|
If it's hiring them, they're not hackers; they're employees.
Mind, I suppose "Pentagon hires employees to do testing" wouldn't be bait for many clicks.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Are they really paying money or is it just an euphemism?
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: The Pentagon is paying hackers security researchers to test its key internal systems for vulnerabilities -- and they are finding weaknesses faster than expected.
To be fair. But of curse such title not so bombastic...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Pen Testers like to call themselves hackers. It is what it is.
The "Certified Ethical Hacker" doesn't help any.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli
|
|
|
|
|
Calling all space cadets: Today, a group of researchers led by the Carnegie Institute of Science released an impressive database containing 61,000 so-called Doppler velocity measurements of 1,600 nearby stars. The team is graciously inviting you to use their data to find the next exoplanet. "Planet Claire has pink air. All the trees are red."
|
|
|
|
|
Machine learning could lead to unprecedented advances in quantum physics. "I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics."
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but can they teach themselves C++ in 21 days?
|
|
|
|
|
Back in the mists of time, when .NET was young and new and beloved of enterprise software developers, there was An Idea. The idea became known as ALT.NET, and the efforts of those who pushed for it were valiant, but they fought against an inexorable tide, and were frustrated. Did I fall asleep and miss the .NET Dark Ages?
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: .NET Dark Ages?
v1 was a nasssty plague. It should never have seen the light of day.
I still await the coming of the next great thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Bloomberg says that early staffers “had an unusual compensation system” that multiplied staffers salaries and bonuses based on the performance of the self-driving project. Yes, please
|
|
|
|
|
Theoretical physicists from ETH Zurich deliberately misled intelligent machines, and thus refined the process of machine learning. Oh sure - lie to them and irritate them. That will end well.
|
|
|
|
|
On February 13th, 2002, the first version of .NET was released as part of Visual Studio.NET. It seems just like yesterday when Microsoft was building its “Next Generation Windows Services” and unleashed a new level of productivity with Visual Studio.NET. The traditional gift for the 15th is Crystal, so maybe make a Report
Or don't - I wouldn't wish that beast on anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: The traditional gift for the 15th is Crystal, so maybe make a Report
I thought it was meth.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I think I might be more likely to do crystal meth than Crystal Reports. 
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Rumor has it one often resorts to crystal meth after programming Crystal Reports.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Golly, is it really so long ago that they produced a product that they named with a filename that's only legal on *NIX systems?
I thought they'd turned stupid at least three years later than that.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: I thought they'd turned stupid at least three years later than that.
Who told you that they were not stupid from the very beginning?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, DOS was cool!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Should the WWW be locked down with DRM? Tim Berners-Lee needs to decide, and soon. "Give it away, give it away, give it away now"
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, Hollywood and musicians and developers are so afraid that people download their software... Meanwhile they're breaking record after record, most watched show, most bought game in the first hour, most visited cinema movie... They make millions, if not billions, but boohoo some people are still (illegally) downloading their products.
First of all, not every download is a missed sale, some people would never ever buy your product even if they could not download it for free.
Second, some downloads actually become sales! I've downloaded plenty of music back in the day (which was/is? legal in the Netherlands) that I later bought because I thought it was good. More people do this, we can't just go around and buy everything because there are hundreds of interesting releases each month!
Last, but certainly not least, imposing DRM upon honest folk only drives them to go and download illegal copies of your product. I've got a friggin' CD I cannot play anywhere else than in my stereo or computer. I wanted to listen to it in the car, but unfortunately my car couldn't play it because of some DRM protection. Had I known I never would've bought it! And what about those annoying commercials on DVD's and Blu-Rays, the ones you can't skip and pirated version don't have. Or the maximum number of installs or machines on a game!?
I've actually already ranted about these money hungry morons today[^] (two posts below), but this still pisses me off.
I hope everyone who thinks DRM (in most forms) is a good idea, and everyone representing copyright owners and coming to take your money (because that is all they're really after), step on a Lego 
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed all (except I'd suggest a shattered lego).
The whole idea of a black-box "We'll sue anyone who opens it!" DRM module is completely intolerable, not because DRM is a bad thing per se, but because the people who want to make it a black box have proven themselves to be completely untrustworthy (DVDs with rootkits, anyone?)
The only reason I can see for their denying security firms the right to "look into the box" is because they don't want the firms seeing what they want to do to consumers.
For instance, you can bet your bottom groat that the things will be filled to the brim with "telemetry*" routines, which will be pretty much undetectable, because their activities can be shrouded by the flow of data to and from the browser.
Forget privacy altogether, if this thing goes through. Hollywood, sony, etc. will own you far worse than MS would ever try to -- and MS behaves like saints, compared to those greedy {insert appropriate plural or collective noun here}
With people like that, their only reason for hiding stuff is that they've got something to hide.
The sony rootkit will be less than the tip of the iceberg.
* The latest euphemism for "spyware".
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
So, what's the best Israeli-made browser, these days?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
How do you avoid getting made obsolete by artificial intelligence in a time when resources and research are largely being funnelled toward improving that area of tech? By merging with the machines, according to Tesla CEO Elon Musk. Turn on, jack in, space out
|
|
|
|
|
I'd rather be obsolete in Elon's eyes than have an extra dependency that can fail. Merging would also mean adding some limitations on health-care - would you go into a giant magnetic scanner if your head contains a few chips?
An expert at selling the hype.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
