is modern software being purposely sabotaged? the assembler produces a binary that is full of zeros for no reason.

is modern software being purposely sabotaged? the assembler produces a binary that is full of zeros for no reason. why does it need to be so bloated?

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    This is obviously a zero-effort shitpost but there is at least one sense I know of in which software is intentionally sabotaged and it's by its own creators. Imagine if any other industry used "well it's just best practice--no I can't explain it," "yes it's worse but it makes our job easier," or "yes it could be 80,000x times faster but this is fast enough" as excuses for their product being shit. They'd be out of business that same day.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      all of those things are literally happening right now

      >"well it's just best practice--no I can't explain it," "yes it's worse but it makes our job easier,"
      this is literally clean code cultism

      >yes it could be 80,000x times faster but this is fast enough
      this is webshit's kneejerk reaction to premature optimization

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah inside software not outside it moron. Read my post with your eyes open.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      > Imagine if any other industry used "well it's just best practice--no I can't explain it,"
      This just means you're talking to the wrong person, there does exist a person in any industry who can explain why something is best practice

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        This hasn't been the case in decades. Most experts will be explicitly AGAINST best practices in every industry and niche.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >"yes it could be 80,000x times faster but this is fast enough" as excuses for their product being shit.
      That's just how capitalism works. People don't want to pay for shit and by making a better prodcut you'll have to charge more. You'll lose to your jeet competition because everyone flocks to their absolute turdpile that does the same thing in the required timeframe, even if a million times slower.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        All that matters is price.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      its a classic case of "the innovators aren't innovating"
      the "smart" are lazy.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Imagine if any other industry used "well it's just best practice--no I can't explain it," "yes it's worse but it makes our job easier," or "yes it could be 80,000x times faster but this is fast enough" as excuses for their product being shit. They'd be out of business that same day.

      My sweet summer child, that is most industry these days. Most shit doesnt matter these days because what really matters and brings in money is stock price. Investment money cares more about gambling on the movement of that more than the quality of whatever products or services are offered (unless and until the shittiness of quality leads to unexpected shitty earnings reports gamblers can buy put options on).

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The industry has internalized "worse is better" Unix philosophy.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        it really is better if you actually understand what "better" usually means to the kind of homosexuals who say "worse is better."

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >if you actually understand what "better" usually means
          "Better" means better, moron. Read the essay the term comes from.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >"Better" means better, moron. Read the essay the term comes from.
            you don't know what you're talking about absolute dipshit. define better, or frick off. I bet your definition is worse than "worse" as is always the case of POOSIX haters.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Better means it works. "Worse is better" is literally arguing that a worse product (harder to use, slower, buggier, less features, etc.) is better.
          >we can't fix this because we want to keep normies out!
          >bugs are a good thing because it forces users to upgrade!
          >it has to be hard to understand so students can take out $100,000 loans!
          >it took too much time to learn to do things the wrong way!
          >just memorize all the bugs and work around them!
          >developer time is more important than user time!
          That's all Worse is Better.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            most of these are true though.
            stay filtered normgroid.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >imagine if any other industry...
      Imagine?
      >it's just best practice
      The medical industry, there it's pretty much your only CYA option to defend yourself from frivolous lawsuits.
      >it's worse but it makes our job easier
      Pretty much every industry ever cuts corners to save on production costs.
      >this is fast enough
      The entirety of engineering is about getting it "good enough" and unusually large safety margins will get you shunned for overengineering.

      TL DR you need to be 18 to post here.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Still not a single consistent answer in the thread.

        >The entirety of engineering is about getting it "good enough" and unusually large safety margins will get you shunned for overengineering.
        Not really, there's some autists out there that seriously go against the grain to the detriment of company costs. Engineering is a bit weird like that.
        Take Brunel's Western Railways and their ultra wide gauge, though in that case it also made the ride comfortable too (and frankly it's better than the standard gauge or even most broad gauges). This is also partially because overcompensating can actually reduce costs with regards to research time and insurance (especially insurance).

        Ironically, often they'll go so far with safety sometimes that the thing they're engineering becomes so impractical to use that it's arguably unsafe.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      every single industry does that and the fact you think otherwise tells me you either have zero real life experience or you're just plain autistic

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      why is this good? i heard that DOS could execute flat binaries

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        why is this bad?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          it means that headers are not needed to run the program

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >yeah just scan all instructions and take a guess at arch instead of marking in compile time

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            yes, it should just try running the code and inevitably crashing

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Queue the current shitfest where trying to implement any permissions system is thwarted because we don't have headers.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >i heard that DOS could execute flat binaries
        Frick that, recently I've tried cracking some DOS shitware and it's a mess to find any lead

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      i don't want no fricking elves on my computer

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    look up computational marxism

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      thanks looked into it and now I want to kms

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    cpu jump handling area. cpu interrupt handling area.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    "Full of zeroes" is a sparse file on modern file systems, you fricking moron. You file system doesn't contain those zeroes.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >not looking at OPs image

      https://i.imgur.com/ebSPsqf.png

      is modern software being purposely sabotaged? the assembler produces a binary that is full of zeros for no reason. why does it need to be so bloated?

      its not sabotage, its subterfuge, the only way stuxnet can be implemented is by having other programs flip bits around in the background that get accessed later, just like those mario world speedruns sethbling did

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >sethbling
        what happened to his channel? i remember him being a redstone guy, but all he's been doing is mario videos

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Could be junk, could be tracking IDs

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    oh my fricking god, OP is the most moronic poster that I found on IQfy

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's alignment. That's why hello world is a few kb in size instead of bytes. You can disable that with compiler flags but elf standard recommended alignment

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    homie, check with disassembler which section it's part of, I bet it's part of .data to force stack preallocation for temporary variables used in functions

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >They're using our satellites against us. The clock is ticking

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous
  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    So programs bug each other out less.
    There's a reason why we use hypervisors and it's not just cybersecurity.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I hate tech illiterate Black folk. It's because aligned accesses are faster on modern cpus and also it might be different parts of program than go in different memory pages (data rw, code rx)

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    > no reason

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >doesn't know what a header is
    >doesn't understand alignment / padding

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's purposely sabotaged, but your misunderstanding is just one of many ways it is

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >what is machine heuristics

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >technology board
    >used by the technologically illiterate

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    0's don't take space you moron

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *