
They carefully avoided the word "water", at least as El Reg reports the new.
All they say is that "a sustained flow" rounded stones corners.
Could have been another solvent; every river is not water in our Universe.
375 publicly visible posts • joined 2 Jun 2011
No no no it will happen like this :
a big ship assembled on Earth orbit, and an *instant* travel to the Red planet; using quantum motor the Nasa is working on. No worries about radiations as it moves in old fashioned 3D space. The weird part is that the travel would be virtually non existent for the ship and its crew while still be perceived as a few month long from Earth's perspective.
Could happen in no more than a 100 year.
Now where's the tin foil icon when you need it? Ho well "Windows User" will do just fine.
Of course they do, for at least four reasons :
- Plenty of these bugs are really features requested and paid for by "security" agencies (NSA,...)
- MS don't give a fuck about end user's system security, but rather their generous sponsors (NSA...) interests
- Developing fixes cost money and reduce the functionalities requested by generous sponsors
- Publicly revealing these bugs make them exploitable by competing sponsors whose interest may diverge from those of the 51th state of America (by order of creation, but 1st by importance)
"I mean, if everyone was paid exactly what they were worth to the business, how would it ever turn a profit?"
It would because the (Top) Management would be paid (much) less than the production line.
And when you see where the profit is going after investment, one wonder if it's really a good thing *making profit*.... or to rephrase it *who* makes profits
Given the amount of efforts your spend defending Lotus Notes,
you appear like one of those Notes consultants : Irrational and impossible to technically speak with.
I know becauase I used to work with them.
The only peoples i've ever seen defending Notes weren't its users but its (interested) representatives.
GEM - Graphic Environment Manager
Copyright Digital Research - 1985
(For Atari ST systems)
At that time, Pc's were in text mode only and Apple II was sold with a similar graphic OS on a much cheaper hardware. Guess what, the Apple machine was the more expensive yet the most underpowered (arguably with Pc's).
- Heuristic detection is not based on language pattern but on behavior.
- For any language, there's always a lot of ways to compile the code to native instructions. That's why there's different compilers out there and not just Microft Visual C++. They all produce different "signature" for a given code.
More likely than making their own language, they did their own compiler and coded the thing in C, using some libraries (they could have wrote them) that provided object orientation for C.
It make sense because using a close to hardware language gives you a closer representation of the native code you will get, thus allowing you to shape it at will, and make it harder to read.
You all think much too abstract.