Slashdot Mirror


Network Adapter Keeps Talking While a PC Is Asleep

Al writes "Researchers at Microsoft and the University of California, San Diego have developed a network adapter that lets a computer enter sleep mode without disrupting the network connection. The adapter, dubbed Somniloquy (meaning to talk in one's sleep), consists of a gumstix running embedded Linux, 64MB of RAM and a 2G SD memory card, connected via USB. The adapter keeps the network connection going and the researchers have also developed a simplified IM client and bittorrent client that carry out more complicated tasks autonomously, only waking the computer if, for example, an actualy IM is received or a download is completed."

188 comments

  1. So in other words... by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So in other words you still have a computer running, just not your main computer.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:So in other words... by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Funny

      So in other words you still have a computer running, just not your main computer.

      How's it gonna help those of us that download more than 2 gigabytes of porn^Wlinux distros at a time?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:So in other words... by mrphoton · · Score: 1

      To be hoist, one of the main reasons I turn my office computer off when I go home is so it is not hacked by script kiddies at night - I don't think I need a non updating embedded linux system running all the time on my network.

    3. Re:So in other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other words, if you're a PC, you won't need a wife to keep talking while you're asleep.

    4. Re:So in other words... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One of the reasons I don't turn off my office computer at night is because, if some pathetic script kiddie walks on water all the way through thousands of hours of preventative labour and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of top tier hardware all the way down to my desktop windows PC, I want to see it first thing, so I won't have had my coffee before I stab myself through the eyeball with a ballpoint.

      Seriously? You think you're safer by having it off 16 hours a day? Moreover, your tech people think that it's acceptable to have an environment where the security precaution is to turn off your computer when you're not using it?

      Wow. Just...Wow...

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    5. Re:So in other words... by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      Seriously? You think you're safer by having it off 16 hours a day? Moreover, your tech people think that it's acceptable to have an environment where the security precaution is to turn off your computer when you're not using it?

      You would be surprised of how often tech "pros" do something stupid. I've had some people not update Windows because it might "mess something up" then others still have IE 6 because some outdated intranet program needs it, other times they have had non-updated anti-virus, run everything as admin, and a whole lot of other random bad ideas.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    6. Re:So in other words... by tepples · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How's it gonna help those of us that download more than 2 gigabytes of porn^Wlinux distros at a time?

      Wake the host PC after each GB and flush the buffer.

    7. Re:So in other words... by loteck · · Score: 1

      thousands of hours of preventative labour and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of top tier hardware

      Yes, how silly of his "tech people" to think that, especially since every office has tech people, and has that same expensive investment in their complex IT infrastructure, right!?

      Don't be obtuse. If your average under-served office with 1-5 (most likely infected) Windows PCs would shut down more often, it'd be better for both the environment and IT security as a whole.

    8. Re:So in other words... by Tdawgless · · Score: 1

      I only run an anti-virus once every six months or so... I still have never gotten a virus. Also, it's bad practice to update 'just because'. Period. 80% of outages come from a Change and much of it is unnecessary. Not saying you shouldn't apply important updates, but you shouldn't apply EVERYTHING just for the sake of it. (As a side note, people who brag about high uptime is equally retarded for the opposite reason... they're usually the one missing the important updates)

    9. Re:So in other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say it's pretty much 100% certain that the machine will not get pwned while he's away from his desk. Not only that, but why SHOULD he leave it on all night? Electricity may be cheap, but it's not free - and most of the inexpensive office PCs I've encountered get a severe case of the stupids if you try to hibernate them.

    10. Re:So in other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, aside from the un-updated antivirus, the ideas you talk about are good ones.

      Good companies pay to have something called a "test" system. You download the patches, test them, and if it breaks something you either patch the broken part or don't install the patch that will break everything else.

      Good companies don't immediately jump to the next version number - that's why Linux has a "Stable" and "Unstable" version. Stable is the rock-solid, workhorse, thousands-of-hours-of-uptime ready one. Unstable is the We-think-this-works,-run-it-for-a-few-months version.

    11. Re:So in other words... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      Sure...On the desktop. That's why we still get viruses from people clicking on bad webpages, etc.

      But there is nothing going around (that anyone has identified) that will blow through firewall after firewall and install it self across locked down subnets.

      I can't even remember the last time I saw an infection that wasn't caused by a user doing something silly, and the only time it "spreads" is when the user tells other users about the stupid site they went to and they go too.

      There is no excuse not to have tight firewalls, hardcore email virus scanning/.exe filtering, etc, etc. All that stuff can be done with OSS and freeware. If people are infecting office PCs without the user being present, that's a HUGE problem.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    12. Re:So in other words... by Dogtanian · · Score: 4, Funny

      You think you're safer by having it off 16 hours a day?

      Dude, if I was having it off for 16 hours a day, I wouldn't give a flying **** about some shitty PC security!

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    13. Re:So in other words... by Luke+has+no+name · · Score: 2, Informative

      But it IS safer to have your computer off than on.

      Moreover, your tech people think that it's acceptable to have an environment where the security precaution is to turn off your computer when you're not using it?

      If it is THE precaution, then it would be bad. Having it as A precaution, if you don't have a strong firewall/gateway, isn't bad.

    14. Re:So in other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow that is a sentence full of dirty words that I am too intoxicated to rearrange to in a more hilarious manner. Instead, I'm going to deflect back to big brutherz and p.c. phonz home etc.

    15. Re:So in other words... by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      I only run an anti-virus once every six months or so... I still have never gotten a virus.

      -you- might have not gotten a virus, but I'm sure I'm safe to say that you know a heck of a lot more about computers than the average employee using a computer. Most of them just need a "click here and run the program to see a cute kitten" and they will install a trojan willingly.

      Also, it's bad practice to update 'just because'. Period. 80% of outages come from a Change and much of it is unnecessary. Not saying you shouldn't apply important updates, but you shouldn't apply EVERYTHING just for the sake of it. (As a side note, people who brag about high uptime is equally retarded for the opposite reason... they're usually the one missing the important updates)

      Sure, but a lot of them I would say were missing the "important updates", I mean, seriously, who still has XP Service Pack 1 installed... in 2008? Apparently the tech guys in one of my jobs I was at for a while.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    16. Re:So in other words... by noidentity · · Score: 2, Funny

      So in other words you still have a computer running, just not your main computer.

