By contrast, Hamas has it written into their charter they Hamas considers it their responsibility to kill every Jew on earth.
Mildly amusing when a politician quotes such rhetoric it always seems to be in the context of excuses for inaction and avoidance of constructive resolution to outstanding problems.
How many times have politicians used "Death to America" as an excuse to rally against the Iran nuclear deal? Leveraging rhetoric exclusively to justify a position is weak sauce.
Israel is not trying to censor speech. They're trying to stop incitement. In other words, they're trying to stop predominantly arabic language terrorist recruiting and training material.
All of which is not at all relevant on a disposable device like a smartphone.
I don't consider my mobile phone to be a disposable device. I refuse to waste my "disposable income" continuously upgrading phones for increasingly marginal benefit. Mobile is fast approaching parity with PC in terms of pointlessness of continuous replacement.
WindowsPhone is the best mobile OS I ever used with a superior UI that never crashes, freezes, or glitches and runs 400 to 500% faster. My 820 which inferior hardware to my Galaxy S 5 was so much faster. To this day cut and pasting calander events with conference calls with pins is not possible with Android. You need to write down the pin with paper and a pen.
Windows phone is the most oppressive piece of spyware Microsoft has ever released.
I actively avoid OLED when purchasing tech with displays. OLED suffers from CRT style burnin on steroids, more prone to failure with usage/age and offers inferior daylight visibility.
I don't care about which of the two panels looks slightly better than the other. I can't tell the difference and frankly I wouldn't care if I could.
It wasn't designed to "look like a bomb", it was designed to look like a clock a kid modified. It just happened to look like a cartoon or movie bomb, which is nothing at all like what real IED's look like.
Nobody knows for sure what actual intent was.
What did it for me was when he plugged in and set the alarm of his suitcase clock to go off in the middle of class. Given family history I'm more inclined to believe they got precisely response they were hoping for and then some.
What the hell does physical sabotage have to do with cyberattacks? Who's behind the spin on this story and what is their agenda?
Ask Hugh the nose picker... He's the one who invented it with the express intent to get people who didn't RTFA to draw conclusions that were never actually articulated.
It solves it in the sense that a procedure requires you pass inputs as query parameters.
No absolutely not. It does no such thing. Anyone can call stored procedures from strings without binding parameters. Using stored procedures in and of itself solves exactly nothing.
The types of people who still code in SQL injection attack vectors are the same types of people who aren't going to understand the subtleties of content versus context.
I'm sick of these lame ass excuses for ignorance. It isn't a hard concept at all in any shape or form to understand. Anyone who can't grasp it has no business in the industry.
Giving them a tool which will always force them to parameterize their queries is a means of saving them from themselves.
I worship at the church of designing systems requiring people to try really hard to fail yet this isn't what my comment is about. It is about "common wisdom" that is actively harmful.
Perl?!? Are you serious? That's the language you will have problems with to read back your own code after a minute you wrote it.
This is the same person who recently posted the following jem:
A language is not secure or unsecure. It's what developers do with it that makes the result secure or unsecure. I can write a.NET or Java application that has all the vulnerabilities you can think of.
It's irresponsible to continue to do this. With stored procedures
Does using stored procedures solve SQL Injection? Show of hands... all of you who raised yours are part of the problem.
Also, validate and sanitize your input data man. If you're writing code for the web you *have* to do this, no excuses. Albeit, most "web developers" I've seen don't have a clue. Now, get off my lawn!
The number of people who incorrectly believe SQL Injection is in any way related to data validation means the problem will never go away. SQL Injection is a failure to enforce context and has got exactly nothing to do with content.
The data validation misinformation is so prevalent the only way you are probably even reading this is you regularly browse -1 as many of you will have modded my comment into oblivion.
In the many-worlds interpretation of QM, also called "QM without collapse", becoming more and more mainstream, this is a straightforward consequence of entanglement.
The most outlandish explanations usually are the most straightforward once their assumptions have been discounted.
Note: I'm not endorsing this, I'm tossing it out as a thought, I get that it has problems and isn't perfect...
Nothing wrong with a problem solver just tossing those ideas under the nearest troll bridge.
It is easy to say "well more bombing won't solve the problem", and that might be true, the way we do it. What if we started using nuclear weapons? The point could be made, "either join the 21st century or be exterminated".
Do you not even see the irony in this statement?
It worked against Japan. They simply didn't get it, couldn't change, and wouldn't listen, even when we were firebombing Tokyo. It took the threat of extermination to finally get the Emperor to see reason.
