We obviously need to do something, otherwise one day it WILL get real bad
Even that is alarmist, because the Earth has had much higher concentrations of CO2 in the past. The simple fact is our weather models aren't reliable enough for accurate predictions.
First: If you're not interested in arguing, then don't. It takes two.
Second: Your original point was, besides comparing to SELinux, to question the whole idea by instead trusting programmers and teaching them. And it was exactly this tired old saw I was responding to.
By all means, if you're going to code in C, teach best practices, but it's a band-aid at best.
Well there are differences in people's organs. Some people can drink more than others. Some are better athletes, etc. People have different hair -- mine happens to be thin and fly-away, which annoys me.
This idea that all people are of equal capability intellectually is just really silly. You think geniuses like Newton or Einstein didn't have something different going on in their brains besides just upbringing or education?
Anyways, this particular brain is interesting for it's known impairments. An unfortunate slice that causes memory failure teaches us about how the brain functions. We've actually learned a lot by doing tests on people for brain surgery. More detailed information of physiology can only help.
There are lots of ways to image and study the brain. This is just one more. Sure, in a hypothetical future they might be able to scan it down to the finest detail, but for now we do what we can.
I said "improving or hiring perfect programmers", because while you didn't say perfect, your message about "trusting" the programmers and educating them is part of the same old message from C programmers that these mistakes can be eliminated with sufficiently educated/good programmers. To prevent all buffer overflows, programmers need to be perfect.
No, just using something like a strncpy is not good enough. Even that requires the programmer to get the n right, and there are many, many places buffer overruns can occur. Just look at the huge number of bugs that have occurred in real-world systems.
Now compare that with a language that, by design, doesn't even allow buffer overflows.
I don't see any straw man. Tripe about "trust programmers to Do Things The Right Way" and "teach proper programming technique" when it comes to buffer overflows is the same old shit we've been hearing for years from C programmers. It's much better if the language makes it impossible to have a buffer overrun, or in regards to the current article, to violate security policies.
Somehow the fine article proposes "saving the textbook industry" as something we'd actually want to do. The textbook industry adds no value to your education. All value comes from the university.
I'd go a step further and say the universities are the ones that aren't adding much value these days. Consider online lectures like Khan Academy, or online lectures from universities like Stanford and MIT, and the obvious question is: What's the point of each professor rehashing the same material on their own? Each professor wastes time coming up with similar material and repeating it ad nauseam in front of a class.
The only value that I see in universities is meeting other people and learning from them, but even that could be replaced with online social networking or local user groups. The research that comes out of universities is also nice, but it's mostly grad students that are involved with that.
Solution: Don't sell your book back for 20% to the bookstore. Sell it either directly to another student for 50% or sell it elsewhere. Back when I was in college there was a street vendor who would buy back used books, but his prices were even worse than the bookstore. If I recall correctly, the university bookstore was pretty good, at least much better than 20%.
There are so many ways to hook up buyers and sellers in today's connected world that you're really failing if you can't find an alternative with a 20% vs 90% spread.
but wouldn't it be better to teach proper programming technique in the first place?
Good God, no. How much failure do you need to see in the real world before you guys stop with this old saw about improving or hiring perfect programmers? Programmers are people, and they make mistakes, even the best of them. Any tool that helps automate away common mistakes is a good thing.
For the money they were asking for the PS3, I bought another gaming PC.
Not to get into a PC vs. console war, but there are advantages to a console that I enjoy. Mainly I like that it's a static target for the developers, I like the "couch" aspect, and the Blu-ray was a minor bonus. I didn't buy my PS3 until the Slim came out for $300, so it was a pretty good deal in my eyes compared to a gaming PC.
My argument is against giving Sony money (essentially subsidizing their dirty tactics), not against playing games on the console of your choice.
I understand, but there is no such thing as a 100% clean company, so we all make compromises to some extent. As I said, I respect your decision.
We could prove it by solving the problem ourselves and checking if it matches.
The point was that you can't prove the bees always solve the problem, unless you reversed engineered their brain. Even if a bee solved 1,000 problems it wouldn't prove they would always be correct. Besides that, I'm sure there's a limit to the number of flowers that bees can handle, so by not scaling, they really can't solve the problem the way a scalable algorithm could.
No it isn't, because some cars have 4-wheel drive.
This is also a separate issue to the culturally imperialist language...
If the same automobile called a 4WD in Australia would be called an SUV in the United States, then it's not "cultural imperialism" to use the US term when reporting on a US-centric site. By the way, there really were two countries involved in this story. NASA is a United States organization, while the launch took place in Australia.
I've made dozens of simple corrections over the years. There was only one time that somebody who decided they owned a page reverted my edit. I brought up the revert on the Discussion page (note I did NOT get in an edit war, that's the wrong way to go about it). The editor replied to me but tried to brush me off, but I kept at it. Other people hopped in, and consensus was eventually reached.
It wasn't always pleasant, and it annoyed me that I had to fight to make a simple change, but in the end this person was in general keeping the page at a certain quality, and people will always disagree on certain issues. Overall Wikipedia functions very well.
My advice, if you seem a simple error, is to just take a second and fix it. There's nothing to be afraid of.
Ok, you named the person who reverted your edits, but you didn't say what page or link to the revert. For all we know this person was doing the right thing.
Fuck that. By the way, that position is the one all the girls held in class when the college professor posed the question in my political science class.
Now, if Google had an army of lobbyists in Washington pushing to extend those loopholes or create more of them, that would be evil.
How about secret agreements with the IRS? From the article:
"After three years of negotiations, Google received approval from the IRS in 2006 for its transfer pricing arrangement, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The IRS gave its consent in a secret pact known as an advanced pricing agreement. Google wouldn't discuss the price set under the arrangement, which licensed the rights to its search and advertising technology and other intangible property for Europe, the Middle East and Africa to a unit called Google Ireland Holdings, according to a person familiar with the matter."
In another couple months, when they've disconnected and shut down all their users for cheating in single-player mode?
I bet you Blizzard will be doing just fine.
To get back on topic, I don't own a PS3, but if I did, I would have sued Sony for false advertisement and fraud when they removed the ability to run OtherOS on it
People have sued Sony over that. There's a class action lawsuit going on as well as individual lawsuits.
Sony simply hasn't given me any reason to trust them at all, while showing me constantly that I shouldn't trust them.
I respect your decision. Personally, I bought a PS3 because I wanted a next-gen gaming console and there aren't very many choices. Even Nintendo is aggressive with anti-piracy measures.
OK, so the percentage wasn't high, but Microsoft paid $240 million dollars, resulting in a $15 billion evaluation of the company. Having a low percentage even worked out in their favor. The point is the money, remember?
Yes, I am, because Anonymous as a whole was being discussed. The vast majority aren't what was called Gene Simmon's "what was once your devoted fan-base".
Slashdot Mirror
Hey global-warming robots, we can't change world economies on a dime. The evidence needs to be extremely solid, which it isn't.
We obviously need to do something, otherwise one day it WILL get real bad
Even that is alarmist, because the Earth has had much higher concentrations of CO2 in the past. The simple fact is our weather models aren't reliable enough for accurate predictions.
Being able to reclaim some land is what I would characterize as some "short term gains."
Why not call them long-term claims, if these are long-term weather patterns?
First: If you're not interested in arguing, then don't. It takes two.
Second: Your original point was, besides comparing to SELinux, to question the whole idea by instead trusting programmers and teaching them. And it was exactly this tired old saw I was responding to.
By all means, if you're going to code in C, teach best practices, but it's a band-aid at best.
Well there are differences in people's organs. Some people can drink more than others. Some are better athletes, etc. People have different hair -- mine happens to be thin and fly-away, which annoys me.
This idea that all people are of equal capability intellectually is just really silly. You think geniuses like Newton or Einstein didn't have something different going on in their brains besides just upbringing or education?
Anyways, this particular brain is interesting for it's known impairments. An unfortunate slice that causes memory failure teaches us about how the brain functions. We've actually learned a lot by doing tests on people for brain surgery. More detailed information of physiology can only help.
There are lots of ways to image and study the brain. This is just one more. Sure, in a hypothetical future they might be able to scan it down to the finest detail, but for now we do what we can.
I said "improving or hiring perfect programmers", because while you didn't say perfect, your message about "trusting" the programmers and educating them is part of the same old message from C programmers that these mistakes can be eliminated with sufficiently educated/good programmers. To prevent all buffer overflows, programmers need to be perfect.
No, just using something like a strncpy is not good enough. Even that requires the programmer to get the n right, and there are many, many places buffer overruns can occur. Just look at the huge number of bugs that have occurred in real-world systems.
Now compare that with a language that, by design, doesn't even allow buffer overflows.
I don't see any straw man. Tripe about "trust programmers to Do Things The Right Way" and "teach proper programming technique" when it comes to buffer overflows is the same old shit we've been hearing for years from C programmers. It's much better if the language makes it impossible to have a buffer overrun, or in regards to the current article, to violate security policies.
Somehow the fine article proposes "saving the textbook industry" as something we'd actually want to do. The textbook industry adds no value to your education. All value comes from the university.
I'd go a step further and say the universities are the ones that aren't adding much value these days. Consider online lectures like Khan Academy, or online lectures from universities like Stanford and MIT, and the obvious question is: What's the point of each professor rehashing the same material on their own? Each professor wastes time coming up with similar material and repeating it ad nauseam in front of a class.
The only value that I see in universities is meeting other people and learning from them, but even that could be replaced with online social networking or local user groups. The research that comes out of universities is also nice, but it's mostly grad students that are involved with that.
