For context, Ontario has no natural resources. We have always been an export economy. With globalization and automation, manufacturing is mostly gone, and it's creating social problems. We have a fundamentally different view of the role of government here, we believe government should promote quality of life and happiness. Yes it is socialism and we don't apologize.
Please do not profess to speak for all Ontarians, or all Canadians; you do not. There is no general 'we', there are a number of disparate groups with their own views and motives. The average voter is not even so complex as to have a self-consistent integrated worldview.[1]
In addition, many of your fellow Ontarians disagree as to the cause of the province's malaise, and the potential solution(s). There are many areas without natural resources, which have still managed to do very well (economically) in recent times.
Ya, turn down the condecending/arrogance dial a bit. First of all Ontario does have significant natural resources i.e logging/mining. Also I'm not sure if you've been in the country for the last decade but it's been under a conservative leadership and it's not exactly socialism. PS - I'm in favor of experimenting with baseincome and live in Ontario.
Also full of minerals (nickel, copper etc). I'm not sure how productive the mines are anymore but Ontario has areas names Nickel Belt, Copperclif, Nickel Centre.
I'm from Ontario and couldn't have more different opinions about the role of government in society. Perhaps a little less generalization?
I'd happily agree that a small majority of voters in Ontario generally support a slightly higher level of taxation and social spending than is found in, say, the United States, while still periodically electing governments who run on austerity platforms and cut social spending aggressively. That, I think, is more accurate.
Xen is worse than Linux in terms of quality, and therefore security. That Linux is much bigger doesn't make Xen any better.
What de Raadt means to say is, generally speaking, you can't build security on top of bad code. No amount of patching, sandboxing, or whatever will help. Security comes from quality and Xen (like Linux) is very lacking in quality.
Beautiful! So the dot pattern here is "face centered cubic," right? Would you get a better density with a "hexagonal close-packed" pattern? It may make a difference visually. I would love to see a comparison.
The FCC and HCP lattices are 3D concepts, but you're on the right track. They're using a square lattice, but you could get a higher density using a hexagonal one.
What's really interesting is that they're modulating drop size to change the color intensity through white space and the coffee-ring effect!
Europe could decide to open their borders, and they would be fine. The US deals with much larger migrations every year. Or they could decide to close the borders, and they would be fine too.
Instead they do some schizophrenic dance in between. Some borders open, some closed. Broadcast to the world that people are welcome, and greet them with fences...
Decide and do. Stop talking about how it makes you feel.
> The US deals with much larger migrations every year
Are you suggesting that the "much larger migration" in US is provided free food, free housing, free counselling, free healthcare, free judiciary assistance, are taken care of by american public workers to guide them in their asylum application process ?
Yes it is a self-inflicted problem ( the west trying to decide who should rule in Syria, just like in Libya and just like in Libya it backfired replacing order by chaos). But confusing the situation in US with illegals that obviously don't show up at the nearest refugee center as soon as they cross the mexican border with millions of people coming in Europe as refugees seeking asylum and all the percs is not having spent 1 minute trying to understand the situation.
> Broadcast to the world that people are welcome
As far as I know the only country who did this was Germany which is also, rightfully, the country that received the most refugees since they invited illegals to come there. So things work as intended.
What other countries between Turkey and Germany are asking is that Germany starts picking the refugees it wants at the Greek border, instead of relying on smuggler gangs to bring them to Germany.
It's a bit more nuanced, although I get your point.
So the way I see it is that you can hardly close your borders, it's a myth. Countries are gigantic, if you want to migrate bad enough, you migrate. Building giant walls isn't effective or even realistic. You can make it harder and reduce the flow, but people will come. And if you close borders, that means you need to act accordingly. i.e., if someone does get through, you can't accommodate him, after all that would imply the rules are only valid for those who don't break them, but once you do break the rules and get in illegally, you can stay. That makes no sense, so now you've got closed borders, people still get in, but they can't start a life. Can't get a home, a job, can't become self-sufficient. Now you've got a problem of a large group of dependents, who face homelessness and desperation which leads to other issues, too (e.g. crime). And because they have an ethnic profile, that'll lead to a backlash of racism. Migration studies have shown time and time again, those whose place in society is facilitated tend to do well and become a part of society relatively quickly and become 'decent tax paying folk' with positive socioeconomic mobility outlooks, whereas making normal life difficult left and right for new migrants leads to the opposite, a new group of dependents that everyone hates on.
