Well, that might be true is some (most?) places. But:
In Winnipeg (which I just moved away from a couple months ago) can have violently different weather day to day and even sometimes within the same day. It as explained to me as: there are different "spheres of influence" when it comes to weather patterns and Winnipeg sits on the boarder of two of them. Knowing that weather is never stable means that this "line" constantly moves, sometimes quickly. Thus, the violent weather patterns.
In fact, in Southern Manitoba when farmers got together for the longest time (still?) they of course asked "How's the weather?". This was/is-n't just simple pleasantries. They were actually getting a reading on weather patterns because it although it might have been raining on one farm, on another one (just a mile down sometimes), it might not have been.
So basically, it isn't nor has it really ever been true for everyone.
According to the Wikipedia these taxes were/proposed/ on Oct 31. 2006. But, I find nothing actually done about it since this proposal. Not to mention that something such as this would take more than just a couple months to pass.
Basically, this tax that you cite that Harper has done, actually hasn't been done. In fact, it hasn't even left discussions.
1) This is life, not Mathematics. Thus rules are ALWAYS subject to exceptions.
2) And how many students are on such a "substantial scholarship"? Because for there to be any/real/ benefit, there has to actually a substantial number of people that will benefit from it. This is just one of those, "basically no-one will will actually use this, but it makes us look good for doing it" type thing.
The really scary part for me is that Canadians are getting/have gotten that "I don't listen to 'outsiders' b/c they are 'morons'" attitude that average Americans have. To me, that means that at least a signifcant portion of Canadians will not have that realization. They'll think everything is fine. That is unless they are directly affected. Which is unlikely b/c they go along with the party line.
""" Hey, don't forget there's still Mexico. And they speak their own language down there, so there's no way to know how they're doing. """
Given the massive amounts of people illegally cross the US-Mexico boarder, I think that we can all agree that Mexico is rather messed up. At least to a significant degree for the average person.
I all honesty, what hasn't the Harper gov/not/ fucked up. In fact, every decision they've made, everything they've done, ONLY benefits the rich. Anyone surprised by this hasn't been paying attention.
Also, there's absolutely nothing that can be done. They'll just "go it alone" and do whatever they want to do anyway. All that without communicating at all with the media because they want our journalists to write down the question before press conferences and our journalists refused (yes we have real journalists here).
Hey, US people. We now have an un-government too! Now all of North America is fucked!
Um, freedom of information? Or do you like the idea of living in a world where there are "great firewalls" everywhere a la China?
Haven't you heard of net neutrality before? This also have NOTHING to do with blocking content. Please look up what it actually is before you comment further.
But there's the whole blogger thing that was posted here in Oct. as well.
This really isn't directed at you as you were the only one to respond without attacking. So, if you read it, read it minus the animosity. That isn't meant for you.
All of you guys are completely missing the point. You 1) didn't read my post, and 2) have quite short memories.
1) I said STARTING and SIMILAR. Also, I was making this comment IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS THREAD. As in, making comments about torture is pure sophistry or in other words that type of argument is the logical fallacy of Emotional Appeal (i.e. a Red Herring).
There's also the whole surveillance society thing and actually having speakers on them so people can get chastised for such anarchy promoting things as littering.
Basically, it cannot be denied that there is a pattern here. One in which is taking the UK legal system TOWARDS the Chinese one, NOT away from it. Just take a look at the UK over the past couple years and try to deny it.
Proof of concept for a virus exists. It was posted here; check the archives.
There is also a difference between hiring people to check the security of an application/os/etc, someone starting a "month of bugs" thing, and down right daring them to do it. The first two are good, the last is just plain stupid. What the last will produce is the "Oh yah? Let's see how much damage I can do and release it to nock to fuckers down a couple notches."
There is also a difference between making some queries to security professionals, and daring the malicious to do it. Which is exactly what you get when you, "dare" people in some article.
For that matter, daring?!?!? Where are we? In a school yard?
... started back at university at around 34 and just graduated this past academic year at 39 (I believe) with a Math Honours degree. This academic year he started his grad program. He's similar to your situation as he worked for about a decade as a programmer/sys admin/etc.
But, how he got into doing research was to excel in his classes and get introduced (by me) to the instructor that I was marking for who happened to be doing research and needed someone with his skills. This turned into a summer job and the the next summer and this instructor turned into his graduate supervisor.
