First of all, your dig at the Nobel Peace Prize is racist, you just can't stand that a black man won it in 2009 and you'll go to any length to criticize him.

Second, that pro-capitalist bullshit is a bunch of bullshit, stop cheerleading for Danone and other multinational corporations. The sooner they are driven out of business, the better.

Third, the whole "money-lender" thing is anti-Semitic, and this is the nail in the coffin of your whole gestalt. Yeah, you didn't actually say "Jews" but then again you didn't need to, you made it quite clear. Please stop speaking in public.

Java had tons of capability problems when Oracle changed a string in a copyright file unrelated to the version after acquiring it from SUN.

Keep in mind I have not written java code for a long time now. But there was a method to check I think in java.lang somewhere.

Want to know why these apps failed? They used RMI to bypass the platform and use win32 apis to go check strings in c:\program files\jre etc or they use WMI to check the owner of the copyright. Instead of using a =, the incompetent programmers used an "==" and would call a break writeln (This program requires java 1.4.2 to run etc)

This was terrible and a ton more work not to mention broke compatibility with Linux and MacOSX for no reason at all?? My guess is these were corporate crap anyway that sent IE 6 specific CSS for these web apps anyway.

It is what you get when you go H1B1 visa holders.

My point is you would be shocked at all the garbage that goes and yes I can see poorly written MFC apps written in VC+ 4.2 doing a string check for Windows 9.x and printing out "Upgrade to Windows2000 Please!". If it happened in Java I am sure it can happen elsewhere

Not really at the kernel level besides some power management features. Services and gui there is a vast difference.

But it does make more sense to put everything together unlike a Linux OS it comes together and the pieces are not installed separately.

"It left China with either letting go of censorship, or breaking significant chunks of the Internet for their population."

I love the tiny minds at work here. People who cannot see outside of themselves, nor consider any perspective but their own Western one. As if there were any choice involved! China doesn't block websites because they're evil, they block websites because they are damaging to China's body politic. These overseas actors want to harm China, and like antibodies reacting to bacteria, China's government reacts to block the damage. You can cry censorship all you want, but the fact remains that it's for China's own good that these actions are taken.

I remind everyone that the Chinese Communist Party is made up of the smartest people in China. It is full of scientists and engineers, people with analytical minds, and people who are qualified to make decisions for others. If Slashdot were based in China, the most thoughtful constantly-modded-up users would be mostly CCP members. Think of John Gruber, the MIT economist who helped get the badly needed Affordable Care Act passed despite opposition from lesser minds. There is nothing particularly scandalous about what he did. The seriousness of the deception depends on the extent of the harm done. Getting healthcare for millions of uninsured is the same as China's blocking these harmful websites. A little harm is done, mostly to people who intend harm in the first place, and much good is done to people who badly need it. It is a Faustian bargain, but it is worth it. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

The Western mindset that censorship is automatically bad is outdated and unsuitable for 2014 and beyond. We need to just relax and let the smart people do their thing. We're better off with them in charge rather than the mob. If you disagree, then say so - but don't doubt China's justification for its own point of view, which I doubt anyone, especially those in this "freedumb center", has even taken a moment to think over.

Then turn around and offer it fix it for a very inflated price once websites wont render anymore after you force them to use your product. Make sure it ties into as many business processes unrelated to your product selling points as possible so your customers can fire people who do the things your software does. Therefore can't leave you when done.

You will go well in the medical industry especially.

Doesn't matter as these companies only hire inexperienced Indians to develop the software so the CEO can get his bonus.

An app failing due to a stupid version check done incorrectly brings in revenue as these customers will now have to pay twice :-)

I have seen this in the medical industry where an outdated version of IE is targeted on purpose knowing it will create demand for another purchase later on when websites stop rendering correctly. It doesn't make economic sense to hire good coders who prevent future re-purchases.

Also the MBAs are stupid and will just deny upgrades and approve software without IT's approval that is poorly written. After all IT is a cost center and they know more and are better than we are because they are profit centers. If you do not like go work elsewhere etc ...

Don't these 2 competitors realize by not sueing each other they both win?

In the end it doesn't matter who wins. the lawyers will take the money and both Nvidia and Samsung loose.

Not enough ram or cpu power. With vi he only had 200k free

I am sure it will fly through through an emulator

There are lots of pressing problems.

Cyphers, as opposed to codes, have well-defined functions (be it an algorithm or a lookup table) which map the input to the output. The same functions are applied in the same way across the entire input. Unless the functions are such that the output is truly indistinguishable from a random oracle (or, indeed, any other Oracle product), information is exposed, both information about the message and information about the method for producing the cyphertext. Since randomness can tell you nothing, by definition, the amount of information exposed cannot exceed the the information limit proposed by Shannon for a channel whose bandwidth is equal to the non-randomness of the output.

(A channel is a channel is a channel. The rules don't care.)

So, obviously you want to know how to get at the greatest amount of the unencrypted data that's encoded in the non-randomness, and how do you actually then extract the contents?

In other words, is there a general purpose function that can do basic, naive cryptanalysis? And what, exactly, can such a function achieve given a channel of N bits and a message of M bits?

In other words, how much non-randomness can a cypher have before you definitely know there's enough information leakage in some arbitrary cypher for the most naive cryptanalysis possible (excluding brute-force, since that's not analytical and isn't naive since you have to know the cypher) to be able to break the cypher in finite time? (Even if that's longer than the universe is expected to last.)

Is there some function which can take the information leakage rate and the type and complexity of the cypher to produce a half-life of that class of cyphers, where you can expect half of a random selection of cyphers (out of all cyphers with the same characteristics) to be broken at around that estimated half-life point?

If you can do that, then you know how complex you can make your cypher for a competition page, and how simple you can afford it when building a TrueCrypt replacement.