swappiness won't help him if he doesn't have any swap. He probably does have swap but isn't aware of it.
He might have swap, but one doesn't have to have swap for that problem to occur.
Throwing out the read-only pages of programs without writing them to disk and then reading them in later when they're needed is different from paging read-write memory to disk and paging them back in again (swapping)
The difference is that in the first one you are not writing anything to disk. For example program A, a 1 megabyte program using ten 100KB pages is running. Those 100KB pages are loaded from disk when you start program A and are then executed. They are read-only, in that the contents of those pages do not change during the execution of program A.
During a context switch when program A is not running, program B is started, which loads three 100kb pages from disk. The OS then loads program B into the first three pages of the memory used by program A (after all, program A is not running *at* *this* *moment*). When the scheduler switches back to program A, the OS then reloads the first three pages of program A from the disk before program A starts running again. Another context switch later program B needs to run so the OS loads program B back into the first three pages of program A....
Considering that the scheduler might decide to give each of program A and program B equal time and context switch thousands of times per second, it's no wonder that the disk might not be able to keep up. However we see this happen very little these days, mostly because executable pages tend to be so very small relative to the data memory that they use, most people have swap enabled and disks are a great deal faster than those 80MB drives that I used to see this problem occur on.
Linux took some thought, and a couple of tries as you had to leave room to create a swap drive, which it didn't tell you at first, but it gave you some hints about how big to make it after you had made your OS partition. It was vastly easier than BSD.
In my early Linux installations (120MB drives?) I use to split the partition such that the swap was always towards the center of the disk, between two identically-sized partitions (os partition and/home). Lowest average seek time was for the swap partition:-) I always thought it made a performance difference (maybe just my perception)?
Having an IDE for scripts isn't necessarily a bad thing. Scripts are often complicated beasts.
bash has a heck of a lot of builtins, and then there are external executables. Remembering the commands, the syntax, and so forth for all of this can be quite challenging.
Just to take a very simple example. For the sake of this post, I was going to say "assign a variable a different variable + 1". So, I tried doing that in bash.
x=3
y=$(x+1)
Oh, right, I need another $
x=3
y=$($x+1)
Hmm. no. Right. Double parenthesis in this case.
[snipped]
done file
You can't tell me that it wouldn't be a tiny bit practical to have an IDE help you with the syntactic fun of bash in these cases.
I can tell you that you're doing it wrong - what's wrong with bc? And yet, $() vs $(()) is dead simple to remember, so simple that I hardly use bc. It's not just the bash shell that's powerful, it's all the utilities that go with it - cut, sed, grep, etc. It's the fact that the less trivial logic can be written in python, perl, hell even some other compiled program.
The value of bash is ironically not bash itself, it's the ability to use some third-party program, which was never designed for anything other than plain-text, in new scripts. I'm not sure how powershell competes with this, due to never having used it. But I have to ask, how do I use powershell on my csv file if I first want to run 'sort -u' on it and then 'sed "s/,,/0.01/g"'?
You can get a million dollar award for a MRI destroying your psychic abilities.
"Haimes, 42, contended an allergic reaction to a dye injected during the exam gave her severe, recurring headaches that forced her to give up her practice in New Castle, Del., two months later."
"She contended that a diagnostic CAT scan she had undergone 10 years ago left her with chronic and disabling headaches when she sought to look into either the past or the future, preventing her from continuing practice as a psychic..."
That's pretty much in keeping with "destroyed her psychic powers"; if she cannot do it anymore[1] it's gone, hence destroyed. "sought to look" doesn't mean that she succeeded in spite of the headache, it just means she attempted. She does not say if she was successful.
In this case, something can be done: the company can stop selling the lock as "secure" (or "a lock"), and then put out a new one that is actually secure. Maybe do a product recall so people know about it.
You know, it's possible to disclose that a vulnerability exists without disclosing how to exploit it. The letter from the lawyer also states that the firm is interested in discussing this further but was rebuffed by the "researcher". How are they supposed to know if the exploit is real or not if the "researcher" in question refuses to disclose the PoC to their lawyer. I'm pretty certain that a single phone call resolved the "are you working on their behalf" question. At that point (verification) he should have simply given the vendor the PoC and a few more days before putting people at risk.
