|
Microsoft has fixed a privilege escalation vulnerability in Microsoft Defender Antivirus (formerly Windows Defender) that could allow attackers to gain admin rights on unpatched Windows systems. Apparently no one defends the Defender
|
|
|
|
|
So, can we expect a Windows Defender Defender in the next update? I can visualize the shield-in-a-shield icon now... 
|
|
|
|
|
Probably something similar to the bugs of bitdefender?  
ADDITION (I just remembered it):
The 3 bugs about TCP a couple of days ago are 12 or more years old too...
looks like bug's puberty is not compatible with remaining hidden
I wonder what will come out once they reach the legal adult age.  
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.
modified 12-Feb-21 5:21am.
|
|
|
|
|
From the annals of “nothing to see here,” China’s largest state physics lab is insisting it’s not helping a private company build a time machine. That's what they *always* said
|
|
|
|
|
The announcement is dated 25-Jun-2097.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
If they succeeded, we would have known a thousand years ago.
There's no time travel, but keep spending resources on it.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: If they succeeded, we would have known a thousand years ago.
A great many time travel scifi stories include the idea of a law that prevents disclosure of time travel to earlier societies. Some stories even have a police force to enforce this regulation.
So the lack of evidence for travelling back in time is not evidence of lack of time travel, even by our own current estimations of how it might work in practice.
Is it likely that it could work? Seems unlikely. But we are in no position to know that it absolutely cannot ever work. Spending a few billion dollars on finding out more seems like a good investment for the Chinese to me: If it doesn't pan out then the Chinese government is down some pocket change (and it will soon be replaced by western consumers eager for cheap goods). If, on the other hand, it does pan out then it was worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
markrlondon wrote: A great many time travel scifi stories include the idea of a law that prevents disclosure of time travel to earlier societies. Some stories even have a police force to enforce this regulation.
So the lack of evidence for travelling back in time is not evidence of lack of time travel, even by our own current estimations of how it might work in practice.
Or it might have been possible and worked, but created another temporal line / parallel reality. And we still would never know.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Hah, quite!
I'm partial to the time stream concept of time (i.e. that there are multiple parallel universes or streams of time, with many possible outcomes all continually diverging or perhaps reconverging) and what you suggest would fit.
|
|
|
|
|
markrlondon wrote: A great many time travel scifi stories include the idea of a law that prevents disclosure of time travel to earlier societies. Some stories even have a police force to enforce this regulation.
And there's never a "mistake" where they get found out? Ever? Because humans from the future don't make those mistakes?
Like aliens; if either existed, we would have seen them. And we have no written recording of either.
We cannot even send information back, so not worried about humans being sent. (Just binge watched "travellers" on NetFlix)
Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
If they could build a time machine, maybe the first thing they could use it for is to stop the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2? 
|
|
|
|
|
12 monkeys?
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Would that be to China's advantage? They don't seem to have suffered, strategically speaking.
|
|
|
|
|
Economically, they do, still. And they depending a lot on economy and trade. Having food gives stability.
And their population still at risk, moreso due the mutations. That's what scares me most; the flu doesn't mutate at that rate. If it is not eliminated soon and the vaccine not world wide, we'll meet a version that adapts to the vaccine.
I dare not think about how this evolves in the next five years.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're looking at a future in software engineering, these are the platforms and languages you should get a handle on. Because that's what people enjoy - the interviews
|
|
|
|
|
The argument boils down to "if you don't know we messed up, it can't hurt you." I wonder how well it would work if I tried that
No more suing me for bad song lyrics, meanness to a certain company, or horrid puns (sorry, that last one is redundant).
|
|
|
|
|
But then... When then they come and sue you with something then you are the one that have to proof innocence because in civil right you have not the "innocent until proven guilty" right.
Everyone is equal under the justice and has the same rights... but some are even more equal than us.  
Addition:
Quote: According to the filing's reasoning here, Facebook should not have been held liable for violating Illinois law, because doing so didn't actually hurt anyone, as far as it could tell.
What a dangerous sentence... you can break law if you don't harm anyone or even better... if you can't be proven to have hurt anyone
Quote: We will find out sometime in May or June if the Supreme Court decides "no harm, no foul" to be a compelling legal argument.
Why I do have the feeling that it will be a really sad day for the "normal" population
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.
modified 12-Feb-21 5:26am.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: What a dangerous sentence... you can break law if you don't harm anyone or even better... if you can't be proven to have hurt anyone
Nelek wrote: Why I do have the feeling that it will be a really sad day for the "normal" population
Yes, both these arguments are very, very dangerous.
Even if the current court rejects them (which surely it should, although this is far from certain), I feel sure that legislators will make up for it in future.
|
|
|
|
|
I suggest that the likes of Google, Facebook, et al will eventually get their way on this. 
My reasoning on this is that, as they accept more and more state regulation of and meddling in their services, they will demand that in return they should have some of the protection of the state. I.e. If the state (I mean government, not state in US terms) wants to meddle very heavily in their services then it is only fair that they are treated more like a branch of government with special legal protections.
I think this argument will eventually be compelling for law makers (especially after a nice undocumented deal for future employment).
This type of special legal protection for private businesses is already the case in some countries. E.g. The UK where privatised utility companies have special legal rights and protections that do not apply to other private companies. The US will follow.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Hotwire offers “an alternative approach to building modern web applications without using much JavaScript.” It’s described as an “HTML-over-the-wire” approach, meaning it generates the HTML file on the server and then delivers it to the browser. It’s an alternative to delivering JSON, a data format used by many JavaScript-heavy web apps to send content from the server to the client.
Run, Don't Walk[^] obligatory music video.
The lyrics are oddly appropriate. "I can't stop talking to myself." 
Ruby on Rails Creator Takes on JavaScript Frameworks with Hotwire – The New Stack[^]
modified 11-Feb-21 13:34pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Link?
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Grainger wrote: Link?
OMG. I failed at my Insider News post. 
|
|
|
|
|
ASP.NET WebForms did that 20 odd years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: ASP.NET WebForms did that 20 odd years ago.
I know. The irony.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
