It's all sensationalistic nonsense until it actually happens. Which seems to be just a matter of time and judicial incompetence. If you want to be optimistic about it, that's your own business, but I am NOT.

Yes, it makes it more difficult for the end user. But I'm sure somebody has made a quote about convenience and liberty at some point (Ben Franklin?). That's a wholly different argument.

NK is heavily armed (proportionally), possibly nuked up, and has the at-least-nominal support of China. Given the recent U.S. track record of invading other countries, what the heck should we be doing?

Ooh, I know--maybe we can have the U.N. impose another sanction on them! So the average guy can be even more miserable and starving than before.

Thanks for the info. This is a rare application for me to put that one half-course in assembly to use ;)

I had to look some of that stuff up earlier as I was unaware that main() was actually implemented differently in the compiler instead of just throwing a compile-time warning for non-int typing or something...you learn something new every day, eh?

What the hell difference does it make, then, if the user can disable it? So somebody could e.g. modify GRUB to default to when booting Windows pass some sort of --secure-boot-on flag, and --secure-boot-off for everything else, right? In which case the only thing we gain from it is Windows patting itself on the back that it's "secure"...until somebody figures out how to hack it in about 6 months...

That was basically (part of) what I was saying, yes.

I was saying that you don't need to be a "brogrammer" (gag) to not know that main() in C returns an int. There are plenty of other languages out there that one can be very conversant in without knowing one random bit of trivia about one first introduced in the early '70s.

One could say all 3 posters were a bit at fault here, really:
1) HeckRuler's code, while syntactically valid, returns the number of characters in the string, not 0 for success, which is rather misleading.
2) dimeglio thought it was a stupid mistake, which I'm sure was an honest mistake on his part because he doesn't know about the C standard. Which I can't blame him much for.
3) The A.C. just flamed him. Well, at least he included a period at the end of the sentence.
4) You and I are arguing about whether it's reasonable to expect J Random Programmer to know a tidbit about C that the compiler will almost certainly warn you about anyway. As someone who knows C++ and x86 assembly (the basics, anyway), I find your choice of where to draw the line that delimits a n00b too arbitrary for my tastes. But I'm splitting hairs again, so go figure...

Do any other C functions have a reserved return type? No? Then it's not exactly an intuitive conclusion to jump to if one has never programmed in C, is it?

If by "cargo cult" you mean "modern"... ;)

It's a convention; if you think about it, it's not exactly necessary. Him not knowing just means he's inexperienced (in that specific area, anyway). Why he's posting to "correct" is another matter...

To be able to share the stuff, yes, they would need to have access to the keys. But as a strictly backup medium, there is no reason they need ever see them. Of course, this kills any chance of a user who lost their keys getting their files back, but...I would be willing to take that risk.

But I assume Mega encrypts the stuff for you? You don't provide your own keys?

that we're aware of.

That's exactly what I was saying.

I find it kind of interesting that everybody likes to bring up the invisible bit. You wouldn't be very omnipotent if the puny humans could walk in on you by accident...

If you were immortal, wouldn't *you* eventually start fucking around with people? Forever is a long time.

You'll have to excuse me if I don't take you seriously as you A) are using an ad hominem argument in the first place, and B) can't even spell it correctly.

Oh. Then why bother even linking to another article linking to it?

After having actually read TFA, I still don't know what they mean by "misconduct." Are we talking academic, i.e. falsifying data or plagiarizing, or sexual misconduct, or what? The article carefully avoids ever joining an adjective to it.

Because come on...in general, does anybody believe males if they report being accosted?