What did they do instead? Start threatening the guy who told them about the vulnerabilities.
(How do you know they weren't going to contact their customers after the PoC was verified? You have a time machine?)
Anyway I dunno about the "threat" - I read that letter from them that he published; I don't get any impression of threats, implicit or otherwise. I read the summary. He gave them 30 days to respond to him. They took 29 days. Now he feels that they took too long to get back to him... what a crybaby.
The problem here is not the vendor (yet). This is a physical item that may or may not need to be recalled. That is the problem. That, and the fact that reading the "researcher's" (I hate using this word to describe this guy) story from the link in TFS shows quite clearly that he's handling this in an irresponsible manner. Go ahead, click the link and read what he has to say - "Hey personally/i/ love the drama on this kind of stuff.. ".
No. A deadman's switch is when you have a PC constantly asking for password verification ever X amount of minutes. At the time you don't respond when expected, the logic is that you're "dead", and thus commences the process of self-destruction.
Nope. That's a watchdog of some type. A dead man's switch is activated at the very instant the operator stops interaction (for specific defined values of "interaction"). They're usually constructed out of an actual switch with a spring. You step off, the spring causes the switch to closed/open and that's it.
The people who use the locks have a right to know that their locks aren't fit for purpose and why.
We'll see what they say when they find out some asshat posted instructions for bypassing the lock on the internet. You can inform the world that $X isn't fit, you don't have to be an asshole and give instructions on how to break it. The owners aren't on your side here.
Parent is correct - disclosure is only responsible when something can be done to fix the vulnerability. If nothing can be done, find some other way to disclose.
Arrest is largely a non-issue; it's conviction I'm talking about. Raising suspicion by these activities can get you a conviction.
"Your worship I had no idea that these were law enforcement officials and I worked under the impression that my [valuable IP/mistress love letters/evidence of infidelity/homosexual porn] on the computer can be stolen from me at any time, hence the need for my security measures."
The problem for the prosecution is that even a semi-intelligent reason, like conspiracy theory paranoia, is enough for the court to chuck the "we think he had evidence on the computer" out of admission/evidence. Just because you have something to hide is no reason to leap to the conclusion that what you were hiding is evidence of a crime. Just because they have a trail that leads to your IP doesn't mean that they get to throw the book at you. If they cannot corroborate their trail then, well, even a lawyer so green he needs mowing is going to at least reduce your term, iff they actually manage to get past that pesky "reasonable doubt" bit. Do not give them more evidence in the naive hope that it can't make things much worse.
This is from someone who represented himself in court on criminal charges for violent crimes in three different districts, with three different prosecutors, in three different years AND was acquitted all three times.
Well, arguably being the fastest at writing code doesn't mean any of it is actually good.
I once worked with a guy who could crank out massive quantities of code. It made for some pretty amazing proof-of-concept and demo stuff -- but it was utterly unusable in the real world because it was, overall, really badly written code.
Man, that guy sure get's around doesn't he?
(I'm pretty sure I've worked with him...)
Maybe then there is something about how to really teach programming that everyone is missing. With drawing, people are either good at drawing or awful at it, regardless of classes, until teachers figure out what drawing really is and what the mind is doing when it is drawing.
While I agree with your premise I disagree with your analogy; drawing, specifically, can be taught. There are purely mechanical rules to producing a reasonably high quality sketch of a face, or scene or object. I can (and have) taught the basics of drawing, sketching and shading in pencil.
"Somehow, people around 45 years old (and females especially) REALLY lose their ability to problem solve or learn concepts."
I've been writing software for over four decades now.
Man, you are an old fart! You should move over and let us young un's with almost three decades of programming under our belts take over. You just know we're quicker, smarter and faster than you! 'Cos we're younger!
Hey, waitaminute... what's this 25 year old doing here? What do you mean "65 hours a week"? Overtime? Are you mad? Hey, wait, let me back in... I'll be good, promise!
Young girls (and older women) are constantly "attacked" (as a "never ending beauty contest") by what you describe in any environment (more if a mixed one with males) - in a class it is better to provide a less sexual environment (as possible, since full asexuality is unrealistic) in which females (and males) can concentrate in their studies.
