eldondev

Certainly not an advertising apologist, but sometimes advertising attempts to provide information to alter consumer behavior in a way that is more optimal for the consumer and the advertisng vendor than it is pessimal for the original vendor. From a mpg(society) perspective, some urban commuter might do far better in a Prius than in, say, a Suburban. This might be the result of advertising and also a net gain for society. Also, sometimes really good things get underwritten NPR, Podcasts, etc (which might be like advertising).

But if you insert a random branch instruction into the object code of a working program, the results are somewhat different.

Maybe, maybe not. I've observed lots of dead code in my time developing, where inserting random instructions would have no impact whatsoever. Inserting random instructions into a give program may have negative side effects, it may not. But (without having read your reference, though I might, or the linked article here), most of the source and object code that exists is highly specified and functionally dense. These are the ways we code when we want something very optimized and not broadly adaptive. Essentially you could say that almost all of the code we are writing is rain man style code. Good at some few sets of things in specific conditions. I think it is possible that there will exist (although perhaps not written in the same way) code where less of the genome is lethal, and there is more "wiggle room" for code to expand and change as a system. The stillborn offspring we might encounter if todays systems were "genetically evolved" are the equivalent of disseminated haploid genetic material. I think the conditions for conception (if you'll ride with me on my beaten metaphor) are not so far off as you may think, even if they are very different in terms of compilation/process execution/parallelism. While much of the code we write still mirrors the serial logic we often apply in the sciences, it is neither a foregone conclusion that software will continue exclusively in that way, nor a lack of capabilities of modern infrastructure to achieve parallelism comparable to some biological systems.

Actually, a lot of times I think IC's have the fullest story. If you are a backend dev at a smallish company, you probably know how the stuff works. Also, warning people against "waking up to a bad day" is spoken as someone who really values their place as a cog in a machine. If your co-workers are not being frank with you, in my opinion that company is probably not a really healthy environment, and best to move to greener pastures. I think HN is about frank talk, and let the PR people send canned releases to ars.

You could call Inter Library Loans a version of this, but it's free. If my library doesn't have a piece of media, it is very possible that I could get that piece of media from another library across the country. I might pay postage, but depending on the library, it might still be free. Like the non-brit who has not paid the licensing fee, I paid no taxes to the other library, but in this case I can still take advantage of that resource. This sort-of already happens with BBC and US Public Broadcasting, but I don't think BBC probably licenses anything back from WABE here.

I'm not sure this is true. I see plenty of products that have 1k+ rollouts more frequently. Maybe some businesses aren't sophisticated enough to do that, but those are the large, slow businesses of the herd that will get picked off by faster movers. That's why healthcare, defense & education are popular industries to enter right now, because many of the entrenched players can't keep up with the game. There is _no_ intrinsic reason that b2b should be different from b2c. I bet the old guard's lobbyists and capital can only last for so long.

Well, I hate the opaque bits of both those, but that doesn't mean an upgradable board can't be designed around the specs they implement, and those chips are just the commodities that populate them. Write your code for ARM, make a good pin-compatible interface that can allow for replacement with other components if necessary.

Is designing 10-year products really a thing any more? I can't think of any device that I use practically that is that old. I think the only places that you will want 10-year products anymore are space, implant, and undersea/underground/tracking applications. I'm not saying it is a good thing, as it leads to this "disposable tech" mindset, but it seems like that may be the reality of it. OTOH +1 wandboard and iMX in general. I wish the Novena were a little less expensive, but I can't blame bunnie for wanting to err on the side of making quality hackable goods.

< Iceland_jack> xQuasar: We are cooperating with you, you're just not aware that your goal is learning Haskell Hilarious with 1984 undertones. I love it!

Is this supposed to be serious, because we want javascript to be better, or sarcastic, because most people DO live behind locks that are broken and can be bypassed trivially with relatively unsophisticated tools? Everybody break out your bobby pins!

I'm sorry but a year+ at those companies proves you've provided at least something of worth to them. Not sure about that. I think there are lots of "well known companies" where a good bluffer can relabel themselves and bounce around enough that nobody realizes they haven't got anything to offer.

