rmserror
rmserror on Hacker News
Posted by
rmserror on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @10:28PM
from the nature.com dept.
Except he's enabled WEP because it's "more convenient" for him. It's still a strong signal that he doesn't want outsiders on the network.
A better door analogy is replacing the deadbolt with a slightly crappier one that unlocks whenever you're in bluetooth range (for "convenience"). Just because the system is "easily broken into" doesn't mean that you're not "breaking and entering" when you break the security and enter the house.
The number of shares in an option grant is not necessarily the number of shares in a stock grant. You're assuming the choice is "5,000 options [for a single share]" or "5,000 shares." That's ridiculous. Clearly the shares are worth strictly more. But that's (typically) not the comparison.
A capacitor meter to test capacitors that are soldered onto an PCB?
That's, uh, not a checkmate. Kxb1
This is crap.
1e: this is undefined behavior (-Wsequence-point) x can be literally anything.
3. a typical mistake that the compiler both warns about and that anyone who has taken a course on C should be able to immediately recognize
bonus 1. void main(int)???
a complexity theory error: "Just as you can reduce all NP hard problems to 3-SAT..."
you can reduce all NP problems to 3-SAT because 3-SAT is NP complete. you cannot reduce all NP hard problems to 3-SAT. for example, all problems in NP reduce to SUCCINCT-SAT, an NEXP-complete (and therefore NP-hard) set. good luck reducing SUCCINCT-SAT to 3-SAT (despite how little progress in separation of classes we've made, the time hierarchy theorem still indicates this is impossible)
I don't understand why there is so much xenophobia about this exploit. A government backdoor would be far more capable and sophisticated than this. Occam's razor applies here: an suid debug binary was left in the production image by accident.
A discovered backdoor is a vulnerability. You fix the vulnerability.
It's not remotely accessible and really seems more like a debug tool.
Your tinfoil hat might be defective.
What is this an argument for? Sure, this argues against a literal interpretation of the truth of the Bible, as somebody has lived more than 120 years.
If I start another religious cult and claim that humans won't live for more than 130 years, am I suddenly more valid?
What exactly is your point here?