1,400 karma · joined October 12, 2008
Contact: reginaldo at ubercomp.com
Links: http://www.ubercomp.com/ https://github.com/ubercomp/
There's a lot of bad parenting going on in the world, and her dad looks like a pretty balanced person.
Out of curiosity: do you do (or know someone who does) this?
Do you think the functionality is worth the code to implement it?
GET /picture.jpg HTTP/1.1
Host: host.sample.com
[Other header: value]...
That could of course be solved with something like
<img src="hxxp://host.sample.com/picture.jpg" ip="10.0.0.1">
or even
<img src="hxxp://10.0.0.1/picture.jpg" host="host.sample.com">This means there's no way to cut the cord.
So it might be better to engage in some little public self-embarassment than go around telling what you're up to...
[1] http://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_keep_your_goals_to_you...
Would have been very much cooler, would it not?
DeLuna was sentenced to death and executed based only on eyewitness accounts despite a range of signs he was not a guilty man, said law professor James Liebman
Eyewitness accounts are proven to be wrong again and again. They should not be used to convict anyone. Much less to the death penalty. The brain has this amazing (if a little buggy) capacity of sometimes being completely wrong and at the same time being absolutely sure that it is right (like it happens, for instance, when you see an optical illusion).
I believe there was a time when they were useful (but even then, they were used to falsely accuse - sometimes intentionally, sometimes not). But now there's enough technology to make me think convictions should be made based only on material evidence. Eyewitness accounts should be used only to give context to the material evidence found. If there's not any, tough luck. I would have a very hard time reconciling if, for instance, being accused of rape/assault like it happened to this guy: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/27/local/la-me-accused-...
It is just crazy how many conditions they impose instead of just taking my money, then complain when people who are less patient than me just go ahead and pirate the damn thing.
I've always thought that this is because they don't have any other advertisers for that particular show. Like "this ad is not relevant but it's the only one we have so we'll show it to you anyway".
But it will grow a lot, with forecasts saying it will be about 60 to 70% by the end of 2014.
For now, mobile internet is somewhat restrict so showing some initiative in this area is good for the C&A brand, because it associates it with a feeling of status, which normally doesn't come when one is thinking about C&A. So good for them. I haven't seen the hangers in the stores yet but will check them out (and try to see the counter going up) soon.
That "hack" has the nasty characteristic of probably making everybody lose, maybe more than the $200 the guy was getting.
I imagine shipping was not free for the government, which also probably paid the credit card operator a fee. The credit card operator is losing money by paying rewards on a bogus transaction.
That actually happens sometimes. Someone used my email when registering for an online store, and now I get mail receipts for everything he buys. The thing is there's no way I can contact him. I tried contacting the store, but they didn't do anything about it either, so I just created a mail filter and got on with life.
I guess the real lesson in my case is: always validate your user's email address by sending it a confirmation link (by t he way, I think people using giant regexps to validate mail are missing the point). I see the point in letting the user log in right away (as soon as an email address and password are provided), but I think there still should be a confirmation email and the system should not send any email to unconfirmed addresses.
Is it ok if I take a shortcut to get something that I am entitled to have access to because the rules by which my access is should abide by are basically bullshit?
I tend to think it is ok. I'm also indebted to Grace Hopper [1], who came up with the gem It's easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to get permission, a behavior that I often find useful. Also, I tend to give the highest level of access to people working under my supervision so they can do their jobs without any avoidable hassle. It's important to be consistent, after all.
But (there's always a but) some content creators don't have the same pragmatic thinking I pride myself in having, and will tell you convoluted stories like "we don't sell the music/video, we sell the physical disc with the thing inside, and you can only access such thing trough the disc". And sometimes these convoluted stories do stick. Except that when you have a network as the distribution channel they don't work anymore and become plain bizarre "we sell you only the nontransferable right of watching/listening to this only up to 3 times in the next 24 hours and will not refund you if our network goes down and you're unable to watch".
So, my answer to you, and to the general question is: IMHO, you're ethically in the clear, but legally your situation might raise some concerns. Obligatory disclaimer: this is not legal advice. I would love to see what other people think about all this, though.
It's succinct at "only" 195 pages. People who are interested can use this to start and then read the Intel manuals when they need something that is not covered by the tutorial.
I think it's unbelievable that people want to learn about a subject but can't be bothered to read a book about it. This leads to flawed learning at the foundational level, and then avoidable surprises when years (yes, years...) down the road people discover some "unexpected" behavior they should have learned about at the very beginning of the learning journey.
In ye good olden days, when people came to a forum with a stupid question that could be easily solved if the person asking would just bother to read the manual, they used to get a polite RTFM...
Maybe we should start saying RAFB when stuff like that is posted.
I agree in that I also don't need a watch, much less a watch that needs a phone. But I imagine I will wear a watch-like device again in the future. Have you ever heard about the expression "the internet of things"? Well, it is going to happen, but we're not quite there yet [1]. And when it happens, I bet we're going to navigate trough it using watch-like devices at first [2]. It's more natural because the watch in one's wrist is much more accessible and therefore has a much lower latency then the phone in one's pocket.
Today, the precursor of the internet of things is the internet of smartphones. So Pebble uses a watch to navigate the internet of smartphones. When the internet of things finally comes, they'll be in a very nice position with experience and brand recognition.
[1] The signs are here though: arduino, raspberry pi... How long until we have a low power 5 dollars board that we can put anywhere? How about a 1 dollar board?
[2] then we'll use augmented reality glasses and finally we'll just implant chips and be ourselves part of this internet of things.
Kidding apart, it's nice to see Google innovating in many fronts :)
I was a happy user of a free DNS hosting service for many years, when this service was acquired by a competitor in august 2011, I was forced to move somewhere else.
While migrating my zone files I realized that I don't like Bind syntax files neither administering tens of domains through a web interface. I've started to experiment on how it should look a perfect DNS service for me. I've realized that I would love to store my configuration files in a Git repository and I would need some configuration language for templating (Lua).
This is how Luadns was born on October, 2011.
I don't know if this is an after the fact explanation, but either way it's a very good story about scratching your own itch.
By the way, they had me at I would love to store my configuration files in a Git repository. As soon as I have a use for this in a new project, I'll be their user. The examples are pretty cool too.
Because it runs in the browser. See, for instance:
or my own
I believe I could do static recompilation for programs that run on a barebones environment and do not employ self modifying code. The more general problem of finding all executable code in a blob of arbitrary binary data (which I would have to solve if I wanted to run an arbitrary program unmodified, which I do), is equivalent to the Halting Problem, so that is a no go. This means that, to have a general solution, a hybrid approach of static and dynamic recompilation would have to be employed.
For well behaved programs, code generation on the fly does not pose a significant overhead (that's what the profiler tells, if I recall correctly), so I'm not sure the hybrid approach is worth its weight in complexity.
Besides, I don't know if I'd be able to run a full OS, though, because those need interrupts (in my case, currently there's a timer tick and the UART interrupt when input is entered through the keyboard), and I haven't thought about handling that.