I'm sure hackers like going through your Gmail too. Seriously, running XP? When's the last time that OS got a security update? When's the last time the browser you're running on it did?
How dare anybody accuse Google of being non-partisan and interfering in elections. They would never do that. And neither would Twitter, the idea is preposterous!
Is anyone here old enough to remember Trump's big "voter fraud" commission?
Yes, I remember how the lack of cooperation for requested information doomed it from the start. Of course, that doesn't mean voter fraud doesn't exist. We know it does:
"In 2015, one Kansas county began offering voter registration at naturalization ceremonies, as Hans A. von Spakovsky and I reported in January at Fox News. Election officials soon discovered about a dozen new Americans who were already registered â" and who had voted as non-citizens in multiple elections."
I've been writing C programs for 3 decades, and I have made plenty of mistakes along the way. Occasionally because of using the wrong pointer, but most of them were simply because I got the algorithm wrong.
Security bugs are typically exploited, and not found in ordinary usage. When you get the algorithm wrong is usually obvious right away.
There is very little stupid assembly code out there.
There is very little assembly code out there, period. But we've seen, going one layer down, that even the experts at Intel can screw up security.
Probably the worst language I've seen in terms of security was version 4 of PHP.
Because PHP is an awful language that was heavily inspired by Perl. Gee, it turns out when you make awful design mistakes, it impacts the number of errors! Just like C.
You DO have to be careful with C - and C programmers generally know that, and are careful.
Is that why 20% of CVE bugs are for overflow and memory corruption?
I fear the language which may be even worse for security than PHP 4 may be Rust.
You've got to be shitting me. Rust will remove a vast swath of the errors that pops up in C all the time. Not only that, it's a difficult language, so by your own standards it will be geared towards more expert usage -- even more expertise than required with C!
Why? Because Rust hypes some very basic features to a ridiculous degree, pretending that avoiding oob access magically makes your code secure, and many Rust programmers actually believe that.
I'm sure many, many more aren't so stupid as to believe that all security is taken care of because some areas have been made more secure.
You mean you're willing to judge a whole race by the actions of a single person committing a B&E? How very non-tiki-torch burning of you.
You mean you're willing to make everything about race, when I was talking about criminals? Do you think only blacks are criminals? Why are you so racist? I guess that explains why you see racism everywhere.
It's not "playing the race card" when you're an actual racist.
So the black professor who authored the study was racist? Do you know how stupid you sound?
By your line of dumbfuckery, all Republicans, Trump supporters and a good number of Libertarians are all bloodthirsty fascists who need to be denounced and rejected. Because a few people have bought a t-shirt.
No, that's retarded. But if Trump went around and proclaimed his idolatry to Pinochet at every event you'd have a legitimate comparison.
It's also a numerical fact that a black is for more likely to be involved in a violent crime, which has fuck-all to do with police murdering people minding their own business or assigning the death penalty for petty BS like selling loosie cigarettes
If the majority of cases were about "people minding their own business" you'd have a point. But that's bullshit. People who commit more violent crime are proportionally more likely to be shot and killed by the police. The ones that make the national news are the most controversial.
Tamir Rice
An idiot who won the Darwin Award. At least he provided for his family by winning the settlement lottery. Hint: Pointing your "not gun", that looks like a real gun, at people in public is suicidally stupid.
In Garner's case, he kept saying he couldn't breath, as he couldn't breath in a banned choke hold. At no point did he try to fight off the officers and make a break for it.
He resisted arrest. Fact. If he hadn't, he wouldn't be dead. That's no excuse for the chokehold, but anybody that resists arrest from an officer puts their safety in danger.
It means you're further flying your idiot flag when you call them a leftist newspaper. That's what it means.
Lulz. This is the same paper that recently hired one of your fellow social "justice" idiots onto their editorial board, an Asian woman that's openly racist against white people.
Sarcasm is noted, but that's exactly what your words would say if you expanded them to people with lighter skin.
