Researchers are actually studying ways to "prove" software is correct. For example, VDM-SL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V.... The problem that I see is that they can't prove the proving software is correct.
We can prove software is correct. The problem is that it is equivalent to the halting problem, which is NP. In other words, it is infeasible to prove correctness for all but the simplest programs.
There ain't no such thing as 'hacker-resistant'.
Yep, I especially loved this gem from the summary:
The software is mathematically proven to be invulnerable to large classes of attack
Anyone who knows anything about software and crypto knows you cannot make the software "invulnerable" to attacks. You can greatly decrease the number of bugs and known attack vectors. You can make it infeasible to brute-force your system using a realistic amount of computing power. But you do not know what you do now know, and the system cannot be 100% secure.
I would love to see how they "mathematically proved" it is 100% secure (invulnerable, remember).
Perhaps the better phrasing is don't talk to police if they come to you first.
Do not answer guilt-seeking questions. If you ask the police for help, give them information. If they turn around and act like you are guilty, be silent and talk only to your lawyer. Regardless, be VERY careful when talking to law enforcement. Give very specific, fact-based answers. Do not say "this happened" say "this is what I saw/heard." The difference may not seem like much when you are distraught and providing a police report, but it could be the difference between a conviction and "not guilty" in a court of law: with either the guilty party or your innocent ass fighting for freedom.
Yeah but how effective will this be? A few tens of thousands of miles is barely 10% of the way to the moon.
Objects whiz by at tens of thousands of miles per hour (orbital velocity). By the time you focus the telescope, will it and shade already be out of sync? I am no physicist, but I understand that when things move very fast it is difficult to keep them in sync (reference: I have been to the circus and watched the motorcycles in the spherical cage). With just a telescope and a target that is easy enough, but then you have a shade orbiting between the two and all three have to be lined up correctly for this to work (reference: try drawing a straight line between three points that are not colinear).
Wonder what the repercussions would be of that? Maybe a ban on US tourists visiting the Bahamas? Wonder how many dollars that'll cost?
This.
Follow the money.
People talk about shooting burglars, but most places, they have more rights than the homeowner, and a shot burglar usually means the homeowner is going to prison for a long time, not the intruder.
[Citation Needed].
Here in Ohio, if you come in my house against my will, the law authorized me to shoot to kill. The police and the family of the intruder are forbidden from suing me unless the incident meets certain criteria that are very difficult to meet (essentially, I welcome someone in then shoot).
Does you TAX office allow payment in cash?
U.S. currency is valid tender for all debts, public and private (within the jurisdiction of the U.S., of course). Certain purchases (e.g. brand new cars) are pretty rare with cash, but any business or government agency that accepts payments will accept cash. It may not be as convenient: for example, to pay federal taxes with cash you may need to drive to another city with an IRS office, but it is possible.
The constitution gives the interpretation to the supreme court. So, while it's totally allowed to disagree with them, but the courts will uphold what the SCOTUS says, not what you say. And that is constitutional.
Judicial Review is an implicit power. I believe it is an important power that should be enumerated and limited in scope, but it is not.
You won't find a right to a bank account in the Constitution.
That you won't find the power to stop you from having a Bank Account in the Constitution is a fact that will be lost on the anti-drug "Goddamned Piece of Paper" Republicans and liberals.
"General welfare" clause. It is the Silly Putty of the Constitution: it can morph into any shape and justify any law or government action, even if other parts of the Constitution are at odds with it.
Not completely anyway
:). At four or five you're gonna have a hard time with ET. It's surprisingly complex, especially for an Atari 2600 game. The only things that are comparable are Raiders of the Lost Ark and Solaris (and Solaris doesn't count, it's a 16k cartridge, the larges the 2600 ever had) :)
I remember Solaris even if vaguely. That was a tough game. I remember you would have to conquer solar systems and move to others which were progressively more difficult. I remember that after a certain point the controls were all reversed: at that young age I was done, I kept screwing up when I got that far. My older brother was able to keep going but that was still a tough game -- but not dumb bugs like ET which was basically unfinished.
Raiders of the Lost Ark was also tough. If I remember correctly you had to solve a bunch of puzzles and collect artifacts all before nightfall when the door to the city closed and you were stuck with lethal enemies. I remember the tsetse flies being one-touch lethal. I never could beat that game either.
It's really not. I had it as a kid and enjoyed it. It could have used another 3 months polish (there's a rom hack floating around that does just that) and you _really_ have to read the instructions to play, but as a kid used to nothing more complex than Space Invaders I loved it. There were multiple screens (a big deal back then) and several different gameplay elements (also a big deal). I suppose it doesn't hurt that I bought it on clearance post crash, but I was so young it didn't occur to me that $5 bucks wasn't much money for a game.
Randomly getting stuck in a pit with no way out was fun? Or every screen being identical? Yeah I know 1983 graphics were not great but damn, at least make them different colors or something. Even at four or five years old I knew that game was a bucket of fail.
I agree 100%, since there have never been bugs in languages like Java.
Also, managed languages like Java and
When 3D printing becomes fast, cheap and ubiquitous, the makers of Lego, and the makers of crappy plastic keychains will have to find another business.
No. When 3D printing becomes fast, cheap and ubiquitous, the rent seekers will lobby Congress to make it illegal.
You would think accesibility features would be a priority within the community or some segment of it.
I would think whoever checked in the change that broke the software should have known when the automated test cases failed, and that person should be held responsible. At my last job, the person that broke an automated test and could not prove the tests ran successfully locally (i.e. build server might be different than a development machine in some way that breaks a test, should not happen but it does sometimes) was obligated to bring donuts the next day.
I've been coding in Java for over a dozen years now and I can say without equivocation you're either a liar who's never actually worked with it or you're a fucking troll. Write once, run anywhere is is 100% real and is so common that it's a joke.
I agree, with some minor caveats. Using public APIs, avoiding deprecated sections, is generally very safe. Using anything in the sun.* packages as well as undocumented behavior is no-man's land. I worked on a project that actively exploited bugs in Swing in Java 5, and broke on Java 6. Recoding the sections that took advantage of "undocumented features" restored it to correct functionality regardless of the JRE version. Again, using documented, supported parts of the JFC is key. Not actively trying to do things that ought not to be done is important.
For example, building filesystem paths where the path separator is hard-coded.
The I/O library in Java automatically corrects this. You can even mix "/" and "\" in the same path and it will work.
When it is incorrect, it is, at least *authoritatively* incorrect. -- Hitchiker's Guide To The Galaxy
