Morg

(just to be clear, I have no clue wether HIV was assisted by some military programmes, but I can safely say such "mistakes" have been made in the past by the same army, like when they used to test nukes for example)

That means I just used the HIV word to connect to the concept of bio weapon testing gone wrong - weapon testing gone wrong.

The reason why is that one of the most popular theories on HIV is that the US military had a part in its development.

I don't know and I don't care, those people have such a bad karma even AIDS wouldn't make much difference - just read the disclaimer next time ;)

Indeed it would affect everyone just as much - still, I will spread MySQL knowledge (not hate) whether or not there is a reason for it.

And I'll say it time and time again, If you think MySQL does not have major issues as a DBMS, you should not make database-related decisions as your knowledge is too limited to make a sensible decision.

Just like windows.

The real Windows experts can both tell you how much it's made of fail and fix your issues, the others are charlatans.

First, I don't believe I need real security, that protects me from most of the worries you cited.

I know it's not safe, and I don't care.

It's like mail or gmail or anything, I know someone has access to my data, and I don't care because it's unavoidable/ not an issue.

You have to trust, but actively try to prove wrong, that weeds out most of the crappy software, like MySQL, MSSQL (lolwut 32 trigger chain?lets cut it here silently) or others.

You have to base your decision on stuff that really works rather than the latest fad, so fck ruby and all that crap, write in C, that's safe, proof is even the chinese and the military have their OS written in C.

Proprietary/closed source, you remain paranoid, test it yourself for what you can think, never think it cannot be the cause.

Hardware you cannot trust, have to learn where the limitations are, remain paranoid as well, question the status quo (is ECC really doing its job or am I just trusting my enterprise data to magic).

Poor decisions that you realize later ? everyone makes mistakes, who cares ?

IMO the main thing is, don't trust anyone to do it right, especially in IT, sometimes you come to trust a specific group, like linux kernel or pgsql because they're proven right time and again - and imo you have to leave it there, I don't want to write an OS at the moment.

Most poor security decisions are related to trivial things like: -using windows -not updating your OS / kernel / tart -using testing tech, like the latest release of ruby, node.js, mongolianDB, etc. -not researching tech before using it (i.e. google mysql ACID, you'll read a few of my posts from when I was pissed off to discover it was in fact just a toy db with half-implemented features) -not actively trying to hack/destroy your own creation -not spending a few K on a honeypot session -not actually knowing anything about hacking -not reading about standard hacking tactics, like SQLi for nubs, XSS, MitM HTTPS, tomato launchers and many more

etc. I'm no security pro and I wouldn't pretend being one before winning several honeypots.

Exactly, take the problem / solution, reduce it to 5 words tops and it'll make a standard short intro that people think is cool these days.

From what I can gather it's about a platform to make readable content more accessible, more dynamic, in an attempt to provide a nice reading/learning experience much like wikipedia clicking for half an hour, but on more serious topics and in a friendlier fashion that allows you to easily go back to the article/topic you were reading one thought step before.

That's still too long, but summarizing the idea made it way more appealing to me so it might be a direction.

Annoying UI really . I hate the open close thingies, can't quite see the diff between one and the next inside, the I is either too big or ugly, and the fat grey bar in the bottom is ugly as well, prolly needs some rounding or whatever.

I know pale UI's are all the rage but you might want to consider a bit more color still - not very good at UIs myself it just felt really really grey.

Well maybe you should check that again.

Your approach sounds like you should have stored procs instead. Using prepared statements or variable binding to fight SQL injections is not the best idea, although its widespread.

In most cases where you want a prepared statement, you'd be better off using a stored proc, as you'll skip the expensive optimization every single time.

MySQL is not even a real RDBMS (no ACID, no triggers, fail APIs, etc.), anyone using it should switch to PostgreSQL yesterday unless their data really doesn't matter.

SQL injections are 100% avoided by user input control in the application, and the simplest way is to escape all escape characters, that may require reading a bit of doc but w/e.

I trust noone. except maybe the pgsql guys. However, imho on the topic of SQL injection, either escaping the escape characters is enough or you should change DBMSs / APIs right away.

But really, security without reading sources is blind more or less calculated risk, not security.

Alright, you want details ? During the testing of nuclear weapons, the US had no problem testing the secondary effects of nukes through radiation far beyond the blast zone, by putting boats with soldiers to watch the thing.