I'm not going to address the "attacked" issue - magazines read by women, written by women, for women with nary a male involved in the process can hardly be the fault of men.
What I will ask is... how less sexual can you get from the headshot pic used? That's as asexual as it gets - face of a lady.
I think his rhetoric question was just to show that the picture has a sexual notion. I am not so "sensitive" (and veeeryyy against modern "feminism"/"SJW's"/etc!), and i agree with you that "you can make a problem of anything", but using a picture with a sexual notion (even if not explicit) in a CS class (instead of a neutral) is inappropriate i think - many (if not most) young girls will not be so comfortable in such a situation while in class with some teenage boys.
Why wouldn't they be? Their (young girls) magazines are filled with scantily clad women in suggestive poses. So are magazines for young men. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that both young men and young women think women are more beautiful than men. I'm inclined to agree with them.
Its a woman face and she's very proud of her picture.
I'm sure Anthony Weiner is proud of his dick pics, so what? Teachers still have to decide the appropriateness of material presented to their students.
Did you just compare the risqueness of a womens face with a mans dick as equal?
it really didn't see any use outside of academia and is now not much more than an afterthought.
Someone has to do those experimental language features that eventually filter down to the more often-used languages. Those people are generally in academia. If the academia didn't exist we'd get more carelessly-designed languages like Python and PHP.
Slashdot Mirror
Since spider-farming is historically unproductive
That's a really odd way to spell "nightmare fuel".
swappiness won't help him if he doesn't have any swap. He probably does have swap but isn't aware of it.
He might have swap, but one doesn't have to have swap for that problem to occur.
Throwing out the read-only pages of programs without writing them to disk and then reading them in later when they're needed is different from paging read-write memory to disk and paging them back in again (swapping)
The difference is that in the first one you are not writing anything to disk. For example program A, a 1 megabyte program using ten 100KB pages is running. Those 100KB pages are loaded from disk when you start program A and are then executed. They are read-only, in that the contents of those pages do not change during the execution of program A.
During a context switch when program A is not running, program B is started, which loads three 100kb pages from disk. The OS then loads program B into the first three pages of the memory used by program A (after all, program A is not running *at* *this* *moment*). When the scheduler switches back to program A, the OS then reloads the first three pages of program A from the disk before program A starts running again. Another context switch later program B needs to run so the OS loads program B back into the first three pages of program A....
Considering that the scheduler might decide to give each of program A and program B equal time and context switch thousands of times per second, it's no wonder that the disk might not be able to keep up. However we see this happen very little these days, mostly because executable pages tend to be so very small relative to the data memory that they use, most people have swap enabled and disks are a great deal faster than those 80MB drives that I used to see this problem occur on.
IBM spent $1B on Linux in the early 1990's
Wait, what? IBM stepped into the Linux game quite late, not "early 90's"
Linux took some thought, and a couple of tries as you had to leave room to create a swap drive, which it didn't tell you at first, but it gave you some hints about how big to make it after you had made your OS partition. It was vastly easier than BSD.
In my early Linux installations (120MB drives?) I use to split the partition such that the swap was always towards the center of the disk, between two identically-sized partitions (os partition and /home). Lowest average seek time was for the swap partition :-) I always thought it made a performance difference (maybe just my perception)?
My story is pretty much the same, except it was ftp download onto floppies. And it was in 1994.
What if you actually wanted and md5 hash of the directory listing? Now what?
That *does* give you the md5sum of the directory listing. To get the md5sum of every file you'd use
.`
md5sum `find
Having an IDE for scripts isn't necessarily a bad thing. Scripts are often complicated beasts.
bash has a heck of a lot of builtins, and then there are external executables. Remembering the commands, the syntax, and so forth for all of this can be quite challenging.
Just to take a very simple example. For the sake of this post, I was going to say "assign a variable a different variable + 1". So, I tried doing that in bash.
x=3 y=$(x+1)
Oh, right, I need another $
x=3 y=$($x+1)
Hmm. no. Right. Double parenthesis in this case.
[snipped]
done file
You can't tell me that it wouldn't be a tiny bit practical to have an IDE help you with the syntactic fun of bash in these cases.
