I read that when Google switched Gmail over to HTTPS that their server load increased by 1%. Today's CPUs are blazingly fast. Why would you think that the server load would be an issue with encryption and decrypting all communication? A web site is largely about having a large enough Internet connection and a large and fast enough database to keep up with the Internet traffic. Those CPUs are mostly just sitting around twiddling their thumbs waiting for I/O.
And what about their bandwidth usage? There is a well-thought out caching system in HTTP -- implemented throughout the internet -- that saves a lot of bandwidth. You can kiss all this goodbye, and have every request come to your server. This also means akamai doesn't work, which many large sites rely on.
The real solution for facebook and others would be to make large, static content, such as images, stylesheets available on another, cache-able domain, and not send cookies on this domain. The dynamic content -- and javascript -- should stay on the main domain and be encrypted.
"Let's just encrypt everything all the time" is just a narrow-minded comment of an end-user.
Its a law of physics that CO2 is an infrared absorber - is someone questioning that?
Its a fact that CO2 levels are rising in our atmosphere - is someone questioning that?
Its a fact that most of that rise is due to man - is someone questioning that?
No?
So what are they questioning then and who is doing it? I mean who of significance , not the kind of pig ignorant arts graduates who couldn't tell you what CO2 is composed of or its physical properties if their lives depended on it.
I think the question is whether the effect you describe is the dominant one (>1% contribution) to the observed and predicted temperature rise.
Unfortunately, people conclude from arguments against that, that they do not have to do any good to their environment and change their ways. No matter if climate change is anthropogenic or not, we should not pump toxic chemicals in the air, fill our oceans with plastic, and destroy species and ecosystems. Continuing the inefficient handling of resources -- be it for energy production or food -- use will cause shortages.
I doubt the bees find a global optimum in all cases. The bees are, like other biology-inspired algorithms like ant-colony optimization, "only" doing a heuristic or approximation. It is unfair to compare it to a global optimizer; compare it to equivalent heuristics, e.g. greedy algorithms run in milliseconds rather than days.
Nevertheless, that is not the point of the article I guess. It is the fact that algorithms happen in nature, and are very effective. Also, the appreciation that such a development happened/happens.
What's more, that was five years, starting with Netscape's codebase.
They needed this time for refactoring and building the knowledge. If you are an experienced software engineer, you know there are parts of your projects that are flexible, and some you don't have the knowledge of to restructure easily. Tinkering with parts improves your understanding and allows you to do larger and larger improvements. The same is going on with Xorg right now. In a few years, we should have a extremely versatile X server architecture.
What should they start with now, OpenOffice? If so, why are they more qualified to handle it than the groups currently working on OpenOffice/LibreOffice?
There is a good advice we can take from managers: If a company is extremely good and successful at building cars, and thinks it should thus expand to other domains, say, building trains, it is very likely to go bankrupt. The same phenomenon is known from good software developers starting building medical appliance software.
You need to start within the field, and the transferrable knowledge is minimal. For this reason, I don't think the advice for Mozilla to start an Office suite is good.
plus/minus 10 jupiter masses. The distinction between planets and brown dwarfs is really fuzzy. Even Jupiter emits more light in some frequencies than it receives from the sun.
It is the time measured from when a bid/ask order is sent from the customer's network port, until it has been processed/stored and possibly matched at the Exchange, and back again.
ikkonoishi writes:
Lots of data going in lots of data going out. Millions of people make trades on this thing constantly.
nacturation writes:
One eighth of a millisecond is an awfully long time?
davester666 writes:
It increases the time delta between when your broker trades the stock up a little, then puts through your trade by selling you the stock he just bought, but for a little more than what he bought it for. Every time.
lena_10326 writes:
You do realize this is a stock exchange processing large volumes of transactions requiring a high degree of availability and consistency? Not a ma-and-pop website processing 100 transactions a day. Right?
Johannes concludes: no one knows what it does. Yet we are stunned of the millions of transactions flowing around.
The limiting factor can't be throughput/number of transactions, given that the data flow is continuous. The closest to an answer is that it is network latency. But why is it relevant to use Linux then? Because the TCP/IP stack is so great? Wouldn't the specs of the network (fibre?) be more interesting?