      Don't worry, they're working on a solution which allows the network computer to go to sleep as well without disrupting the network connection. Perhaps they could add a second network computer that allows the first to power down...

    17. Re:So in other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't think that's the kind of buffer Shakrai is interested in flushing

    18. Re:So in other words... by The_mad_linguist · · Score: 2, Funny

      'sup dawg, I heard you like computers, so I put a computer in your computer so you can download while you sleep.

    19. Re:So in other words... by dave562 · · Score: 3, Informative
      -you- might have not gotten a virus, but I'm sure I'm safe to say that you know a heck of a lot more about computers than the average employee using a computer. Most of them just need a "click here and run the program to see a cute kitten" and they will install a trojan willingly.

      I think it's time to put this one to rest. In any sort of corporate environment where "employees" are using computers, there should be multiple layers of defense to eat the 'click here to see the kitten' program before it makes it to the desktop. Between anti-virus on the email server, content filters and the like on the perimeter and anti-virus on the desktop, it should be next to impossible for an employee to get a virus.

      I'll be the first to admit that having to have those various levels of security is pretty insane, but it is what it is. Where I work we use Websense to filter malicious content from the web. We route our email through Postini (Google) first and then scan it on the Exchange server before it gets delivered to the users' mailboxes. Then we're running AV on the desktop and Firefox as the default browser (with AdBlock) to pick up whatever Websense doesn't filter. It sucks to have to run the network that way, but it has kept infections down to zero so far this year. One of the pluses is that the users are starting to run Firefox at home because they appreciate the lack of ads at work.

    20. Re:So in other words... by aix+tom · · Score: 1

      (As a side note, people who brag about high uptime is equally retarded for the opposite reason... they're usually the one missing the important updates)

      What? In a couple of weeks I will shut down a box with 1247 days of uptime because of a hardware upgrade. All the important updates were done on that box continuously. Why would updates destroy your uptime when you use a real server OS and do some preliminary testing of the updates?

      ;-P

    21. Re:So in other words... by wampus · · Score: 1

      You would be surprised of how often tech "pros" do something stupid. I've had some people not update Windows because it might "mess something up" then others still have IE 6 because some outdated intranet program needs it

      So the correct course of action is to throw patches into production without testing and break compatibility business apps? Where do you work? It sounds exciting.

    22. Re:So in other words... by wampus · · Score: 1

      If you are taking some service on a box down to update it, what is the damn difference if you reboot the entire box?

    23. Re:So in other words... by billcopc · · Score: 1

      There are hundreds of millions of computers on the internet, many of them 24/7. Do you think their sysadmins power them off to reduce the risk of infection ? No. Ideally, you should treat a PC as "tainted" from the moment you plug it into an untrusted network. In practice, having an unpatched Windows box on the internet for maybe 5 minutes is enough to get it breached, because out of those hundreds of millions of computers, a significant chunk of them are already infected, and scanning for new victims to bork.

      Statistically, sometimes I wonder how we manage to get any real data out there, with all the hijinx going on.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    24. Re:So in other words... by fireman+sam · · Score: 1

      Hey, your link didn't work. I tried to "click here to see a cute kitten" but I didn't see anything, can you email me the link my email is administrator@desktop_pc-10543.nasa.gov thanks

      --
      it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
    25. Re:So in other words... by aix+tom · · Score: 1

      If you update something and there is no reboot needed do do it, why should you reboot?

    26. Re:So in other words... by aix+tom · · Score: 1

      Also, a lot of times you don't have to take services offline to update them. Just install the update, then reload the service and everything is dandy without anybody noticing.

    27. Re:So in other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So they can't afford an off-the-shelf firewall router and a free anti-virus? High end security is hard. Low end security, which would stop damn near everything, is practically free.

      Look, I know where you're coming from: any turned off zombie is a good zombie. But just accepting you're pwned and giving up is pathetic.

    28. Re:So in other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just F-ing great, Microsoft has figured out a way to download malware onto your computer while it's turned off.

    29. Re:So in other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      use a bigger sd card?

    30. Re:So in other words... by Sadsfae · · Score: 1

      To be hoist, one of the main reasons I turn my office computer off when I go home is so it is not hacked by script kiddies at night

      Your office computer has a routable, public facing ip address? Surely your company has heard of NAT?

      --
      Have a squat over at the hobo house.
    31. Re:So in other words... by indiechild · · Score: 1

      Not sure why your post was modded insightful. He didn't say his only precaution was to turn the PC off.

      Besides, when his PC is off, then the script kiddy can't get to it. Makes sense to me. And saves a bucketload of electricity.

      Yours is one of the less plausible excuses I've heard for keeping desktop PCs on 24 hours a day.

    32. Re:So in other words... by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Some sage products blew up if IE7 was installed a few years ago, and one or two Server 2003 updates caused the serverside database to consume 100% cpu. Then theres SP3 which rendered some computers unbootable, SP2 which caused IT headaches all over the place, etc etc.

      WSUS was created for a reason, you know, some updates really can blow things up.

    33. Re:So in other words... by Locutus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      much like the OLPC design for their mesh networking. Another cool thing they, the OLPC people, was to let the CPU sleep but the video card keeps displaying what's on the screen.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    34. Re:So in other words... by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      Fallacy here.
      Ok, the GP was a moron, but it doesn't explain why you would not turn your computer off.
      Unless you enjoy wasting electricity, I don't see any reason.

    35. Re:So in other words... by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

      Better yet; visualization -> Special 'asleep OS' that can only listen/talk to the network and read/write to storage devices.

      --
      Here be signatures
    36. Re:So in other words... by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

      You are reading /. from a browser... Hmmmm... there is not a single possibility that you could be raped by a-... letÂs say...- browser exploit?

      --
      Here be signatures
    37. Re:So in other words... by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      Awesome. :D

    38. Re:So in other words... by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      I have service pack 1 active and running in 2009. Strangely I have quite a bit of uptime.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    39. Re:So in other words... by donaldm · · Score: 1

      I only run an anti-virus once every six months or so... I still have never gotten a virus.

      Anti-virus? I can't find that on my Fedora laptop and I leave my machine on 24x7. In addition I update on a regular basis (once or twice a week) and only reboot when I get a new kernel (about twice a month) if I feel like it. Total updates per month come to approx 200 MB when using delta rpms. I do make sure each member of my family has a separate login and no one works as root, so I have yet to see or experience a Linux virus.

