|
Oracle's chief security officer is tired of customers performing their own security tests on Oracle software, and she's not going to take it anymore. Security through "No peeking!" Brilliant.
|
|
|
|
|
Next step is to ask the hackers to stop too.
Sorry, but a company as big as Oracle ought to know the legal ramifications of negligence.
What do you mean - you didn't perform a security audit on the database system holding all that data? Because Oracle said not too!
|
|
|
|
|
Brilliant idea 
The best way to have software with no known bug is to forbid search for bugs.
MS will do anything to hire such a brilliant person.
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
You want people to search for vulnerabilities?
Because that's how you get people to search for vulnerabilities 
|
|
|
|
|
I loved that point, where she came to threaten those who reveal a vulnerability...Good basis for long time partnership...
The most fascinating part is where she told, that Oracle does have a "fairly robust assurance programs" - it means they do not take any responsibility for your data!
Hopefully, this nice blog will upgrade Oracle's sells...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
After all, what a bummer to think about kidnapped children, genocide, urban violence, global-warming, etc. [^].
«I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center» Kurt Vonnegut.
|
|
|
|
|
Never mind marriage; can you claim a robot as a dependent on your tax return?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
A team of international scientists used several of the world's most powerful telescopes to study the energy of the universe and concluded that the universe is slowly dying. "The time is gone, the song is over, thought I'd something more to say"
|
|
|
|
|
Ticking away the moments that make up a dull day
Fritter and waste the hours in an off-hand way
We all do it! 
Good tune
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.1 new web site.
I know the voices in my head are not real but damn they come up with some good ideas!
|
|
|
|
|
Did they take the lens cap off?
|
|
|
|
|
Meh.
|
|
|
|
|
I've read that the universe is contracting. The initial singularity that created the universe in the first place is now in reverse, and rather than expanding, the universe is now contracting. This gives rise to speculation as to what happens when the universe eventually contracts down to a single atom. Will there be another singularity? Is the universe constantly moving from big bang to singularity? Have there been many universes before the one in which we currently find ourselves?
I find these sorts of questions fascinating. This is why I love reading science so much. It piques the imagination and really makes you think
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult." - C.A.R. Hoare
Home | LinkedIn | Google+ | Twitter
|
|
|
|
|
According to the latest data, it's known for some years now that it is not contracting but expanding, and the expansion rate is even accelerating. There is no indication that the mass inventory of the universe is above critical density, so the gravitational force is not strong enough to pull it back and it will likely expand (and cool down) forever, tomorrow even faster than today.
With our current theories (relativity and quantum mechanics), we actually don't need to speculate but can describe and understand the state of the universe when it was the size of a single atom. Both theories only fail when we reach the Planck length (~ 1,6*10^-35 m) and time (~ 5,4*10^-44 s); a single atom is huge in this regards (~ 2,5*10^-11 m).
|
|
|
|
|
Are they sure that energy does not follow a sinusoidal profile, coming down only to go up again, after several billion years?
|
|
|
|
|
It is not the energy that is getting lower, but the usable energy. You can only make use of the difference between two potentials (e.g. hydroelectric power uses a water reservoir at the top of a mountain, and generates electricity from the flow downhill). What the article is saying is that the peaks and valleys are flattening out, not that energy is somehow "leaking" from the Universe.
I don't know why these scientists are surprised to discover that the Laws of Thermodynamics are universally applicable.
One of the cosmological theories compatible with General Relativity is a "rebounding Universe", where the Universe starts with a Big Bang, expands to an upper limit, contracts to a singularity, and repeats. In this model, the total amount of energy in the Universe would be constant, but the Universe would somehow be "recycled" (entropy would decrease to a minimum) at each Big Bang.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Yes - considering the entire Universe as an isolated system, the total energy must be constant, as per its law of conservation. Only that it transforms. However, entropy is non-decreasing, as most processes are irreversible.
|
|
|
|
|
Hot flash: The Laws of Thermodynamics are Universal!
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Don't worry. Our world view has changed many times, here are a couple of examples:
flat world
round earth
earth not the center of everything
sun not the center of everything
universe -> multiverse
universe is flat
universe is dying
Any bet this will change again.
What's next?
Kitty at my foot and I waAAAant to touch it...
|
|
|
|
|
Power Puff Boy wrote: What's next?
earth 2.0 
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Will we all get a free upgrade? 
Kitty at my foot and I waAAAant to touch it...
|
|
|
|
|
Only for the first year.. after that, you'll have to pay! 
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I knew it was too good to be true. 
Kitty at my foot and I waAAAant to touch it...
|
|
|
|
|
We watch the sand trickle, anxious about it's steady flow.
But what we really fail to see is, that any minute, the glass might just burst into pieces.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
In the philosophical words of Homer, "Well, it was a good ride while it lasted."
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