It was widely known at that time that radiation was bad for you mkay, and that nuclear fission bombs were nuclear fission bombs, i.e. accelerated nuclear degradation bombs and drained all their explosive power from radiations, that kill mkay.

In the past, biological, chemical, explosive weapons were tested on rocks, plants, prisoners, personnel, unsuspecting local populations, etc. by the nazi regime, the US govt, the USSR and France - that are widely confirmed.

I wouldn't put it past THOSE people to do such a thing, would you ?

So really, if you want to say it's IMPOSSIBLE or UNLIKELY that they would've done that too, without knowing the consequences - I suppose you must be right.

Exactly. OSX had very bad security before the first big news on virus's, and it won't have good security before another thousand big news on virus's, trojans and backdoors.

As usual, when you trust a piece of code without reading the source, the fail will be strong.

This is like java's GUID that are random but not unique, etc. you can't guess it from the function name or description, you need to know the internal process to know how it's going to explode and when.

HIV (just to be clear, I have no clue wether HIV was assisted by some military programmes, but I can safely say such "mistakes" have been made in the past by the same army, like when they used to test nukes for example)

Luckily this time it's a simple pc virus we can easily disassemble and counter - I think cyber war's still miles better than the alternatives.

Yet everyone uses much slower RAM in servers and will likely continue to do so, all the while caches swell, etc.

Optimizing memory usage is almost irrelevant today, until it starts being a bandwidth problem, and that's still solvable but only through complex scaling strategies that also cost several engineer-years.

As I said above, that's a better implementation of the same solution which is, pick two states and alternate by using the knowledge that if the previous is odd the next is even.

In essence your solution and the strcmp one follow the same logic, except yours is limited to two states as it is - but indeed the best n-state solution uses an array too.

What you posted here is a somewhat optimized implementation of the right solution, which is slightly better, like the boolean one (indeed you're using one bit that you flip ...).

But the BIG difference between the mod family of solutions and ours is that mod is over ten times slower because it does not correctly use the problem data.

I'm not the best coder there is, but I know it is much simpler to base yourself on something you already know (the state of the previous row) rather than doing additional computing because an analytical approach says alternating two colors is like having a color for even rows and one for odds.

By the way. your code is evil, if you're going to implement two-state logic, you're expected to use a boolean, and it will run faster with an if(b){str1}else{str2} than with an array that costs additional processing because of its nature (I'm talking straight out of my ass btw, but I still know it's inevitable that an array of two strings requires more bits and ops than two strings).

Also, the point of using an array for such an exercise would be to support n-state logic, yet your fake-boolean int approach makes it doubtful ;)

You are repeating a point of view you do not understand.

You don't know WHY people started saying that, WHEN they started and WHO started.

It was started by old people a while ago who told even older people that for the simple stuff they were writing for DESKTOP computers, it didn't matter anymore.

Indeed, if you have a 486dx4 and all you want to do is word processing, it didn't matter much wether it was optimized or microsoft word as the thing was way too powerful for that kind of stuff already.

Today, battery life is a concern, virtualization is a reality, scalability is a CORE issue, there are low power states etc.

Today, making your application 100 times more efficient gives you 10x more battery life,100x lower cloud hosting costs, 100x better scalability, etc.

Think that's unlikely ? You've been stacking inefficient blocks for a lifetime, sometimes with inefficiencies multiplying, where do you think you are today ?

Simple example, from a pgsql>jdbc>jboss>j2ee>hibernate>java report factory to a dumb php script that did simple SQL, you already have factors above 20 in favor of the simple solution.

That's before you make a better data model or even try using a fast language or a more suiting data store depending on your needs.

Besides, your argument is nonsense, the simplest most correct way IS the most efficient, that's the power of programming, there is absolutely NO compromise between reliability and efficiency in terms of code.

Readability is over rated, as long as you don't code crap, any COMPETENT coder will be able to read and understand fast enough, even without comments.

Do you work on overweight UIs that drain phone batteries or cloud-hosted applications or anything that needs scaling ?

I love fairy tail Indeed you can do much better, flipping boolean + cmp if you only need two states, and integer + array if you need three or more - main thing is, even the "stupid" string comparison is much cheaper than a modulus, and it's a very logical basic approach that says " if the previous row was odd, this one must be even ".

My idea with that is that it's extremely important to reach that conclusion, as it matches the problem perfectly and thus is much more efficient than our (often natural) standard approach of mod(x,2).

When you've reached that step, you can further improve by using a boolean instead of a short string, but that steps clearly into optimization, as it's not "formulating the problem correctly" but "finding a better way to implement the same solution".