      Oh you mean anti-virus for MS Windows? Well I do have virtualised MS XP SP2 but for the life of me I can't work out what to use this for. :)

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
    40. Re:So in other words... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      I think it's time to put this one to rest. In any sort of corporate environment where "employees" are using computers, there should be multiple layers of defense to eat the 'click here to see the kitten' program before it makes it to the desktop.

      ... one layer of which should consist of something similar to a gibbet, on which hang the putrifying remains of the last person who caused damage to the system by clicking on the cute kitten trojan.

      The Bastard Operator From Hell did (does) have a serious point behind those lime pits (buried in the pits, even). The gibbet ... well the very word includes implications of being highly visible to the target audience for whom it is meant to be a deterrent. Details are location-dependent.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    41. Re:So in other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      so, every 10 minutes with a decent connection. maybe the 2GB is upgradable.

    42. Re:So in other words... by Lusa · · Score: 1

      It's not always stupid, sometimes we are not given a choice. I still have IE6. Not because I want to but because my companies customers want to. Plenty of call centres still use IE6 and see updating as an expensive and unecessary task. They usually are running on severely locked down machines with no access to the internet or even the intranet in some cases. So the risk to them not upgrading is pretty low versus the cost of regression testing what might be quite a large number of different applications and not to forget the additional cost of fixing the issues found from testing. So for my development environment I just put my IE6 in a readonly VM, I also have one for IE7 and IE8. The appserver and databases live elsewhere. It reduces the risk of infection and allows me to disable unecessary features as I *only* need the browser for one task.

    43. Re:So in other words... by asdf7890 · · Score: 1

      How's it gonna help those of us that download more than 2 gigabytes of porn^Wlinux distros at a time?

      The summary states that the storage is provided by an SD card. If the reader copes with SDHC then you could potentially chuck 32Gb in there.

    44. Re:So in other words... by dave562 · · Score: 1

      I like the gibbet idea, but I've always been partial to pikes myself. Not only are polearms bad ass in and of themselves, they make great places to put the heads of the conquered or others who need to be made examples of.

    45. Re:So in other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now you just need some non-windows platform to sync the deal of being virus/malware free.

    46. Re:So in other words... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      but I've always been partial to pikes myself. Not only are polearms bad ass in and of themselves, they make great places to put the heads of the conquered or others who need to be made examples of.

      Personally, I think you'd be hard put to beat a billhook for getting up close and personal. They were my tool of choice for doing forestry work as a youth, combining the heft of a handaxe with a fair length of edge and a piercing tip to the bill. Putting them onto a pole (making the early pike) gives you reach, but makes them much more cumbersome.
      I wonder if you can still get them? The local DIY stores don't have them, and I've got an out-of-control hedge in the back garden that needs a serious talking-to. But the BTCV is still selling them (which doesn't surprise me in the slightest, once I think about it) ; I really should get back together with them - forestry work is fun.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    47. Re:So in other words... by sjames · · Score: 1

      I've had some people not update Windows because it might "mess something up"

      Sadly, they may have a point. Hopefully they update a test dummy and then approve it if that doesn't crash and burn. Unfortunately, it's a balancing act. The only real question is would you rather plunge into the starving gator pit on the left or the starving lion pit on the right.

  2. Yo Dawg by decipher_saint · · Score: 4, Funny

    We put a computer on your computer so you can download while you download...

    --
    crazy dynamite monkey
    1. Re:Yo Dawg by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 4, Funny

      The question is whether the NIC can go into a power saving mode and be awoken by an even simpler device when a packet comes in.

    2. Re:Yo Dawg by ichthus · · Score: 2, Informative

      I use Wake On Lan to wake my PC. The same thing should work for this.

      --
      sig: sauer
    3. Re:Yo Dawg by tepples · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I use Wake On Lan to wake my PC. The same thing should work for this.

      Some applications, such as BitTorrent, require a continuous stream of packets. If you can offload processing these packets to another device that draws less electric power and keep the PC turned off until the device is ready to commit its changes, you can save money on your electric bill.

    4. Re:Yo Dawg by sukotto · · Score: 1

      well, there are lots of turtles down there. one of them can turn it on.

      --
      Come play free flash games on Kongregate!
    5. Re:Yo Dawg by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Yes. The device runs NetBSD.

    6. Re:Yo Dawg by KibibyteBrain · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Still, the issue remains, why not just have two computers, a gumstix based box that runs bittorrent 24/7 and forwards the data to a cifs share on the windows box, and then a windows box that is set to sleep when idle but WOL? I see no benefit in tying the low power headless machine to your other computer. I essentially do this now, running my 24/7 tasks on an Atom based desktop and then sleeping my workstation when im not sitting in front of it. I also run my IM client on the remote host too, so the only benefit of their system over mine is they have an API that wakes the host machine on certain events, which I could implement if I really wanted that functionality.

    7. Re:Yo Dawg by pclminion · · Score: 1

      Or you could just shut the whole thing off. From my understanding, the only useful reason to have a BitTorrent client running is to either download or upload data. Without the main PC running, how will you access main storage in order to save and retrieve this information? Unless the network stick has several GB of persistent storage on it (which is possible, of course) I can't see how that would be useful.

      But if we're just looking to save power and torrent shit at the same time, why not use a small, low-power device, such as a multifunction mobile, and port a BT client to it?

      I fail to see the purpose of this hack, cool as it is. Basically it's a tiny, low-power computer which connects to your PC. Why not just do that over a USB link and gain the advantage of a portable network device you can take anywhere?

    8. Re:Yo Dawg by Hymer · · Score: 1

      "The question is whether the NIC can go into a power saving mode and be awoken by an even simpler device when a packet comes in."
      Yes it can, it is called Wake On Lan (WOL) and it has been a part of almost all NICs for almost a decade.
      You send a "Magic Packet" to the adapter using its MAC address... and magically you PC powers up.
      The point is probably to control a PC over longer distances and WOL can only be used on the same LAN segment.

    9. Re:Yo Dawg by kthejoker · · Score: 1

      When you say "no benefit", then concede in the next point "I essentially do this now", then point out their "only benefit" (so does it have no benefits or only one benefit?), then fail to acknowledge the difference in physical footprint, cost, and potential power draw between a USB-based network adapter and an "Atom based desktop" ..

      do you even realize the things you're writing?

