Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror

Submission + - IOCCC 28 starts tonight UTC! (fosstodon.org)

Submitted by achowe
achowe writes: The IOCCC.org web site has been completely overhauled and made ready for the next contest to start later tonight UTC. From IOCCC Mastodon account `@ioccc@fosstodon.org` :

```
The IOCCC28, the 40th anniversary of the IOCCC is now scheduled to run from **2024-12-29 23:58:13.213455 UTC** to **2025-04-01 23:29:31.374143 UTC**!!!.
```
Participants should join Mastodon to keep track of announcements of Rules, Guidelines, and tools update notices.

Comment Good programmers work with a plethora of languages (Score 1) 370

My strength and love is "C" and more recently come to enjoy Erlang. Currently work in NodeJS Javascript. Been studying Rust with growing admiration, though not had occasion to use it yet. Wrote a hosted Forth interpreter in C (yeah I know) just for fun and curiosity. Worked with Lua and Rexx, both of which are great. Have done lots of Shell (Ksh, Bash) scripting. Wrote cyber cafe time management system for Windows in Java. Done some work in C#, which is surprisingly good given it was created by Microsoft. Dabbled with Ruby and Python, probably will again. Done many a web site using PHP. Worked with WSL (Waterloo Systems Language, now discontinued I think) for a co-op job. Long ago wrote a Pilot interpreter in Z80 assembler. Know some C++, though I avoid it like a plague. Once learned Perl, but have come to despise it and intend to kill those brain cells with booze.

Comment Vegetarian Headhunters (Score 1) 477

by achowe (#57153702) Attached to: Recruiters Are Still Complaining About No-Shows At Interviews

In all my professional life, I've never once found work through an employment agency, which I think are disgusting parasitic, often offshore outsourced, rancid vermin. Every job I've had has come from word of mouth or direct ad by the employer. Intermediary agents are horribly stupid. I've never blown off an interview with a company that does show interest, but would happily do it with a recruiter given I have zero respect for them.

On the other hand I understand being ignored by employers who don't reply to job seekers. I think I've had only three negative replies to job inquiries in my life, the rest just leave you hanging. So I can understand the "bale if not better" mind set. If employers want to be taken seriously then they need to at least play nice with potential employees.

However in today's thrifty world, sending out N negative replies by post or even email is often too much a burden (hassle) for a business, so they leave applicants hanging; only fair turn around if an applicant does like wise.

Comment CERT Secure Coding Standards (Score 2) 220

by achowe (#56184357) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: How Would You Teach 'Best Practices' For Programmers?

Start with the CERT Secure Coding standards, especially for C programmers it covers many of the "gotchas" to watch out for.

        SEI CERT C Coding Standard: Rules for Developing Safe, Reliable, and Secure Systems (2016 Edition)
        https://resources.sei.cmu.edu/...

Apparently they them for other languages like C++, Java, Perl.

Submission + - Oracle may have stopped funding and development efforts on Java EE (arstechnica.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: ArsTechnica is reporting that Oracle has quietly pulled funding and development efforts away from Java EE, the server-side Java technology that is part of hundreds of thousands of Internet and business applications. Java EE even plays an integral role for many apps that aren't otherwise based on Java, and customers and partners have invested time and code. It wouldn't be the first time this has happened, but the implications are huge for Java as a platform.

Submission + - Frontier Teams With AT&T To Block Google Fiber Access To Utility Poles (arstechnica.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: Frontier submitted a court filing last week supporting ATT's efforts to sue local governments in Louisville and Jefferson County, Kentucky to stop a new ordinance designed to give Google Fiber and similar companies access to utility poles. They're concerned the ordinances will spread to other states. Frontier's filing said, "the issues raised by the case may have important implications for Frontier's business and may impact the development of law in jurisdictions throughout the country where Frontier operates." The ordinance in Louisville lets companies like Google Fiber install wires even if ATT doesn't respond to requests or rejects requests to attach lines. Companies don't have to notify ATT when they want to move ATT's wires to make room for their own wires, assuming the work won't cause customer outages. ATT claims that the ordinance lets competitors "seize ATT's property." Frontier is urging the court to consider the nationwide implications of upholding Louisville's ordinance, saying Louisville's rule "is unprecedented" because "it drastically expands the rights of third parties to use privately owned utility poles, giving non-owners unfettered access to [a] utility's property without the [...] utility in some cases even having knowledge that such third-party intrusion on its facilities is occurring." Frontier said companies should be required to negotiation access with the owners if they didn't pay to install the utility poles. They urged the court to deny Louisville Metro's motion to dismiss ATT's complaint.