There is major cost in not formulating the problem correctly (even odd is an approach to alternating colors, not the problem itself), and mod for table rows is a prime example of that.

Indeed, I should drop the agression. However, the subject is not optimization but coding correctly in the first place.

And the anti-optimization argument would be correct if: -typing represented more than 1% of dev work -code was never reused -code was never massively used -code had a short lifespan

So let me help you see clearly: -I'm not a typist -Every bad code tutorial out there creates millions of code bits that contain the N times slower version, with an aggregate impact that actually matters -Any 10% opt mistake in a codebase like iptables would cause more carbon than you can imagine -Fortran is still in use because it's the fastest language there is with the best math libraries.

Those seem to be eternal so far, and C seems to remain the only other relevant language throughout the short history of coding.

Sure, there are much more problematic cases than the dumb even odd example, but I picked that one because many would recognize it.

Yes, sometimes the compiler can compensate bad decisions from the programmer, the jvm can collect your garbage etc. - none of these will save you from stupid data models and idiotic objects.

I did write it like that yes.

And it would still be faster than a mod, too, even though one byte might be better for registry usage, it won't affect cycles that much iirc.

If said coworkers are actually trying to improve and can take the advice peacefully, I will deliver it peacefully.

The others I will be pleased not to work with.

I suppose you are referring to the very particular case of the right shift, but as much as that's easily predictable, it's a corner case.

Who knows maybe the trend will be 3 colors instead of two. Or maybe it'll be another instruction that's wrongly abused. Or another compiler that actually sucks, like most JS interpreters.

The idea really is to use the simplest logical approach to the problem rather than the wrong one.

In the very well known case of the alt row table, it looks to me like we're alternating odd and even, why not just code that to start with, before any optimization ?

For people using mysql, that kind of query really isn't such bad SQL at all.

Indeed it should never be spelled wrong, as it means in itself in latin, my bad really.

Alt rows are a simple concept, the first row is odd, the next is even, etc.

A good step forward is an if/then/else or a switch or an unrolled loop - a huge step forward in terms of performance too, as a mod takes 63 cycles and a cmp takes almost nothing.

an example could be

rowClass='even'; loop if(rowClass=='odd'){ rowClass='even'; }else{ rowClass='odd'; } endloop

IT DOES NOT COST MORE TIME TO CODE CORRECTLY

Some approaches are NOT acceptable, it's not about optimizing prematurely, it's about coding obvious crap.

While you may be used to the usual "code crap, fix later" and "waste cycles, there are too many of it" , it doesn't mean you're right.

Everyone says it but you're still running on C (linux, unix), you're still going nuts over scaling issues (lol nosql for everyone) and you're still paying your amazon cloud bill.

Someone should add basic numbers like ns count for 63 cycles modulo and that type of stuff - That'll help bad devs realize why putting another useless cmp inside a loop is dumb, and why alt rows in a table should NEVER be implemented by use of a modulo, for example.

Yes I know that's not latency per se but in the end it is too.

Indeed the title made the content look shitty.

Workflow engine means an engine to drive workflows - at least for me.

This thing is meh, no reason to use it over existing C tools, I wonder why someone rererererereinvented the (not actually round) wheel.

I think there's a typo in the price, they meant to sell it for 29 bucks and they put 329 instead.

It IS going to burn when you open your eyes.

Do you really think it makes sense to give voting rights to people who don't understand the issues, don't care and don't have a clue on how to fix them ?

That importance coefficient used to exist but it was mostly a measure of social influence rather than something that made sense.

I personally vote for dictatorship, with me as benevolent dictator ("Hold on, I'll just get my rape shoes") of doom.

I have no clue as to how life was before books.

I can tell you I have incredibly good and fresh memory but it's much worse when it comes to web-accessible stuff, like what's PHP's function for this or that, while at the same time I can recall conversations from south park episodes I haven't seen in years.

I have googled the same function at least a dozen times while at the same time I could recall every detail of the Silmarillion after having read it only once (that was a while ago and I had much better memory but still).

It is highly likely that accessibility lowers the ability to retain knowledge in its raw form, as increasingly the brain relies on pointers to base a google search on instead of keeping track of the whole thing.

Just to clarify my cryptic statement: We're all incredibly less intelligent than we could have been.

Trying to supplement the brain with technology while we haven't even started trying to develop our intelligence, is a stupid idea imho.