Well handing columns of US provided armored military vehicles over to Daesh didn't seem to work... so why not... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
It saddens me to even say that, it is a horrible thing, but we're facing a horrible situation that won't get better by being nice about it.
No I totally get it... killing everyone would solve what is mostly a regional civil war.
A more serious reply is this one: they don't want you to know you are on a watch list. If you represent a serious target, they REALLY don't want you to know. On the other hand, if you have any reason to suspect you are a serious target, assume the worst and unplug now.
Why would anyone tip their hand and let them know you know? This is the kind of advice meted out by amateurs and NSA shills.
Oh, and by the way: hi NSA!
Figures... wave to your pals.
After all, most NSA people are geeks, and so they read Slashdot.
From time to time I search stackoverflow for easy answers and I would say about 20% of the time the question has been closed even though it is the reason I went to stackoverflow in the first place. In most of these instances a useful answer was also provided before closure. So my question to you is simply what gives.
The most common reason for closure I run into is that the people closing it don't have any domain clue what is being asked and appear to assume if they don't understand nobody else does either.
Another common reason for closure is the "duplicate" question meme in which nuance is overlooked and questions are marked as duplicates because the people doing the marking failed to understand or appreciate the difference. This is very annoying.
Less common but equally annoying issues are closure due to chatter about domain specific algorithms not being "programming questions" or even more amusing someone posting a question that is more specifically addressed by one of a hundred different stack exchanges even though it is still on topic.
The next time you go shopping for a TV ask the salesperson for a dumb TV. When they look at you and shrug walk away. The only way the bullshit stops is lost sales.
Slashdot Mirror
By contrast, Hamas has it written into their charter they Hamas considers it their responsibility to kill every Jew on earth.
Mildly amusing when a politician quotes such rhetoric it always seems to be in the context of excuses for inaction and avoidance of constructive resolution to outstanding problems.
How many times have politicians used "Death to America" as an excuse to rally against the Iran nuclear deal? Leveraging rhetoric exclusively to justify a position is weak sauce.
Israel is not trying to censor speech. They're trying to stop incitement.
In other words, they're trying to stop predominantly arabic language terrorist recruiting and training material.
Occupation is a pretty powerful incitement tool.
All of which is not at all relevant on a disposable device like a smartphone.
I don't consider my mobile phone to be a disposable device. I refuse to waste my "disposable income" continuously upgrading phones for increasingly marginal benefit. Mobile is fast approaching parity with PC in terms of pointlessness of continuous replacement.
WindowsPhone is the best mobile OS I ever used with a superior UI that never crashes, freezes, or glitches and runs 400 to 500% faster. My 820 which inferior hardware to my Galaxy S 5 was so much faster. To this day cut and pasting calander events with conference calls with pins is not possible with Android. You need to write down the pin with paper and a pen.
Windows phone is the most oppressive piece of spyware Microsoft has ever released.
Follow the ISIS weapons supply chain and maybe we'll find out who has more blood on their hands
Or even who the US is supporting (e.g. Saudi Arabia and Qatar)
I actively avoid OLED when purchasing tech with displays. OLED suffers from CRT style burnin on steroids, more prone to failure with usage/age and offers inferior daylight visibility.
I don't care about which of the two panels looks slightly better than the other. I can't tell the difference and frankly I wouldn't care if I could.
All I can think of is the EFF's NSA spy eagle playing in its "nest" with its baby spy eagles perched atop some poor souls roof.
It wasn't designed to "look like a bomb", it was designed to look like a clock a kid modified. It just happened to look like a cartoon or movie bomb, which is nothing at all like what real IED's look like.
Nobody knows for sure what actual intent was.
What did it for me was when he plugged in and set the alarm of his suitcase clock to go off in the middle of class. Given family history I'm more inclined to believe they got precisely response they were hoping for and then some.
For that to work you'd also have to come up with a scheme of monetary compensation or none of us will get to play with toys.
Like this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Nobody wants to be stalked with creep ware.
What the hell does physical sabotage have to do with cyberattacks? Who's behind the spin on this story and what is their agenda?
Ask Hugh the nose picker... He's the one who invented it with the express intent to get people who didn't RTFA to draw conclusions that were never actually articulated.
This is one of the most outright blatant trolling attempts by an author of a summary I've seen in at least a week.
It solves it in the sense that a procedure requires you pass inputs as query parameters.
No absolutely not. It does no such thing. Anyone can call stored procedures from strings without binding parameters. Using stored procedures in and of itself solves exactly nothing.
