Also some Flash objects do not have a visual presence, and in fact sit off the screen since they do other things. I believe Google's Pacman logo uses Flash to power sound in IE (since it doesn't support HTML5 audio).
It IS a beta, and if you have a problem with it... such as being unable to log on... you're expected to report such problems (unless the devs already clearly know about it, maybe).
It is very uncommon to see 64-bit web browsers, as most plugins only come in 32-bit flavors. So running a 64-bit Windows won't matter for 99.99% of users. Only IE offers a 64-bit version, at least theirs is the easiest to find and use. Firefox might offer one I think? But it won't be the default download. Chrome does not yet offer one for Windows.
RTFS. Just because Java and JavaScript appear in the same paragraph doesn't mean someone is equating the two. This is a JavaScript engine coded in Java, hooked up to Minecraft.
When you're dealing with rankings, 1st can be considered the highest. And so on. "Lower" would not be a valid term as it implies being worse when 4th is better than 14th.
1. Some algorithms work by simply looking ahead at all possible move combinations by you and your opponent. It then determines a "score" based on the favor of the outcome in whichever player's direction. It may then, for each outcome or only for "favorable" ones, go down another turn for both players. Eventually it will select a move that results in the most "favorable" outcomes and the least "unfavorable" ones based on how the other player moves. This isn't something you can internalize as the computer has to handle thousands upon thousands of possible game states at once and compare them all. Of course this is largely brute forcing but it is also guaranteed to give you better solutions the more turns it thinks ahead.
That's fairly pointless. Let's say I start typing "Tuna". My browser sends "Tuna" to Google's servers so it can get a list of suggested search phrases, including the two you provided. On its way to Google servers... it passes through Chinese ISP servers and I get flagged for searching for Tuna. Google's warning would come too late.
Google's system, though I never saw it myself, sounds like it would have sent a list of banned words to the browser as part of the page, before the user searches. Then when the user starts typing, the browser will NOT send anything to Google with a banned word in it until the user addresses the warning displayed. Your idea, if adjusted properly to not send traffic to Google with banned words in it, would end up being only a minor variation of this.
Once you can attach a remote debugger to a process you can pretty much run whatever code you want, it's just not user-friendly. The big thing here is that a system process is bypassing sanity checks on API calls (for speed, I assume) and so it's exploited to run arbitrary code in kernel mode, and then you have the whole system (in this case, it just flips the switch to allow any app to run, for the current session only I assume, it won't persist to the next boot).
MS may restrict the processes to which the debugger can attach to fix this, so you can't attach to any system process which uses the faster API calls lacking sanity checks. Assuming there's no way to get other programs to use those versions of DLLs, this would close the exploit, unless the user removes the hotfix (can you do that in RT?) or reinstalls Windows (if that's easy to do).
Either way a tool to package up the remote debugger side of things into something usable would be fairly trivial to make, just gotta capture the network activity of the exploit and then automate it so normal users just push a button and then trigger the proper breakpoint by adjusting the system volume.
The Wii U has a huge day-one system update patch, weighing in at 5GB. I have FIOS (15mbits/s) and it took 30-45 mins to download. Steam and other digital distribution systems are becoming more popular and games easily weigh in at multi-gigabytes. Today I just got Assassin's Creed 3 as a gift and it is a 15gb download.
As services like these are more commonly used, more people will eventually figure out that they will need improved internet connectivity to better use these services.
I doubt many gaming platforms have that ability. And operators will probably find it easier to just outright ban the users than implement a new feature like that.
In this case, let's say your uncle mails his letters by leaving them in his mailbox (I think some places let you do this) for the mailman to pick up. Now let's say a shady guy comes along and copies the names of people your uncle is mailing letters to, including yours, then sends him a letter purportedly from you asking him to loan you money by wiring it to a specific bank account or whatever.
Your NAME was involved but you had nothing to do with it, and the scammer found out your name from him.
Well the exploit uses APIs that only work in IE, such as attachEvent, so it breaks in other browsers before it can even try the exploit.