Basically, if you want to do research you canNOT just jump in i.e. having the "starting not at the bottom", "quick fix" mentality for research is absolutely ridiculous. You need the education (recently) and a little bit of luck to find someone that you can work with. The latter shouldn't be a problem if the profs know that you are one of the top students. This will also lead to more contacts as those profs are not typically just working with "locals".
In other words, go back to university. The other path is pretty much impossible.
""" Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. """
Well first off, this just plain isn't true. But, I believe that it is true (or at least has been) for Windows. A simple search of the security focus archives would reveal if this has been true or not in the past. Any takers?
""" I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine. """
As someone above said careful what you wish for. Basically, I remember seeing the ad from Apple about Mac not having any virii. At that point, I wondered how long it'd be before someone did it (NEVER challenge an attacker). I think it was just a few months before it happened.
Basically, if I were Bill, given even just Vista's already sketchy security track record, I'd be careful about making such comments. How long do people here think that it'll take before the month of Vista happens?
If it lives up to just a portion of its potential, I think we'll have quite a fun game on our hands.
I also wouldn't say that older gamers are the only true ones. I'd just say that older gamers have a higher probability of being a gamer that doesn't need wicked graphics, etc for considering a game good. Not that I'm a younger gamer defending myself (I started on the Atari 2600).
But, I agree that company behaviour today is rather... questionable. I also agree that $600 for a console is WAY too much. Especially considering what actually comes in the box. I'd much rather spend that money on a Wii with an extra controller w/ nunchuk, memory card and a game or two and actually have some fun.
I wouldn't say that pretty graphics preclude that a game is only about the graphics. A game pretty much has to be pretty to make it today which isn't necessarily a bad thing (as long as there can be exceptions to the rule of course). It's just that it can't be the primary focus for the developers. Because we all know where that leads as there are tonnes of games out there that are pretty much suck.
I know that a platform isn't a game, but the Wii has really thrown out what home gaming has mention. Not to mention that it's gotten... rather good reviews; people seem to love it. So, originality seems to be not entirely out of the question for something in the industry to sell well.
I'll also point out that "gamers" is a rather illusive term today. Nintendo among others have realized that female gamers have different ideas of what makes a good game as well as "older" gamers as well. And that's only two of the markets that are only beginning to be tapped.
Basically, although it may be true that the traditional "hard-core gamer" may prefer to stick with the same type of game over and over, other types of gamers may actually prefer more original content. Of course, we won't know for a fair number of years if this is true, but I wouldn't count original content out just yet.
"If a student is harassed for three hours at night on the Web and they come to school and have to sit in the same classroom with the student that's the bully, there is an effect on education, and in that way, there is a direct link to schools," he argues.'"
How is this different from when kids/actually went out in the evening/ and got bullied for hours, and then had to sit in the same classroom with the bully?
Schools are completely failing not only with education, but with controlling students in the classroom as well. IMO, this type of thing is just schools attempting to gain control over something that isn't here domain because they have lost the ability to teach and control students. No-body likes to feel useless, but this is embarrassingly transparent.
I've played games that have done this in the past and done it wrong.
Basically, the game "watched" me get better at playing a certain level of the game... unsuccessfully. But, apparently it saw that I was doing soooo well, that it decided to increase the difficulty without telling me. Which actually made me continue to fail to complete the level. Quite frustrating, not to mention annoying to have to keep an eye on the difficulty level so that it doesn't go beyond what you want.
IMO, Ratchet Deadlocked did it right. If it sees you having problems/too easy, Clank says something along the lines that if you're having problems or what a greater challenge, you can adjust the difficulty at load. If you don't and continue to perform in this way, it'll actually pop up a dialogue box asking you if you want to change the difficulty at the next death (haven't experienced the way it does it if you're too good;)).
Basically, auto adjust can only be done correct for a certain amount of people, but will piss others off. Do it the Ratchet Deadlocked way. It'll give a hint to the player and leave the final decision up to him/her.
""" Others may not like the terminology, but if the math is good, the result is good. """
That isn't exactly true. Mathematics, if it is to co-exist with other maths, it must be consistent. By altering definitions, there may be unintended consequences (if not only confusion).
An example of problems with redefining things, would be the first attempts at proving Fermat's last theorem. Basically, people were working in a system that they thought was fine, but in actuality they assumed that they had unique prime factorization which they actually didn't. This caused the proof to be erroneous.