We wax poetic about DRY yet you're gonna ask me to repeat myself? Some people can wax poetic pretty effectively without being effective at implementation. I've written a 1 line fizzbuzz python generator in less than 2 minutes. If one is too arrogant/uncompromising to take the two minutes to satisfy this (if asked), or unable to turn it into something interesting ("This is done with generators. I might never do it this way in practice, but the question you asked me was so mind-numbingly boring I had to do it this way to entertain myself"), then one probably won't work that well on an effective team.

I think this is pretty perceptive. I wish that there were more active development for the portage tree community, but the truth is, there is just so much _there_, and as I see it, gentoo hasn't been commodified by an enterprise (canonical, red hat, etc), which is both a blessing and a curse. Also, I think nobody really runs "stable" gentoo, because stable things on single systems are naive. This is part of the reason for the explosion of distributed systems (cassandra, hadoop, hbase, etc). I think most people who run gentoo (correctly) don't actually rely on one single system being stable.

Also, feel free to contact me directly freeside@<mynick>.com

Haha, as if we didn't get enough folks coming around wanting to hack the gibson! But really, the challenges around retaking the hacker term to mean tinkerer/maker/understander-or-things is enough without us getting cease & desist/DMCA/strike letters.

Freeside ATLien here, sorry you missed us! If you come back through town, we have open houses every Tuesday evening.

Can you be specific about the other security methodologies docker rolls in? Everywhere I read, people say "LXC != VM-level security," specifically, I hear that root on the container means root on the host. These suse guys at least say "If you want to be secure, kvm is still your answer." : http://unixcal.com/s/a4mn . Thoughts?

Another data point: in a household of 2, we may consume 2-3 liters on peak days, probably an average of 1 a day during warm periods in the year. His math is probably right, but his assumptions don't seem to be backed by anything but anecdote! Also, saving bottles is a footnote, but I think environmental benefit adds up quickly when you compare the cost of transporting lots of bottles from the bottler to the store to your house to the recycling center. Wish he had some hard real-world usage data available.

Worth mentioning that you require fluency in either Norwegian or Swedish if (http://atbrox.com/jobs/#post-2162) is what you're advertising. Is it?

I think this is for engagements where they may not want to stop/reboot the virtual machine. This tool claims to patch memory directly, so a running VM would be the target. Perhaps the vm they want to connect to has some existing connections of some sort that they don't want to break, alerting that would happen if it were restarted, or unlocked keys in memory (think ssh agents). One of the first thing virt-edit says is "You must not use virt-edit on live virtual machines."

>"The web" doesn't have to be a browser anymore. It can be any app.

I think HTTP and "the web" are pretty distinct. The reason that "any app" is mostly not "the web" is that it doesn't really let you go to just _any_ web page. The web is what it is because I can follow a link to anywhere. If the app does support this, then it is a branded browser on top of being a native app, and it competes with firefox.

>if Firefox screws up or doesn't implement a feature the right way or whatever, your app isn't beholden to Firefox to fix their stuff in a future release.

But if the native ecosystem (IOS, android) screws something up, you are beholden to them, and this happens plenty. I think firefox os is going to try to solve this problems with OS fragmentation more than anything. Since android has some closed core components, and IOS is mostly closed, this is what they are trying to free similarly to what they did with IE. I am optimistic about it.

So I see from your profile that you're an admitted contrarian, but I'll bite your troll-bait. I think if only 18-20 people have the skill, then it does not qualify as a "base or core" skill. The fact that a skill is necessary to complete a task does not, to me, imply that it is also "of central importance". Feel free to continue trolling on the matter by yourself.

Well, the fact that he says "only 18 to 20 people in the [U.S.] who have those fundamental skills" seems bizarre. If only 18-20 people have them, they're not fundamental, they're exceptional. On the other hand, he's pretty vague about those skills specifically. I know a fair number (>> 20, and I'm a recluse) of people who I could imagine implementing some DPI, and knowing "what looks like normal internet traffic" isn't that hard. On the other hand, there aren't that many people doing automated analysis of targeted malware or 0day, in that context his numbers make more sense (but I would stil call them low). It all comes down to tradeoffs and skill levels. You can always set a bar of "having a set of skills" where the skill level is so high that only 20 people have them. But, most companies aren't doing the bare minimum, and security professionals are wiley so it might seem to some like there are only 20 people, because they're all quietly employed or enjoyably semi-employed.

"it has often been misapplied to other fields where the same controls are not hard to apply"

Do you mean "are hard to apply" ?

I had trouble hitting this, Google doc cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Q7G5bd4...