Here's a chance for you to improve your standpoint; I'd recommend taking two minutes aside, typing both names into Google and reading a bit about both people first. You might learn something ;)
They are both smart mathematicians, but if you trust user code and don't check for conditions that are that well known, or have set up some automatic system to catch these issues (ala GCCs automatic warning if you use gets()) then yes, you are an idiot.
If you get owned by something that isn't well known, by a bug in the CPU, by a corrupt compiler, by a cross site script attack ten years ago, fine, but not something that everybody should know is dangerous.
Comments
Why? These two people are clearly idiots.
Here's a chance for you to improve your standpoint; I'd recommend taking two minutes aside, typing both names into Google and reading a bit about both people first. You might learn something ;)
They are both smart mathematicians, but if you trust user code and don't check for conditions that are that well known, or have set up some automatic system to catch these issues (ala GCCs automatic warning if you use gets()) then yes, you are an idiot.
If you get owned by something that isn't well known, by a bug in the CPU, by a corrupt compiler, by a cross site script attack ten years ago, fine, but not something that everybody should know is dangerous.
You did look into the actual bug that tripped up djb? It's a bit more complex than you seem to think.
The parent was joking.
There are many idiots who would write that without joking though. Absent the /s sarcasm tag, we don't know.