It is currently established that a prime number is a number that is greater than 1 and has divisors that are only 1 and itself. You start messing with that and something else might go away, something that you need or something someone else needs that is attempting to use your work.
You just can't screw with established definitions. Now if you wanted to call your definition wozzle-wuzzle, no one's going to care. But, "Prime Number" has a clear established definition and no-one is going to take you seriously (never mind getting published) if you ignore that.
To join this little debate (replying to you as I don't want to reply to two different people with the same post):
Actually, if one considers 1 a prime problems end up happening e.g. inconsistencies with algebraic number theory (prime ideals) and elementary number theory. Basically, if you pop in 1, elementary number theory is fine (at least up to where I've studied it doesn't really matter aside from making some proofs more difficult than necessary). But, then some further developments like algebraic number theory start having problems, like the before mentioned inconsistency in the definition of a prime.
Leaving 1 out as a prime makes the elementary number theoretic definition consistent with the algebraic number theoretic definition. Just thought I'd point that out as math is all about detail and consistency. And not having a consistent definition of a prime is a rather large f**k up as we all know how important primes are.
So, although 1 has been considered a prime in the past, it does seem (keep in mind, I've looked through several libraries) that 1 has been dropped as a prime. Modern mathematics seems to have taken care of this discussion.
IMO, I think that this has to do with constant learning.
With regards to language, one constantly has to keep updating the colloquialisms. But, when two (or more) languages are concerned, one much also keep in mind what is the equivalent word/phrase in the other language(s). Then there's the whole translating between languages. That would require somewhat fast thought as to not lose subtleties.
I imagine the same is true for anyone that constantly learns and/or has to do consistently high level critical thinking. Keeping the brain active has its benefits. I mean, how many academic researchers go nutty statistically speaking (at least the ones that didn't start that way;)).
I remember hearing about a master chess player in his old age complaining that he couldn't see as far into the game anymore. Then after he died they found out that this technically had advanced Alzheimer's. They conjectured that having played the game his whole life, the brain had so many "connections" that the Alzheimer's just cut off a lot of them, but not the majority/all of them.
Basically, the phrase, "If you don't use it, you lose it" has more than just a couple applications.
""" In case you haven't notice, GPL licensed code is way more widely used than BSD licensed code. """
The only thing that I said was that BSD/MIT was the GPL's nearest competitor. Which according *to what I linked to* is correct. So, I actually did notice. It is you that didn't notice that I noticed due to your failure to read what I wrote.
""" You could equally say that by making the BSD sound GPL like, it's an attempt to show people that the BSD license is just as good as the GPL at protecting the rights of the people receiving the software. """
What "equally"?!?! Who are you talking to? Because, I honestly believe that you aren't replying to anything that I actually wrote.
In all seriousness, I strongly recommend that you go back and actually read my post and click on those links that I provided so that you have a clue of what I actually said.
Personally, I think that this is just an attempt to make the BSD license somewhat equivalent to the GPL just so that people will use the GPL more. After all, we all know that the GNU Foundation has gotten really active with regards to activism:
And the BSD/MIT licenses are the GPL's nearest competitor according to a poll here at/. (yes, I know that polls here aren't exactly accurate, but it does provide a indicator).
From Goaway \\\ The thing is, the vast majority of PHP users don't even understand that there is a problem. PHP is a language used mainly by beginners, and actively aimed at beginners, but it is not designed to be used by beginners. It's a landmine-filled sandbox. \\\
So, where do you get that PHP is a "landmine-filled sandbox"? Because people don't use it properly (see function list below)? If so, that rather asinine.
From Goaway \\\ Thus, the internet is full of SQL injection vulnerabilities. \\\
SQL injection errors are created by people that have no clue how to do there jobs. It is NOT language dependent (see list of functions below).
From Goaway \\\ Blaming every PHP programmer for not being a security expert is idiotic. Most programmers aren't, and they wouldn't need to be, if the language was designed properly. \\\
If you define a security expert as one who pretty much uniquely knows to escape params to a SQL query, then I'd hate to think what your code looks like. In fact, my first piece of paper was from a college where I got a 2 year diploma. And even there they EXPLICITLY taught to do sanity checking at the client AND server level. And the instructor HATED teaching that stuff AND his actual expertise was networking. This is NOT about being a security expert, it is about/common sense/.
