JMich: Script Kiddies is a term specific to the infosec that the rest of the world uses to refer to something they do not fully understand. A company will not say that a script kiddie hacked them, since that would mean their security is laughable (whether it is or is not). So if you wish to use an infosec term, ask the infosec community what they mean by that, or at least verify that you use it as it should be use.
When in a programming context: script kiddies use and/or make scripts rather than actually taking the time to learn a programming language. This came from people referring to HTML and/or Javascript as programming. As things like PHP and and other interpreted languages grew more complex and useful, this has relatively lost its meaning.
But, even if you threw this definition out and relied on the infosec definition, anyone whose even gotten the basic willpower (as in, not afraid of the magical black box) to try googling and using copy and paste can perform what I have suggested.
You said money is not an issue, I didn't object to that. And the start-stop system is not an EV conversion. Pure gasoline (or diesel) systems can have the start-stop system as well.
True, but it still fulfills the requirements of your request.
Yes. Of course you can change the engine (and the body, and the ECU, and everything else). Which would be similar to saying that instead of modifying a forum that they don't understand its code, they replace the forum. But you claimed that you could modify the car you have to have additional features, though it seems you meant by replacing most of the car.
A car is not an engine. You can indeed do all of these things, but the simplest and laziest answers are the ones I provided, since I spent no more than 10 minutes on google. If i'm going to do this for real, money becomes an item, and i'm going to do alot more research, including whether or not it'd be cost effective at all, or if i'm going to spend more money than percieved gains.
The basis of the argument comes from abstraction: I don't have to understand how every part of the car works: just enough knowledge to know what i want to modify. Let's say, for another example, that I wanted to modify the printf function in the stdlib so \n always prints out "\r\n" instead. I could modify printf directly by learning how it works, I could also find out what functions it calls and modify that. Or, I could even drop right into printf's declarations and check each param to detect whether or not they're a string and, if so, replace all instances of \n" with "\r\n". Odds are, i'm going to find what function it calls (fprintf most likely, which i could probably get away with sticking to modifying the format string, or hijacking whatever the system's "write" function is).
And, yes, i'm well aware that the escapes are turned into single characters at compile time. I'm just short-handing it.
2 examples actually. The Witcher Adventure Game also required Galaxy and an internet connection to run back while it was in its beta phase. Once it was properly released, it no longer did. Which means that GOG didn't fully abandon their DRM-Free principle, even if for a time the game required Galaxy. But as soon as the steps repeat, the sky is falling.
Perhaps then we learned that backlash worked? I'm sure people dropped their opinions back then. But, hey, it's not like the history of other websites isn't repeating itself here. Every time someone says "optional," it becomes mandatory, "because we don't have the resources to maintain the traditional method, and only a few people use it anyway," and usually it's difficult or impossible for the average customer to even identify whether or not either of the arguements are true. Seems to be the history of every website that has it's own download manager, conveniently.
Of course. Why should it ever have been trusted. Because they provided you with what you expected them to?
At some point, one has to be able to trust words. If you make trust of words earned to start, you won't get very far with anything. Why even bother registering with gog if i don't start off with the assumption of truth, for example?
That was one of the removals that were actually announced in the front page. 23rd December 2015 if my rss feed is correct.
I could've just missed or forgotten that one. At that point, that's my own fault.
No, they are not. Foxit can open them, edge can open them, any self sufficient browser can, as can a ton of other programs. Adobe Reader is one such program, but pdf files do not care about adobe reader either.
The format was designed by Adobe for Adobe reader. Just because microsoft's docx and such can be read by other programs doesn't mean they weren't designed to be read exclusively by microsoft word. The same can easily be said for pretty much every executable format that gets turned into a "rom file" as well.
Why would you expect trustability from anyone asking you for your money? You did use the bridge example, would you expect them to have any trustability, or would you check them on every transaction you did with them? And why would you trust anyone, even after X amount of transactions?
Because trust must exist, and it is buildable. This is the insidious part of betrayal: the nature of relationships of any kind is trust, even that of enemies. They act and react in predictable ways, thus you expect them to continue acting that way. Why take wedding vows if you do not trust the words of your spouse to be? Typically, what you do, is you take words, watch actions, and if they match, you accept that as trustworthy (thus building trust).
You mean like DosBOX or ScummVM? Third party executables required to run older games? What about glide3d, also third party software required for other games? Are you also outraged that those do not have a warning?
They come implied. I do, really, wish they'd list which games use dosbox, however. There are certain games i'm more likely to buy for using dosbox, while other games i'm less likely to buy if they use dosbox. That said, the compatibility layers are reasonably necessary. I can't buy a gameboy game from GOG and expect it to run without a gameboy or an emulator of some kind. The same thing applies to DOS games.
Infosec is not an organization. It's a description of a field.
Certain links and grammar in this post lead me to believe otherwise. I stand corrected. As it's not even a centralized authority, it makes it even harder to take seriously definitions set forth, since everyone would have their own definition, with certain members having repeated definitions established by individual centralized authorities (like their professors).
The article doesn't call him a script kiddie. It calls the virus a script-kiddie style virus. Do link one that does call him that if you have one though.
Edit: ignore the above request, found one such link:
http://self.gutenberg.org/articles/Script_kiddie I was just about to say, on that. I picked him up on the annecdote that he was not only classified as such, but also pulled off hex-editing the thing. I don't think i could've stumbled on an even better example, outside of the skids i've personally had to deal with (my personal favorite is this guy who went around using RATs [i learned the term from him, since back in the day we just generically called them trojans, since they were much fewer back in the early 2000s], and he had a VB program working he had found, or something, and he could shut down certain chatrooms with it, but he'd constantly have to restart it since it'd crash on him constantly [he would skype call with me while doing this stuff as i tried to siphon little bits of data from him to hopefully catch him]).