Can someone explain to me what the system does in these 126 microsecond? Is it sending packets through the world, doing some complicated calculations, solving locking resources? It seems an awefully long time to add to a table and update some stats.
Problem with that is: Farmville (like a lot of games on FB) is a flash game, and Flash would have to go if FB would become an Apple asset.
Why? Jobs only rejected Flash for mobiles, because Flash clips on the web are not in a suitable format for mobile devices (and can not be re-wrapped for them). A valid point, solvable by HTML5, but as far as I know he never extended this to all Flash being evil.
I would conjecture that Jobs prefers Flash to Silverlight.
Right, and tidal plants stop the tide. I think you are going across some orders of magnitude here.
Although it was previously thought that a tidally locked planet (or one without a magnetic field) would have their atmosphere taken away, studies have shown that without the solar storm would induce a magnetic field protecting the atmosphere within one hour.
Actually, galaxy collisions are thought to leave solar systems undisturbed, with only a handful of collisions. The reason is that the space between the stars are so large compared to their size. Gas merges and spiral arms are distorted, but a planet would be fine. This is also what is expected of the Andromeda galaxy merge.
I would like a solution that combines metalinks (one file that contains multiple urls for a download plus the checksum) with Bittorrent. A client could start a http download from one server, and a bittorrent that requests pieces for the latter chunks. You can also make multiple http request with a offset these days, on another http server or the same one.
This could even be built in magically into http browsers: if the file size is > 50MB, ask the cloud if there are nodes for the given url. That is provided you have a checksum like with metalinks. Appearantly metalink already features this possibility: http://www.metalinker.org/
Apparently neither you nor your moderator have heard of public key encryption. You are right, but what you argue against is not what I was suggesting. https is of course a solution.
If it is "keep the governments out" I am a yea. If I actually get a vote on this. Do we get a vote? What about the people of North Korea, do they get a vote on this? Even if it passes, do they get Internet access since the "world body said so"? Somehow, I don't think so.
What is the difference between government voting and you voting. You voted for this government, so they can represent you. Or at least the majority of your country. Do you oppose what most people of your country vote for? If so, voting directly will not give you a different result.
If I actually get a vote on this. Do we get a vote? What about the people of North Korea, do they get a vote on this? Even if it passes, do they get internet access since the "world body said so"? Somehow, I don't think so.
Familiar with the prisoners dilemma?
If everyone says "I won't do it, because others won't", it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It was the US who didn't sign the Kyoto protocol.
We got to start somewhere. Even if not everyone participates. If the goal is noble, the not participating countries can be made to comply by economic leverage, or making a contract: Nation X doesn't sign a nuclear weapon treaty, because those are its powerful weapons. Nations Y and Z contract with X to help out in case of war. For this to work, however, you need credibility. I found the book on Harvard's negotiation project an interesting read on this.
Function names like wtfyourunhere_heee, p4tch_sel1nux_codztegfaddczda and datatypes like __yyrhdgdtfs66ytgetrfd as well as hex-code doesn't make the code look less suspicious. I can't be sure that the rootkit (or a different one) is not in there.
You are a dummy for downloading from a http website without a checksum. No thank you.
Better than letting African children rip out the wires, let them burn the plastic off on open fields while they get a good taste of the chemicals, and resell the copper for a few cents. But I guess Africa is further away from Australia than Europe...
I would like to know if SELinux, grsecurity, PAX or some other hardened Linux measure would have prevented this privilege escalation. SELinux tracks how the user logged in, and always looks at this security context. If I am not mistaken, when configured correctly, e.g. a webserver would not be able to do actions as root, even in the case of privilege escalation.
Slashdot Mirror
The release song doesn't even have lyrics :-(
How good can the release be then, I ask!
You missed the part where the bus driver lets repeated free riders in, but does a drive-by at their house with his homies at midnight.
I read that when Google switched Gmail over to HTTPS that their server load increased by 1%. Today's CPUs are blazingly fast. Why would you think that the server load would be an issue with encryption and decrypting all communication? A web site is largely about having a large enough Internet connection and a large and fast enough database to keep up with the Internet traffic. Those CPUs are mostly just sitting around twiddling their thumbs waiting for I/O.
