Do I need to spell it out for you? If the executable image is bigger, more of it needs to be mapped in to memory. If more of it needs to be mapped into a (finite) amount of memory, the system will end up swapping more memory out to disk, making it slow.
If the executable also comes with its own libraries instead of using installed system libraries (the whole idea behind snaps and docker and whatever), then all of those will also need to be mapped in to memory instead of reusing the ones already mapped in for other processes.
If the application's designers pepper blocking disk accesses or writes to a network socket in every other line of code, then the application will run slower and the CPU will need to execute more context switches for the same functionality.
Quite an apt analogy. Do you just assume that your alarmist predictions are right and crash the economy into a tree with governmental micro-management driving us all back into serfdom and a healthy application of socialistic guilt-trips to keep the objectors quiet?
The 2FA at my employer uses a text message to give me a code that I can then use to VPN in. That's great. Except when my phone doesn't get reception. Or when I'm working in a room where carrying wireless devices isn't permitted. Or if I forget to bring my phone with me. Security isn't for free.
The only way to tell if this is real is to wait, take the measurement, and compare it with prior prediction. That's science. Everything else is speculation.
Bloat always translates into being slow. I don't care how many gajigabytes of SSD storage you have on your system, all the page fault delays when mapping and unmapping them all into memory take time away from the app and everything else on the system. Sloppy coding practices like that tend to pile up (imagine that, laziness is contagious) and make for unusable messes.
MS Word or Powerpoint on a new machine takes many tens of seconds to load and render some pages whereas the version of that software from about 10 years back has most of the same functionality but screams on even low-end hardware you can buy today. Why? Laziness. Laziness that wastes my time when I'm trying to work.
It's also not a good idea to assume that the PC your crapware is being run on is the same 4k top-of-the-line workstation you're testing it on. I don't know if you've heard, but mobile device are all the rage these days. The thing that distinguishes mobile from laptop from workstation is power consumption. On a desktop workstation, you can throw around gigabytes and gigahertz like you don't care. On mobile devices you count milliwatts.
You're delusional if you think encrypting the channel protects your privacy when you don't control the other endpoint of the channel. Judging by your sig, you're delusional about other things too.
Same thing happens to me at work all the time. Some internal website gets served out of a machine that wasn't made to play with our internal CA quite right and I have to hack FF to display it because HTSP is set by the server but the wrong certifiate is being served out. The best use of time and resources (your taxes at work, we're on a US government contract) is not to have a 100/hr IT compliance officer waste his time configuring a server that's going to be used for a week and then wiped again.
On your own private LAN, you don't need either. You can make it all work with packets over port 80 and you can serve out webpages with nothing fancier than ethernet chip and a PIC16.
Last month bitcoin was the new fad. These silicon valley types must have been drinking too much Raw Water(TM) picked up some brain parasites.
Very little needs to be encrypted or authenticated. Not everything that needs to be encrypted when going through the open internet needs to be encrypted or authenticated when happening on a closed LAN. Encryption isn't for free. SSL certificate management isn't for free. When stepping away from the half of web browser use that happens on the open internet and into the other half that happens on closed networks, it is wasted effort for no benefit.
not to patch shit just because some code money says to. Security and functionality are in direct opposition to each other. Increasing security lowers availability and increases the number of points of failure. This is a trade that real engineers (as opposed to software weenies) make in the presence of limited computational resources. Things that face the public and run unattended in remote installations? Err on the side of security. Things that never see the light of day and run inside a steel vault with two guards stationed outside at all times? Fuck IT security.
The worst (or best) is when the monkeys load in the calls from jquery.org or somewhere without actually hosting a copy locally. This is especially a problem on corporate networks where a firewall policy of "Thou shalt not go outside the network" will now break the internal website. This means you now have to open up requests to the outside making another hole for proprietary data to leak out undetected, either with a compromised jquery.org or just making it look like normal traffic.
