What people seem to ignore is the fact that both chess and Go are wargames
So what? The relation to war is superficial. Chess is an abstract, mathematical puzzle. Being good at chess doesn't mean you would be a good military commander, and even less so a good politician. There are lots of smart people who aren't good at politics, managing, or "street smarts". The only thing that Kasparov has going for him is fame; maybe he can succeed at politics, but there's no high probability that he will because he's good at chess.
After 5 minutes of mucking around, I left the interview room to track down my interviewer to ask for some tweaked permissions. That was win #1; apparently only 20% of interviewees came foreward before trying some type of coding
I find these interview "challenges" silly. There are usually two expectations from the interviewer:
The interviewee challenges the interviewer somehow (I need more information, tools, etc).
The interviewee is supposed to make do with what he has and just get something working.
And now the poor interviewee is supposed to decide just how his potential employer expects him to behave in their bizarre little game. There are probably tons of good people that are passed over because of tests like this. I understand that these tests are trying to mimic real-world situations, but an interview environment is completely different from an actual working environment. The interview process should be completely transparent, not based on tricks.
You obviously know nothing about OCaml, Haskell, or Standard ML.
I've looked into Haskell before. Just scratched the surface, really, but definitely more than "know nothing".
If you did, you'd see immediately how they either take care of all those problems at compile time, or it's completely impossible for them to even be affected.
Bold statements like this are bullshit. Any language can benefit from static analysis. How can you seriously claim otherwise? Obviously a language like C would benefit more than Java, and Java would benefit more than Haskell, but no language checks for every possible problem at compile time.
Here's a counter-example to your claims: Catch - Case Totality Checker for Haskell: "A Haskell program may fail at runtime with a pattern-match error if the program has any incomplete (non-exhaustive) patterns in definitions or case alternatives. This paper describes a static checker that allows non-exhaustive patterns to exist, yet ensures that a pattern-match error does not occur."
But if you go to download.com or any other somewhat reputable source of apps, your Windows PC won't get infected
That's just not true. You can't make any such guarantees. Nothing prevents a programmer from making a trojan that will only activate at a later time, once there have been enough downloads. Even Apple, as reputable as you can get, recently distributed a Windows virus with iPods.
In reality, you don't get infected by downloading stuff.
So the security of the Mac (and the general quality of Mac apps, and the intolerance of Mac users for crappy apps) is the reason why Mac users aren't afraid of downloading stuff.
No, I think the dominating factor is that the Mac is niche market. If the market shares were reversed between Windows and Mac, the Mac would have just as many problems and your "free love" days of downloading anything you wanted would be over.
I really hate responding to shadows, but here goes:
The only reason such tools are deemed necessary for Java, C and C++ apps is because those languages just aren't as suited for static analysis as most functional languages.
There's a list of warnings that FindBugs outputs. If you want to claim that static analysis is unnecessary for Haskell or OCaml, then go over the list and say why. It's not enough to just claim by fiat that your favorite language doesn't have that problem and then tell "Blub" to go master it.
Seems like JML & friends still don't support Java 1.5 yet, and now 1.6 is out. I've seen you mention this quite some time ago, but I write all my code in 1.5. Do you know if they are they working on 1.5?
When I go to that page the sidebar overlaps the text of the article. It kinda puts me off that a rant about "good code" is hosted on a page with terrible web design.
I don't like Zonk either, but your reasons for abandoning Slashdot seem pretty shallow. The truth is the PS3 was getting a lot of bad press everywhere. Also, if you look at Zonk's posts about the 360 when it came out, there was plenty of negative stuff, like the under-supply-to-raise-demand-conspiracy and the over-heating issue.
Slashdot is much bigger than Zonk. Running away because Zonk posted some anti-PS3 articles makes you look like a whiney fanboy.
Hell, I've been part of a startup that went from around 10 to 50, and even in that small jump there were growing pains and fiefdoms that started to appear. It got so bad that they brought in some outside consultants to "clear the air".
I'm curious, how did you fall into the MVP role? Did you actively seek it out? What benefits does it give you? Is it like a job, in that you feel some kind of obligation to put in a certain amount of effort?
Why should I care why there are no viruses? There are none, that's all that matters.
