Re: Well this all raises a pretty good point
> but ECMAScript is an even worse name (sounding as if it is an unfortunate medical condition somewhere between eczema and acne).
And thus describes that mess of a programming language pretty well!
1979 publicly visible posts • joined 18 May 2007
They ask for country code and had the expected county code starting with a + already filled in. It then refused the accept the + as it only allows numbers
Heh. Copy-paste coding. The net is rife with examples where a phone number is supposedly "validated" so that + in front is not allowed. Eg. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2386054/javascript-phone-number-validation
I too encounter this all the time. There is a legit workaround: "00" is usually acceptable as an alternative to "+", but not in all countries. In fact, the "+" notation was introduced precisely because of the variation in international prefixes. (But probably there are some moronical web sites that forbid also phone numbers stating with zeros).
> I think the glass pyramid idea was dropped because of the technical difficulties of filming a large piece of light refracting material.
According to the "Lost worlds" they next planned a transparent monolith with the 1x4x9 dimensions, and actually cast it from Lucite (whatever that is, Clarke claims it was the largest block ever made of that material), but as you note, filming the transparent object convincingly was too difficult, and they switched to black. In the book version of 2001, the monolith is still transparent (to be precise, the version the ape-men encounter is transparent, in later appearances it is black).
> Must find my, by now, yellow copy of The Lost Worlds...(No, it's not for sale!)
I hope I still have my in my attic, under tons of other stuff. Got to check.
We have clearly reached the Singularity. No, not the Kurtzweill one, but a situation where the combined complexity of processors and OS means every patch creates at least as many bugs as it fixes. From now on, there is no reliable computing, unless you are willing to simplify radically.
The big thing Facebook, Google etc bring to the table is a huge network of maintained servers. We can dream up alternative social networks and software all we want, but it has to run somewhere, And that costs real money, and cannot be done as a hobby (at least not for long).
What is even worse, even many multi-statement code sections are going to be similar, because sometimes there is just one or very few ways to do something, or the code section in both programs may have originated from a common source that is in the public domain, or liberalry licensed.
But no doubt this will be a gold mine for IP lawyers.
In my first computer-related job in the 1980's, me and other trainees had among others the task of printing and mailing monthly reports to branch offices around the country from a line printer, with ink ribbons that resembled Torah scrolls. I recall the printer itself rarely caused grief (apart from the regular need to change the scrolls and clean the print head), but whoever had written the reporting software (for the Honeywell Bull mainframe) did not bother to sort the output by office. So we implemented a manual sort algorithm on the mailing room floor. That was to most time-consuming part. But I guess trainee time was cheaper than CPU time in those days...
I never owned one, but borrowed from a friend for a while (enough to experience the data loss from the infamous wobbly RAM pack). One thing not mentioned in the article was that since the screen refresh was almost entirely handled by the Z80 CPU, your program ran much faster if you turned it off. The BASIC had FAST and SLOW commands for this. In the FAST mode, the screen just displayed "snow" until the program execution ended.
I wondered about that too. If every device has its own global IPv6 address, it should be easier for the cops argue some particular laptop was used for something naughty. The alleged criminal cannot so easily claim the IP address was actually used by someone else's device, like a neighbour or a "wardriver" who has managed to break in into his WLAN.
Early in my C programming career, I wrote the equivalent of
switch (some_enum_variable)
{
constant_a:
some_code1();
break;
constant_b:
some_code2();
break;
constant_c:
some_code3();
break;
}
and spent many hours wondering why none of the branches ever activated... (no, the compiler did not even warn about this. It is syntactically perfectly correct C).
Standard DVD video disks are encoded with MPEG-2, so anyone wanting to create them on Linux is happier there are no patent restrictions now. Not that it stopped us before. Even if mainstream Linux distributions omitted patent-encumbered codecs, they were easy install from alternate repositories.
Btw. Ffmpeg is not the only free MPEG-2 encoder implementation, there is also mencoder, and possibly others.
I wonder how that came across. One would assume the chefs wrote 1500 instead of its equivalent as Norvegian words. In a little experiment of translating the egg order from Finnish to Korean, Google seemed to leave that number and variants like 1 500 alone. Hmm, maybe the chefs made the blunder themselves in the original text, and are now blaming Google...