    10. Re:Yo Dawg by gmiernicki · · Score: 1

      LOL

    11. Re:Yo Dawg by tepples · · Score: 1

      Why not just do that over a USB link and gain the advantage of a portable network device you can take anywhere?

      Because most portable network devices involve another $60 per month phone bill that I don't want to pay.

  3. Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by jdb2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    .....their incompetency once again.

    Apparently Timothy doesn't understand how to use Google, or, dare I say, even the Slashdot "Old Stories" search

    Almost the exact same story was posted on Monday, April 27 .

    jdb2

    1. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by MilesTails · · Score: 1

      I thought my dupe senses were tingling!

    2. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yes we ALL read every story that pops up from months ago. If it was last week ok... But from months ago? Im sorry the rest of us do not live on this website...

      So what if it was a dupe...

    3. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You see, he would have seen the original article but his computer was in sleep mode at the time.

    4. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by MilesTails · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well you are on about a par with us.for correcting someone's grammar. P.S You are missing a double quotation mark.

    5. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say the troll is the most pathetic for trolling the dupe comment on a dupe.

    6. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by Desler · · Score: 3, Funny

      Posting dupes of 4 month old stories is the Slashdot way!

    7. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by DeathMagnetic · · Score: 1

      I don't know. Usually doesn't take that long...

    8. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by corbettw · · Score: 3, Funny

      Now if only they could come up with a NIC card that could do that when the editors are asleep.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    9. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by ichthus · · Score: 1

      And then, you became the most pathetic for trolling the troll who trolled the dupe.

      And now, I am the most pathetic for trolling the troll who trolled the troll who trolled the dupe.

      --
      sig: sauer
    10. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      "Apparently Timothy doesn't understand how to use Google [google.com], "

      If you're going to tell someone they don't know how to use google and then you link it, at least have the link go to the finished search, because with just the link going to google.com it looks like you don't know how to google either.

      same goes for any search engine, including /.'s

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    11. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by Desler · · Score: 1

      True, by 4 months it has usually been duped at least 3 times.

    12. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sup dawg, I herd you like trolls...

    13. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by jdb2 · · Score: 1

      "Apparently Timothy doesn't understand how to use Google [google.com], " If you're going to tell someone they don't know how to use google and then you link it, at least have the link go to the finished search, because with just the link going to google.com it looks like you don't know how to google either. same goes for any search engine, including /.'s

      So you're saying that because I didn't spoon-feed the reader a link, which any 10 year old who has Internet access could have found by typing 'somniloquy usb network [ENTER]' in the text input field on the Google home page, that demonstrates my incompetency?

      Wow, either you've invented some new form of logic that is beyond the grasp of the rest of us or you just spewed out a non-sequitur which proves you're a lazy hypocrite. ( In the time it took you to write your reply one could have performed the aforementioned Google search 10 times over, with variations )

    14. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now, I am the most pathetic for trolling the troll who trolled the troll who trolled the dupe.

      ... who swallowed the dog to catch the cat, and swallowed the cat to catch the bird, and swallowed the bird to catch the spider...

    15. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by taucross · · Score: 1

      Now I'm the most
      Pathetic troll
      for trolling the troll
      who trolled the dupe
      Now i'm the most
      pathetic troll
      for singing this song
      in an infinite loop

      --
      "In the absence of the ability to establish the attribute of truth they tried to establish the noble attributes."
    16. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Almost the exact same story was posted on Monday, April 27 .

      May I recomend everyone begin submitting as many stories as they can find about cell phones being used to track traffic patterns. After all, /. has never posted a story about it. NEVER! Can you believe it?! It's amazing! Hopefully, one day they'll come to their senses, and post a story or two on the subject.

      You can read more here:

      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/31/168228

      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/19/143247

      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/19/0745248

      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/01/159241

      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/16/076217

      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/30/1243247

      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/13/0428229

      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/10/2337259

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    17. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by sootman · · Score: 1

      Actually, slashdot has had VERY few dupes in the last several months. It was always a joke, then it got REALLY bad for a while, but I'm here just as much as ever and I haven't seen a dupe in quite a while. Not like it used to be at all.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    18. Re:Slashdot editor's demonstrate..... by T-Bone-T · · Score: 1

      What you did was just plain rude. It is like telling someone to check out this cool story on /. from 3 months ago but only giving them a link to the main page. If you aren't going to link directly to what you are talking about, don't link to anything at all.

  4. Microsoft using Linux? by markdavis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Researchers at Microsoft"..."have developed"..."running embedded Linux"

    Um, was that a misprint or did hell just freeze over? Hasn't MS referred to Linux as a "virus", a "cancer", "un-American", a "patent violator", and "communistic"?

    1. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by nycguy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Will be researchers formerly at Microsoft "running with an embedded chair" after tomorrow I'm sure...

    2. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by AndrewNeo · · Score: 2, Funny

      If only this hadn't been posted in April their jobs could have been saved!

    3. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by qw0ntum · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apparently not.

      Who would have thunk it, researchers at Microsoft getting the task done in the best way possible rather than being dogmatic.

      Sheesh. Get over the FUD.

      --
      'Every story, if continued long enough, ends in death.' --Ernest Hemingway
    4. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by bmajik · · Score: 4, Informative

      if the work came out of MSR, they have a very high degree of platform & technology autonomy.

      MSR is basically academia, without classroom requirements. There are some product unit partnership projects where obviously a focus on shipping/evolutionary MS platforms or technologies make sense for the problem domain, but more abstract problems are often solved entirely with non-MS tools.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    5. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Both of you need to chill. Embedded linux is practically the standard for networking and routing devices...If they'd used anything else it would have been weird and worth of comment.

      Using something else would have been like having something other than an RJ45 port on it.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    6. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using something else would have been like having something other than an RJ45 port on it.

      I'm sure there's a group, somewhere in the bowels of Redmond, trying to do exactly that. They'd love nothing more than to have a real "Microsoft Network", 100% incompatible with everything else.

    7. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by qw0ntum · · Score: 1

      Which is my point exactly.

      --
      'Every story, if continued long enough, ends in death.' --Ernest Hemingway
    8. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by Nimey · · Score: 1

      VxWorks is also quite standard for consumer routers.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    9. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in your dreams at wow, probably. MS loves windows, that is why they bought SUSE. Assimilate, Ameliorate and Annihilate.

    10. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Embedded linux is practically the standard for networking and routing devices"....then why does Microsoft have Windows CE? And are you saying the Windows operating system doesn't implement networking or routing?

