|
Kent Sharkey wrote: Internet Explorer is a 'compatibility solution'
WTF does that even mean?
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
It means you should only use it for that one internal garbage fire the PHB bought based on a 2 page glossy ad in his throne reading that was designed around deliberate targeting of defects to prevent upgrading anything without a service contract. Not that it matters if your PHB bought a 20 year contract or not since GarbFiSoft went out of business 5 years ago after their source safe repo became hopelessly corrupt leaving no upgrade path to a standard compliant browser.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
It probably means that they baked it so far into the operating system (so that they could tell judges that they weren't trying to be monopolistic) that a lot of windows stuff won't work without it.
At one point, you couldn't even delete the IE desktop shortcut, without it popping up a message saying that it might break things.
How'd Scotty say say it? "What a tangled web (of code) we weave when first we practice to deceive"
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
So Internet Explorer isn't something you should use to Explore the Internet? I bet you someone is really regretting that name choice! \snark
|
|
|
|
|
By joining OpenChain, Microsoft takes another big step forward in being fully open-source friendly. "Open source, creates a license so that nobody can ever improve the software"
Yeah, I know. He hasn't been around for a while, but that kind of quote lasts forever.
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: in being fully open-source friendly.
a.k.a. releasing buggy software and relying in other to fix their mess?
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Google today announced that it is open sourcing ClusterFuzz, a scalable fuzzing tool that can run on clusters with over 25,000 machines. Now you can have your very own clusterfuzz
|
|
|
|
|
Google said: it has used the tool to find more than 16,000 bugs in Chrome
Given that chrome is a "modern" app, which is built up from frameworks and libraries, I wouldn't be surprised if it only contained 16,000 lines of code (or even less), giving a 1:1 bugs per line of code ratio.
Which just goes to prove that their devs are either:
- Utter garbage
- Focussed too much on data-slurping, and not enough on browser development.
Sadly, neither would surprise me.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Google parent Alphabet Inc. warned that its business may be damaged by changing data privacy practices, new digital advertising polices and software bugs that leak user information. Poor dears
|
|
|
|
|
In other news, burglars report that alarms and barred windows could hurt their profits.
I mean, seriously, WTF?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
No f***
Their business is just the opposite, what a surprise that if there were more privacy their business would be damaged.
Kent Sharkey wrote: new digital advertising polices and software bugs that leak user information.
In other words... if we can't earn money with it... why should we protect it that hard?
or yet other words... taking the private data as inverted hostages "if you f*ck with our benefits / money, we will make your data public (using the excuse of a bug)"
either way... the one fvcked up is, as always, the user.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
modified 7-Feb-19 3:03am.
|
|
|
|
|
Are they trying to motivate legislators to add more laws on the subject?
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
With each release of C#, it gains more low-level capabilities. While not useful to most business application developers, these features allow for high performance code suitable for graphics processing, machine learning, and mathematical packages. Those will be nice and portable
|
|
|
|
|
That's it. InfoQ is nothing more than a bunch of techno brown-noses, slurpin' around at Microsoft's bunghole, lookin' for an easy meal.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, I resemble that remark
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
I find the coverage of C# language changes/evolution by Jonathan Allan at InfoQ to be very high-quality; perhaps your excess bile made you miss the fact that this article discusses proposed new features, in fact, extremely specialized ones. I suggest you read some of his articles on actual new facilities in specific framework/language releases.
I find his blog entries valuable: [^].
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: With each release of C#, it gains more low-level capabilities.
That's really bad. How can I then educate my colleagues to use higher-level features? They fall into primitive obsession and similar crap like List<Tuple<int, string, Tuple<...,...>, ...>> - perfectly readable code!
Oh sanctissimi Wilhelmus, Theodorus, et Fredericus!
|
|
|
|
|
@BernhardHiller Bernhard Hiller wrote: They fall into primitive obsession and similar crap like
I am not sure if you are criticising the new Tuple facilities, or not.
Care to clarify ?
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, while Tuples are a welcome addition to the language, usage such as that shown strikes me as a misapplication of a good feature, where declaring a class/struct may be more appropriate.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
I am even less sure of what this comment is about than I am of Bernhard's comment 
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
|
|
|
|
|
“Borked” caught the attention of Jeffrey Sherwood, a lexicographer at the Oxford English Dictionary, when he began working on a project to source new words. "Bork, bork, bork"
|
|
|
|
|
My understanding of bork is that it's an Internet typo, like teh or pron.
Bloody US politicians try to take credit for everything!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Security researcher Linus Henze demoed a zero-day macOS exploit impacting the Keychain password management system which can store passwords for applications, servers, and websites, as well as sensitive information related to banking accounts. "Show me the money"
Once one company has bug bounties, everyone expects them all to have them?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm shocked that ms has a bounty program.
Good job it's for vulnerabilities, and not bugs, or they'd go bust within a week.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: Once one company has bug bounties, everyone expects them all to have them?
It seems reasonable to me that companies should encourage security researchers to submit details of vulnerabilities by financially rewarding the disclosure. Apple are behind the curve on this, and leaving an unpatched security issue in their product because they are unwilling to do so puts a lie to their marketing about the security of their products.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
