Where's the snow?
It was eaten by the bears that people ride to work...
Where's the snow?
It was eaten by the bears that people ride to work...
@Polygeekery said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@Captain said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
What is this left-pad thing?
The craziest part of this is that there's a language out there being used in production which doesn't have even the simplest of string manipulation functionality and has to rely on 3rd party code from random people online. That's really scary; even PHP can do string padding...
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
I was under the impression that C# as a language was always open.
The spec was from day one, for both. The actual code implementation wasn't until recently.
So what you're saying there is, C# the actual language, was always open source. Glad you agree with me. So your point about C# being better because it wasn't open source is what, bullshit? For anyone else, I'd hesitate and give them the benefit of the doubt, but this is you, and you'd not extend the same courtesy, so them's the breaks.
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Aren't pretty much all the best and most used dev languages in the world open source?
Best: possibly. But note that C#.net was only made open source after it was already pretty damned good, not while it was being developed.
Most-used: no. VBA's no doubt on the list of most-used dev languages, it's not open source.
Aren't you getting C# and the .Net framework confused there? It's the .Net framework which has recently been open sourced, I was under the impression that C# as a language was always open.
@Sutherlands said:
If you said "write me a function that determines the length of a string", I'd tell you "String.Length". Piss off, wanker.
Excellent, you win the prize for missing the point and making yourself look like an idiot.
smxlong said if he asked you to write a function. String.length is not writing a function, it's using a built-in function of a language (probably Java or .Net from the looks of it) Multi-byte encodings cause problems when you don't know the exact encoding of a string and just assume, which is why even the string length functions built into languages get it wrong. So internally, instead of looking at the byte length of a string in memory and calculating character length by dividing it by the number of bits used per character, the whole string has to be traversed from start to end to determing the character length based on the byte patterns of each character. Negligible if you do it once, but when have you ever only needed to get the length of a string once in your code?
@Sutherlands said:
edit: And besides, if you're getting international text and are using an array-index because you think that's a "specific position" character, you'd very possibly be wrong.
This is why the suggestion of using a fixed-length encoding was brought up, because then you can use array-indexes on strings with confidence that it will work as you intend.
@aliceif said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan
More than one.
Have you ever heard of C?
Ok, I've been lucky enough not to do things in C, only C++ (which does have a string library). But hell, C is pretty darn old now. Javascript is meant to be this new shining beacon of a language that was meant to pave a way to new ways of developing server software. Of course, I jest a little, but is it too much to expect that basic string functions exist in a toy language whose main way of interacting with cookies in the bad old days was to do it with string manipulation?
@Gordonjcp said:
@Speakerphone Dude said:
@arh said:I was visiting family in Texas (all the way from Europe).
The real WTF is that at some point people in that family left Texas to move to Europe. WHY? It's like taking back a Dodge Viper to the dealership and saying: give me a Cavalier instead, this one is too awesome for me.
They probably just left Texas to get some decent food...
Or maybe just to get away from this guy http://totallylookslike.icanhascheezburger.com/2008/07/15/george-bush/
@morbiuswilters said:
You've got to be fucking joking. You people eat haggis, for Christ's sake..Hey, nothing wrong with that, it's actually really great with mushy peas and mashed potato.
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
@Medinoc said:The thing is, you can watch videos on YouTube without ever having read their terms, so they become unenforceable. The link I posted above shows a legal precedent for this. And even if the terms were enforceable, they are between YouTube and the visitor as you mentioned, so getting permission from Blakeyrat is still not required, because that's not in YouTubes terms (which do have to be agreed to before uploading videos). The only thing Blakey is miffed about is that he wasn't asked first, despite him not needing to be, and the fact that asking would not have had any affect on the outcome. It's just Blakey being Blakey, having a good moan about something which doesn't really matter and largely exists in his head.In Blakeyrat's defense, there is such thing as a difference between "permission is always granted" and "permission need not be sought".
Part of that difference is basic politeness.
It's a no-op. This whole "politeness" thing is a rule BlakeyRat made up inside his own head. Even if people are violating YouTube's terms, it doesn't mean that the uploader has to agree with YouTube's stance and that they can't turn a blind eye (since it's not their problem anyway – it's between YouTube and the visitor, unless they do agree fully with YouTube). One of the problems with rules and laws is that they're absolute: you can't have leeway without loopholes, and you can't convict anyone if a law is merely a suggestion.
I go by the basis of harm done, not legalistic obsession.
@blakeyrat said:
@ender said:That would be a pretty dumb thing to do, I agree. I didn't disable anything, so if it wasn't enabled in the first place by default...Let me guess: you disabled indexing?That would be a crotchety luddite thing to do.
Are you sure it's working on partial matches the way I'm talking about though?
As an example, lets say I didn't know what Microsoft Outlook was named fully. I start to type 'look' because that's the only part I remember. What do you think should happen? This is what I got:
@Adynathos said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
The spec was from day one, for both.
So what you're saying there is, C# the actual language, was always open source.
By that logic, every (not secret) language is open source, because if the spec was not published, no one could write programs in that language.
If there exists no open-source compiler/interpreter for the lang, it does not count as open-source.
Have you a for-instance?
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
I was under the impression that C# as a language was always open.
The spec was from day one, for both. The actual code implementation wasn't until recently.
So what you're saying there is, C# the actual language, was always open source. Glad you agree with me. So your point about C# being better because it wasn't open source is what, bullshit? For anyone else, I'd hesitate and give them the benefit of the doubt, but this is you, and you'd not extend the same courtesy, so them's the breaks.
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Aren't pretty much all the best and most used dev languages in the world open source?
Best: possibly. But note that C#.net was only made open source after it was already pretty damned good, not while it was being developed.
Most-used: no. VBA's no doubt on the list of most-used dev languages, it's not open source.
Aren't you getting C# and the .Net framework confused there? It's the .Net framework which has recently been open sourced, I was under the impression that C# as a language was always open.
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
The craziest part of this is that there's a language out there being used in production which doesn't have even the simplest of string manipulation functionality and has to rely on 3rd party code from random people online.
Yeah Node.JS is awful that way.
And Python. And Perl. And Ruby.
OH WAIT, all shitty open source crap-languages were coded by lazy slackers who didn't bother to make standard libraries for them. Maybe not to the extent to lacking string padding, but you can hardly claim Node.JS is unique here.
You're crazy, but I'm bored so I'll bite.
Aren't pretty much all the best and most used dev languages in the world open source?
@aliceif said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan
More than one.
Have you ever heard of C?
Ok, I've been lucky enough not to do things in C, only C++ (which does have a string library). But hell, C is pretty darn old now. Javascript is meant to be this new shining beacon of a language that was meant to pave a way to new ways of developing server software. Of course, I jest a little, but is it too much to expect that basic string functions exist in a toy language whose main way of interacting with cookies in the bad old days was to do it with string manipulation?
@Polygeekery said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@Captain said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
What is this left-pad thing?
The craziest part of this is that there's a language out there being used in production which doesn't have even the simplest of string manipulation functionality and has to rely on 3rd party code from random people online. That's really scary; even PHP can do string padding...
// A hack to cope with un-configurable call to wp_magic_quotes // E.G. Make the original $_POST available through a global $_REAL_POST $_REAL_GET = $_GET; $_REAL_POST = $_POST; $_REAL_COOKIE = $_COOKIE; $_REAL_REQUEST = $_REQUEST;
Oh dear god, someone get some bleach for my eyes!
@gleemonk said in Wordpress comes with DO NOT WANT built-in:
// Add magic quotes and set up $_REQUEST ( $_GET + $_POST )
Yeah, that line doesn't make sense either. $_REQUEST is not just $_GET and $_POST. See, it's this kind of shit (WordPress) that makes people think that PHP is a terrible language (ok, it can be written in a terrible way, but it can be done so nicely too)
@PJH Ah, it sounds like maybe something was different on the reinstall? I'm not sure how it creates a signature for a system, but seems likely you fell afoul of that then.
Regarding the same computer, from the same IP
It really wasn't clear from your original post that they were reporting on the same origin IP, so there's no way to tell if this was not a distributed attack.
Sure they could have debounced the emails as @anotherusername mentioned, but that's not a massive WTF really.