This also is an issue that has NOTHING to do with language design. If we were talking about having a standard db interface then THAT would be language design (btw PHP doesn't have one and that is a problem, but that's a completely other issue). What we ARE talking about, is how that design is IMPLEMENTED. These things are completely different.
From Goaway \\\ I don't use PHP, for exactly that reason. \\\
Well, it's obvious that you don't use PHP because you have no clue what functions are in its library.
""" Escapes special characters in a string for use in a SQL statement """
etc
So, there are loads of functions that do the required escaping without the "programmer" having to be a "security expert" i.e. it's just having a clue as to what functions are available/and using them/.
Also, point of fact, web programming today REQUIRES knowledge of security features/programes/etc. If you don't know, then you have no business doing it.
Point of fact, security is about creating layers of defenses to ensue that the app is pretty much tamper proof.
This starts with sanity checking at the browser, then a web application firewall (e.g. http://www.modsecurity.org/), specific sanity checks in the application code itself (e.g. restricting usernames to alphanumeric and checking for it), and if one is using a language that has functions like the above, use them (if they implemented internally, great), if not, do it yourself.
Of course sanity checking at the client level and using a web application firewall are optional but the others are required, period. If you don't do this you're asking for trouble. Furthermore, if you depend on others to do this checking for you, you are as well asking for trouble.
There will always be vulnerabilities in any language, web server, db server, etc. What makes any vulnerabilities not exploitable (or extremely difficult to exp
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that might be true is some (most?) places. But:
In Winnipeg (which I just moved away from a couple months ago) can have violently different weather day to day and even sometimes within the same day. It as explained to me as: there are different "spheres of influence" when it comes to weather patterns and Winnipeg sits on the boarder of two of them. Knowing that weather is never stable means that this "line" constantly moves, sometimes quickly. Thus, the violent weather patterns.
In fact, in Southern Manitoba when farmers got together for the longest time (still?) they of course asked "How's the weather?". This was/is-n't just simple pleasantries. They were actually getting a reading on weather patterns because it although it might have been raining on one farm, on another one (just a mile down sometimes), it might not have been.
So basically, it isn't nor has it really ever been true for everyone.
According to the Wikipedia these taxes were /proposed/ on Oct 31. 2006. But, I find nothing actually done about it since this proposal. Not to mention that something such as this would take more than just a couple months to pass.
Basically, this tax that you cite that Harper has done, actually hasn't been done. In fact, it hasn't even left discussions.
1) This is life, not Mathematics. Thus rules are ALWAYS subject to exceptions.
/real/ benefit, there has to actually a substantial number of people that will benefit from it. This is just one of those, "basically no-one will will actually use this, but it makes us look good for doing it" type thing.
2) And how many students are on such a "substantial scholarship"? Because for there to be any
Agreed.
The really scary part for me is that Canadians are getting/have gotten that "I don't listen to 'outsiders' b/c they are 'morons'" attitude that average Americans have. To me, that means that at least a signifcant portion of Canadians will not have that realization. They'll think everything is fine. That is unless they are directly affected. Which is unlikely b/c they go along with the party line.
We live in frightening times, indeed.
"""
Hey, don't forget there's still Mexico. And they speak their own language down there, so there's no way to know how they're doing.
"""
Given the massive amounts of people illegally cross the US-Mexico boarder, I think that we can all agree that Mexico is rather messed up. At least to a significant degree for the average person.
I all honesty, what hasn't the Harper gov /not/ fucked up. In fact, every decision they've made, everything they've done, ONLY benefits the rich. Anyone surprised by this hasn't been paying attention.
Also, there's absolutely nothing that can be done. They'll just "go it alone" and do whatever they want to do anyway. All that without communicating at all with the media because they want our journalists to write down the question before press conferences and our journalists refused (yes we have real journalists here).
Hey, US people. We now have an un-government too! Now all of North America is fucked!
Um, freedom of information? Or do you like the idea of living in a world where there are "great firewalls" everywhere a la China?
Haven't you heard of net neutrality before? This also have NOTHING to do with blocking content. Please look up what it actually is before you comment further.
But there's the whole blogger thing that was posted here in Oct. as well.
9 07456
This really isn't directed at you as you were the only one to respond without attacking. So, if you read it, read it minus the animosity. That isn't meant for you.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=220896&cid=17
All of you guys are completely missing the point. You 1) didn't read my post, and 2) have quite short memories.
