Oh, so you don’t believe the Bitcoin crime of the century was pirateat40’s BS&T going away with 500,000 BTC, that are now valued at about 20 million dollars?
I think you haven't actually given it a try. The clues are written as regexes, which require to know the syntax, but it's actually a pretty easy logic puzzle.
It took me less than 10 minutes to complete that crossword. It's actually easy, because the clues always give enough information to immediately place a letter somewhere with minor thinking; no tracking back is ever needed (unlike in some Sudoku grids where it's often easier to "try" a number, then cancel if an inconsistency appears).
Actually most of the clues can be easily translated to natural language and make the puzzle understandable to the average people: [^M]*M[^M]* means "there is one and only one M in this line", (RX|[^R])* means "every R in this line must be followed by an X", etc.
1. The act of stealing
Oh wow, the first attempt to justify a piracy site not by directly defending it but by making a pointless semantic argument.
Oh wow, looks like the second Slashdot troll of the year!
Think of it as being able to walk into a fancy department store, steal anything you want, and never get caught.
Oh wow, the piracy / physical theft analogy. Looks like the first Slashdot troll of the year!
Sorry, what was I thinking? This is obviously more elegant:
tr -dc '/\' </dev/urandom
and going 64 bit has a significant memory cost -- for typical C++ code, around 33% extra.
There is no such thing as "typical C++ code" for the memory usage metric. Pointers may be larger, but a decoded 1680×1050 32-bit image takes 7 megabytes of memory on a 32-bit platform and 7 megabytes on a 64-bit platform. Remember that the web is full of images.
I work on multi-million-line C++ projects and my personal experience indicates about 5% overhead. I'm not saying you're wrong, but you really need to back up that claim with some real life figures if you're going to use the word "typical".
No they don’t. The PS3 provides a stripped-down OpenGL ES for testing purposes but almost no one uses it except hobbyists or indie devs. And you can certainly guess how many hobbyists and indie devs there are who can afford targeting the PS3.
Most PS3 games use libgcm, Sony’s own graphics library for the RSX, which actually has a very Direct3D-like API. Source: if I told you, they’d have to kill me.
Are you referring to the PS3, and if not, what console is that? Do you really know how many of your games actually use OpenGL?
A 0.5-millisecond difference in a 3.6-millisecond frame time is “hardly worth mentioning”? You know, people get paid a lot to find out how to gain those 0.5 milliseconds in a 33-millisecond frame time.
Sir, this is complete, utter bullshit.
DirectX gets almost nothing “much earlier”, because it has no extension mechanism. With DirectX you are stuck with the latest version. It has obvious advantages, but early features are certainly not amongst them. Think what you want about the ARB, it does release and releases often.
As for the documentation being terrible and vague, that's pretty uninformed, too. Every extension is fully documented and the vendors know precisely what needs to be implemented. There is no Direct3D equivalent of the 600-page OpenGL specification. The DirectX documentation is a programmer’s guide, not a specification. Every single version of the GLSL standard comes with a full grammar of the language which lets you reimplement a parser or compiler. There is no such thing as a grammar for HLSL (the D3D equivalent). What Microsoft calls a “grammar” for HLSL can be found here and anyone not even in the field of graphics programming will immediately understand how much of a joke it is compared to this (pages 166 to 174).
(Source: I work on Windows, Linux, PS3, Xbox and mobile game engines)
Is it time to consider more secure alternatives
Why now? How does Microsoft change anything? It was time to consider more secure alternatives from day zero!
How can one misspell W3C twice in so few words?