Don't forget trojans -- there have been trojans on OS X. You should care because when you make smug comments about Windows, you should know just what, exactly, is protecting you. If it is only obscurity, then you have no cause to be smug. Let's say that everybody buys into Apple's commercials and switches from Windows to Macs. Will the Macs prevent today's abysmal security situation from repeating itself?
There are dozens of browsers and dozens of Mail clients, all with a frai market share.
I'm willing to bet most users Safari or Firefox. I did some googling, and a cursory glance supports that view.
Macs are just more secure.
This comes back to my original question. I wanted to know what security the Mac offered that let users download and run arbitrary programs without worrying about malware. The only technical answer I've seen is user privileges. As I understand it, you don't have to have admin rights to install an application, and malware can infect these applications. At least, that's my understanding based on OSX.Leap.A. Seems to me that all the ingredients are there for Mac users to experience the same misery as Windows users, but given the small market share, there's no focus by malware writers.
Except that playing a PS3 is a different gaming experience than playing a PC. And if you've got money to burn, paying extra for the privilege of getting what you want now instead of months later makes sense.
I'm actually hoping for the PS3 to fail, but even I won't call somebody an idiot for purchasing one.
The only reason Macs don't have more viruses and trojans is because Macs are a niche market, and thus hardly targeted. Windows is everywhere, so it's targeted more.
So the only thing "protecting" you is obscurity. Macs are more visible now, so expect more problems. Indiscriminate downloading and use of shareware used to be prevalent in the early days of Windows and DOS too, with few problems, until an entire industry was made out of hacking peoples' machines. Now there's online banking, so they'll want to crack your machine to get your password, and botnets, so they'll crack your machine to send spam.
Frankly, if your attitude is typical of Mac users, I'd say as a class you would be a perfect target.
Because you were trying to sound smart, but you were really just rehashing what the poster said. That's ok, keep trying. One day the critical thinking process may kick in.
Some businesses try to do things to improve society and try to find a way to make some money at it. Other business mimic existing successes and try to crush their competitors.
Google has done plenty of "me too" and buying out of competitors. They bought Deja News and turned it into Google Groups. They bought YouTube when their video search wasn't competitive. They got into email, chat, and god knows what else, when they originally said they were going to stick to search. I'll credit you that Google has been more creative than Microsoft, but I wouldn't put Google on too high a pedestal. I used to really love Google, but I think they are turning into a giant, "I want it all" corporation.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, that was a great interview. He totally threw the NPR guy for a loop with his anti-Putin comments :)
Brilliant deduction.
So what? The relation to war is superficial. Chess is an abstract, mathematical puzzle. Being good at chess doesn't mean you would be a good military commander, and even less so a good politician. There are lots of smart people who aren't good at politics, managing, or "street smarts". The only thing that Kasparov has going for him is fame; maybe he can succeed at politics, but there's no high probability that he will because he's good at chess.
Eek, Satan has stolen your shift key!
Almost anybody can get a good reference. It's really the lowest bar there is to getting a job.
I find these interview "challenges" silly. There are usually two expectations from the interviewer:
And now the poor interviewee is supposed to decide just how his potential employer expects him to behave in their bizarre little game. There are probably tons of good people that are passed over because of tests like this. I understand that these tests are trying to mimic real-world situations, but an interview environment is completely different from an actual working environment. The interview process should be completely transparent, not based on tricks.
I've looked into Haskell before. Just scratched the surface, really, but definitely more than "know nothing".
Bold statements like this are bullshit. Any language can benefit from static analysis. How can you seriously claim otherwise? Obviously a language like C would benefit more than Java, and Java would benefit more than Haskell, but no language checks for every possible problem at compile time.
Here's a counter-example to your claims: Catch - Case Totality Checker for Haskell: "A Haskell program may fail at runtime with a pattern-match error if the program has any incomplete (non-exhaustive) patterns in definitions or case alternatives. This paper describes a static checker that allows non-exhaustive patterns to exist, yet ensures that a pattern-match error does not occur."
That's just not true. You can't make any such guarantees. Nothing prevents a programmer from making a trojan that will only activate at a later time, once there have been enough downloads. Even Apple, as reputable as you can get, recently distributed a Windows virus with iPods.