      And yes, Microsoft choosing to use embedded linux over its own TCP/IP stack implementation and Windows Mobile/CE is significant. The fact that users and certain manufacturers understand that embedded linux is far more powerful, adaptable, and open solution doesn't mean that Microsoft's sales goals for its embedded products has changed.

      I'd bet that the UCSD crowd started the project and found they HAD to partner with Microsoft in order to get the sleep mode functionality on Microsoft's PROPRIETARY OS. They didn't have the source code and the API's were the normal Microsoft crap that doesn't quite actually do it is supposed to be doing.

    11. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by phoxix · · Score: 1

      "Researchers at Microsoft"..."have developed"..."running embedded Linux"

      Um, was that a misprint or did hell just freeze over? Hasn't MS referred to Linux as a "virus", a "cancer", "un-American", a "patent violator", and "communistic"?

      Microsoft Research helped create Xen virtualization for Linux ...

      Hell they even *ported* Windows XP to Xen 1.0

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xen#MS_Windows_systems_as_guests

    12. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, MSR employees are not allowed to use Linux sources. I know that for sure, I made an internship in MSR a couple of years ago.

    13. Re:Microsoft using Linux? by richardablitt · · Score: 1

      It just goes to show that 2009 is not the year of Windows on the embedded computer.

  5. Awesome by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 2, Funny

    only waking the computer if, for example, an actualy IM is received or a download is completed."

    So now if my falling asleep leads to the computer falling asleep, it'll wake up to wake me up when it finished downloading.

    It sounds like a dislexic "Yo Dawg..."

  6. Less is More. More is Less by sexconker · · Score: 1

    "carry out more complicated tasks autonomously"

  7. Great! by parlancex · · Score: 1

    Now all we need is a network cable that can carry on the tasks of this NIC allowing it to sleep when it isn't busy, waking it when it needs to wake the main computer! Wait...

    1. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *runs off to patent office*

  8. So much for... by ooomphlaa · · Score: 1

    So much for letting sleeping computers lie.

    --
    "I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me." --Hunter S. Thompson
    1. Re:So much for... by Abreu · · Score: 2

      Download's not dead which can eternal lie.
      And with strange torrents even NICs may die.

      --
      No sig for the moment.
  9. O RLY? by FlyingSquidStudios · · Score: 1

    'Round these here parts, we've had a device like that for years. We call it a network router.

  10. "an actualy IM is received" by jaymz2k4 · · Score: 1

    hmm, that makes sense.

    --
    jaymz
    1. Re:"an actualy IM is received" by sharkey · · Score: 1

      Actualy is a perfectly cromulent word.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  11. So... by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1, Funny

    .. does this mean my botnet can continue to spam folks even if they turn off their PCs? If so, this is a great feature!

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  12. so a lower cost ver of the killer nic? by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    so a lower cost ver of the killer nic?

    1. Re:so a lower cost ver of the killer nic? by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      does killer nic have a 2gb flash card?

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    2. Re:so a lower cost ver of the killer nic? by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

      it can use usb flash divers and usb hdds.

  13. If They'd Only Had This For Token Ring by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    If they'd only had this for Token Ring maybe one of its shortcomings wouldn't have hurt it so badly.

    (Yes, I know they were supposed to close a pass-through relay on power loss -- and how often somehow they didn't.)

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:If They'd Only Had This For Token Ring by Falconhell · · Score: 1

      I miss token ring you know, one of the great pleasures in life was to tell the boss/customer we had lost the token, and ask him to look around his office for it........

  14. CAR ANALOGY TIME!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    are you ever in a position where you need your car to slooooowly move forward all night? Well, imagine a device that let's you do that while the motor "sleeps"! Just plug it into your lighter adapter, set the device out in front of the car, and go ahead and turn that engine off - by sunrise your car will be over yonder.

    Magic? No... just a fully functional electric car that may well have more torque than your own. Or something. /analogy

  15. Mainframe architecture revisted ... by golodh · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It's funny how today's PCs continue to take architectural queues from earlier mainframe and minicomputer designs.

    Remember when your IBM mainframe had an array of special I/O processors? Well, the bus arbitrator on your motherboard looks suspiciously like one of those. And remember when disk arrays because "smart"? Well ... just looks at the electronics on the average SATA IDE drive and you'll see what I mean. It manages the hardware, and you only talk to the drive's on-board controller, never to the drive itself.

    And now this network controller. Pardon me, I mean network card.

    1. Re:Mainframe architecture revisted ... by paeanblack · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recapitulation_theory

      It wasn't true in biology, but it is certainly true for computer design.

    2. Re:Mainframe architecture revisted ... by snspdaarf · · Score: 1

      As long as my computer stays a PC, and not a "baby 36." Just typing those two numbers made my head hurt.

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    3. Re:Mainframe architecture revisted ... by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      And remember when disk arrays because "smart"? Well ... just looks at the electronics on the average SATA IDE drive and you'll see what I mean.

      Yeah, but to be fair IDE (the original) has been around- and even standard- for a long time now. It's not like this is something just coming back.

      Actually, I'm kind of surprised that a standard that was originally associated with the lower end of the hard drive market- and until recently still the mass-market favourite, its philosophy continued by SATA- is one based around each drive having its own "smart" electronics. You'd have thought that from a cost point of view that it would have been less favoured for that reason.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    4. Re:Mainframe architecture revisted ... by mishikal · · Score: 1

      It's funny how today's PCs continue to take architectural queues from earlier mainframe and minicomputer designs.

      I don't get it. What do long lines have to do with how a home PC is designed? Or this a reference to the number of people who queue while waiting for windows to complete a task?

    5. Re:Mainframe architecture revisted ... by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

      It's funny how today's PCs continue to take architectural queues

      Yes, but modern PCs take them with no sense of priorities, so the queues just end up in a big heap instead of a neat, orderly stack.

      (I think you cued my inner grammar Nazi, and he didn't have to wait in a queue)

    6. Re:Mainframe architecture revisted ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      remember when disk arrays because "smart"

      The commodore 1541 was some time ago.

  16. This already happens by Anonymusing · · Score: 1

    Check all your Ethernet connections, at all terminations, especially if you are a bank or R&D place. Has someone snuck a battery-operated Linux gumstick somewhere, transparently mimicking the MAC address at both ends of its traffic, secretly recording and transmitting all your traffic to a nefarious third source? You don't usually notice somebody ADDING something to your network -- of course, in the two seconds of downtime it took to insert it, you probably just thought it was a blip. Maybe you didn't even notice.