So closing the borders makes little sense. Further, tons of countries, particularly a number of Western European ones, are bound by various treaties and laws they entered in to themselves. Take WW1, more than 1 million Belgian refugees fled north to the Netherlands which was unaffected at the time, a country of just 6 million people back then. Can you imagine one in 7 in your country is a recent refugee from just one particular country? Not just that, but most of them came to the south. There were villages of just 15 thousand people which saw 100 thousand Belgians arrive, completely changing into essentially Belgian cities. Experiences like that and many other with refugees, shaped all kinds of laws, policies and treaties, which can't just simply be broken. So you need an alternative.
But then open borders is tricky, too. For one because there need to be two things. 1) some form of a check on whether the person is a refugee or not, and 2) some, quite small, level of friction, so as to discourage new migrants from coming unless it's absolutely necessary, and 3) some level of friction to slow down the influx and spread it out over a longer time period, so as to be able to properly accommodate everyone. That means decent housing, social programmes, employment or at least a level of occupation (whether it's voluntary work or education) to keep people busy, etc. Complete open borders means you'll get a bunch of non-refugee migrants coming along, and a large influx into a small number of popular cities that aren't adequately prepared.
So I understand the schizophrenic dance in between, with sorta-open borders. What I don't get is that the overal policy just feels hugely ineffective, that everything is moving much slower than need be, and that alarm bells are going off left and right with a society that's going crazy over a problem that's relatively minute in the history of European crises. Europe has the resources to handle this, but somehow it's failing.
This is how we got sound to play on the TI graphing calculators. It sounded bad and drained the batteries but it was fun. Another fun thing was getting grayscale graphics on those screens. They had only black and white pixels but flipping them on and off at different frequencies made them gray.
That's an important difference. Christians believe good is from God and evil is from Satan. (Forgive me if I'm mistaken, I know that's a gross oversimplification.) Muslims believe good and evil are both creations of God. So most things have both good and evil in them, including alcohol:
They ask you about wine and gambling. Say, "In them is great sin and [yet, some] benefit for people. But their sin is greater than their benefit."
Keep in mind that the Quran was revealed piece by piece over two decades. The later parts add to the earlier parts. That can be a source of ambiguity to Western readers (not to mention that the chapters are not in chronological order), which is why it's important to understand it as a whole rather than its individual verses or chapters.
Venture capitalists are interested in a particular kind of person who can provide them with a quick profit: young people who are naive enough to prioritize business over their own life. If you are willing to spend a few years sleeping under a desk, drinking Soylent, then you are a good candidate for venture capital. If you have your head on your shoulders, you probably want to start a lifestyle business, and that is no good for venture capital.
People here defend VC because they think they too will get rich quick, but they won't, and in the meantime they will be very stressed and nasty on the Internet. Welcome to HN.
The bug is in the compiler, not OpenSSH. The OpenSSH developers explicitly erased memory with memset. GCC decided to remove those lines without any warning. There's the bug. (Here come the language lawyers...)
What's the difference between GCC deleting parts of your code, and an attacker hacking into the source code repository and deleting those parts of the code?
The C standards committee addressed the problem in 2009 with memset_s. [0] The GNU developers reject patches and state they hope this feature is never implemented. [1]
Pretty much every claim you just made is wrong, but at least you provided the sources to demonstrate such. In short, dead store removal is not a bug, it is explicitly allowed. C11 Annex K is optional, and the rejection was not based on this feature, it was based on other problematic requirements imposed on a conforming implementation.
CompCert is not free software. This non-commercial release can only be used for evaluation, research, educational and personal purposes. A commercial version of CompCert, without this restriction and with professional support, can be purchased from AbsInt. See the file LICENSE for more information.
I'm not entirely sure if something like that is good for an unpaid-for open source project...
