↑ ↓
 

Podcast for 11 May 2015

Started by MrBogosity, May 10, 2015, 06:00:01 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1
User actions
May 10, 2015, 06:00:01 PM
[mp3]http://podcast.bogosity.tv/mp3s/BogosityPodcast-2015-05-11.mp3[/mp3]


Co-Host: Tim Dyson

News of the Bogus:
45:10 - Biggest Bogon Emitter: Richard Fowler (nominated by Gabriel Lee DiMatteo) https://www.facebook.com/TheKellyFile/videos/1654857174729141/

52:07 - Idiot Extraordinaire: Boeing http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/nasty-boeing-dreamliner-bug-could-shut-down-your-plane-in-mid-air/
This Week's Quote: "It is insufficient to protect ourselves with laws; we need to protect ourselves with mathematics. Encryption is too important to be left solely to governments." —Bruce Schneier
May 10, 2015, 08:35:16 PM #1
As a student about to get his Master's (not Master's of Science) of Software Engineering I'd like to share this graph:


Lawsuits ladies and gentlemen.
Working every day to expose the terrible price we pay for government.
May 10, 2015, 08:44:29 PM #2
Also it's weird why they'd use signed integers for time.  Speaking for myself I've gotten into the habit of using unsigned integers in my for loops*. 




*Though now that I think about should use them if I was starting from a positive number and iterating at a rate greater than one.
Working every day to expose the terrible price we pay for government.
May 10, 2015, 08:51:17 PM #3
In regards to the BBE, if you're the kind of person that honestly believes that prisons serve a legitimate purpose in a free society, then those Muslims deserve to be put in jail for at least 20 years and not let out until they realize...

...IT IS NOT OKAY TO KILL SOMEONE BECAUSE THEY OFFEND YOU!!!!
Working every day to expose the terrible price we pay for government.
May 10, 2015, 10:48:50 PM #4 Last Edit: May 10, 2015, 10:51:31 PM by Ibrahim90
yeah, this will require explaining:

The objection to drawing Muhammad in the manner described is the same as any objection a devount Christian would have towards drawing an offensive picture of Christ: as Shane's pointed out, the difference is that Muslim's are still at a stage similar to Christianity a few centuries ago. Added to that, non-offensive portraits in Sunni Islam are also a no-no, due to the fear of veneration (as is done with christian Icons). No such objectio exists among the Shi'ites, and protraits of the prophet and of Ali are all over the place in Iran to this day. Prior to the 18th century, it was even common among sunnis--though usually for illustrative purposes (for example in biographical works describing his life).

Remember that Islam arose at a time when Icon veneration was a topic of serious controversy in Christianity: it was bound to influence Islam's development. (though curiously, the oldest accounts of Muhammad's capture of Makkah make it clear that he ordered that Icons of the Virgin Mary be spared destruction).

as to the name: actually, while very common today, before Islam it was quite a rare name, as was a variant of it, Ahmad: there are IIRC just three or four historical characters from that region with the name (the prophet included), compared to several named 'Amr, 'Umar, hishaam, and so on.

People name their children after him as a way of honoring his memory, much like people in the US will name a kid after a former president or founding father (or Jesus in Latin America). It's even common to change your name to Muhammad, or add it to your given name. My Grandfather did so when he became an Imam for example.
Meh
May 11, 2015, 06:44:05 AM #5
Quote from: Dallas Wildman on May 10, 2015, 08:44:29 PM
Also it's weird why they'd use signed integers for time.

I thought that was weird, too; but an unsigned int would still have reset in less than a year and a half.

They haven't said anything about the technical details of the bug, let alone the fix, but assuming they have a good reason for using a signed integers, a 64-bit signed int would give them the next 3 billion years. That would seem to do the trick!

QuoteSpeaking for myself I've gotten into the habit of using unsigned integers in my for loops*.

You have to be careful, though, especially if you're sharing code with others. There was a buffer overflow awhile back that shouldn't have happened. A programmer made a function that received an unsigned int, and to prevent an overflow he just checked to see if the value was less than 1000. But whoever wrote the procedure that called this function passed a signed int, and a hacker could put in a negative number so the check would have worked (since it would indeed be less than 1000) while still overflowing the buffer.
May 11, 2015, 08:37:07 AM #6
Quote from: MrBogosity on May 11, 2015, 06:44:05 AM
I thought that was weird, too; but an unsigned int would still have reset in less than a year and a half.

They haven't said anything about the technical details of the bug, let alone the fix, but assuming they have a good reason for using a signed integers, a 64-bit signed int would give them the next 3 billion years. That would seem to do the trick!

My calculation says you're off by two orders of magnitude.  A 64-bit signed int allows you to count up to the number of seconds in about 300 billion years.  I recalled that it had been pointed out that a 64-bit int allows for more seconds than the expected lifespan of the universe, so 3 billion years couldn't be right.

Quote from: MrBogosity on May 11, 2015, 06:44:05 AM
You have to be careful, though, especially if you're sharing code with others. There was a buffer overflow awhile back that shouldn't have happened. A programmer made a function that received an unsigned int, and to prevent an overflow he just checked to see if the value was less than 1000. But whoever wrote the procedure that called this function passed a signed int, and a hacker could put in a negative number so the check would have worked (since it would indeed be less than 1000) while still overflowing the buffer.

I'm pretty shre that also required the type checking to be artificially relaxed.  Signed and unsigned ints are not automatically castable like that.

Another thing you have to be careful about it trying to deal with really old (as in, 30+ years) C code.  Before ANSI C, the length of the different ints was entirely based on the hardware it was being compiled for, so a short int, for instance, could be 8, 9, 12, 16, 18, 31, 32, or 36 bits long.
May 11, 2015, 10:48:57 AM #7
Quote from: evensgrey on May 11, 2015, 08:37:07 AM
My calculation says you're off by two orders of magnitude.

No, these were hundredths of a second, remember.
May 11, 2015, 03:18:35 PM #8
Dear Richard Fowler

Fuck you and your victim blaming ass.

Sincerely.

Yours truly.

PS:  Send this message to the SJWs and leftists crying "islamophobes" too.
"When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole world—'No. You move.'"
-Captain America, Amazing Spider-Man 537
User actions
Print
Go Up Pages1