Submission + - Judge Dismisses Movie Piracy Case, IP-Address Doesn't Prove Anything (torrentfreak.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: In what's believed to be a first of its kind ruling, a federal court in Oregon has dismissed a direct infringement complaint against an alleged movie pirate from the outset. According to the judge, linking an IP-address to a pirated download is not enough to prove direct copyright infringement. In the Oregon District Court, Magistrate Judge Stacie Beckerman recently recommended dismissal of a complaint filed by the makers of the Adam Sandler movie The Cobbler. According to the Judge both claims of direct and indirect infringement were not sufficient for the case to continue. What’s unique in this case, is that the direct infringement claims were dismissed sua sponte, which hasn’t happened before. To prove direct infringement copyright holders merely have to make it “plausible” that a defendant, Thomas Gonzales in this case, is indeed the copyright infringer. This is traditionally done by pointing out that the IP-address is directly linked to the defendant’s Internet connection, for example. However, according to Judge Beckerman this is not enough.

Submission + - Federal Court: The Fourth Amendment Does Not Protect Your Home Computer (eff.org)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: The EFF reports that a federal court in Virginia today ruled that a criminal defendant has no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in his personal computer (PDF), located inside his home. The court says the federal government does not need a warrant to hack into an individual's computer. EFF reports: "The implications for the decision, if upheld, are staggering: law enforcement would be free to remotely search and seize information from your computer, without a warrant, without probable cause, or without any suspicion at all. To say the least, the decision is bad news for privacy. But it's also incorrect as a matter of law, and we expect there is little chance it would hold up on appeal. (It also was not the central component of the judge's decision, which also diminishes the likelihood that it will become reliable precedent.) But the decision underscores a broader trend in these cases: courts across the country, faced with unfamiliar technology and unsympathetic defendants, are issuing decisions that threaten everyone's rights.

Submission + - Like Comcast, Google Fiber Now Forces Customers Into Arbitration (arstechnica.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: In Google Fiber's updated terms, the company now says they "require the use of binding arbitration to resolve disputes rather than jury trials or class actions." Ars Technica reports: "While the clause allows cases in small claims court, it otherwise forces customers to waive the right to bring legal actions against the ISP. Arbitration must be sought on an individual basis, as the clause also prevents class arbitration. The previous terms of service did not have the binding arbitration clause, though they did limit Google Fiber's liability to the amount customers pay to use the services." The good news: customers can opt out of the change. The bad news: they have 30 days. "According to the terms, the new agreement kicks in within 30 days of accepting the new language. Customers can, however, during that time period use this online form (you must be logged in to your Fiber account to access it) to opt out of this change and future changes to the arbitration agreement," writes The Consumerist. Ars Technica reports that Google told them customers have 60 days to opt out. "An e-mail sent to customers on June 14 says the new terms of service will apply unless they call to cancel service within 30 days. If customers do nothing, they will have "accepted" the terms at that 30-day mark. After that, customers who remain with Google Fiber have another 30 days to opt out of the new terms using the online form," writes Ars.

Submission + - Paper suggests cancer's an evolutionary mechanism to 'autocorrect' our gene pool (sciencealert.com)

Submitted by schwit1
schwit1 writes: Two scientists have come up with a depressing new hypothesis that attempts to explain why cancer is so hard to stop.

Maybe, they suggest, cancer's not working against us. Maybe the disease is actually an evolutionary 'final checkpoint' that stops faulty DNA from being passed down to the next generation.

To be clear, this is just a hypothesis. It hasn't been tested experimentally, and, more importantly, no one is suggesting that anyone shoulddie of cancer. In fact, it's quite the opposite — the researchers say that this line of thinking could help us to better understand the disease, and come up with more effective treatment strategies, like immunotherapy, even if a cure might not be possible.

So let's step back a second here, because why are our bodies trying to kill us? The idea behind the paper is based on the fact that, in the healthy body, there are a whole range of inbuilt safeguards, or 'checkpoints', that stop DNA mutations from being passed onto new cells.

One of the most important of these checkpoints is apoptosis, or programmed cell death. Whenever DNA is damaged and can't be fixed, cells are marked for apoptosis, and are quickly digested by the immune system — effectively 'swallowing' the problem. No mess, no fuss.

But the new hypothesis suggests that when apoptosis — and the other safeguards — don't work like they're supposed to, cancer just might be the final 'checkpoint' that steps in and gets rid of the rogue cells before their DNA can be passed on... by, uh, killing us, and removing our genetic material from the gene pool.

Slashdot Top Deals

Save yourself! Reboot in 5 seconds!

Close