Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Well. (Score 3, Informative) 115

by arth1 (#46819555) Attached to: How Apple's Billion Dollar Sapphire Bet Will Pay Off

I to am on the Gorilla Glass bandwagon as well, and a big big fan of Corning. But Gorilla Glass is under patent. Synthetic Sapphire has been around since 1902, and it was cheap back then. Sapphire is hard... 9 on the Mohs scale, and the only substance harder is natural and synthetic diamond. I find it difficult to believe... so...do you have any references that says Gorilla Glass is cheaper and harder than Sapphire?

I'm not the parent poster, but here's a ref claiming that Gorilla Glass is indeed both cheaper and far weaker than sapphire.

Comment: Re:Obligatory (Score 1) 299

The 21st century of "civilized countries" that are "permitted to kill its own citizens"?

Barbaric tribal practices, indeed. But since they're your tribal practices...

I never said that civilized countries are permitted to kill its own citizens. You're reading things I never wrote, drawing erroneous conclusions.

If the electorate of a country vote for a government that kills its own citizens, like the US does, that is up to them. That doesn't make it less barbaric, but at least they have the jurisdiction and the will of the people.
Most civilized Western countries have long since abandoned a revenge based justice system and capital punishment.

What countries don't have is jurisdiction outside its own border. Two countries tend to disregard this on a permanent basis.

Comment: Re:Obligatory (Score 1) 299

What about children, felons, and those who are not old enough to have a) voted

In civilized countries, children enjoy special protection, and the right to vote is inalienable, so there are no felons who cannot vote.
Quite unlike here in the US, where voter disenfranchisement is rampant and children are tried as if they were adults.

It's high time for 'Tis of Thee to join the 21st century and abandon her barbaric tribal practices and join modern Western civilization.

Comment: Re:Obligatory (Score 4, Interesting) 299

So let me get this straight, it's perfectly OK to kill people with drones as long as they're not American citizens?

It should be the other way around. A country should only be permitted to kill its own citizens, not citizens of other countries.
The former is acceptable, given the citizens in question are part of the electorate who sanctioned the laws and government, giving them powers over their lives.
The latter is an act of war and trespasses on the sovereignty of other countries and its citizens.

Comment: Re:Obligatory (Score 4, Insightful) 299

It'd certainly be a good border security method against Mexicans. In fact, they could start by just targetting drug runners and practically solve the drug problem overnight. Drug dealers cost America more money and kill more americans than terrorism by about 100000x

When did drug smuggling become a capital crime?
And when did suspicion (probable or not) of capital crime put aside the requirement for due process?

Movies

Joss Whedon Releases New Film On Demand 133

Posted by samzenpus
from the when-you-want-it dept.
Rambo Tribble (1273454) writes "Popular director Joss Whedon has taken the film world by surprise by releasing his latest offering, 'In Your Eyes', available for download on the same day it premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival. The new release comes from Whedon's own "micro studio", Bellwether Pictures, and is featured on Vimeo as a $5 rental, (free trailer). Whedon mused, 'It's exciting for us because we get to explore yet another new form of distribution — and we get $5.' Mr. Whedon has a history of pushing the delivery envelope, as with Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog, in 2008."

Comment: Re:...news for nerds.. (Score 3, Interesting) 393

by arth1 (#46805555) Attached to: In a Hole, Golf Courses Experiment With 15-inch Holes

Darts is the weirdest thing to be honest. People will consider archery and shooting sports, but not darts. I think it's because it seems so random to a beginner, but when you get deeper into it, it becomes pretty clear that it's all about fine motor skill.

And maths and strategy. You're left with a score and need to get to zero with the last dart hitting a double, so you need to not only know what combinations will get you there, but also which ones will do the least amount of damage if you miss, and redo your strategy if you miss or a dart blocks your strike zone.
It's as much in your head as it is in your aim, arm and hand.

Comment: Re:The commits are funny into themselves. (Score 1) 372

by arth1 (#46800879) Attached to: OpenSSL Cleanup: Hundreds of Commits In a Week

If decrementing and comparing to 0 is faster, then a modern optimizing compiler will do that automatically even if you use for(i = 0; i < 8; i++) instead of the other way around.

Do you have one example of a compiler that actually does that?

gcc for example, might unroll the loop, but not revert the look to use a more efficient comparison. A quick test with icc (older version, I admit) doesn't do it either.
Which compilers do you refer to that do this?

Comment: Re:Since when is every search engine Google? (Score 1) 155

by arth1 (#46800651) Attached to: New 'Google' For the Dark Web Makes Buying Dope and Guns Easy

Are you sure about that? I thought Kermit and ZModem were unrelated evolutions, more in parallel than Kermit being a predecessor (or successor) of ZModem. It becomes pretty obvious when you look at features, Kermit and ZModem send filenames to the other end, while XModem and YModem do not. XModem does show off that it is older since unlike the others it doesn't have any sort of error detection.

They're unrelated - X/Y/Zmodem share a heritage,but kermit is unrelated. However, it seems obvious that X/Y/Zmodem was attempting to provide the file transfer capabilities of kermit, making it simpler to both install and use. BBSes embraced it, and X/Y/Zmodem had its days of glory. Nowadays, kermit has overtaken Zmodem and Ymodem-g, so it has possibly gone full circle.

Comment: Re:I would think (Score 1) 372

by arth1 (#46800455) Attached to: OpenSSL Cleanup: Hundreds of Commits In a Week

Also..OpenVMS has not been updated in almost 4 years. If you have native servers on these machines exposed to the internet, you get what you deserver regardless of the version of openssl you're running. Tell you what - you maintain the OpenVMS patches and I'm sure no one will stop you. Otherwise, stop complaining about it.

They don't need to be on the internet - they may be running back-end or internal systems. But if front-end systems or internal PC or midrange systems communicate with them using openssl, the versions have to be compatible. You can't just upgrade one end of the connection, at least not without extra testing.
Or, it might be a system that has to be accessible and visible to just a small part of the internal userbase, and you protect it from internal hacking.
So legacy systems sometimes need software upgrades too.

Comment: Re:The commits are funny into themselves. (Score 1) 372

by arth1 (#46799799) Attached to: OpenSSL Cleanup: Hundreds of Commits In a Week

Comparing to zero is faster in most architectures and still is a valid optimization.

Indeed, and you might want to take it even one step further, and test for --i = 0.

There's also the fact that there are plenty of older archiitecture CPUs out there, being deployed even today, especially in the embedded world where product lifecycles are really long, and switching to a new architecture can mean dozen of man-years of work.
Do you want your water company and cable provider to install new meters every two years to keep up with the latest technology? Guess who would pay for that!
In critical infrastructure it becomes even more important to support old hardware. Would you feel safer in a plane running hardware/software that has shown itself to work, or one with bleeding edge computers that crashes as often as a typical desktop?

Optimization isn't bad. But you have to know what you're doing, and why. High level developers relying on magic abstractions layers need not apply. Their strengths lie elsewhere.

Comment: Re:I would think (Score 1) 372

by arth1 (#46799629) Attached to: OpenSSL Cleanup: Hundreds of Commits In a Week

not necessarily - when I saw a commit that said "removed use after free" (ie still using a structure after it had been freed) then you've got to think the code is just generally sloppy.

Not necessarily - if they used their own allocation routines (which it appears they did), it could have an API allowing use after free until a new allocation occurred. If so, the bug would be replacing the memory allocation routines without also rewriting the parts that depended on the old functionality.
And before someone going on a rant saying that that's a brain dead thing to do, it's something that pretty much every compiler does when using the stack. The stack pointer isn't going to change until you change it. So if using a private stack for memory allocation, this is perfectly fine. It's a different API to what's common, but different doesn't mean wrong. It just means that those who use it have to understand it and not make erroneous assumptions.

Help me, I'm a prisoner in a Fortune cookie file!

Working...