Think about the jobs that this opens up. Janitors, security guards, secretaries, and the businesses that sell to them, as well as to the travelers who come through. Hotels require waiters, maids, etc. A lot of service level jobs can be found at an airport.
To answer the first question: API lock-in. A lot of strange hardware is windows-only, and the same with a lot of software. Microsoft might have horrible API's, but people use them to appeal to the Windows market, and so increase its size. Look at COM vs. Objective-C. The answer to the second question is because of the fear of a libel suit. You said the bug occurred because Microsoft didn't check it. Far more likely is they checked it incompetently. The difference is the difference between libel and truth. Actually, I might still be vulnerable to a lawsuit.
The Universal Deceleration of Human Rights has a lot fewer holes then the Bill of Rights. For one, the Bill of Rights says cruel and unusual. If I was to kick everyone in the groin if they were convicted, then that would not be illegal, as it's cruel, not unusual. The Bill of Rights also says nothing about your right to life, liberty and security of person. Without a life you can't enjoy any of the other rights.
They already can do that by recording the queries and responses. DNSSEC doesn't offer anything new in terms of traceability. So did you use Tor to post that comment?
He was arrested. Ok, so was he charged? Was he convicted? Mistakes happen, but there is a system for fixing them. If you want to say the law is overly broad, you need to point at a conviction upheld on appeal. And the word percived doesn't appear in the law you cited.
CC only says the OS must adhere to a document the vendor provides. The document for Windows says that it doesn't break if no one malicious attacks it. It is EAL4, but that is completely meaningless as the specification it follows exactly is worthless.
You cannot control what DNS entries refer to you. Read one of the RFC's titled.sex considered harmful for a discussion of all the problems. Also, what is porn? My standards for obscenity can be very different from yours.
Pratchett isn't really fantasy, more parody. And part of the issue is that some books cross the line. Take Dune for instance. The Benne Gessirit have supernatural powers, and the sandworm ecology needs to be taken with a huge amount of salt, but the suits of the Fremen are pretty rigorous from a scientific standpoint.
It would be hard to determine what constitutes appropriate security. And how are you supposed to know about a zero-day or a subtle misconfiguration? A pool is easy to secure. A car is easy to secure: Both have small threat models and physical protection is all you need. A computer is much harder to secure.
On the contrary, the problem is the technology. We simply cannot make complex, correct, software without huge expense. Even something as simple as automatic speed control can get screwed up. Example: The BMW's which spontaneously accelerated due to a software bug.
It's because we didn't expect people to know about modern science and they didn't have to. If we want to remain a democracy we need to increase the education level of the populace, and that means engaging more of them. I dread the day we have to make a decision as a society involving category theory.
Why doesn't the teacher get an aquarium, put fish in it, and poison them? Are they that scared of actually grading something based on thought, not on the right or wrong answer.
The point is to put pressure on an unresponsive vendor or one with a bad track record to improve. And if you have insecure products on a network you deserve getting hacked. OpenBSD/RBASC are free, and they are never attacked successfully. Attackers are part of the internet environment now, and complaining about it is like complaining about rain making your expensive suit wet when you forgot an umbrella. Sure, it might be expensive to be secure, but that's the tradeoff, and it is not going to change.
It has to run correctly for IOCCC. Sure, enter it, but it won't win. A lot of IOCCC entries take a lot of thought to do. Take burley(a poker program) for instance. The main loop is very simple but it requires a lot of abstraction before it becomes understandable.
Just because a model cannot predict short-term behavior on a small scale accurately doesn't mean it can't predict long-term behavior on a large scale very well. For example, I cannot say whether or not you will die in the next year. However, if I was to take a million people I could predict the total number that would die in the next year to a great degree of precision by using actuarial tables.
Remember the Pentagon Papers were classified. Classified information should be protected, but if you end up with an official secrets act, esp. a mechanically enforced one pr you have a real problem.
They are probably one of the best places to put a rootkit. Device drivers are always loaded, and get changed by updates. There are a lot of them, and they can see all activity on the system. Network drivers would be very good targets: Just copy all packets to one of your bots. Or a video driver that includes OpenVNC support.
Slashdot Mirror
There is a big difference between a big company serving its educated customers better, and skilled engineers working for peanuts.
Think about the jobs that this opens up. Janitors, security guards, secretaries, and the businesses that sell to them, as well as to the travelers who come through. Hotels require waiters, maids, etc. A lot of service level jobs can be found at an airport.