And what about their bandwidth usage?
There is a well-thought out caching system in HTTP -- implemented throughout the internet -- that saves a lot of bandwidth. You can kiss all this goodbye, and have every request come to your server. This also means akamai doesn't work, which many large sites rely on.
The real solution for facebook and others would be to make large, static content, such as images, stylesheets available on another, cache-able domain, and not send cookies on this domain. The dynamic content -- and javascript -- should stay on the main domain and be encrypted.
"Let's just encrypt everything all the time" is just a narrow-minded comment of an end-user.
If you want to know the difference between this and turnitin, you'd have to read the article, it specifically mentions a few differences...
In the dejavu subsite, most publications share an author, so yes, it does "recycling" / self-plagiarism.
Its a law of physics that CO2 is an infrared absorber - is someone questioning that?
Its a fact that CO2 levels are rising in our atmosphere - is someone questioning that?
Its a fact that most of that rise is due to man - is someone questioning that?
No?
So what are they questioning then and who is doing it? I mean who of significance , not the kind of pig ignorant
arts graduates who couldn't tell you what CO2 is composed of or its physical properties if their lives depended on it.
I think the question is whether the effect you describe is the dominant one (>1% contribution) to the observed and predicted temperature rise.
Unfortunately, people conclude from arguments against that, that they do not have to do any good to their environment and change their ways.
No matter if climate change is anthropogenic or not, we should not pump toxic chemicals in the air, fill our oceans with plastic, and destroy species and ecosystems. Continuing the inefficient handling of resources -- be it for energy production or food -- use will cause shortages.
I doubt the bees find a global optimum in all cases. The bees are, like other biology-inspired algorithms like ant-colony optimization, "only" doing a heuristic or approximation.
It is unfair to compare it to a global optimizer; compare it to equivalent heuristics, e.g. greedy algorithms run in milliseconds rather than days.
Nevertheless, that is not the point of the article I guess. It is the fact that algorithms happen in nature, and are very effective. Also, the appreciation that such a development happened/happens.
The article is actually pretty decent: http://www.qmul.ac.uk/media/news/items/se/38864.html
What's more, that was five years, starting with Netscape's codebase.
They needed this time for refactoring and building the knowledge. If you are an experienced software engineer, you know there are parts of your projects that are flexible, and some you don't have the knowledge of to restructure easily. Tinkering with parts improves your understanding and allows you to do larger and larger improvements.
The same is going on with Xorg right now. In a few years, we should have a extremely versatile X server architecture.
What should they start with now, OpenOffice? If so, why are they more qualified to handle it than the groups currently working on OpenOffice/LibreOffice?
There is a good advice we can take from managers: If a company is extremely good and successful at building cars, and thinks it should thus expand to other domains, say, building trains, it is very likely to go bankrupt.
The same phenomenon is known from good software developers starting building medical appliance software.
You need to start within the field, and the transferrable knowledge is minimal. For this reason, I don't think the advice for Mozilla to start an Office suite is good.
here: http://codebutler.com/firesheep
They apparently call it "sidejacking", i.e. sniffing other users cookies from a wifi, and using it. Not new, but made userfriendly.
plus/minus 10 jupiter masses. The distinction between planets and brown dwarfs is really fuzzy.
Even Jupiter emits more light in some frequencies than it receives from the sun.
Anonymous Coward writes:
It is the time measured from when a bid/ask order is sent from the customer's network port, until it has been processed/stored and possibly matched at the Exchange, and back again.
ikkonoishi writes:
Lots of data going in lots of data going out. Millions of people make trades on this thing constantly.
nacturation writes:
One eighth of a millisecond is an awfully long time?
davester666 writes:
It increases the time delta between when your broker trades the stock up a little, then puts through your trade by selling you the stock he just bought, but for a little more than what he bought it for. Every time.
lena_10326 writes:
You do realize this is a stock exchange processing large volumes of transactions requiring a high degree of availability and consistency? Not a ma-and-pop website processing 100 transactions a day. Right?
Johannes concludes: no one knows what it does. Yet we are stunned of the millions of transactions flowing around.
The limiting factor can't be throughput/number of transactions, given that the data flow is continuous.