I judge each case by its merit. I also don't claim that a few tragic deaths represents an epidemic of police killings. I also go with the statistics. And finally, I'm in favor of solutions that work for all races. Funny how you bring up a white death by police, to then just completely dismiss any greater significance because he's not black.
Sometimes racism is just that... racism. Removing hate speech doesn't have to be about Conservatives vs Liberals.
But it's conservatives that are tarred with the "racist" label, for example, arguing against phony narratives like Black Lies Matter. But when it comes to liberals, they get away with saying the most hateful and racist things against white people.
The fact that a small percentage of Republicans (and it is a small percentage-not all Republicans are racist douche-bags; the party existed before Trump and used to be fairly intolerant of racism like the rest of us) feel it is necessary for racism to be allowed to express their political views is quite telling about what really drives those individuals.
Do you believe your own bullshit? Here's the real story: Twitter cast a wide net based on associations, block lists, and the double standards of their Orwellian "Trust and Safety" (Target and Silence) team. Here it is from the horses mouth, CEO Jack Dorsey:
" 'In the spirit of accountability and transparency: recently we failed our intended impartiality. Our algorithms were unfairly filtering 600,000 accounts [bold mine], including some members of Congress, from our search auto-complete and latest results,' claimed Dorsey. 'We fixed it. But how did it happen? Our technology was using a decision making criteria that considers the behavior of people following these accounts. We decided that wasn't fair, and corrected. We'll always improve our technology and algorithms to drive healthier usage, and measure the impartiality of outcomes.' "
I fully support freedom of speech, but media companies are not required to post and keep every single thing you write on their platforms- nor should the be.
You're a liar. If you fully supported free speech, you wouldn't be so transparently biased in your support. If you truly supported free speech, you would acknowledge that there is no "hate speech" under the 1st Amendment.
If you truly supported free speech, you'd realize that the online public square is ruled over by an openly biased oligarchy, and that we don't really have free speech in this country when a handful of big tech companies running out of California decide in a partisan fashion that they're going to shut down the free speech of others right before the crucial midterm elections.
It's an empty gesture because he's not Bill Gates. His contribution wouldn't amount to more than a few weeks of relief on the problem.
Oh, really? His most recent house he bought for $600,000. What do you think his other two houses are worth? He personally makes over $170,000 a year, and is never going to want .
So what would happen if he gave away that wealth and spread it around? The median income for a full-time worker is around $30,000 per year. He could easily make a significant difference in the lives of a dozen of people if he chose to. He's a hypocrite that is unwilling to lead by example.
I don't recall Rachel Maddow miming shooting Trump
Did Alex Jones do the same for Pizzagate? No. So your comparison is just as invalid. Jones is no more responsible for the pizza shooting than Maddow is for her rabid and biased coverage of Republicans.
If you're gonna do Whataboutism can you at least try harder than that?
Why did ignore the rest of my post, where I pointed out how you excused the actual violence done by Antifa? Where I pointed out how the Proud Boys were banned but did not endorse or commit violence except out of self-defense from the likes of Antifa. Where I pointed out the massive white hatred from Twitter verified checkmarks.
What's that? You'd rather prattle on about Sandy Hook and Pizzagate? Yeah, exactly.
Alex Jones is a distraction from the far more pervasive censorship by Twitter. The real story is that Twitter was caught mass shadowbanning those on the right, to the point that Republican senators got caught up in it.
And now right before CEO Dorsey is supposed to testify before congress, magically the mass shadowbanning disappears.
And before you knee-jerk reflexively dismiss Breitbart, try attacking the argument, not the site.
The platforms are worked one of his listeners is going to go off and shoot somebody. This isn't idle speculation either.
By that standard, MSNBC is guilty of incitement and should be taken off the air: "The next month, he cited the MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show as one of his favorite television programs, adding that a recent show had highlighted the contributions of 17 wealthy donors to the Republican Party."
TL;DR: The Left isn't getting banned because they don't lean on violence.
