Live data from Hacker News

Viewing profile — cautious_int

cautious_int

HN member
Joined
Sun, Aug 02, 2015, 6:16 AM UTC
HN karma
73
Public activity
47 items

About cautious_int

No profile information was provided.

Recent public activity

  1. comment
    Comment #10068607

    I don't trust open systems either. Don't put words in my mouth please. I reject the thesis that trust is binary. Were I to accept it, I trust nobody - everyone is vulnerable to bei…

  2. comment
    Comment #10068539

    This is a lose-lose scenario. If you don't trust a closed operating system in the first place, why would you then, after performing these steps, trust the system that it really doe…

  3. comment
    Comment #10068517

    The Sun is the center of the Universe. Interesting.

  4. comment
    Comment #10068227

    Transmission like this looks really good in a simulation, but I wonder how much lubrication would this require to operate in the real world. this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N…

  5. comment
    Comment #10059747

    Mill processors? Aren't they still in research stage, only using emulation and no hardware.

  6. comment
  7. comment
    Comment #10059139

    Why not put it into a Faraday cage?

  8. comment
    Comment #10057596

    I was talking about the same line. Apparently new is a "special" operator, or there is a bug in the compiler. I also can't get a warning with g++. The problem seems to be that, as …

  9. comment
    Comment #10057414

    Because no truncation happens. In this case [] operator doesn't specify any type, only that the expression inside is an integer expression. While normally the type size_t is used f…

  10. comment
    Comment #10056674

    This is a common problem in C. Integer types are inherently type unsafe and are silently promoted with many different rules which are hard to remember and understand. As is seen in…

  11. comment
    Comment #10056334

    Because unsigned overflow will not happen in C, and will instead wrap the value. The variables in question were unsigned. This is defined and perfectly normal. However signed integ…

  12. comment
    Comment #10054936

    Can you also fake/spoof the appropriate signatures/headers? Otherwise separating that data is going to be very easy. Unless you do it on a higher level like emulating input, but th…

  13. comment
  14. comment
    Comment #10054011

    Windows 10 seems to transmit information to the server even when OneDrive is disabled and logins are using a local account that isn't connected to a Microsoft Account. Well there y…

  15. story
  16. comment
    Comment #10048117

    You got it backwards there. Only if you know your implementation and plan to code only for it, can you even start to consider bending the C Standard, and not the other way around.

  17. comment
    Comment #10047900

    Since you didn't back it back then, you can now buy it immediately on Steam. It looks like a functional game, and not a failed project.

  18. comment
  19. comment
    Comment #10046243

    Actually it is misleading by them( and you ) to assume that in C, an unsigned int can represent values larger than the largest signed int value. In other words, C allows that UINT_…

  20. comment
    Comment #10046213

    It is not true that unsigned wrap is defined? Did you even read my comment, here is the relevant part: unsigned wrap is defined

  21. comment
    Comment #10045114

    The conditional move still depends on both values taken from the array, via other variables.

  22. comment
  23. comment
  24. comment
    Comment #10044314

    Well a branch will fetch the incorrect cache line if it mispredicts, but a conditional move will fetch both cache lines every time.

  25. comment
    Comment #10044239

    That blog is wrong. The program won't be undefined( unsigned wrap is defined ), but the offset will not be correct.