I can tell you that you're doing it wrong - what's wrong with bc? And yet, $() vs $(()) is dead simple to remember, so simple that I hardly use bc. It's not just the bash shell that's powerful, it's all the utilities that go with it - cut, sed, grep, etc. It's the fact that the less trivial logic can be written in python, perl, hell even some other compiled program.
The value of bash is ironically not bash itself, it's the ability to use some third-party program, which was never designed for anything other than plain-text, in new scripts. I'm not sure how powershell competes with this, due to never having used it. But I have to ask, how do I use powershell on my csv file if I first want to run 'sort -u' on it and then 'sed "s/,,/0.01/g"'?
I can do a lot more with old linux tools than powershell have ever had the capability of.
What is it that Powershell can't do?
I hear that it's incompatible with systemd
*Ducks and runs
Getting a judgment is another matter entirely.
Of course with the right lawyer and the right jury
http://articles.latimes.com/19...
You can get a million dollar award for a MRI destroying your psychic abilities.
"Haimes, 42, contended an allergic reaction to a dye injected during the exam gave her severe, recurring headaches that forced her to give up her practice in New Castle, Del., two months later."
You are disingenuous.
And you're an idiot - from her statement:
"She contended that a diagnostic CAT scan she had undergone 10 years ago left her with chronic and disabling headaches when she sought to look into either the past or the future, preventing her from continuing practice as a psychic..."
That's pretty much in keeping with "destroyed her psychic powers"; if she cannot do it anymore[1] it's gone, hence destroyed. "sought to look" doesn't mean that she succeeded in spite of the headache, it just means she attempted. She does not say if she was successful.
[1] Not that she ever could.
disclosure is only responsible when something can be done to fix the vulnerability. If nothing can be done, find some other way to disclose.
Of you don't disclose every user is vulnerable and doesn't know it, so can't take steps to protect themselves.
I never proposed non-disclosure, so I'm not sure why you're replying to me.
In this case, something can be done: the company can stop selling the lock as "secure" (or "a lock"), and then put out a new one that is actually secure. Maybe do a product recall so people know about it.
You know, it's possible to disclose that a vulnerability exists without disclosing how to exploit it. The letter from the lawyer also states that the firm is interested in discussing this further but was rebuffed by the "researcher". How are they supposed to know if the exploit is real or not if the "researcher" in question refuses to disclose the PoC to their lawyer. I'm pretty certain that a single phone call resolved the "are you working on their behalf" question. At that point (verification) he should have simply given the vendor the PoC and a few more days before putting people at risk.
What did they do instead? Start threatening the guy who told them about the vulnerabilities.
(How do you know they weren't going to contact their customers after the PoC was verified? You have a time machine?)
Anyway I dunno about the "threat" - I read that letter from them that he published; I don't get any impression of threats, implicit or otherwise. I read the summary. He gave them 30 days to respond to him. They took 29 days. Now he feels that they took too long to get back to him... what a crybaby.
The problem here is not the vendor (yet). This is a physical item that may or may not need to be recalled. That is the problem. That, and the fact that reading the "researcher's" (I hate using this word to describe this guy) story from the link in TFS shows quite clearly that he's handling this in an irresponsible manner. Go ahead, click the link and read what he has to say - "Hey personally /i/ love the drama on this kind of stuff.. ".
No. A deadman's switch is when you have a PC constantly asking for password verification ever X amount of minutes. At the time you don't respond when expected, the logic is that you're "dead", and thus commences the process of self-destruction.
Nope. That's a watchdog of some type. A dead man's switch is activated at the very instant the operator stops interaction (for specific defined values of "interaction"). They're usually constructed out of an actual switch with a spring. You step off, the spring causes the switch to closed/open and that's it.
With this script and having the USB key attached to his wrist, he would have been able to shutdown his laptop when the feds took his laptop from him.
Riiiight, because the cops are idiots and wouldn't notice and cut the string?
They bust down the door in full riot gear, weapons drawn.... and don't bother to shout "hands up!"? Just how polite are the cops in your district?
The people who use the locks have a right to know that their locks aren't fit for purpose and why.
We'll see what they say when they find out some asshat posted instructions for bypassing the lock on the internet. You can inform the world that $X isn't fit, you don't have to be an asshole and give instructions on how to break it. The owners aren't on your side here.
