pdonis

41 ms·

661.
by pdonis 2y ago
I love this comment: "So at least it’s nice that this rogue code was compiled with stack buffer overflow protection. Can’t be too careful."
662.
by pdonis 2y ago
> you don't just need a decent government ID; it needs to be from the state you're purchasing the Sudafed from The FDA rule on this [1] doesn't appear to be quite that strict: it says the ID can be "a photo identifi
663.
by pdonis 2y ago
> accident created expenses seem like one of those things where the state should cover the personal injury costs As far as an individual who gets injured by someone else is concerned, "the state" is just another form of insur
664.
by pdonis 2y ago
> if your insurance policy does not cover the full amount you can be on the hook. If "your" means the person who got hit, it's not their insurance that's on the hook, it's the insurance of the person who hit th
665.
by pdonis 2y ago
No, the at fault driver and/or their insurance would be responsible for paying their medical costs. The person who was hit doesn't pay their medical bills and then ask the insurance company for reimbursement. They file a claim wit
666.
by pdonis 2y ago
> I thought gravity was basically the curvature of spacetime. Classically, it is. But most physicists believe that there is a quantum theory of gravity that underlies the classical theory, and that that quantum theory will include, at
667.
by pdonis 2y ago
> a judge still needs to issue a warrant for the police to actually go and look at the file Only in the future. Maher's conviction, based on the warrantless search, still stands because the court found that the "good faith ex
668.
by pdonis 2y ago
> I think you are very confused about what sudo and being in the sudoers group does? I think you are very confused about what a Linux user actually has to do--and not do. > create a second unprivileged account and log into that ins
669.
by pdonis 2y ago
Trojaning your VSCode means trojaning the compiler that makes executables for you so what gets compiled is not just the source code you put in. And these are executables you might end up shipping somewhere. Is it really so hard to see why d
670.
by pdonis 2y ago
> that doesn't mean everything they disagree on is their values. I never made any such claim. > the fact that users and Microsoft differ on what constitutes a security boundary I never made that claim either. > MS obvious
671.
by pdonis 2y ago
> this is not a value system disagreement. Yes, it is. The issue is not that people don't understand how MS defines what is and is not a security boundary. The issue is that MS's definition is for the benefit of MS, not fo
672.
by pdonis 2y ago
> Can't you just install it at the user level? Sure, if you want your ordinary non-admin user to have write access to the executables, which makes it a lot easier for some malicious piece of software to hack them since it no longe
673.
by pdonis 2y ago
> it's usually enough to install it outside of Program Files Meaning, in a user's home directory somewhere? That's even worse, because now that user has write access to the executables. Which makes it even easier for som
674.
by pdonis 2y ago
> this is the default way Linux works (not entirely the same but similar enough) with sudo Kinda sorta. Here "not entirely the same but similar enough" means "doing the one major thing that Linux does not force you to do
675.
by pdonis 2y ago
> If you want a security boundary, don't create a user in the Administrators group. Which makes no sense. The fact that a user is in the Administrators group does not mean every single action they take should automatically have ro
676.
by pdonis 2y ago
> I’ll take the engineer who studied diligently with an aim to learn the material over the one who was just in it for the credential. The former engineer will learn on the job just as well. The latter one won't learn well in eithe
677.
by pdonis 2y ago
> What I care about is whether the engineer I’m working with fifteen years and four employers later actually learned the fundamentals. For professional engineers, at least, the degree is not what tells you whether they have learned the
678.
by pdonis 2y ago
> get more value If actually learning is valuable to them, independent of whether it will actually help them with prospective employers, then yes. But I don't think we can assume that all students value that.
679.
by pdonis 2y ago
> the signaling value of college degrees as indicating knowledge I'm not sure knowledge is what a college degree signals to prospective employers. The alternative hypothesis, which AFAIK has a fair bit of support, is that it signa
680.
by pdonis 2y ago
> what is with this modern trend of trying to pretend the filesystem does not exist. My cynical read is that the filesystem is user freedom, and the walled gardens don't want user freedom.
681.
by pdonis 2y ago
> GP is correct that the argument contains an informal fallacy The GP didn't say that. As for which informal fallacy the GGP's argument contained, I would say it was more like a false dilemma. And the GGP did say "almost
682.
by pdonis 2y ago
Huh? A tautology is a statement that is automatically true by the laws of logic.
683.
by pdonis 2y ago
For extra fun, the original Mac OS used CR by itself to mean newline.
684.
by pdonis 2y ago
You're welcome! :-)
685.
by pdonis 2y ago
> We did just fine associating with people of different political perspectives and discussing politics with them all the way up through 2008 at least, without the violence. No, we didn't. Look up what happened in the 1960s. And ev
686.
by pdonis 2y ago
> The belief that politics are "abstract" Is obviously daft in a country where, by the person's own admission, people get killed for their political views.
687.
by pdonis 2y ago
> non-relativistic field equations of the Standard Model If you're using the non-relativistic approximation, most of the Standard Model is irrelevant since you're limited to interaction energies much less than the rest mass o
688.
by pdonis 2y ago
> Shouldn't there be an equation in "Schroedinger form" with some relativistic Hamiltonian? Writing it this way goes against the basic idea of QFT, which is that, in a relativistic context, quantum systems can no longer
689.
by pdonis 2y ago
> This doesn't answer my question at all. I wasn't trying to answer your question. I was pointing out that your question presupposes that the majority has the power to enforce its will on the minority. It doesn't even co
690.
by pdonis 2y ago
Peter Thiel made a similar argument about monopolies years ago. As I pointed out then [1], the argument only shows that monopoly is good for the monopolist; it doesn't actually show that monopolies are good for society as a whole. [1]

More ›