    --
    Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
    1. Re:This already happens by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Why run on battery when decent switches (used by banks...) have PoE available?

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
  17. problem solved! by cashman73 · · Score: 1
    Much to the disdain of husbands around the world, women have known how to talk in their sleep for years! Perhaps they should hire a woman to do this?

    // Ducks! ;-)

  18. Somniloquy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Somniloquy (meaning to talk in one's sleep)

    English motherfucker, we speak it.

    1. Re:Somniloquy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>Somniloquy (meaning to talk in one's sleep)

      >English motherfucker, we speak it.

      Oh grow up.

    2. Re:Somniloquy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He did. He grew from smart arse to douche.

  19. the killer xeno pro and ultra by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

    both these nics are supposed to have this functionality.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
  20. Exit The Grid and Become Human by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You need to turn on; tune in; and drop out.

    I am not advocating drug use.

    Yours In Serotonin,
    K. Trout,

  21. Research? This is already a product by xianthax · · Score: 2, Interesting

    NIC's with on board processors and off load for these types of applications have been on the market for several years.

    http://www.bigfootnetworks.com/products/

    I think the only difference here is the operation while sleeping which could easily be done with a killer nic with firmware/driver changes

  22. DRAC by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

    This sounds strangely familiar to a Dell Remote Access Controller, where it's basically a computer inside of your computer that interfaces with its various input and output buses and has its own NIC that's always powered on as long as the PSU(s) in the system have power. As long as the system is plugged in and the DRAC has an active network connection, the system can be accessed remotely no matter what state the physical system is in. I've performed many remote OS installs from 5 states away with these nifty little guys. Now if someone or some company could come up with a standard interface for remote access controllers, then we'd really be in business. As it is now these guys are all proprietary (and hella expensive).

    1. Re:DRAC by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

      IPMI

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseboard_management_controller

      But yeah they're not terribly compatible between vendors.
       

      --
      Deleted
  23. lol! by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

    It's funny how today's PCs continue to take architectural queues from earlier mainframe and minicomputer designs.

    And fifos, and skip lists too!

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  24. How about security? by bughunter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My first thought was "IMs? What about malware, etc?" In other words, a firewall on an embedded system in the NIC would be far more useful than something that lets your CPU sleep while you keep downloading porn.

    And then my second thought was "Great, another vulnerability for attack. Why hack someone's PC, which could have any configuration, when you can hack the monoculture of embedded processors in consumer NICs?"

    Either way, marketing this kind of NIC without addressing all of its security potentials/weaknesses would be hasty... and possibly even irresponsible.

    --
    I can see the fnords!
    1. Re:How about security? by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

      marketing this kind of NIC without addressing all of its security potentials/weaknesses would be hastyPotential? All of them?

      Care to list a single operating system where all of its potential security issues and weaknesses were addressed before it was released into the marketplace?

      It'd be tempting to list OpenBSD, but even that has had (and probably still has) unknown security issues, both potential and realised ones.

      Actually, operating systems are highly complex. Let's go for something more tangible and a lot less complex: List all potential security issues with box cutters. If you go back 10 years to 1999, would you at any point have placed "could allow terrorists to high jack four airliners and bring down two of the biggest office buildings in the world" on that list? I wouldn't - you'd have to be completely mental to think that'd even be remotely possible, even if you settle for the high jacking.

      What you're suggesting is putting a complete halt to every single piece of technological development in all fields.

    2. Re:How about security? by BikeHelmet · · Score: 1

      Either way, marketing this kind of NIC without addressing all of its security potentials/weaknesses would be hasty... and possibly even irresponsible.

      Seems to be working fine for Bigfoot. :P

      I don't think there's a huge number of vulnerabilities for an OS stripped down that much. The much reduced attack surface of the kernel and running applications will harden it to almost all exploits. Not all, but enough that it'll be rare to get hacked that way.

      After all, technically you can hack current NICs, but it's not every day that it happens. ;)

    3. Re:How about security? by bughunter · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yours is a fallacious interpretation of my statement. If I said "Eat your vegetables," an analogously false interpretation would be "Become a Vegan."

      --
      I can see the fnords!
  25. A bittorrent client? by bcmm · · Score: 1

    Does this wake the system up every time that 2GB has filled up then?

    --
    # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
    Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
    1. Re:A bittorrent client? by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      "Does this wake the system up every time that 2GB has filled up then?"

      yes, that's kinda the point, and you can probably increase the storage.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  26. Re-Post - USB-Based NIC Torrents... 04.27.09 by Browzer · · Score: 1

    http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/27/2310234

    and my comment to the first story: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1213805&cid=27741803

    I'm guessing the inventor's statistics "In the office environment, 52% of respondents left their machines on for remote access, and 35% did so to support applications running in the background, of which e-mail and IM were most popular (47%)." are still true.

    http://mesl.ucsd.edu/yuvraj/research/documents/Somniloquy-NSDI09-Yuvraj-Agarwal.pdf

  27. Is it just me? by SuseLover · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is this scary technology? Now your system can become a true zombie on a botnet while asleep. Couldn't a virus/worm just wake your system up and infect it?

    1. Re:Is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now your system can become a true zombie on a botnet while asleep. Couldn't a virus/worm just wake your system up and infect it?

      no, your computer would have been on anyways in this situation (idle-waiting on a download or IM)

    2. Re:Is it just me? by Neptunes_Trident · · Score: 1

      OH LOOK I JUST RECEIVED AN IM! Oh its the authorities telling me their on their way. On that note, couldn't this little device with its memory, easily log or retain past website access info? So any *cough* inquiring individual or *cough* group/gang/thugs access it 24/7 since you know, since its always on. And why do I get the feeling this is being developed ULTIMATELY for law enforcement, to snoop around while your at work or asleep? First business will adopt the tech, then they'll implement it on all home pc's and motherboards, network cards etc.. Promote the "convenience factor" then, in the end, stick it too us when magically, law reinforcement (and other undercover groups), find out they can use it to their benefit. Ah the future, so convenient, so intrusive. Do I really need to be bothered so much? No. I know my privacy rights. If my computer is offline then I am also offline, If its important, call me, don't IM me....idiots. I know a rat when I smell one.

