Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Depends on who uses them (Score 1) 137

by sjames (#46763891) Attached to: The Security of Popular Programming Languages

I thought about that a bit. It's easy to remove all but the functions intended to be used parameterized, but that doesn't prevent you from doing something stupid, it just doesn't invite you to be stupid. There is certainly something to be said for that.

The solution for the second part would be a bit heavy weight and never really satisfactory. For example:

"SELECT info from STUFF where id=$uid;"

Pretty much anyone would agree that uid should be parameterized. However, what about:

"SELECT $field from $table where $other_field = $value;"

Which of those do we want to force into parameters for all cases? Surely we don't want to force the first query to be re-written as:

"SELECT $1 from $2 where $3=$4;", array('info','STUFF','id',$uid)

But short of that, we can't stop someone from being stupid.

Comment: Not too many, but instead, LOUSY ones. (Score 1) 129

Seriously, the more that I see of today's profs the less impressed I am. Have you noticed how many announcements are made about various new items that never make it to market, or even to change the R*D? In some cases, it is all predicated on lies. The profs that the universities are hiring are HORRIBLE, and getting worse. Bad R*D and bad teaching.

The American universities are falling apart, in no small part, because of the quality of ppl being hired.

+ - IRS: give us machine-readable tax formulas

Submitted by johndoe42
johndoe42 (179131) writes "Now that tax day is almost over, it's time to ask the IRS to make it less painful. All of the commercial tax software is awful, overpriced, and incompatible with everything else. Some people have tried to do better: OpenTaxSolver and a rather large Excel spreadsheet are tedious manual translations of the IRS's forms. I'm sure that many programmers would try to make much friendlier tax software if they didn't have to deal with translating all of the IRS instructions. Let's petition the IRS to publish computerized formulas so that this can happen."

Comment: Re:Force her out! (Score 1) 313

by mi (#46762215) Attached to: Double Take: Condoleezza Rice As Dropbox's Newest Board Member

Please stop misquoting Orwel, he was talking about war not about abusing prisoners.

First of all, whoever Orwel was talking about, I did not "misquote" him — the quote is perfectly accurate.

As for who he was talking about — you are attempting to make a distinction without difference. The idea remains the same — you can abjure waterboarding as "stooping low" all you want, but you are only able to do that, because others are waterboarding your enemies on your behalf.

Hope you're feeling all snug and cozy under your blanket of US exceptionalism.

Yes, thank you, the only drawback of the US exceptionalism is the nasty butthurt it is causing among citizens of lesser countries...

Christopher Hitchens changed his tune afterwards.

I'm sure, Mr. Hitchens, whoever he is, did not like it — by all descriptions, it feels horrible. It does not change the facts I stated: waterboarding works by fear, rather than pain. That sets it aside from "torture".

It may still be "bad", or even "outside any civilized standard", but that's not what I was saying: it is not torture.

Your opinion in the matter is completely irrelevant

Why, thank you, why didn't you say so from the beginning? Until now I labored under assumption, that I'm facing a good faith opponent...

That you happily put yourself there

Happily? Where did you get the "happily" part? Of course, I'm very much unhappy, that we — the US — had to apply the questionable procedures to the captured enemies in order to save ourselves from actions of their still-at-large comrades. But we had to — broken spirits of the handful of bona-fide terrorists aren't worth the lives of Americans, civilians or otherwise, and I'm glad, the Bush Administration had "the minerals" to act as it did.

makes my point in highlighting how far the US has fallen.

You are displaying a fantastic naivette, if you believe, the US — like all others — have not used this and similar methods in the past. That we are now more open about it, rather than being "shocked, shocked, waterboarding is going on here", is a good sign.

Comment: Re:What the tax form should look like (Score 1) 347

by sjames (#46761817) Attached to: Intuit, Maker of Turbotax, Lobbies Against Simplified Tax Filings

Even better, roll it back to the original intent. Line 2, subtract $100,000. Line 3. If line 2 >0, divide by 10 and enter here. Else, don't bother filing.

By now, that number may be closer to $200,000 given inflation.

Originally, it was intended that the vast majority of people wouldn't even be required to file. Those who were were almost certain to already employ an accountant.