I looked into how other browsers handle manually firing events and found this nice example. As you can see, you are REQUIRED to create your OWN event object, where the exploit depends on the browser creating and populating one.
fireEvent is only supported in IE. Can you show how other browsers are affected? The only way to manually fire events in a standard way involves supplying your OWN event object and properties... this exploit relies on the browser filling some in.
What you are seeing has nothing to do with sync and would happen even if you turned sync off. Chrome is just starting up as quickly as it can and only loading bookmarks when it can get to it.
Chrome has its own built-in PDF reader which works fine for 99% of cases, no need for Foxit. Chrome even has a "Save to PDF" virtual printer so you don't even need Foxit for that.
There's sort of a flaw in your reasoning... the accident rate you cite is with HUMAN drivers. Driverless cars would naturally change it (ideally, lower it). And assuming this, chances are accidents involving driverless cars would mostly occur with human-driven cars and be the human's fault, so no liability there.
However I suspect at least initially software/hardware to enable driverless control of cars would be provided by companies other than the manufacturer so they would not be held liable. They would probably have the results of their own tests of the system to show to the court to say they did their own QA on it and found it to be as safe as they could expect. It would probably be closed source, so what more could they do? The software devs themselves may not be claimed either, depends on the nature of the crash, why it happened, the bug in the code that triggered it, whether or not that bug would have been reasonable to locate and fix via a reasonable QA process, if the bug was already fixed in newer firmware why the vehicle wasn't patched (could be found to be the owner's fault), etc etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Also some Flash objects do not have a visual presence, and in fact sit off the screen since they do other things. I believe Google's Pacman logo uses Flash to power sound in IE (since it doesn't support HTML5 audio).
It IS a beta, and if you have a problem with it... such as being unable to log on... you're expected to report such problems (unless the devs already clearly know about it, maybe).
It is very uncommon to see 64-bit web browsers, as most plugins only come in 32-bit flavors. So running a 64-bit Windows won't matter for 99.99% of users. Only IE offers a 64-bit version, at least theirs is the easiest to find and use. Firefox might offer one I think? But it won't be the default download. Chrome does not yet offer one for Windows.
To be fair Valve is the one who was first to promise new versions of their flagship product in shorter periods of time and look what happened! :)
RTFS. Just because Java and JavaScript appear in the same paragraph doesn't mean someone is equating the two. This is a JavaScript engine coded in Java, hooked up to Minecraft.
When you're dealing with rankings, 1st can be considered the highest. And so on. "Lower" would not be a valid term as it implies being worse when 4th is better than 14th.
1. Some algorithms work by simply looking ahead at all possible move combinations by you and your opponent. It then determines a "score" based on the favor of the outcome in whichever player's direction. It may then, for each outcome or only for "favorable" ones, go down another turn for both players. Eventually it will select a move that results in the most "favorable" outcomes and the least "unfavorable" ones based on how the other player moves. This isn't something you can internalize as the computer has to handle thousands upon thousands of possible game states at once and compare them all. Of course this is largely brute forcing but it is also guaranteed to give you better solutions the more turns it thinks ahead.
Well, I suppose "round" is a shape.
If you play Minecraft you need Java installed.
My FIOS has trouble streaming from YouTube. The problem is on YouTube's end.
That's fairly pointless. Let's say I start typing "Tuna". My browser sends "Tuna" to Google's servers so it can get a list of suggested search phrases, including the two you provided. On its way to Google servers... it passes through Chinese ISP servers and I get flagged for searching for Tuna. Google's warning would come too late.
Google's system, though I never saw it myself, sounds like it would have sent a list of banned words to the browser as part of the page, before the user searches. Then when the user starts typing, the browser will NOT send anything to Google with a banned word in it until the user addresses the warning displayed. Your idea, if adjusted properly to not send traffic to Google with banned words in it, would end up being only a minor variation of this.