    3. Re:Is it just me? by Deanalator · · Score: 1

      Why would it need to wake the system up?

    4. Re:Is it just me? by b1ad3runn3r · · Score: 1

      "Wake up! I need brainz and r hungry!" - Your friendly neighborhood botnet zombie

      --
      "Reality continues to ruin my life" - Calvin and Hobbes
    5. Re:Is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't have to, but the fact it could is scary. Wake it up to infect the host operating system, more than just the adapter.

  28. seen this somewhere before by v1 · · Score: 1

    Sounds a lot like Lights Out Management eh. Seen this in Sun and HP too.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:seen this somewhere before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes and HP and Sun had it long before Apple did.

  29. It's been done before.... by macraig · · Score: 1

    Though I can't cite an old /. post or other article, I was reading about a LAN adapter with embedded processor and RAM for download storage at least a year ago. I don't think it was early news of this same.

  30. A little too defensive? by Anachragnome · · Score: 0, Troll

    Anyone but me get the Willies seeing "Microsoft" and "BitTorrent" used together in such a fashion?

    Without having even reached the end of the paragraph I had already gone into "Yeah, right." mode.

    Seriously, with as much effort as Microsoft has put into DRM development, how can anything like this be expected to actually function the way WE, the end-user, want it to work?

    I find it exceedingly difficult to dismiss a past such as Microsoft possesses, and having some university name attached to the idea does nothing for me. Universities these days will do anything for a buck, much like Microsoft.

    And if I didn't already have a raging case of the Willies, throwing the name "Akamai" into the mix didn't help.

    1. Re:A little too defensive? by Anachragnome · · Score: 0, Troll

      "What DRM are you referring to? What will the DRM do? Will it prevent the comupter from sleeping? Will it prevent the computer from waking up? Will it prevent the network card from working? Will it prevent packets from arriving? What will Microsoft gain from this so-called DRM?"

      All very good questions that you do not answer and so remain.

      And that WAS the point of my comment. Too many questions simply because of the names involved. I didn't even touch on the fact LINUX is involved somehow. And who the fuck said I didn't read the article? Do you see the name "Akamai" in the summary?

      "...must not feed troll. Must not feed troll..."

    2. Re:A little too defensive? by cpghost · · Score: 1

      Anyone but me get the Willies seeing "Microsoft" and "BitTorrent" used together in such a fashion?

      Perhaps Microsoft are planning for the future or just feeling the recession: since their OS + patches keep getting bigger and bigger all the time, they may consider distributing them via BitTorrent to save bandwidth?

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    3. Re:A little too defensive? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Seriously, with as much effort as Microsoft has put into DRM development

      I shouldnt feed trolls but...

      MS doesnt put much into DRM development. They are at worst a purchaser of DRM (bad yes, but we treat the cause of the disease not the symptom) from other companies.

      The companies/organisations you should be angry at are:
      MPIAA
      RIAA
      Sony/Sony DADC (Securom/blu-ray)
      Thales Group (Tages)
      Macrovision (SafeDisk)
      and Apple (Fairplay or whatever their video DRM is called)

      I'm certain I've left one or two out but these are a start.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  31. When decent switches are hard to find by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why run on battery when decent switches (used by banks...) have PoE available?

    Because the switches and switch-router-NAT appliances marketed for use in homes or small businesses often aren't "decent switches", and because PoWLAN isn't yet available.

  32. Intel AMT LAN has been doing that for years by Glasswire · · Score: 1

    Management engine in the chipset has it's own IP stack and runs even when PC is off.

    1. Re:Intel AMT LAN has been doing that for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What would really be interesting would be a variant of Atom and a low-power chipset grafted into the full power x86 chipset, all under host OS control, i.e. in an asymmetric SMP mode, so the host OS can just power down the fast CPUs and RAM to keep its normal background tasks running on the power-miser CPU, RAM, and peripherals. Of course ideally it could mix and match devices and memory controllers, e.g. via soft power-off of internal PCIe ports and what not. It would even need to power down a fast multi-lane PCIe switch in favor of a slower single lane switch, but would have the benefit of being able to execute all OS tasks and apps, with greater power, speed, latency trade offs possible.

    2. Re:Intel AMT LAN has been doing that for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, Since 2005, and it uses the Treck TCP/IP stack, Happy hunting!

  33. Microsoft better be quick. by VulpesFoxnik · · Score: 1

    They make the mistake of using Linux.
    They should be running Windows CE!

    (Yes, this is a joke for those without humor sense. I'm actually somewhat happy to see linux used.)

    --
    RES PUBLICA NON DOMINETUR
  34. A Beowoulf cluster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    of Network Adapters!

  35. I bought one already! by fikx · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I already have a store-bought version of this on my PC! It doesn't use USB though...it uses cat5 as the bus and does much more than their hobby version....the box says "broadband router" but I'm a techy person...I read the specs and figured out what it REALLY was....

    --
    AB HOC POSSUM VIDERE DOMUM TUUM
  36. on a large scale network chatter by markringen · · Score: 1

    on a large scale network chatter costs energy, and causes power fluctuations strangely enough. these tiny fluctuations actually cause power-supply's in servers to break quicker, and that's why you should always separate the power of network devices. most switches are of truly crappy quality and thus destroy the stability of your power, allot of servers don't like this strangely enough! the best thing to do is to have them connected to a UPS or another external power-system. why can't anyone make a power-noise free switch?

  37. Romantics : Talking In Your Sleep by sukotto · · Score: 1

    >The adapter, dubbed Somniloquy (meaning to talk in one's sleep) ... keeps the network connection going ...
    >also developed a simplified IM client and bittorrent client that carry out more complicated tasks
    >autonomously, only waking the computer if, for example, an ... IM is received or a download is completed."
    .
    "Talking in Your Sleep" -- The Romatics
    [...]
    I hear the secrets that you keep;
    When you're talking in your sleep;
    I hear the secrets that your keep;
    When you're talking in your sleep;
    .
    When I hold you in my arms at night;
    Don't you know you're sleeping in the spotlight;
    And all the things that you keep inside;
    You tell me the secrets that you just can't hide;
    .
    You tell me that you love me;
    And you tell me that yuo need me;
    You tell me that you love me;
    And I know that I'm right;
    'Cause I hear it in the night;
    .
    I hear the secrets that you keep;
    When you're talking in your sleep;
    I hear the secerets that your keep;
    When yuo're talking in your sleep;
    [...]