The types of people who still code in SQL injection attack vectors are the same types of people who aren't going to understand the subtleties of content versus context.
I'm sick of these lame ass excuses for ignorance. It isn't a hard concept at all in any shape or form to understand. Anyone who can't grasp it has no business in the industry.
Giving them a tool which will always force them to parameterize their queries is a means of saving them from themselves.
I worship at the church of designing systems requiring people to try really hard to fail yet this isn't what my comment is about. It is about "common wisdom" that is actively harmful.
Perl?!? Are you serious? That's the language you will have problems with to read back your own code after a minute you wrote it.
This is the same person who recently posted the following jem:
A language is not secure or unsecure. It's what developers do with it that makes the result secure or unsecure. I can write a .NET or Java application that has all the vulnerabilities you can think of.
The Hiawatha webserver can block SQL injection attacks. I like to hear what you think of it.
All heuristic attempts at blocking SQLi not only don't work but can themselves be leveraged as a vector for attack/denial.
It's irresponsible to continue to do this. With stored procedures
Does using stored procedures solve SQL Injection? Show of hands... all of you who raised yours are part of the problem.
Also, validate and sanitize your input data man. If you're writing code for the web you *have* to do this, no excuses. Albeit, most "web developers" I've seen don't have a clue. Now, get off my lawn!
The number of people who incorrectly believe SQL Injection is in any way related to data validation means the problem will never go away. SQL Injection is a failure to enforce context and has got exactly nothing to do with content.
The data validation misinformation is so prevalent the only way you are probably even reading this is you regularly browse -1 as many of you will have modded my comment into oblivion.
Or...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
In the many-worlds interpretation of QM, also called "QM without collapse", becoming more and more mainstream, this is a straightforward consequence of entanglement.
The most outlandish explanations usually are the most straightforward once their assumptions have been discounted.
Note: I'm not endorsing this, I'm tossing it out as a thought, I get that it has problems and isn't perfect...
Nothing wrong with a problem solver just tossing those ideas under the nearest troll bridge.
It is easy to say "well more bombing won't solve the problem", and that might be true, the way we do it. What if we started using nuclear weapons? The point could be made, "either join the 21st century or be exterminated".
Do you not even see the irony in this statement?
It worked against Japan. They simply didn't get it, couldn't change, and wouldn't listen, even when we were firebombing Tokyo. It took the threat of extermination to finally get the Emperor to see reason.
Well handing columns of US provided armored military vehicles over to Daesh didn't seem to work... so why not... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
It saddens me to even say that, it is a horrible thing, but we're facing a horrible situation that won't get better by being nice about it.
No I totally get it... killing everyone would solve what is mostly a regional civil war.
"it's has the 3 letter code SSSS"
I'm going to be a little skeptical of anything written by someone who can neither spell nor count to 4.
After all these years of Slashdot's misleading headline and trolling torture I honestly thought I could see 5 S's on my boarding pass.
A more serious reply is this one: they don't want you to know you are on a watch list. If you represent a serious target, they REALLY don't want you to know. On the other hand, if you have any reason to suspect you are a serious target, assume the worst and unplug now.
Why would anyone tip their hand and let them know you know? This is the kind of advice meted out by amateurs and NSA shills.
Oh, and by the way: hi NSA!
Figures... wave to your pals.
After all, most NSA people are geeks, and so they read Slashdot.
You would know.
Tim Cooks remarks are nonsensical.
None of the batteries are user replaceable, neither is anything else.
Microsoft had to ruin windows with its cloud adware/spyware garbage.
Price is ridiculous.
From time to time I search stackoverflow for easy answers and I would say about 20% of the time the question has been closed even though it is the reason I went to stackoverflow in the first place. In most of these instances a useful answer was also provided before closure. So my question to you is simply what gives.
The most common reason for closure I run into is that the people closing it don't have any domain clue what is being asked and appear to assume if they don't understand nobody else does either.
Another common reason for closure is the "duplicate" question meme in which nuance is overlooked and questions are marked as duplicates because the people doing the marking failed to understand or appreciate the difference. This is very annoying.
Less common but equally annoying issues are closure due to chatter about domain specific algorithms not being "programming questions" or even more amusing someone posting a question that is more specifically addressed by one of a hundred different stack exchanges even though it is still on topic.
I feel a great disturbance in the force as if millions of voices suddenly shrugged and switched to Mozilla.
The next time you go shopping for a TV ask the salesperson for a dumb TV. When they look at you and shrug walk away. The only way the bullshit stops is lost sales.