To answer the first question: API lock-in. A lot of strange hardware is windows-only, and the same with a lot of software. Microsoft might have horrible API's, but people use them to appeal to the Windows market, and so increase its size. Look at COM vs. Objective-C. The answer to the second question is because of the fear of a libel suit. You said the bug occurred because Microsoft didn't check it. Far more likely is they checked it incompetently. The difference is the difference between libel and truth. Actually, I might still be vulnerable to a lawsuit.
Stephen Hawking can't mop a floor. He's paralyzed.
The Universal Deceleration of Human Rights has a lot fewer holes then the Bill of Rights. For one, the Bill of Rights says cruel and unusual. If I was to kick everyone in the groin if they were convicted, then that would not be illegal, as it's cruel, not unusual. The Bill of Rights also says nothing about your right to life, liberty and security of person. Without a life you can't enjoy any of the other rights.
They already can do that by recording the queries and responses. DNSSEC doesn't offer anything new in terms of traceability. So did you use Tor to post that comment?
He was arrested. Ok, so was he charged? Was he convicted? Mistakes happen, but there is a system for fixing them. If you want to say the law is overly broad, you need to point at a conviction upheld on appeal. And the word percived doesn't appear in the law you cited.
Impulse just needs to be high enough to injure someone. And you do not need impulse to perform tai chi.
It's still libel if the the author publishes it maliciously and falsely. This seems to be what is going on here, but IANAL.
CC only says the OS must adhere to a document the vendor provides. The document for Windows says that it doesn't break if no one malicious attacks it. It is EAL4, but that is completely meaningless as the specification it follows exactly is worthless.
You cannot control what DNS entries refer to you. Read one of the RFC's titled .sex considered harmful for a discussion of all the problems. Also, what is porn? My standards for obscenity can be very different from yours.
Pratchett isn't really fantasy, more parody. And part of the issue is that some books cross the line. Take Dune for instance. The Benne Gessirit have supernatural powers, and the sandworm ecology needs to be taken with a huge amount of salt, but the suits of the Fremen are pretty rigorous from a scientific standpoint.
It would be hard to determine what constitutes appropriate security. And how are you supposed to know about a zero-day or a subtle misconfiguration? A pool is easy to secure. A car is easy to secure: Both have small threat models and physical protection is all you need. A computer is much harder to secure.
Just because they lost their patent doesn't mean they have to go out of business. Now the bar to entry is much lower.
On the contrary, the problem is the technology. We simply cannot make complex, correct, software without huge expense. Even something as simple as automatic speed control can get screwed up. Example: The BMW's which spontaneously accelerated due to a software bug.
Second quote is not a point the author is making. It is a point he is attacking, and he has restated it. Where's -1 Misleading when you need it?
It's because we didn't expect people to know about modern science and they didn't have to. If we want to remain a democracy we need to increase the education level of the populace, and that means engaging more of them. I dread the day we have to make a decision as a society involving category theory.
If they truly were emo, they wouldn't be cutting. Replace emo with whiny.
Why doesn't the teacher get an aquarium, put fish in it, and poison them? Are they that scared of actually grading something based on thought, not on the right or wrong answer.
The point is to put pressure on an unresponsive vendor or one with a bad track record to improve. And if you have insecure products on a network you deserve getting hacked. OpenBSD/RBASC are free, and they are never attacked successfully. Attackers are part of the internet environment now, and complaining about it is like complaining about rain making your expensive suit wet when you forgot an umbrella. Sure, it might be expensive to be secure, but that's the tradeoff, and it is not going to change.
It has to run correctly for IOCCC. Sure, enter it, but it won't win. A lot of IOCCC entries take a lot of thought to do. Take burley(a poker program) for instance. The main loop is very simple but it requires a lot of abstraction before it becomes understandable.
Unfortunately a lot of economic data doesn't appear, such as the various inequity indexes, forgien investment, and road coverage.
Just because a model cannot predict short-term behavior on a small scale accurately doesn't mean it can't predict long-term behavior on a large scale very well. For example, I cannot say whether or not you will die in the next year. However, if I was to take a million people I could predict the total number that would die in the next year to a great degree of precision by using actuarial tables.
Remember the Pentagon Papers were classified. Classified information should be protected, but if you end up with an official secrets act, esp. a mechanically enforced one pr you have a real problem.
They are probably one of the best places to put a rootkit. Device drivers are always loaded, and get changed by updates. There are a lot of them, and they can see all activity on the system. Network drivers would be very good targets: Just copy all packets to one of your bots. Or a video driver that includes OpenVNC support.