Bullshit. Funny how you excuse Antifa, who practice actual violence. Why were the Proud Boys banned, when the only violence they commit is to defend themselves when attacked by the likes of Antifa?
Twitter has policies against promoting violence and racism, yet leftists accounts get away with it all the time. Say you hate black people, and you'll be banned in a nanosecond. Speak out in favor of white genocide, not only will Twitter let you keep your blue checkmark, they suspend the guy pointing you out.
Ah. So you're saying I can drop a GCC program in Green Hills, PGC or Intel?
I didn't say that. I said, "I'm talking about mainstream features that every C compiler supports. If you have to radically alter your approach to writing C programs to a subset of C, you just aren't in C land anymore, and trying to say, "See, the problem isn't C!" is a farce."
Software capable of running theorems on software haven't been around that long, to the point of being usable I'd say they're newer than Rust.
Maybe the caveat there is "usable". I've looked into formal methods over 10 years ago and came away non-plussed.
There is no "standard C", there are only C standards. And almost nobody complies with them. So your argument is a little dubious. Everything out there is a subset.
This is disingenuous. I'm talking about mainstream features that every C compiler supports. If you have to radically alter your approach to writing C programs to a subset of C, you just aren't in C land anymore, and trying to say, "See, the problem isn't C!" is a farce.
No, your tired and frayed racist card has no meaning. I referenced statistics that shows the Black Lies Matter narrative is bullshit, including a study done by a black professor at Harvard and written up by the New York Times.
See reply to DNS for why this is BS that's only insulting your own intelligence.
It wear on my intelligence to argue with sympathizers of domestic terrorists from the Black Liberation Army.
The paper that shilled relentlessly for the Iraq war
Doesn't mean they're wrong about everything, including covering basic statistics.
It's a numerical fact that a black person is far more likely than a white person to be shot. That the majority of those killed by cops are white does nothing to change this fact.
It's also a numerical fact that a black is for more likely to be involved in a violent crime, which explains why they are for more likely to be shot by a cop. Funny how you and other Black Lies idiots can figure out per-capita when it comes to more whites being shot, but can't figure out per-capita when it comes to blacks and crime.
Did it occur to you that none of the people murdered by cops in the parent's examples resisted either?
He only mentioned the Eric Garner case, and he did indeed resist arrest. Which is the common thread among the vast majority of the Black Lies Matter incidents.
But he's white, so his life didn't matter. Or it didn't happen. Or he deserved it. Or something, because only Black Lives Matter. To say All Lives Matter is racist.
See, that's the problem. BLM didn't want to focus on solutions for everybody. They wanted their phony narrative that it was a black epidemic. The truth is that it's very rare to get a conviction of a cop, no matter the color.
I think you're being dismissive of both the modern benefits of a "not C" language, like modules instead of #include, and parts of the code where it's no so obviously a 95/5 split of unsafe to safe.
Redox is a good example, look at the low-level parts like the bootloader. What was the point of writing it in an esoteric safe language when literally 95% of the lines in that section are marked unsafe?
It would have been cleaner and easier to read in C.
Presumably Rust provides other benefits over C, like modules. Also, I imagine you're going to have other parts of the code that are more like a 50/50 safe/unsafe split, or 75/25. What then? You might as well just stick with one language that handles it all.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure hackers like going through your Gmail too. Seriously, running XP? When's the last time that OS got a security update? When's the last time the browser you're running on it did?
How dare anybody accuse Google of being non-partisan and interfering in elections. They would never do that. And neither would Twitter, the idea is preposterous!
And Facebook, what a bunch of angels!
Is anyone here old enough to remember Trump's big "voter fraud" commission?
Yes, I remember how the lack of cooperation for requested information doomed it from the start. Of course, that doesn't mean voter fraud doesn't exist. We know it does:
"In 2015, one Kansas county began offering voter registration at naturalization ceremonies, as Hans A. von Spakovsky and I reported in January at Fox News. Election officials soon discovered about a dozen new Americans who were already registered â" and who had voted as non-citizens in multiple elections."
Does he mean the 'intelligence agencies' that he says are lying about everything and are worthless?
I'll wait for your quote that shows that he says that.
Or has someone spoon-fed Trump enough that he's got it through his 5th grader mentality how things actually work?
Given your own 5th grader mentality here, you should look in the mirror and stop throwing stones.
The Russia hysteria is just that, hysteria, whipped up by the DNC and a Deep State intent on keeping up the Trump/Russia collusion narrative.
Don't believe the article? Watch this testimony. Any techie on Slashdot should be flabberghasted at this stunning admission.
Nuclear energy is both clean
It's only "clean" in terms of carbon dioxide. Nuclear waste isn't "clean".
And that is a Very Bad Thing, indeed ...
It's pretty cool in a dystopian, cyberpunk way, though.
Funny, you run around calling everybody racist based on "dog whistles", but you won't answer questions that portray your racist assumptions.
Me too, but it's more to avoid the Google spying machine than the interface.
Why don't you answer the question? Do you think only blacks are criminals? Is that why you always hear dog whistles?
You won't answer because you know, deep down, you're a racist. Those who accuse the most turn out to be the real offenders.
I've been writing C programs for 3 decades, and I have made plenty of mistakes along the way. Occasionally because of using the wrong pointer, but most of them were simply because I got the algorithm wrong.
Security bugs are typically exploited, and not found in ordinary usage. When you get the algorithm wrong is usually obvious right away.
There is very little stupid assembly code out there.
There is very little assembly code out there, period. But we've seen, going one layer down, that even the experts at Intel can screw up security.
Probably the worst language I've seen in terms of security was version 4 of PHP.
Because PHP is an awful language that was heavily inspired by Perl. Gee, it turns out when you make awful design mistakes, it impacts the number of errors! Just like C.
You DO have to be careful with C - and C programmers generally know that, and are careful.
Is that why 20% of CVE bugs are for overflow and memory corruption?
I fear the language which may be even worse for security than PHP 4 may be Rust.
You've got to be shitting me. Rust will remove a vast swath of the errors that pops up in C all the time. Not only that, it's a difficult language, so by your own standards it will be geared towards more expert usage -- even more expertise than required with C!
Why? Because Rust hypes some very basic features to a ridiculous degree, pretending that avoiding oob access magically makes your code secure, and many Rust programmers actually believe that.
I'm sure many, many more aren't so stupid as to believe that all security is taken care of because some areas have been made more secure.
Are you racist too? Do you think only blacks are criminals? Is that why you always hear dog whistles?
You mean you're willing to judge a whole race by the actions of a single person committing a B&E? How very non-tiki-torch burning of you.
You mean you're willing to make everything about race, when I was talking about criminals? Do you think only blacks are criminals? Why are you so racist? I guess that explains why you see racism everywhere.
It's not "playing the race card" when you're an actual racist.
So the black professor who authored the study was racist? Do you know how stupid you sound?
By your line of dumbfuckery, all Republicans, Trump supporters and a good number of Libertarians are all bloodthirsty fascists who need to be denounced and rejected. Because a few people have bought a t-shirt.
No, that's retarded. But if Trump went around and proclaimed his idolatry to Pinochet at every event you'd have a legitimate comparison.
It's also a numerical fact that a black is for more likely to be involved in a violent crime, which has fuck-all to do with police murdering people minding their own business or assigning the death penalty for petty BS like selling loosie cigarettes
If the majority of cases were about "people minding their own business" you'd have a point. But that's bullshit. People who commit more violent crime are proportionally more likely to be shot and killed by the police. The ones that make the national news are the most controversial.
Tamir Rice
An idiot who won the Darwin Award. At least he provided for his family by winning the settlement lottery. Hint: Pointing your "not gun", that looks like a real gun, at people in public is suicidally stupid.
In Garner's case, he kept saying he couldn't breath, as he couldn't breath in a banned choke hold. At no point did he try to fight off the officers and make a break for it.