Once you can attach a remote debugger to a process you can pretty much run whatever code you want, it's just not user-friendly. The big thing here is that a system process is bypassing sanity checks on API calls (for speed, I assume) and so it's exploited to run arbitrary code in kernel mode, and then you have the whole system (in this case, it just flips the switch to allow any app to run, for the current session only I assume, it won't persist to the next boot).
MS may restrict the processes to which the debugger can attach to fix this, so you can't attach to any system process which uses the faster API calls lacking sanity checks. Assuming there's no way to get other programs to use those versions of DLLs, this would close the exploit, unless the user removes the hotfix (can you do that in RT?) or reinstalls Windows (if that's easy to do).
Either way a tool to package up the remote debugger side of things into something usable would be fairly trivial to make, just gotta capture the network activity of the exploit and then automate it so normal users just push a button and then trigger the proper breakpoint by adjusting the system volume.
Does mom also manage the router settings? Cut him off.
The Wii U has a huge day-one system update patch, weighing in at 5GB. I have FIOS (15mbits/s) and it took 30-45 mins to download. Steam and other digital distribution systems are becoming more popular and games easily weigh in at multi-gigabytes. Today I just got Assassin's Creed 3 as a gift and it is a 15gb download.
As services like these are more commonly used, more people will eventually figure out that they will need improved internet connectivity to better use these services.
I doubt many gaming platforms have that ability. And operators will probably find it easier to just outright ban the users than implement a new feature like that.
That's funny, everything I've heard says the ONLY WAY to be completely sure your data is wiped is to physically destroy the disk.
Of course it wouldn't hurt to do a software-based wipe first, and who says he didn't?
How do you know he didn't?
In this case, let's say your uncle mails his letters by leaving them in his mailbox (I think some places let you do this) for the mailman to pick up. Now let's say a shady guy comes along and copies the names of people your uncle is mailing letters to, including yours, then sends him a letter purportedly from you asking him to loan you money by wiring it to a specific bank account or whatever.
Your NAME was involved but you had nothing to do with it, and the scammer found out your name from him.
Well the exploit uses APIs that only work in IE, such as attachEvent, so it breaks in other browsers before it can even try the exploit.
I looked into how other browsers handle manually firing events and found this nice example. As you can see, you are REQUIRED to create your OWN event object, where the exploit depends on the browser creating and populating one.
fireEvent is only supported in IE. Can you show how other browsers are affected? The only way to manually fire events in a standard way involves supplying your OWN event object and properties... this exploit relies on the browser filling some in.
The same argument could also be said to make parental controls and any web filtering software applied by parents illegal.
And if that doesn't work, just tell businesses they can no longer filter the internet against YouTube, flash games, and porn at work.
The problem will be solved in short order.
What you are seeing has nothing to do with sync and would happen even if you turned sync off. Chrome is just starting up as quickly as it can and only loading bookmarks when it can get to it.
Chrome has its own built-in PDF reader which works fine for 99% of cases, no need for Foxit. Chrome even has a "Save to PDF" virtual printer so you don't even need Foxit for that.
Pin the command prompt to the taskbar, problem solved. You even get a shortcut for it: Win 1-9 activates taskbar buttons 1-9.
There's sort of a flaw in your reasoning... the accident rate you cite is with HUMAN drivers. Driverless cars would naturally change it (ideally, lower it). And assuming this, chances are accidents involving driverless cars would mostly occur with human-driven cars and be the human's fault, so no liability there.
However I suspect at least initially software/hardware to enable driverless control of cars would be provided by companies other than the manufacturer so they would not be held liable. They would probably have the results of their own tests of the system to show to the court to say they did their own QA on it and found it to be as safe as they could expect. It would probably be closed source, so what more could they do? The software devs themselves may not be claimed either, depends on the nature of the crash, why it happened, the bug in the code that triggered it, whether or not that bug would have been reasonable to locate and fix via a reasonable QA process, if the bug was already fixed in newer firmware why the vehicle wasn't patched (could be found to be the owner's fault), etc etc.