Comment: Re:Foreign policy is a shambles...? (Score 1) 20

by smitty_one_each (#46761743) Attached to: Democrats playing the race card? Surely as the sun riseth

while saying I'm for it

I'm not sure where, in this thread, I have asserted any positive allegiance on your end. It's possible that I've done that elsewhere, I suppose, but I'm afraid I don't recall where.

They have proven their "moral turpitude" by taking the same money and pushing the same austerity.

I think the austerity is happening, whether anyone wants to admit it or not. Note the smaller portions at restaurants.

That does not require me to supply you with "alternatives". I am simply pointing to the sign that says "bridge out".

This is slashdot. Nobody is ever required to do anything at all here.

Ignore at your own peril, and continue to play the victim card. The system cannot work without a submissive, non-thinking crowd who believe they have no alternative.

I'm just kind of chuckling here at "I am simply pointing to the sign that says 'bridge out'" followed by "crowd who believe they have no alternative".

At a sufficiently high level of abstraction, you're akin to Sri Mick Jagger, belting out "I can't get no satisfaction". Shall we read your double negative literally, and deem you satisfied, or take the spirit of the lyric, and deem you still seeking the satisfaction? This many decades on, did the seeking, itself, become a destination, affording some meta-satisfaction?
Trying to serve it humorously, sir, but I find you a crapflooder, albeit less tedious than ram_degistrars.

Comment: Re:This (Score 1) 224

by MightyMartian (#46761709) Attached to: Is Crimea In Russia? Internet Companies Have Different Answers

Russia may cite what it likes, but as I've said before, the situation in Kosovo was such that Kosovo's secession was necessary to prevent further crimes against humanity; in particular ethnic cleansing that was almost certain to approach, if not become genocide. There is no indication that any Russian or other minority in Ukraine was under that kind of threat.

What is more, the secession of Kosovo was done under the watchful eye of numerous international agencies, whereas the Crimean "secession" was done with the Russian military and a puppet government running the entire show. To equate Kosovo and Crimea is ludicrous; both from the point of justification and from the point of how the secession was carried out.

It might be one thing if Putin and the Russian parliament hadn't been preparing annexation instruments at the very same time this referendum was being prepared.

Comment: Re:Greedy bastards ... (Score 1) 347

by sjames (#46761705) Attached to: Intuit, Maker of Turbotax, Lobbies Against Simplified Tax Filings

The really sad part is that the court's logic was approaching non-sequitur. The law is full of requirements for adverse disclosures. If adverse disclosures are a violation of free speech, then I don't have to disclose if I sell a car that was totaled and 'restored' and I don't have to disclose undocumented income to the IRS. Also, no need to disclose any known issues if I sell my house. Next, I suppose they'll rule that a restaurant need not post an extremely adverse health inspection.

Comment: Re:Marginal costs (Score 1) 20

by smitty_one_each (#46761583) Attached to: REPOST: Brandon Eich

Any reasonable society would recognize that the cost of living for the 2+1 group is higher than the 2 group, and set progressivity in the tax rate to reflect that.
Now, I know some people see it as a subsidy because they don't want children and don't see why other people should get a subsidy (etc), but it isn't one. Trying to get as much money out of parents as a non-parental couple is ultimately (1) a getting-blood-out-of-a-stone situation and (2) going to result in malnourished, poorly educated, badly brought up kids. Moreover, kids don't stay kids. Eventually they grow up. And they'll pay taxes.

These arguments are not "reasonable". I can't find an "reason" based arguments to venture beyond heterosexuality. Political arguments are not infrequently based upon stoking envy along sexual, racial, historical, and material lines.
Politicians demagogue, and low-information voters vacuum it up.

Comment: Re:Mr Fixit (Score 2) 307

Debian was a bit longer, so far as mainline releases go (I don't use testing branches). I have several servers and routers running 6.0, and they're all using OpenSSL 0.9.8, whereas my servers I use as KVM virtualization hosts are running Wheezy and did have vulnerable versions of OpenSSL. I had been thinking over the last few months that I should upgrade my old Debian Squeeze servers and appliances, a number of which are used for my OpenVPN WAN routers and remote client servers. I'm very glad my business/procrastination prevented me from upgrading these systems, and hence they remained untouched, and I don't have to go through the pain of regenerating keys and rolling them out to remote routers and to all the road warriors and work-at-home types.

IF I HAD A MINE SHAFT, I don't think I would just abandon it. There's got to be a better way. -- Jack Handley, The New Mexican, 1988.