cool

RIP

the fact you commented 13 minutes ago is insane, ive gotten this in my recommended like every refresh for like the past week and just now decided to watch it

F

rip

Unplug it after using XD

@@jhonreydaffon8156 just cut the wire

Hold on... Lets close my network socket as well. 0:28

linux be like: "everything is a file" --> sudo shutdown now -h

@@julians.2597 Wait if everythings a file am I a file?

This is like OOP, everything is an object

@@Rudxain Imagine programming with FOP

@@Handlessuck1 That would be an interesting concept. Like accessing file metadata using computed property access. Setting permissions using object descriptors (file descriptors). Classes would be programs specifically designed to create a certain kind of file, so VIM is a class whose constructor returns a new plaintext file object. The only problem is that *EVERY* file is allowed to have own function properties, which means they can come bundled with method scripts that aren't inherited from the prototype, possibly allowing arbitrary code execution lol

same!

Same

well, I did today!1

But I am le tired

so old school before even KZfaq was out and flash cartoons were all the rave!

@@kevinalexander4959 hell yeah, just like burnt face man

Go to the 3 dot menu against those videos and select 'Not Interested'. I know it'll be hard but you gotta do it😥

That is not the case when you try doing it yourself! I am trying just right now and file 3 is not left behind, I think that is a patch of the ubuntu that made this for now but I may return to edit this comm if I figure out what is the wrong

RAII has always been the wrong term, but it caught on. And I guess C(lose)O(n)D(estruction) would remind too much Call of Duty

Yup, let's all have the compiler do stuff for us because it's too complex to do it ourselves!! It's what makes the difference between a good coder who is aware of such things and people who need a runtime to remember all the things they forget because resource management is too complex for them. You might as well just advocate for gameSpaceInvaders.create(); gameSpaceInvaders.run() and have the compiler generate the entire thing for you. Coding and coding well is a skill, but NOT today, it's, let the runtime handle that, import some else's library, job done.

@@thewelder3538 It's a matter of efficiency. Why have people write the same code hundreds or thousands of times? Consumers (because that is who needs to pay for software at the end, even internal software) don't want to pay for developers writing boilerplate code over and over. You want working code the smallest possible amount of effort. Of course, it needs to be fast and safe as well, but nobody has time and money for developers to mess around and try to perfect every little thing. It's generally not that people couldn't do it, but simply that they don't want to.

@@jort93z I'm not sure if you're actually arguing what you think you are. It's simple, if a class opens a file handle, it should close it. It has nothing to do with efficiency. Your arguing that the runtime should close the file handles that YOU forgot to close. This is like the ultimate lazy coders paradigm, where you rely on the runtime and compiler to fix all your bad code for you. Sure, there are always deadlines and stuff, but releasing a badly bugged product affects reputation WAY more than a release delay. The problem with many coders nowadays, is they have literally NO idea what is going on under the hood of the languages they are writing in. I think they should all do a stint writing x86 or ARM assembly because then you HAVE to take care and do things properly. None of this... whoopsie, I accidently left a file handle open, not to worry, the runtime will sort that for me, mentality. You do things right, or you resource leak and your program dies. Then, once you've got that level of understanding, apply it to a higher level and then you'll realise just how much nonsense it is letting a runtime close a file handle, just because it can. This applies to more than just file handles though, it applies to any resource. The same as a GOOD coder has no concept of a string, it's just a list of bytes. Dynamic containers, like vector/map/set etc, most have no idea what's actually going on. But work in assembly for a bit and then you realise how much pain and suffering these dynamic containers save you from.

​@@thewelder3538 "This is like the ultimate lazy coders paradigm, where you rely on the runtime and compiler to fix all your bad code for you" Well, or you look at it another way, you rely on the compiler/runtime, so you need to write less code for the same thing. Just because your code is less verbose, doesn't make it worse. If you know you can rely on the compiler/runtime, there is no need to write it out explicitly. Your problem is you seem to think that people just forget to close it. It isn't that people forget, but simply that people don't want to. Being stupid, and being lazy, are very different things. Generally, smart and lazy people are the best programmers.

python

that's why they made 'with' keyword so we don't fck up, another amazing thing is defer in golang.

That's all fine and good in python, but there's no such thing in C, and all the "real" code that does actual work is written mostly in C

@@gorak9000 you’re watching this on KZfaq, on a website written in html, with effects written in JavaScript, with a backend of C++. Take your elitism elsewhere

@@techheck3358 Uh, I'm not sure where you got this sense of "elitism" from, but thank you for re-enforcing my point that not all software is written in Python, so saying "use 'with' in Python" is not a solution to this issue. I'm just trying to quell the "python fanbois" that no, there actually do exist other languages out there that don't have "auto" file closing. So many "coders" these days think they can string 5 lines of python together, so now they're "software developers". I interviewed 5 or 6 such people in the last couple of weeks. I don't know wtf they are teaching in CS these days, but it's either not getting through to people, or CS education has really taken a nosedive in the last 5 or 6 years. You ask these "software developers" basic data structures questions, or complexity (big oh) questions, and they look at you with a blank stare like you're talking a foreign language.

It makes sense to me except the exploit part at 7:04, we are piping to stdin of newgrp an echo command into a setuid binary/binary with permissions to write "/etc/sudoers"? I don't get the shell script. Also the OSX case is part of the semingly same "mistake", except it doesn't use exec(); except exec() is never used, and the linker should run with permissions of the target binary. 1:11 this is a very honest beginners mistake of "exec() runs a new program, so kernel has to clean up everything that made up the old process"(and this behavior can have usefull usecases).

Nice PFP bro

@@callumery119 commendable to you too, lol someone who notices :)

U did it worng it's btw >& this 😂😂

I'm good now, writing script for the next video :)

Thank you, I will

I thought buffered IO was a thing in most programming languages?

You could edit the sudoers file and then you have admin access to the system