The west must go all out on sanctions. Gonna happen sooner or later.. and later is always bad.
I got too old for this shit
if someone gives you a percentage they are trying to make it better or worse than it actually is.
How is voiding the warranty threat show they are taking security seriously? Everyone puts a voids the warranty warning when they don't want you to see whats inside. IF someone hacks your car is the warranty still void?
His answer seems to mean it wouldn't be his preference, rather than being impossible.
Maybe obscurity doesn't mater after all
It's free. 30 years down the road no one can claim a patent on it. Just let food grow naturally, stop this super this super that crap.
How so? Requiring one party to pay 200,000 euros to operate a taxi while not enforcing that on another party is not competition. That privileged access is a requirement from the government itself.
The more of these we find, the more secure OpenSSL will be. I hope we continue to find these kinds of problems and see them fixed. If open source has one strength, it's that when many skilled eyes DO converge on the code it can be tested and fixed far more quickly than a corporation with limited resources and only paid developers can do the same sort of debugging work. The trick is getting the eyes there in the first place.
10 years ago someone said...
"Opensource will eliminate all bugs, because the world can see the source". Doesn't matter if no one reads the source.
Given all the open-source SSL/TLS security flaws (OpenSSL, gnutls, Apple SSL) that have come out these past few months - mostly thanks to renewed interest in hunting flaws, thanks to the Snowden revelations, I suspect - I hope that companies like Microsoft are also seeing this as a wake-up call driving them to do code reviews on their closed-source SSL/TLS code.
Not quite sure what you mean there. Closed source gets more code review than opensource apparently.
The POS library permeates everything.
"The event" means Jesus is on his way. Go to church people
NASA, France Skeptical of SpaceX Reusable Rocket Project
Yes, that's a lovely headline. But the original headline ("NASA, CNES Warn SpaceX of Challenges in Flying Reusable Falcon 9 Rocket") tells the same story with 42% less bullshit.
NASA found that it was not worth trying to reuse the space shuttle main engines after every flight without extensive refurbishment.
Really? So because the space shuttle couldn't do it, nobody could do it, perhaps by learning lessons from the shuttle program? If this is an example of the kind of thinking in the article, it's a fat waste of time. If it isn't an example, why mention it at all?
I went ahead and skimmed the article, and indeed, the sole counterexample to the potential of reuse continues to be the space shuttle. The article is crap. Flush.
Ugh, why can't people comprehend mildly complex topics? You contradict yourself in your post so much that it hurts.
NASA "warns", does not mean NASA "says it is impossible".
NASA "warns" implies it IS possible but there are other challenges to overcome.
Basic comprehension people.
>> He appeared to announce his resignation from the company on April 1st, but later claimed that it was an April Fools' joke, and that he would remain onboard. In a statement issued Monday, however, VK said that Durov submitted a resignation letter on March 21st and never withdrew it within the mandatory one-month window. Because of that, Durov said, he will be "automatically relieved" of his position.
Politically, it's bad, but I do enjoy seeing someone's stupid April Fools stunt blow up in their face.
Wow he's a total idiot. April fools joke means saying it not doing it.