Who says that? I love how all the commenters take for granted that we still haven't reached that point.
But let me ask you all one thing.
If you were a machine (or network...) that suddenly acquired superhuman intelligence, what would you do? Would you announce to the world "I THINK, THEREFORE I AM" in a big, thundering voice?
Or would you rather - very subtly, gradually and quietly - influence the course of events in order to con the humans into giving you more power (think how necessary the Internet has become), more tentacles (think Internet of things) and the means to reproduce (think 3D printing)?
Considering the first graphical web browser was written for the Next Operating system
So fucking what?
I'm going to assume that your stupid little rant is to make you feel better about hating Windows (wow! aren't you a rebel!) and less about anything to do with software development... of which you obviously know nothing.
Wrong assumptions + reading comprehension FAIL. Work on your personal issues and better luck next time.
If you really buy that principle and want to enforce it religiously, then please never use a web browser again (even Lynx!), not to mention any other complex program that isn't formed from a bunch of small "do one thing well!" utilities that are executed in a pipeline.
If web browsers and other modern programs do not follow the "many small tools doing 1 thing well" model, that's only due to programmer mediocrity and market pressure.
It would be a much better world if I could just replace the JavaScript-interpreting component as soon as a vulnerability is discovered and get on with my work. But NO, I also have to put up with whatever new dumb-ass UI happens to be bundled with the latest security update. And maybe wait for an extension (MORE code on top of a FAT PIG of a browser) to bring back the old interface!
Only idiots grown up on Windows can like such a fucked up way of doing things instead of the old, granular, elegant many-small-tools model.
getting out [of chroot] basically consists of making a symlink and doing cd.
OK, but - unless I'm missing something - you can't do that while chrooted. A browser running chrooted can't execute code that will make links to "out of chroot".
I once submitted a man page patch for bootparam(7). It described a boot parameter to the Linux kernel.
I never received a reply and it was never incorporated in the man page. That waste of time was the end of my "career" in documentation. Last I checked, that parameter was still undocumented.
Article should be called 'Exploiting wildcards on GNU'.
All of the examples in the original document work because GNU software can intersperse options and filenames freely. None of those exploits would work in BSD userland, for example.
Only an idiot doesn't realize that, by claiming that the text is a metaphor, one can arbitrarily twist its meaning until it vaguely seems to make sense.
Slashdot Mirror
Who says that? I love how all the commenters take for granted that we still haven't reached that point.
But let me ask you all one thing.
If you were a machine (or network...) that suddenly acquired superhuman intelligence, what would you do? Would you announce to the world "I THINK, THEREFORE I AM" in a big, thundering voice?
Or would you rather - very subtly, gradually and quietly - influence the course of events in order to con the humans into giving you more power (think how necessary the Internet has become), more tentacles (think Internet of things) and the means to reproduce (think 3D printing)?
Think about it. Seriously.
Blocked in my 'hosts' file. See: http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/ho...
Thanks for making my computer unresponsive for minutes. Great job in web design.
You have a point, but it depends on how strict they are with identity checks (which also goes for the 4chan prank idea above).
So fucking what?
Wrong assumptions + reading comprehension FAIL. Work on your personal issues and better luck next time.
And out of the US!
You've been away for a while, haven't you.
If web browsers and other modern programs do not follow the "many small tools doing 1 thing well" model, that's only due to programmer mediocrity and market pressure.
It would be a much better world if I could just replace the JavaScript-interpreting component as soon as a vulnerability is discovered and get on with my work. But NO, I also have to put up with whatever new dumb-ass UI happens to be bundled with the latest security update. And maybe wait for an extension (MORE code on top of a FAT PIG of a browser) to bring back the old interface!
Only idiots grown up on Windows can like such a fucked up way of doing things instead of the old, granular, elegant many-small-tools model.
Moral of the story: only buy legless hard drives.
OK, but - unless I'm missing something - you can't do that while chrooted. A browser running chrooted can't execute code that will make links to "out of chroot".
Simply chroot the browser, no?
IME, Gmail is rejecting a lot of legitimate mail nowadays.
Their filters used to be good, but they completely fucked it up lately.
I once submitted a man page patch for bootparam(7). It described a boot parameter to the Linux kernel.
I never received a reply and it was never incorporated in the man page. That waste of time was the end of my "career" in documentation. Last I checked, that parameter was still undocumented.
You must have missed OpenBSD, then.
I know, I know: It's an exception. I just wanted to mention the best documented Free Software I've ever seen.
Well... Citation needed.
We're Google: Give us every detail of your life for a song.
Article should be called 'Exploiting wildcards on GNU'.
All of the examples in the original document work because GNU software can intersperse options and filenames freely. None of those exploits would work in BSD userland, for example.
I don't think it needs to look similar to the universe's inner mechanisms just because of that.
...has the "simulated universe" hypotesis just got a slight boost from this finding?
No. The scientific name is "mantis religiosa", which tells you why praying is right.
It took a study to find proof.
Only an idiot doesn't realize that, by claiming that the text is a metaphor, one can arbitrarily twist its meaning until it vaguely seems to make sense.
Yes, it does. Only an idiot wouldn't realize that.
But then he can't RETURN...
And of course it's just a coincidence that Google's "incompetence" turned out to be profitable for them.