised to enhance stability, efficiency or security... It's ALWAYS new features this, connectivity that,
you want a special key for programmers ONLY?
good
try typing © in Turbo C++ v3 (The old IDE which EVERYONE in the c++ world has used, seen, or should do so, or at least the RHIDE clone)
You CAN'T. That's because old legacy code such as that of Win Xp's "NT Virtual DOS Machine" (ntvdm.exe), TC++, MSDOS and others, don't support the extended character set for direct input AFAICT...
Also... keyboards are designed for the "common" man.. you think Jackie Thommpson emailing his mommy about how he tricked the San Andreas police into arresting a cartoonist in a dream, will EVER use the proposed '!=' key? In his life?
but if they keep it free and don't meddle with the core and shell, I'm happy. MySQL 4.1 looks awesome, and even a JV should lead to things like PL/SQL and inter-database connectivity (PL/SQL rips the proposed procedural extensions to MySQL v5 Beta, at least in my beginner opinion).
As a student programmer, it would gladden my DOS based Turbo Heart++ to see it stay free, and match the international enterprise standards that Oracle now represents.
j00 sh0uld try catching one of them 1337 p0dcasts in your iPod... some I hear are very 1337.
Am I 1337 yet?
"On a trip to school, a several years ago, I caught a television broadcast signal on my radio (like, they were transmitting the tv sounds onto the radio), and they were playing the sounds to Casper -- that one with the fat ghost and the smelly ghost and stuff." this happens 'coz the "old-school" or "normal" TV signals are, well broadcast over AM!
... GRRR!
yep. The video feed goes over AM, while audio feed goes over FM... at least that's how it's transmitted over the coax cable.
That's how some of those radios that became fanous, used to catch TV's audio.
won't work for most PPV channels: cable or satellite, for obvious reasons (the frequency band is different, as is the modulation (crudely put: encryption for efficiency's sake) )
I use brackets inside brackets
Am I 1337 yet?