What was the name of the CPU and chipset that fails if you try and double free a region of memory?
Uh, it is not the CPU or chipset that fails, but the program. A double free is a common blunder in C and C++ programming, which leads to a crash or other undefined behaviour, which may be exploitable as a security vulnerability.
Of the later series, I found Tehanu good, but wish she had stopped there. The last one spoils the Magic by its explication of the relationship between humans, dragons and the land of the dead, and the writing is not up to her former standards.
Despite this minor grumble, she was one of the greatest, and influenced me much. Rest in peace.
Who's going to write the code to allow the AI in the trucks?: humans.
Who's designing the electronics (Chips, circuits, etc.)?: humans
Who's doing the maintenance on the trucks?: humans.
Who's issuing the instructions?: humans.
Actually, many of those jobs can also be automated in the future, so that few if any humans are needed...
Even if not, those employ much fewer people than was needed for driving the trucks: Once the code is written and electronics designed, they can be replicated automatically and with next to no cost.
I'd love to see an algorithm that only works if a "good guy" uses it.
Note I wrote "half-way credible", not "credible". For example, always make the crypto implementation store the user's key on the device or data stream but encrypted with a key known only to the good guys. This may well bamboozle people who forget to consider who all will have want to have these master keys (UK? US? China?), and can they be trusted to keep them secret. (And like you point out, will the custodians remain the good guys?).
making secure crypto that is only breakable for lawful law enforcement is just as easy as staying in EU and exiting the EU at the same time. May does that flawlessly, so obviously that crypto stuff is just as flawless
Actually, it is easy to think of several half-way credible ways of doing that. I mean the crypto breakable by good guys only, not the Schrödinger's Brexit. And politicians, aided by some intellectually dishonest experts, may well latch on one of those and make it mandatory.
File shares do let you use large files without downloading it all when reading and uploading it all when writing. With OneDrive, Dropbox etc your local storage limits what remote files you can use. So the discs are huge these days? Yes, and so is the amount of crap that accumulates on them!
Also, if you need to log file accesses, you can do it with Samba down to painful details.
It looks like CPU hardware will not be getting faster for a while, with the microcode and OS patches slowing down even existing CPU:s, and Intel&AMD having to go back to the drawing board, delaying new releases. So software writers (whether proprietary or open source) cannot now rely on CPU speed growth to mask the bloat new versions introduce. This could actually have a positive effect on software quality.
- an enclosed fairing. The extra weight and wind resistance can be mitigated with an electric motor.
Doesn't work (except in California or other warm climates). Unless it is heated vigorously, it will quickly get fogged in cold weather! The energy required would need either a heavy battery, or some fuel-burning heater. Both pretty much negate the whole idea of a bicycle.
The big question in all this is, who defines hate speech?
I think a pretty clear criterium is, does it advocate violence (either physical or mental) against a person or group. An example. Free speech: "The ABCD religion is so stupid". Hate speech: "All adherents of the ABCD religion should be expelled from the country".
Huawei would give full access to its source code to GCHQ experts in a clean-room environment. It was examined, and pronounced clean.
Completely pointless, since there is no assurance that this code is what actually goes into production devices. (It almost certainly isn't, if only because of bugfixes added after the inspection).
It makes no sense to suggest that "Python", as a single thing, can be slowed down by a single amount by these changes.
Depends on its implementation. Python is an high-level interpreted language that may be doing a lot of things not explicitly written into the program code.. A wild guess: maybe the interpreter loop has code that occasionally queries the system time, which needs a syscall. Or polls some file descriptor state. I don't know if any of these is the case, but they are plausible. I guess I right now need to stop talking out of my ass, and go look at the actual (open source) code to see if I can find anything like that.
Is that either one of these supposed defenders of "freedom" felt it necessary to implement blatantly anti-freedom bullshit like "trademarks" in the first place
Unfortunately, if you don't get a trademark, someone else will, if you are succesful, and then hassle you with it. In the early days of Linux, there was a guy who had nothing to do with Linux, but trademarked it anyway! This caused a lot of concern for the real project. Eventually this was settled so that Linus Torvalds got the trademark. (see eg http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/2559 )