2 32202
1) I said STARTING and SIMILAR. Also, I was making this comment IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS THREAD. As in, making comments about torture is pure sophistry or in other words that type of argument is the logical fallacy of Emotional Appeal (i.e. a Red Herring).
2) China, just a little while ago, started making moves for people to register there names for blogging:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/23/2
Sound familiar?
There's also the whole surveillance society thing and actually having speakers on them so people can get chastised for such anarchy promoting things as littering.
Basically, it cannot be denied that there is a pattern here. One in which is taking the UK legal system TOWARDS the Chinese one, NOT away from it. Just take a look at the UK over the past couple years and try to deny it.
Is anyone else starting to confuse the UK and China? B/c there "legal" systems are starting to look awfully similar.
Proof of concept for a virus exists. It was posted here; check the archives.
There is also a difference between hiring people to check the security of an application/os/etc, someone starting a "month of bugs" thing, and down right daring them to do it. The first two are good, the last is just plain stupid. What the last will produce is the "Oh yah? Let's see how much damage I can do and release it to nock to fuckers down a couple notches."
There is also a difference between making some queries to security professionals, and daring the malicious to do it. Which is exactly what you get when you, "dare" people in some article.
For that matter, daring?!?!? Where are we? In a school yard?
Actually, there IS proof of concept and it DID make its way onto /. Perhaps you missed that day.
... started back at university at around 34 and just graduated this past academic year at 39 (I believe) with a Math Honours degree. This academic year he started his grad program. He's similar to your situation as he worked for about a decade as a programmer/sys admin/etc.
But, how he got into doing research was to excel in his classes and get introduced (by me) to the instructor that I was marking for who happened to be doing research and needed someone with his skills. This turned into a summer job and the the next summer and this instructor turned into his graduate supervisor.
Basically, if you want to do research you canNOT just jump in i.e. having the "starting not at the bottom", "quick fix" mentality for research is absolutely ridiculous. You need the education (recently) and a little bit of luck to find someone that you can work with. The latter shouldn't be a problem if the profs know that you are one of the top students. This will also lead to more contacts as those profs are not typically just working with "locals".
In other words, go back to university. The other path is pretty much impossible.
"""
Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally.
"""
Well first off, this just plain isn't true. But, I believe that it is true (or at least has been) for Windows. A simple search of the security focus archives would reveal if this has been true or not in the past. Any takers?
"""
I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine.
"""
As someone above said careful what you wish for. Basically, I remember seeing the ad from Apple about Mac not having any virii. At that point, I wondered how long it'd be before someone did it (NEVER challenge an attacker). I think it was just a few months before it happened.
Basically, if I were Bill, given even just Vista's already sketchy security track record, I'd be careful about making such comments. How long do people here think that it'll take before the month of Vista happens?
Cool, ain't it :-D
:(
The wikipedia entry says PC, Xbox 360 and PS3. I'm hoping for the Wii and/or OSX as well otherwise I won't be able to run it
I know what you mean. But, I wouldn't say that Nintendo is the /only/ company out there trying new things. There is Portal after all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4jnl0hRB9I
If it lives up to just a portion of its potential, I think we'll have quite a fun game on our hands.
I also wouldn't say that older gamers are the only true ones. I'd just say that older gamers have a higher probability of being a gamer that doesn't need wicked graphics, etc for considering a game good. Not that I'm a younger gamer defending myself (I started on the Atari 2600).
But, I agree that company behaviour today is rather... questionable. I also agree that $600 for a console is WAY too much. Especially considering what actually comes in the box. I'd much rather spend that money on a Wii with an extra controller w/ nunchuk, memory card and a game or two and actually have some fun.
I wouldn't say that pretty graphics preclude that a game is only about the graphics. A game pretty much has to be pretty to make it today which isn't necessarily a bad thing (as long as there can be exceptions to the rule of course). It's just that it can't be the primary focus for the developers. Because we all know where that leads as there are tonnes of games out there that are pretty much suck.
I know that a platform isn't a game, but the Wii has really thrown out what home gaming has mention. Not to mention that it's gotten... rather good reviews; people seem to love it. So, originality seems to be not entirely out of the question for something in the industry to sell well.
