The first alpha of REdit had two specific issues.
The first is that pressing
^Down) would draw the screen offset by a line, so the cursor placement and the visible text would be off. This has been fixed.
The second problem was that typing the following in a new file:
would result in this appearing:
and attempting to fix it by inserting a newline would often cause some freaky things to happen.
This was caused by the "create new blank document" routine omitting to set the initial line. It's pointer was -1 (unset) instead of 0 (first byte). This was causing follow-on problems. However it was worth noting that leaving the first line blank meant everything worked as expected (as subsequent lines followed on from the dud first line).
Here's an updated program file for you to play with, but do note... This is an alpha release. There will be other bugs. Please report any issues you find!
Can't see the terror for the trees
Earlier in the week, an incident happened in London. I don't need to say more, it had wall to wall coverage on British TV and heavy coverage in other civilised countries.
And, guess what. The British born nutjob turned Islamic terrorist was known to authorities. Yet again.
I'm sure in due course some infosec numpty will show up to state that the security agencies need more powers. That they need to examine everybody's emails, browsing history, bin bags, and discarded latte cups.
This should be resisted. It won't be, not with the awful Amber Rudd as HomeSec and the wannabe dictator May. But when they sign through legislation to let unknown government officials with a higher ranking than primary school teacher pillage your private life, ask yourself - do you feel secure?
With every new power and every new source of shiny data, our lives are less and less secure.
Consider me, for example. Today my mother and I went to the big town. I had a rather horrible pasta carbonara at the Intermarché "Bistrot" (it was practically cold). And the toilet that was out of service weeks ago was still out of service, so I had to walk about half a kilometre to the E.Leclerc. About fifty metres away, but since the land height was metres different and there was a solid fence, I had to go the long way. Then we went to the Leclerc for a pot of tea and to get some food. Then to the Hyper U for cat litter as Wawa is fussy. Then to Lidl to see what new stuff they had. I got a solar powered glowing butterfly. Then we came home. Surprise! We didn't go near McDo. When I got home I read some random stuff while my phone downloaded episode six of Shikaku Tantei Higurashi Tabito. Then I fiddled around to fix the bugs in REdit. And now I'm writing my blog. When that's done and uploaded, I won't watch Tabito (no subs for that, yet). I might search YouTube to see if there are any Nightwish videos I've not seen yet.
Boring, isn't it?
That's my life. I'm not a secret agent. I'm not involved in cloak and dagger stuff. And I don't fight inter-dimensional demons with a big-ass sword.
So every time somebody, anybody, in the infosec world wastes time on my boring life and the boring lives of hundreds/thousands of other people... that's that much less time they could be keeping tabs on known bad guys.
Is InfoSec the correct solution?
The interesting question arises - is InfoSec the correct solution here? Why do we have some special get-out clause for religion?
In my opinion, anybody who claims to communicate with mythological entities, or who deigns to take instruction from such entities, or perform acts to appease them - those people should be treated as delusional, and sectioned if they are considered to represent a danger to others.
Think about it. If I went around trying to goad people into believing in the little green goblin at the bottom of my garden, I'd be regarded as a crackpot. The police might get involved, and I'm sure spouting rubbish about goblins is probably some sort of public order offence. But it's fine if the goblin is called Jehovah.
There is really no difference between believing in little green goblins, and believing in god (by whatever name).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying people shouldn't believe. I am a scientific-minded person so I look for evolutionary reasons to explain my existence. Others may prefer more philosophical or emotional reasons, and religion is a (rather trite) attempt at explaining where we came from (that isn't so much different to "magical sky aliens pooped and the earth was born"). We can all read the various holy texts and decide whether or not we afford them creditability. However, acting on the instruction of said texts, specifically to impress or appease the god(s) described, that's a delusion that risks hurting others. And should be treated as such, with no special privileges given because "that god is a recognised religion". My green goblin has not one single shred of evidence to support it. Neither does any so-called god that atrocities are regularly committed in the name of.
This nonsense needs to stop.
Please note that while I check this page every so often, I am not able to control what users write; therefore I disclaim all liability for unpleasant and/or infringing and/or defamatory material. Undesired content will be removed as soon as it is noticed. By leaving a comment, you agree not to post material that is illegal or in bad taste, and you should be aware that the time and your IP address are both recorded, should it be necessary to find out who you are. Oh, and don't bother trying to inline HTML. I'm not that stupid! ☺
You can now follow comment additions with the comment RSS feed. This is distinct from the b.log RSS feed, so you can subscribe to one or both as you wish.
List all b.log entries
Return to the site index
PS: Don't try to be clever.
It's a simple substring match.
Last read at 03:11 on 2020/07/13.
© 2017 Rick Murray
This web page is licenced for your personal, private, non-commercial use only. No automated processing by advertising systems is permitted.
RIPA notice: No consent is given for interception of page transmission.