Parent is correct - disclosure is only responsible when something can be done to fix the vulnerability. If nothing can be done, find some other way to disclose.
Arrest is largely a non-issue; it's conviction I'm talking about. Raising suspicion by these activities can get you a conviction.
"Your worship I had no idea that these were law enforcement officials and I worked under the impression that my [valuable IP/mistress love letters/evidence of infidelity/homosexual porn] on the computer can be stolen from me at any time, hence the need for my security measures."
The problem for the prosecution is that even a semi-intelligent reason, like conspiracy theory paranoia, is enough for the court to chuck the "we think he had evidence on the computer" out of admission/evidence. Just because you have something to hide is no reason to leap to the conclusion that what you were hiding is evidence of a crime. Just because they have a trail that leads to your IP doesn't mean that they get to throw the book at you. If they cannot corroborate their trail then, well, even a lawyer so green he needs mowing is going to at least reduce your term, iff they actually manage to get past that pesky "reasonable doubt" bit. Do not give them more evidence in the naive hope that it can't make things much worse.
This is from someone who represented himself in court on criminal charges for violent crimes in three different districts, with three different prosecutors, in three different years AND was acquitted all three times.
My watch is lots cheaper and lots faster than my cheap phone, and I've never changed the battery in 2+ years.
I still use my casio which came with a ten year warranty on the battery. I bought it 11 years ago.
Well, arguably being the fastest at writing code doesn't mean any of it is actually good.
I once worked with a guy who could crank out massive quantities of code. It made for some pretty amazing proof-of-concept and demo stuff -- but it was utterly unusable in the real world because it was, overall, really badly written code.
Man, that guy sure get's around doesn't he?
(I'm pretty sure I've worked with him...)
Maybe then there is something about how to really teach programming that everyone is missing. With drawing, people are either good at drawing or awful at it, regardless of classes, until teachers figure out what drawing really is and what the mind is doing when it is drawing.
While I agree with your premise I disagree with your analogy; drawing, specifically, can be taught. There are purely mechanical rules to producing a reasonably high quality sketch of a face, or scene or object. I can (and have) taught the basics of drawing, sketching and shading in pencil.
"Somehow, people around 45 years old (and females especially) REALLY lose their ability to problem solve or learn concepts."
I've been writing software for over four decades now.
Man, you are an old fart! You should move over and let us young un's with almost three decades of programming under our belts take over. You just know we're quicker, smarter and faster than you! 'Cos we're younger!
Hey, waitaminute ... what's this 25 year old doing here? What do you mean "65 hours a week"? Overtime? Are you mad? Hey, wait, let me back in... I'll be good, promise!
Young girls (and older women) are constantly "attacked" (as a "never ending beauty contest") by what you describe in any environment (more if a mixed one with males) - in a class it is better to provide a less sexual environment (as possible, since full asexuality is unrealistic) in which females (and males) can concentrate in their studies.
I'm not going to address the "attacked" issue - magazines read by women, written by women, for women with nary a male involved in the process can hardly be the fault of men.
What I will ask is... how less sexual can you get from the headshot pic used? That's as asexual as it gets - face of a lady.
I think his rhetoric question was just to show that the picture has a sexual notion. I am not so "sensitive" (and veeeryyy against modern "feminism"/"SJW's"/etc!), and i agree with you that "you can make a problem of anything", but using a picture with a sexual notion (even if not explicit) in a CS class (instead of a neutral) is inappropriate i think - many (if not most) young girls will not be so comfortable in such a situation while in class with some teenage boys.
Why wouldn't they be? Their (young girls) magazines are filled with scantily clad women in suggestive poses. So are magazines for young men. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that both young men and young women think women are more beautiful than men. I'm inclined to agree with them.
Its a woman face and she's very proud of her picture. I'm sure Anthony Weiner is proud of his dick pics, so what? Teachers still have to decide the appropriateness of material presented to their students.
Did you just compare the risqueness of a womens face with a mans dick as equal?
No complaints over this?
it really didn't see any use outside of academia and is now not much more than an afterthought.
Someone has to do those experimental language features that eventually filter down to the more often-used languages. Those people are generally in academia. If the academia didn't exist we'd get more carelessly-designed languages like Python and PHP.