He resisted arrest. Fact. If he hadn't, he wouldn't be dead. That's no excuse for the chokehold, but anybody that resists arrest from an officer puts their safety in danger.
It means you're further flying your idiot flag when you call them a leftist newspaper. That's what it means.
Lulz. This is the same paper that recently hired one of your fellow social "justice" idiots onto their editorial board, an Asian woman that's openly racist against white people.
Sarcasm is noted, but that's exactly what your words would say if you expanded them to people with lighter skin.
I judge each case by its merit. I also don't claim that a few tragic deaths represents an epidemic of police killings. I also go with the statistics. And finally, I'm in favor of solutions that work for all races. Funny how you bring up a white death by police, to then just completely dismiss any greater significance because he's not black.
And to be blunt "tough on crime" plays very well with the dog whistle crowd while disproportionately impacting the poor.
If you've ever been mugged or had your residence broken into you might feel differently, regardless of your income.
Sometimes racism is just that... racism. Removing hate speech doesn't have to be about Conservatives vs Liberals.
But it's conservatives that are tarred with the "racist" label, for example, arguing against phony narratives like Black Lies Matter. But when it comes to liberals, they get away with saying the most hateful and racist things against white people.
The fact that a small percentage of Republicans (and it is a small percentage-not all Republicans are racist douche-bags; the party existed before Trump and used to be fairly intolerant of racism like the rest of us) feel it is necessary for racism to be allowed to express their political views is quite telling about what really drives those individuals.
Do you believe your own bullshit? Here's the real story: Twitter cast a wide net based on associations, block lists, and the double standards of their Orwellian "Trust and Safety" (Target and Silence) team. Here it is from the horses mouth, CEO Jack Dorsey:
" 'In the spirit of accountability and transparency: recently we failed our intended impartiality. Our algorithms were unfairly filtering 600,000 accounts [bold mine], including some members of Congress, from our search auto-complete and latest results,' claimed Dorsey. 'We fixed it. But how did it happen? Our technology was using a decision making criteria that considers the behavior of people following these accounts. We decided that wasn't fair, and corrected. We'll always improve our technology and algorithms to drive healthier usage, and measure the impartiality of outcomes.' "
I fully support freedom of speech, but media companies are not required to post and keep every single thing you write on their platforms- nor should the be.
You're a liar. If you fully supported free speech, you wouldn't be so transparently biased in your support. If you truly supported free speech, you would acknowledge that there is no "hate speech" under the 1st Amendment.
If you truly supported free speech, you'd realize that the online public square is ruled over by an openly biased oligarchy, and that we don't really have free speech in this country when a handful of big tech companies running out of California decide in a partisan fashion that they're going to shut down the free speech of others right before the crucial midterm elections.
It's an empty gesture because he's not Bill Gates. His contribution wouldn't amount to more than a few weeks of relief on the problem.
Oh, really? His most recent house he bought for $600,000. What do you think his other two houses are worth? He personally makes over $170,000 a year, and is never going to want .
So what would happen if he gave away that wealth and spread it around? The median income for a full-time worker is around $30,000 per year. He could easily make a significant difference in the lives of a dozen of people if he chose to. He's a hypocrite that is unwilling to lead by example.
I don't recall Rachel Maddow miming shooting Trump
Did Alex Jones do the same for Pizzagate? No. So your comparison is just as invalid. Jones is no more responsible for the pizza shooting than Maddow is for her rabid and biased coverage of Republicans.
If you're gonna do Whataboutism can you at least try harder than that?
Why did ignore the rest of my post, where I pointed out how you excused the actual violence done by Antifa? Where I pointed out how the Proud Boys were banned but did not endorse or commit violence except out of self-defense from the likes of Antifa. Where I pointed out the massive white hatred from Twitter verified checkmarks.
What's that? You'd rather prattle on about Sandy Hook and Pizzagate? Yeah, exactly.
Alex Jones is a distraction from the far more pervasive censorship by Twitter. The real story is that Twitter was caught mass shadowbanning those on the right, to the point that Republican senators got caught up in it.