I'll also point out that "gamers" is a rather illusive term today. Nintendo among others have realized that female gamers have different ideas of what makes a good game as well as "older" gamers as well. And that's only two of the markets that are only beginning to be tapped.
Basically, although it may be true that the traditional "hard-core gamer" may prefer to stick with the same type of game over and over, other types of gamers may actually prefer more original content. Of course, we won't know for a fair number of years if this is true, but I wouldn't count original content out just yet.
"If a student is harassed for three hours at night on the Web and they come to school and have to sit in the same classroom with the student that's the bully, there is an effect on education, and in that way, there is a direct link to schools," he argues.'"
/actually went out in the evening/ and got bullied for hours, and then had to sit in the same classroom with the bully?
How is this different from when kids
Schools are completely failing not only with education, but with controlling students in the classroom as well. IMO, this type of thing is just schools attempting to gain control over something that isn't here domain because they have lost the ability to teach and control students. No-body likes to feel useless, but this is embarrassingly transparent.
I've played games that have done this in the past and done it wrong.
;)).
Basically, the game "watched" me get better at playing a certain level of the game... unsuccessfully. But, apparently it saw that I was doing soooo well, that it decided to increase the difficulty without telling me. Which actually made me continue to fail to complete the level. Quite frustrating, not to mention annoying to have to keep an eye on the difficulty level so that it doesn't go beyond what you want.
IMO, Ratchet Deadlocked did it right. If it sees you having problems/too easy, Clank says something along the lines that if you're having problems or what a greater challenge, you can adjust the difficulty at load. If you don't and continue to perform in this way, it'll actually pop up a dialogue box asking you if you want to change the difficulty at the next death (haven't experienced the way it does it if you're too good
Basically, auto adjust can only be done correct for a certain amount of people, but will piss others off. Do it the Ratchet Deadlocked way. It'll give a hint to the player and leave the final decision up to him/her.
"""
Others may not like the terminology, but if the math is good, the result is good.
"""
That isn't exactly true. Mathematics, if it is to co-exist with other maths, it must be consistent. By altering definitions, there may be unintended consequences (if not only confusion).
An example of problems with redefining things, would be the first attempts at proving Fermat's last theorem. Basically, people were working in a system that they thought was fine, but in actuality they assumed that they had unique prime factorization which they actually didn't. This caused the proof to be erroneous.
It is currently established that a prime number is a number that is greater than 1 and has divisors that are only 1 and itself. You start messing with that and something else might go away, something that you need or something someone else needs that is attempting to use your work.
You just can't screw with established definitions. Now if you wanted to call your definition wozzle-wuzzle, no one's going to care. But, "Prime Number" has a clear established definition and no-one is going to take you seriously (never mind getting published) if you ignore that.
To join this little debate (replying to you as I don't want to reply to two different people with the same post):
Actually, if one considers 1 a prime problems end up happening e.g. inconsistencies with algebraic number theory (prime ideals) and elementary number theory. Basically, if you pop in 1, elementary number theory is fine (at least up to where I've studied it doesn't really matter aside from making some proofs more difficult than necessary). But, then some further developments like algebraic number theory start having problems, like the before mentioned inconsistency in the definition of a prime.
Leaving 1 out as a prime makes the elementary number theoretic definition consistent with the algebraic number theoretic definition. Just thought I'd point that out as math is all about detail and consistency. And not having a consistent definition of a prime is a rather large f**k up as we all know how important primes are.
So, although 1 has been considered a prime in the past, it does seem (keep in mind, I've looked through several libraries) that 1 has been dropped as a prime. Modern mathematics seems to have taken care of this discussion.
IMO, I think that this has to do with constant learning.
;)).
With regards to language, one constantly has to keep updating the colloquialisms. But, when two (or more) languages are concerned, one much also keep in mind what is the equivalent word/phrase in the other language(s). Then there's the whole translating between languages. That would require somewhat fast thought as to not lose subtleties.
I imagine the same is true for anyone that constantly learns and/or has to do consistently high level critical thinking. Keeping the brain active has its benefits. I mean, how many academic researchers go nutty statistically speaking (at least the ones that didn't start that way
I remember hearing about a master chess player in his old age complaining that he couldn't see as far into the game anymore. Then after he died they found out that this technically had advanced Alzheimer's. They conjectured that having played the game his whole life, the brain had so many "connections" that the Alzheimer's just cut off a lot of them, but not the majority/all of them.