    --
    Come play free flash games on Kongregate!
  38. microsoft using linux? by Gearoid_Murphy · · Score: 1

    perhaps today is the day Satan goes to work in a snow plow?, seriously though, is anyone else a little surprised at this?

    --
    prepare the survey weasels.
  39. Microsoft using linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Researchers at Microsoft... running embedded Linux. "

    I wonder why they didn't use Windows XP Embedded for this task. 64MB of RAM is plenty enought for Windows XP, right?

  40. Run lightweight system so hog can sleep? by Kaz+Kylheku · · Score: 1

    Instead of putting a pig operating system to sleep on the main board, while a daughter card runs Linux, it's a lot simpler to just run Linux on the main board.

  41. Re:Panties STINK! by ciderVisor · · Score: 1

    You need help.

    Wooooooo-wheeeeeeee, you need help !

    --
    Squirrel!
  42. so.. by anonymousNR · · Score: 1

    can i get rid of skype then ?

    --
    -- It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -- Aristotle
  43. Baby 36 by azrider · · Score: 1

    Just typing those two numbers made my head hurt.

    Why, between that and the AT-370 I had a perfectly working data centre in a box ;-)
    Of course, you had to know

    • JCL
    • 370 Assembler (without channel commands)
    • RPG-II (no RPG-III yet - that was for the S/38)
    • SSP

    But, it still was fun.

    --
    And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
    John 8:32(King James Version)
  44. Not news - already done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is already a NIC on the market that does this (and it runs Linux) so why is it suddenly news now that Microsoft has developed one?

  45. Oh BTW, I invented the freakin intertubes! by billcopc · · Score: 1

    These people have successfully recreated the Linksys NSLU2. Yaayyy!

    Any moron can buy a Gumstix and install Linux and TorrentFlux. All it takes is a shell script to send a WOL packet to the snoozing storage PC, dump the files on it and put it back to sleep. Or you could just treat the whole thing as a torrent appliance, hook up a USB-adapted hard drive and cut the redundant desktop PC completely out of the picture.

    There's nothing newsworthy about "inventing" a seedbox that runs on miniaturized PC hardware, because there is no technological gap to bridge. You buy the thing, you install the things on the thing, and then you use the thing. Most techies can do that in their sleep.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  46. Not to speak poorly of M$ researchers but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't this just a Bigfoot Networks Killer M1 NIC ( http://www.tomsguide.com/us/killer-m1-nic,review-1083.html ) with a USB port and a flash drive? Not to say that's not a great upgrade, but certainly not anything revolutionary or even original.

  47. Uhhh... by metachimp · · Score: 1

    Is the machine 'sleeping' or 'hibernating'? Because my Wii stays connected to the network when it's 'asleep', too. Doesn't sound like they 'invented' anything, just implemented a slick way to do something interesting.

    --
    The system has failed you, don't fail yourself. --Billy Bragg
  48. Microsoft research using Linux? by p.harshal · · Score: 0

    If the summery is correct. They actually used Linux instead of their own baby.

  49. IPMI for the masses by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

    Servers already have "lights out" management processors that perform similar functionality.

  50. Re:fp posts first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I dun wanna toss da salad! imareed IMMA LERN TO REED!

  51. There's no escape by consumer_whore · · Score: 1

    Now Windows Update can fuck your computer up even if it's turned off.

  52. Security Risk by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 1

    At night, when your main software firewall is off, people store illegal files in to your machines, causing FBI and other law enforcement agencies to knock on your door, costing thousands of dollars in legal fees, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars due to health conditions related to high stress, and also you will lose your home and your family due to bankruptcy and divorce.

    In short, you should never keep your machine plug in over night, let alone run a server.

    That is, until we have a better legal system, or anarchy where the true freedom lies.

  53. That is pimp!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yo dawg, I heard you like torrenting, so we put a computer in your computer so you can use your computer when you're not using your computer!

  54. not impressed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what we have here is a bandaid over the failures of x86 (power consumption), in order to avoid exposing a fatal flaw of Windows (can't really be ported because the apps are the only reason people use it). Huh... Yeah. No, that's nice guys... you just keep working on that.

  55. MICROSOFT - USING LINUX ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    now just a gosh darned second .. did I READ it right ? .. Microsoft .. with a GAZILLION DOLLAR research budget .. decided to show how well it can use linux ..

    well firstly .. uClinux has been run on many such devices .. in the past .. one particularly cool one was almost the size of a big RJ45.

    ahh ..well .. I wonder if the CE department just got made redundant ..

  56. Re:Panties STINK! by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

    I've seen more of these posts here on /. ... Very disturbing =x

    If this is a joke then it's not funny and if it's not then you need to search for help...

    --
    Here be signatures
  57. So we'll call it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nearly Headless NIC

    (it is not headless anymore after waking the PC)

  58. Old News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Old news, you posted this along time ago.

  59. ...16 Mbps by tepples · · Score: 1

    You speak of a connection that can transfer 1 GB of data, or roughly 10000 Mbits including layer 2, IP, TCP, and BitTorrent overhead, in 600 seconds. So you define a "decent connection" as one that can sustain 16 Mbps. But the summary mentions "Researchers at Microsoft and the University of California", which are in the United States, and 16 Mbps to the home isn't affordable in many parts of the United States. Comcast in particular provides only 6 Mbps down to homes, and the customer is capped at 250 GB per month.

    But then waking every 10 minutes might still save power if it means the computer will be on less than 20 percent of the time. Take 5 seconds to POST, 5 seconds to boot a minimal OS without X (if Moblin can boot all the way to Xfce in 5 seconds, it's possible), 60 seconds to copy data from the SD card, and 5 seconds to shut down.

    maybe the 2GB is upgradable

    The summary says it's an SD card. My concern is whether the SD slot takes SDHC cards.

  60. cue versus queue by golodh · · Score: 1

    Yes, you're right. Sorry, I'll take better care next time. I don't mind being corrected because spelling mistakes like this look stupid.

  61. why is this a problem? by Jessta · · Score: 1

    Typing increases my ability to spell. I'm a much better speller when I type than when I write.
    My writing speed is slow enough that I write and think about each letter instead of words as a whole. When typing, I type whole words and don't even notice that they contain letters. ...and why is this a problem?

    --
    ...and that is all I have to say about that.
    http://jessta.id.au