Posts by nijam

Re: RE: FTFY

How about C is a Jaguar E-type, COBOL a Beford QL? Seems much more apposite to me.

Re: And they'll never listen

> not a single piece of modern C code as EVER been found NOT to have bugs.

What utter drivel. The FBI don't have the resources to have checked every single piece of C code.

Re: C is the new COBOL

> Yes, I know it's verbose, clunky, has over 1k reserved words, has no real standard ....

So not really a well-defined language at all.

Re: C is the new COBOL

> Have you tried fixed point decimal arithmetic in any of the above mentioned languages?

Yes, it's easy. Do all your arithmetic in integers, in the smallest unit of your chosen currency. Your output routines can easily reinstate whatever laout you require.

(Yes, integer overflow may be something to consider on some machines. Or all machines. But that's even more easily solved.)

Re: All you need

> Outlook is not the only email client in the world.

Good point, but at least it's pretty much the worst.

Re: All you need

> So if customer sends Office document and you can't read it properly, you are in the pickle.

In my expoerience, it's almost always because you, or they, don't have the right fonts installed.

Re: Tail end backwards

> Poettering began to realize that he was running out of time.

Ah, the dream!

Re: Not a Hater

> Systemd works. End of story.

Like all too many modern things (not just software), it works until it doesn't. Maintainability is no longer regarded as a necessity.

Re: Not good - just half thruths, lies, fallacies and propaganda.

> "do one thing and do it well"

A new take on Antoine de Saint-Exupery: "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."

Something we should all know already.

Re: "(Almost) all in C"

Oh yes please. And he should be advised to start by implementing a prettyprint pavckage for it.

Re: Modular?

Absolutely not modular.

The P-Head himself says "Suite of ~150 separate binaries... Quite modular", then a few lines later "...with many interdependencies".

He obviously does not understand how broken his reasoning appears.

Re: Or...

> Makes it easier for the 'A.I.' to spot them...

Yes, that's how Artificial Insemination works...

Re: I despair for Humanity...

> Most of those "investing" are complicit and fully on board with the scam.

Given that quiff-boy often reveals how ill-informed and dim-witted he is, could it be that in fact he's the one being scammed?

OTOH he has a track record of successful scam himself, so I think probably not.

Re: Just another example...

In the limiting case, even a site with zero users still has to jump through the bureacratic hoops.

Re: Just another example...

I recently had cause to look intor the "working at Height' regulations. They are are so draconian that under some readings, even a passer-by who happens to witness a breach might be considered to have to some responsibility.

Re: Just another example...

> Health and Safety at Work Act applies to all organisations above a certain level of employees.

Again, do you really belive that would prevent an actual prosecution?

A breach of the H&S regulations could for example be used as supporting evidence, even if the H&S legislation weren't applicable in a particular case. Servo-assisted prosecuting...

Re: Just another example...

> The degree to which one must comply is proportionate to the risk of harm.

Fallacious, I'm afraid. Leaving aside any custodial sentences that might yet be built in, one incident would bankrupt our small sports club. From our point of view this is a bulldozer to swat a gnat.

Re: Just another example...

> If these small hobby sites are so useful to their members then their members won't mind paying a nominal fee to use them and that fee could be used to pay for compliance.

It wouldn't be a small fee, that is why it won't work. The only way to comply with this legislation (which is itself both malicious, and an unnecessary duplication of existing protections - albeit regualtions which the government has decided it's not worth enforcing) is to charge a very substantial amount or shut the site down.

Re: Installing equipment?

> ... I'm confused as to what exactly the new law adds

Nothing. It's another piece of knee-jerk publicity-grabbing legislation, the like of which we've already seen altogether to many times.

Re: All those billions can’t buy a spine

> ...challenge the orange fatso to a cage fight

Who makes cages in his size?

Re: Money for nothing, and ...

> Except people can opt out.

Can they? Really, can they? So many sites and services hook you in willy-nilly to one or more of these "social" cesspits.