Basically, the phrase, "If you don't use it, you lose it" has more than just a couple applications.
"""
In case you haven't notice, GPL licensed code is way more widely used than BSD licensed code.
"""
The only thing that I said was that BSD/MIT was the GPL's nearest competitor. Which according *to what I linked to* is correct. So, I actually did notice. It is you that didn't notice that I noticed due to your failure to read what I wrote.
"""
You could equally say that by making the BSD sound GPL like, it's an attempt to show people that the BSD license is just as good as the GPL at protecting the rights of the people receiving the software.
"""
What "equally"?!?! Who are you talking to? Because, I honestly believe that you aren't replying to anything that I actually wrote.
In all seriousness, I strongly recommend that you go back and actually read my post and click on those links that I provided so that you have a clue of what I actually said.
Personally, I think that this is just an attempt to make the BSD license somewhat equivalent to the GPL just so that people will use the GPL more. After all, we all know that the GNU Foundation has gotten really active with regards to activism:
h tml
/. (yes, I know that polls here aren't exactly accurate, but it does provide a indicator).
http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/06/12/31/010221.s
And the BSD/MIT licenses are the GPL's nearest competitor according to a poll here at
http://slashdot.org/pollBooth.pl?qid=1364&aid=-1
All this is is twisted lawyers, writing twisted conclusions based on twisted sophistry. It is nonsense.
From Goaway \\\
/common sense/.
/and using them/.
The thing is, the vast majority of PHP users don't even understand that there is a problem. PHP is a language used mainly by beginners, and actively aimed at beginners, but it is not designed to be used by beginners. It's a landmine-filled sandbox.
\\\
So, where do you get that PHP is a "landmine-filled sandbox"? Because people don't use it properly (see function list below)? If so, that rather asinine.
From Goaway \\\
Thus, the internet is full of SQL injection vulnerabilities.
\\\
SQL injection errors are created by people that have no clue how to do there jobs. It is NOT language dependent (see list of functions below).
From Goaway \\\
Blaming every PHP programmer for not being a security expert is idiotic. Most programmers aren't, and they wouldn't need to be, if the language was designed properly.
\\\
If you define a security expert as one who pretty much uniquely knows to escape params to a SQL query, then I'd hate to think what your code looks like. In fact, my first piece of paper was from a college where I got a 2 year diploma. And even there they EXPLICITLY taught to do sanity checking at the client AND server level. And the instructor HATED teaching that stuff AND his actual expertise was networking. This is NOT about being a security expert, it is about
This also is an issue that has NOTHING to do with language design. If we were talking about having a standard db interface then THAT would be language design (btw PHP doesn't have one and that is a problem, but that's a completely other issue). What we ARE talking about, is how that design is IMPLEMENTED. These things are completely different.
From Goaway \\\
I don't use PHP, for exactly that reason.
\\\
Well, it's obvious that you don't use PHP because you have no clue what functions are in its library.
From http://ca3.php.net/manual/en/function.dbx-escape-s tring.php
"""
Escape a string so it can safely be used in an sql-statement
"""
and from http://ca3.php.net/manual/en/function.pg-escape-st ring.php
"""
Escape a string for insertion into a text field
"""
and from http://ca3.php.net/manual/sv/function.mysql-real-e scape-string.php
"""
Escapes special characters in a string for use in a SQL statement
"""
etc
So, there are loads of functions that do the required escaping without the "programmer" having to be a "security expert" i.e. it's just having a clue as to what functions are available
Also, point of fact, web programming today REQUIRES knowledge of security features/programes/etc. If you don't know, then you have no business doing it.
Point of fact, security is about creating layers of defenses to ensue that the app is pretty much tamper proof.
This starts with sanity checking at the browser, then a web application firewall (e.g. http://www.modsecurity.org/), specific sanity checks in the application code itself (e.g. restricting usernames to alphanumeric and checking for it), and if one is using a language that has functions like the above, use them (if they implemented internally, great), if not, do it yourself.
Of course sanity checking at the client level and using a web application firewall are optional but the others are required, period. If you don't do this you're asking for trouble. Furthermore, if you depend on others to do this checking for you, you are as well asking for trouble.
There will always be vulnerabilities in any language, web server, db server, etc. What makes any vulnerabilities not exploitable (or extremely difficult to exp