The closest to an answer is that it is network latency. But why is it relevant to use Linux then? Because the TCP/IP stack is so great? Wouldn't the specs of the network (fibre?) be more interesting?
Can someone explain to me what the system does in these 126 microsecond? Is it sending packets through the world, doing some complicated calculations, solving locking resources? It seems an awefully long time to add to a table and update some stats.
... it's the end of summer beginning of fall/autumn here. But I'm not too far off from Canada and we still get 70 degree or so days.
Is that in Kelvin?
Problem with that is: Farmville (like a lot of games on FB) is a flash game, and Flash would have to go if FB would become an Apple asset.
Why? Jobs only rejected Flash for mobiles, because Flash clips on the web are not in a suitable format for mobile devices (and can not be re-wrapped for them). A valid point, solvable by HTML5, but as far as I know he never extended this to all Flash being evil.
I would conjecture that Jobs prefers Flash to Silverlight.
Right, and tidal plants stop the tide.
I think you are going across some orders of magnitude here.
Although it was previously thought that a tidally locked planet (or one without a magnetic field) would have their atmosphere taken away, studies have shown that without the solar storm would induce a magnetic field protecting the atmosphere within one hour.
Actually, galaxy collisions are thought to leave solar systems undisturbed, with only a handful of collisions. The reason is that the space between the stars are so large compared to their size. Gas merges and spiral arms are distorted, but a planet would be fine. This is also what is expected of the Andromeda galaxy merge.
I would like a solution that combines metalinks (one file that contains multiple urls for a download plus the checksum) with Bittorrent.
A client could start a http download from one server, and a bittorrent that requests pieces for the latter chunks. You can also make multiple http request with a offset these days, on another http server or the same one.
This could even be built in magically into http browsers: if the file size is > 50MB, ask the cloud if there are nodes for the given url. That is provided you have a checksum like with metalinks. Appearantly metalink already features this possibility: http://www.metalinker.org/
Apparently neither you nor your moderator have heard of public key encryption. You are right, but what you argue against is not what I was suggesting. https is of course a solution.
If it is "keep the governments out" I am a yea.
If I actually get a vote on this. Do we get a vote? What about the people of North Korea, do they get a vote on this? Even if it passes, do they get Internet access since the "world body said so"? Somehow, I don't think so.
What is the difference between government voting and you voting. You voted for this government, so they can represent you. Or at least the majority of your country. Do you oppose what most people of your country vote for? If so, voting directly will not give you a different result.
If I actually get a vote on this. Do we get a vote? What about the people of North Korea, do they get a vote on this? Even if it passes, do they get internet access since the "world body said so"? Somehow, I don't think so.
Familiar with the prisoners dilemma?
If everyone says "I won't do it, because others won't", it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It was the US who didn't sign the Kyoto protocol.
We got to start somewhere. Even if not everyone participates. If the goal is noble, the not participating countries can be made to comply by economic leverage, or making a contract: Nation X doesn't sign a nuclear weapon treaty, because those are its powerful weapons. Nations Y and Z contract with X to help out in case of war. For this to work, however, you need credibility.
I found the book on Harvard's negotiation project an interesting read on this.
Function names like wtfyourunhere_heee, p4tch_sel1nux_codztegfaddczda and datatypes like __yyrhdgdtfs66ytgetrfd as well as hex-code doesn't make the code look less suspicious.
I can't be sure that the rootkit (or a different one) is not in there.
You are a dummy for downloading from a http website without a checksum. No thank you.
Obviously both copied from SCO. Namely their 64 bit code.
Better than letting African children rip out the wires, let them burn the plastic off on open fields while they get a good taste of the chemicals, and resell the copper for a few cents. But I guess Africa is further away from Australia than Europe...
I would like to know if SELinux, grsecurity, PAX or some other hardened Linux measure would have prevented this privilege escalation.
SELinux tracks how the user logged in, and always looks at this security context. If I am not mistaken, when configured correctly, e.g. a webserver would not be able to do actions as root, even in the case of privilege escalation.
Why aren't they doing what broadway did? They can replace the musicians with synthesizers and record MORE music to protect copyrights.
Because Turing-machines can't produce art.