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?
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
is modern software being purposely sabotaged? the assembler produces a binary that is full of zeros for no reason.
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.
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
Yeah inside software not outside it moron. Read my post with your eyes open.
> 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
This hasn't been the case in decades. Most experts will be explicitly AGAINST best practices in every industry and niche.
>"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.
All that matters is price.
its a classic case of "the innovators aren't innovating"
the "smart" are lazy.
>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).
The industry has internalized "worse is better" Unix philosophy.
it really is better if you actually understand what "better" usually means to the kind of homosexuals who say "worse is better."
>if you actually understand what "better" usually means
"Better" means better, moron. Read the essay the term comes from.
>"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.
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.
most of these are true though.
stay filtered normgroid.
>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.
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.
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
why is this good? i heard that DOS could execute flat binaries
why is this bad?
it means that headers are not needed to run the program
>yeah just scan all instructions and take a guess at arch instead of marking in compile time
yes, it should just try running the code and inevitably crashing
Queue the current shitfest where trying to implement any permissions system is thwarted because we don't have headers.
>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
i don't want no fricking elves on my computer
look up computational marxism
thanks looked into it and now I want to kms
cpu jump handling area. cpu interrupt handling area.
"Full of zeroes" is a sparse file on modern file systems, you fricking moron. You file system doesn't contain those zeroes.
>not looking at OPs image
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
>sethbling
what happened to his channel? i remember him being a redstone guy, but all he's been doing is mario videos
Could be junk, could be tracking IDs
oh my fricking god, OP is the most moronic poster that I found on IQfy
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
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
>They're using our satellites against us. The clock is ticking
So programs bug each other out less.
There's a reason why we use hypervisors and it's not just cybersecurity.
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)
> no reason
>doesn't know what a header is
>doesn't understand alignment / padding
It's purposely sabotaged, but your misunderstanding is just one of many ways it is
>what is machine heuristics
>technology board
>used by the technologically illiterate
0's don't take space you moron