No, in reality you do: Spyware Everywhere. Another example is: zCodec Video Codec is a TROJAN (and you can google for more). Any piece of softare can be malware. The more software you trust, the greater your risk.
No, I think the dominating factor is that the Mac is niche market. If the market shares were reversed between Windows and Mac, the Mac would have just as many problems and your "free love" days of downloading anything you wanted would be over.
Thanks for the info. I've been curious about this for a while.
I really hate responding to shadows, but here goes:
There's a list of warnings that FindBugs outputs. If you want to claim that static analysis is unnecessary for Haskell or OCaml, then go over the list and say why. It's not enough to just claim by fiat that your favorite language doesn't have that problem and then tell "Blub" to go master it.
Ha ha, that guy is so annoying :) Damn kids today!
Seems like JML & friends still don't support Java 1.5 yet, and now 1.6 is out. I've seen you mention this quite some time ago, but I write all my code in 1.5. Do you know if they are they working on 1.5?
When I go to that page the sidebar overlaps the text of the article. It kinda puts me off that a rant about "good code" is hosted on a page with terrible web design.
I don't like Zonk either, but your reasons for abandoning Slashdot seem pretty shallow. The truth is the PS3 was getting a lot of bad press everywhere. Also, if you look at Zonk's posts about the 360 when it came out, there was plenty of negative stuff, like the under-supply-to-raise-demand-conspiracy and the over-heating issue.
Slashdot is much bigger than Zonk. Running away because Zonk posted some anti-PS3 articles makes you look like a whiney fanboy.
Have the stopped waving the American flag in their broadcasts yet?
Hell, I've been part of a startup that went from around 10 to 50, and even in that small jump there were growing pains and fiefdoms that started to appear. It got so bad that they brought in some outside consultants to "clear the air".
I'm curious, how did you fall into the MVP role? Did you actively seek it out? What benefits does it give you? Is it like a job, in that you feel some kind of obligation to put in a certain amount of effort?
Don't forget trojans -- there have been trojans on OS X. You should care because when you make smug comments about Windows, you should know just what, exactly, is protecting you. If it is only obscurity, then you have no cause to be smug. Let's say that everybody buys into Apple's commercials and switches from Windows to Macs. Will the Macs prevent today's abysmal security situation from repeating itself?
I'm willing to bet most users Safari or Firefox. I did some googling, and a cursory glance supports that view.
This comes back to my original question. I wanted to know what security the Mac offered that let users download and run arbitrary programs without worrying about malware. The only technical answer I've seen is user privileges. As I understand it, you don't have to have admin rights to install an application, and malware can infect these applications. At least, that's my understanding based on OSX.Leap.A. Seems to me that all the ingredients are there for Mac users to experience the same misery as Windows users, but given the small market share, there's no focus by malware writers.
Wow, that was stunning. Previously I had seen a show on the King's Cross fire, which went from small to flashover, but that video is something else.
Except that playing a PS3 is a different gaming experience than playing a PC. And if you've got money to burn, paying extra for the privilege of getting what you want now instead of months later makes sense.
I'm actually hoping for the PS3 to fail, but even I won't call somebody an idiot for purchasing one.
The only reason Macs don't have more viruses and trojans is because Macs are a niche market, and thus hardly targeted. Windows is everywhere, so it's targeted more.
So the only thing "protecting" you is obscurity. Macs are more visible now, so expect more problems. Indiscriminate downloading and use of shareware used to be prevalent in the early days of Windows and DOS too, with few problems, until an entire industry was made out of hacking peoples' machines. Now there's online banking, so they'll want to crack your machine to get your password, and botnets, so they'll crack your machine to send spam.
Frankly, if your attitude is typical of Mac users, I'd say as a class you would be a perfect target.
Because you were trying to sound smart, but you were really just rehashing what the poster said. That's ok, keep trying. One day the critical thinking process may kick in.
Or you may be gay.
And how is it not a problem if you're a Mac user?
Google has done plenty of "me too" and buying out of competitors. They bought Deja News and turned it into Google Groups. They bought YouTube when their video search wasn't competitive. They got into email, chat, and god knows what else, when they originally said they were going to stick to search. I'll credit you that Google has been more creative than Microsoft, but I wouldn't put Google on too high a pedestal. I used to really love Google, but I think they are turning into a giant, "I want it all" corporation.