And now right before CEO Dorsey is supposed to testify before congress, magically the mass shadowbanning disappears.
And before you knee-jerk reflexively dismiss Breitbart, try attacking the argument, not the site.
The platforms are worked one of his listeners is going to go off and shoot somebody. This isn't idle speculation either.
By that standard, MSNBC is guilty of incitement and should be taken off the air: "The next month, he cited the MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show as one of his favorite television programs, adding that a recent show had highlighted the contributions of 17 wealthy donors to the Republican Party."
TL;DR: The Left isn't getting banned because they don't lean on violence.
Bullshit. Funny how you excuse Antifa, who practice actual violence. Why were the Proud Boys banned, when the only violence they commit is to defend themselves when attacked by the likes of Antifa?
Twitter has policies against promoting violence and racism, yet leftists accounts get away with it all the time. Say you hate black people, and you'll be banned in a nanosecond. Speak out in favor of white genocide, not only will Twitter let you keep your blue checkmark, they suspend the guy pointing you out.
Ah. So you're saying I can drop a GCC program in Green Hills, PGC or Intel?
I didn't say that. I said, "I'm talking about mainstream features that every C compiler supports. If you have to radically alter your approach to writing C programs to a subset of C, you just aren't in C land anymore, and trying to say, "See, the problem isn't C!" is a farce."
Please avoid the Cathy Newman strawmen. Thanks.
Software capable of running theorems on software haven't been around that long, to the point of being usable I'd say they're newer than Rust.
Maybe the caveat there is "usable". I've looked into formal methods over 10 years ago and came away non-plussed.
There is no "standard C", there are only C standards. And almost nobody complies with them. So your argument is a little dubious. Everything out there is a subset.
This is disingenuous. I'm talking about mainstream features that every C compiler supports. If you have to radically alter your approach to writing C programs to a subset of C, you just aren't in C land anymore, and trying to say, "See, the problem isn't C!" is a farce.
Your referenced racism, you mean.
No, your tired and frayed racist card has no meaning. I referenced statistics that shows the Black Lies Matter narrative is bullshit, including a study done by a black professor at Harvard and written up by the New York Times.
See reply to DNS for why this is BS that's only insulting your own intelligence.
It wear on my intelligence to argue with sympathizers of domestic terrorists from the Black Liberation Army.
The paper that shilled relentlessly for the Iraq war
Doesn't mean they're wrong about everything, including covering basic statistics.
It's a numerical fact that a black person is far more likely than a white person to be shot. That the majority of those killed by cops are white does nothing to change this fact.
It's also a numerical fact that a black is for more likely to be involved in a violent crime, which explains why they are for more likely to be shot by a cop. Funny how you and other Black Lies idiots can figure out per-capita when it comes to more whites being shot, but can't figure out per-capita when it comes to blacks and crime.
Did it occur to you that none of the people murdered by cops in the parent's examples resisted either?
He only mentioned the Eric Garner case, and he did indeed resist arrest. Which is the common thread among the vast majority of the Black Lies Matter incidents.
Unless they literally beat your brains out on the street for no reason.
But he's white, so his life didn't matter. Or it didn't happen. Or he deserved it. Or something, because only Black Lives Matter. To say All Lives Matter is racist.
See, that's the problem. BLM didn't want to focus on solutions for everybody. They wanted their phony narrative that it was a black epidemic. The truth is that it's very rare to get a conviction of a cop, no matter the color.
I think you're being dismissive of both the modern benefits of a "not C" language, like modules instead of #include, and parts of the code where it's no so obviously a 95/5 split of unsafe to safe.
Redox is a good example, look at the low-level parts like the bootloader.
What was the point of writing it in an esoteric safe language when literally 95% of the lines in that section are marked unsafe?
It would have been cleaner and easier to read in C.
Presumably Rust provides other benefits over C, like modules. Also, I imagine you're going to have other parts of the code that are more like a 50/50 safe/unsafe split, or 75/25. What then? You might as well just stick with one language that handles it all.