Solution: Don't sell your book back for 20% to the bookstore. Sell it either directly to another student for 50% or sell it elsewhere. Back when I was in college there was a street vendor who would buy back used books, but his prices were even worse than the bookstore. If I recall correctly, the university bookstore was pretty good, at least much better than 20%.
There are so many ways to hook up buyers and sellers in today's connected world that you're really failing if you can't find an alternative with a 20% vs 90% spread.
but wouldn't it be better to teach proper programming technique in the first place?
Good God, no. How much failure do you need to see in the real world before you guys stop with this old saw about improving or hiring perfect programmers? Programmers are people, and they make mistakes, even the best of them. Any tool that helps automate away common mistakes is a good thing.
Because trying to force everybody to use Ada worked so well...
For the money they were asking for the PS3, I bought another gaming PC.
Not to get into a PC vs. console war, but there are advantages to a console that I enjoy. Mainly I like that it's a static target for the developers, I like the "couch" aspect, and the Blu-ray was a minor bonus. I didn't buy my PS3 until the Slim came out for $300, so it was a pretty good deal in my eyes compared to a gaming PC.
My argument is against giving Sony money (essentially subsidizing their dirty tactics), not against playing games on the console of your choice.
I understand, but there is no such thing as a 100% clean company, so we all make compromises to some extent. As I said, I respect your decision.
We could prove it by solving the problem ourselves and checking if it matches.
The point was that you can't prove the bees always solve the problem, unless you reversed engineered their brain. Even if a bee solved 1,000 problems it wouldn't prove they would always be correct. Besides that, I'm sure there's a limit to the number of flowers that bees can handle, so by not scaling, they really can't solve the problem the way a scalable algorithm could.
4WD is much clearer and a better description.
No it isn't, because some cars have 4-wheel drive.
This is also a separate issue to the culturally imperialist language...
If the same automobile called a 4WD in Australia would be called an SUV in the United States, then it's not "cultural imperialism" to use the US term when reporting on a US-centric site. By the way, there really were two countries involved in this story. NASA is a United States organization, while the launch took place in Australia.
First, an Australian wouldn't call the car involved an SUV, but rather a 4WD (4 wheel drive).
Slashdot primarily writes for an American audience.
Secondly, it doesn't seem like an amazing story.
The footage is pretty spectacular, and three people were almost killed.
Finally, what is with the trolling in the summary about video evidence being destroyed. That has nothing to do with this story.
Agreed.
I've made dozens of simple corrections over the years. There was only one time that somebody who decided they owned a page reverted my edit. I brought up the revert on the Discussion page (note I did NOT get in an edit war, that's the wrong way to go about it). The editor replied to me but tried to brush me off, but I kept at it. Other people hopped in, and consensus was eventually reached.
It wasn't always pleasant, and it annoyed me that I had to fight to make a simple change, but in the end this person was in general keeping the page at a certain quality, and people will always disagree on certain issues. Overall Wikipedia functions very well.
My advice, if you seem a simple error, is to just take a second and fix it. There's nothing to be afraid of.
Ok, you named the person who reverted your edits, but you didn't say what page or link to the revert. For all we know this person was doing the right thing.
Fuck that. By the way, that position is the one all the girls held in class when the college professor posed the question in my political science class.
Now, if Google had an army of lobbyists in Washington pushing to extend those loopholes or create more of them, that would be evil.
How about secret agreements with the IRS? From the article:
"After three years of negotiations, Google received approval from the IRS in 2006 for its transfer pricing arrangement, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The IRS gave its consent in a secret pact known as an advanced pricing agreement. Google wouldn't discuss the price set under the arrangement, which licensed the rights to its search and advertising technology and other intangible property for Europe, the Middle East and Africa to a unit called Google Ireland Holdings, according to a person familiar with the matter."
Maybe he's PEEKing and POKEing instead.
In another couple months, when they've disconnected and shut down all their users for cheating in single-player mode?
I bet you Blizzard will be doing just fine.
To get back on topic, I don't own a PS3, but if I did, I would have sued Sony for false advertisement and fraud when they removed the ability to run OtherOS on it
People have sued Sony over that. There's a class action lawsuit going on as well as individual lawsuits.
Sony simply hasn't given me any reason to trust them at all, while showing me constantly that I shouldn't trust them.
I respect your decision. Personally, I bought a PS3 because I wanted a next-gen gaming console and there aren't very many choices. Even Nintendo is aggressive with anti-piracy measures.
You don't sue your customers unless you otherwise lack a viable business model. [..] The same is clearly true of Blizzard today.
You'd have a point if Blizzard wasn't making truck loads of money.
OK, so the percentage wasn't high, but Microsoft paid $240 million dollars, resulting in a $15 billion evaluation of the company. Having a low percentage even worked out in their favor. The point is the money, remember?
You're willfully ignoring individuality.
Yes, I am, because Anonymous as a whole was being discussed. The vast majority aren't what was called Gene Simmon's "what was once your devoted fan-base".