Diversity does not mean tolerating bigotry directed at minorities. It's crazy that you talk about tolerating disagreement when Eich is the one who donated money to criminalize what he disagrees with.
The bug was found due to observed behavior, not due to a code review.
No. I think you've misunderstood one-time padding (or brute-forcing).
Brute forcing is when you try (almost) every possible key, which is significantly shorter than the message, to see what the message will turn out with said key hoping to find the right one. If the message turns out to make sense (contain english words or ascii alphabet for example) it is likely to be correct.
With OTP the key and the message are of equal length. Going through every key is the same as going through every possible message. So you will not only hit alphabet, but you'll get shakespeare and snowden leaks alike.
That makes all forms of bruteforcing futile. No extra codes necessary.
One bit example:
my message is M (0 or 1) and my pad is P (0 or 1).
M xor P = C cipher text, and equally C xor P is M.
Now, given C, say 1. You can trivially bruteforce it into 0 as if P had been 1 or into 1 as if P had been 0, but that solves nothing. Because both possibilites are equally likely. Repeat that on every bit and all you will ever know about the message is its length.
The length leakage is also easy to counter to some extent by appropriate amount of random padding (adding some extra gunk to the end).
Actually, the code snippet, without context is not an obvious attempt. It is a cleverly hidden attempt that COULD be a genuine error.
Sir, you have not looked into this one bit and are spewing hot air without any substance.
The ANDed limitation of uid being root makes zero sense. Why limit root in particular?
Not to mention that __WALL already has __WCLONE flag in it, what would possibly be the point of that? Aside from the obvious assignment as comparison, which of course seemingly could be a typo, the rest of it is something no sane kernel developer would have any reason what so ever to put in there.
That is why it is a backdoor insertion without any reasonable doubt. Not because of the mere = in place of ==, which I still typo regularly after 25 years of C. Thankfully these days compiler warnings and various static analyzers catch that nonsense.
In an interview with ZDNet, Ballmer said his biggest regret as CEO was in how Windows Vista was developed.
The aftermath of Vista is precisely when he should have resigned. CEOs of other tech companies have resigned for lesser debacles.
The NSA scandal has been so earth-shattering with regards to raising awareness of government surveillance that concerns over civil liberties now outweigh concerns over protecting the country. The shift is across party lines as well. It's no wonder politicians of either party have been decrying a rising trend of libertarianism. Whether or not it's accurate to classify today's anti-government fears as such, the fact that the U.S. has become the kind of country to seek asylum from is staggeringly insane. The "trust us" defense isn't good enough.
If you mean that their disinterest in HD in 2006 didn't hurt them, I agree with regard to the first few years of the Wii's life, but its lack of power eventually caught up with them when cross-platform developers left the Wii. Today, the Wii U isn't selling because it doesn't have much first-party software available to showcase the system. Miyamoto acknowledged that this is the result of underestimating the scale of labor required for HD development and subsequently having to delay their software releases (another area where it's behind is in providing competitive online services). The rest of the industry went through this transition this seven years ago, and Nintendo was able to ignore it at the time because of the money they were making.
Nintendo dragged its feet in the move to HD and is paying the price. They underestimated the time and money expense, and now their first-party releases are behind. On top of that, there's barely been any marketing for the Wii U, which has a name that implies it's an accessory for the Wii rather than a new console. The console's tablet controller doesn't offer anything that people's existing smartphones and iPads can't do better. It was likely released in reaction to the iPad (Nintendo stated in 2010 that Apple is their biggest threat). With the lack of hardware power and user base, there's nothing with which to court third-party developers, who are focused instead on the more powerful consoles coming out later this year.
Nintendo's stronghold remains handheld gaming. However, even that is under threat from smartphones. On top of what Android already supports, iOS 7 will ship with native physical controller APIs, and Apple is working with hardware manufacturers to release official attachments and wireless controllers. While the 3DS certainly won't disappear, it will be interesting to watch how well it fares among adult gamers when physical controllers become commonplace in the iPhone accessory aisle.
"They don't want the voice of reason spoken, folks, 'cause otherwise we'd be free. Otherwise we wouldn't believe their fucking horseshit lies, nor the fucking propaganda machine, the mainstream media, and buy their horseshit products that we don't fucking need, and become a third world consumer fucking plantation, which is what we're becoming. Fuck them! They're liars and murders. All governments are liars and murderers, and I am now Jesus. Now. And this is my compound."
- Bill Hicks, Live at Laff Stop in Austin
People have invested in iOS and Android apps, leaving little incentive to switch. Additionally, WinRT lacks functionality compared to Win32. Microsoft has become reactive and conservative, following what others do rather than leading. They had the opportunity years ago to shake things up with the Courier tablet, which was focused on content creation. The project was killed because Bill Gates wanted it to be a more traditional device that interfaced with Office.
In other words, Microsoft spent more money on advertising the Surface than they took in selling it.
If you'd read the article, citing what other broadband companies do is exactly the defense Google responded with, but that policy contradicts their previous position on net neutrality.
Google plans to offer its own business-class services on Fiber. Can't have people running their own servers as competition. This company tends to claim support for whatever is politically popular among techies and then quietly go back on it when it affects their bottom line.
Wasn't there something about a PASCAL programmer knowing the value of everything and the Wirth of nothing?