You can't objectively measure the more important things about reality to complete exactness. You can, however, make a measurement and it is useful to do so if an honest analysis concludes that the information content of that measurement is useful for the purpose. SATs and standardized tests tend to do that better than some wishy-washy BS. The only reason more schools are going test-optional is that they're embarrassed by the studies that say their graduates aren't learning skills or facts as measured by test scores. Deal.
You didn't get the memo. There are no more hard problems. The science is settled. In 2018, how could you think otherwise? Any output you don't like is evidence of racism. Appreciation for complexity gets you nowhere when you're on a mission from God.
Slashdot Mirror
To be honest, I find the science interesting but I'm more than a bit put off by the shrill tone of everyone involved.
Ain't that the truth.
They do, but that's irrelevant; the barbarians can learn to use Latin script like civilized people.
If it can't be expressed in ASCII, it's not worth writing.
Do I need to spell it out for you? If the executable image is bigger, more of it needs to be mapped in to memory. If more of it needs to be mapped into a (finite) amount of memory, the system will end up swapping more memory out to disk, making it slow.
If the executable also comes with its own libraries instead of using installed system libraries (the whole idea behind snaps and docker and whatever), then all of those will also need to be mapped in to memory instead of reusing the ones already mapped in for other processes.
If the application's designers pepper blocking disk accesses or writes to a network socket in every other line of code, then the application will run slower and the CPU will need to execute more context switches for the same functionality.
Bloat, therefore: slow. QED
I do orbital mechanics for a living. Claims of exactness in predictions aren't all they're cracked up to be, especially if taken out of context.
Quite an apt analogy. Do you just assume that your alarmist predictions are right and crash the economy into a tree with governmental micro-management driving us all back into serfdom and a healthy application of socialistic guilt-trips to keep the objectors quiet?
Bloat always translates into being slow
You don't know how computer operating systems work, do you? Re-read my comment and these articles:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The 2FA at my employer uses a text message to give me a code that I can then use to VPN in. That's great. Except when my phone doesn't get reception. Or when I'm working in a room where carrying wireless devices isn't permitted. Or if I forget to bring my phone with me. Security isn't for free.
The only way to tell if this is real is to wait, take the measurement, and compare it with prior prediction. That's science. Everything else is speculation.
Bitcoin!
Bloat always translates into being slow. I don't care how many gajigabytes of SSD storage you have on your system, all the page fault delays when mapping and unmapping them all into memory take time away from the app and everything else on the system. Sloppy coding practices like that tend to pile up (imagine that, laziness is contagious) and make for unusable messes.
MS Word or Powerpoint on a new machine takes many tens of seconds to load and render some pages whereas the version of that software from about 10 years back has most of the same functionality but screams on even low-end hardware you can buy today. Why? Laziness. Laziness that wastes my time when I'm trying to work.
It's also not a good idea to assume that the PC your crapware is being run on is the same 4k top-of-the-line workstation you're testing it on. I don't know if you've heard, but mobile device are all the rage these days. The thing that distinguishes mobile from laptop from workstation is power consumption. On a desktop workstation, you can throw around gigabytes and gigahertz like you don't care. On mobile devices you count milliwatts.
You're delusional if you think encrypting the channel protects your privacy when you don't control the other endpoint of the channel. Judging by your sig, you're delusional about other things too.
And LA is pretty big.
Probably very few. But it will already show up with an unsecure site warning. And who knows...maybe plain old HTML will be next on the chopping block.
publishing photographs of the insides emergency management and civil defense facilities isn't such a hot idea either. Information wants to be free.
Same thing happens to me at work all the time. Some internal website gets served out of a machine that wasn't made to play with our internal CA quite right and I have to hack FF to display it because HTSP is set by the server but the wrong certifiate is being served out. The best use of time and resources (your taxes at work, we're on a US government contract) is not to have a 100/hr IT compliance officer waste his time configuring a server that's going to be used for a week and then wiped again.
On your own private LAN, you don't need either. You can make it all work with packets over port 80 and you can serve out webpages with nothing fancier than ethernet chip and a PIC16.
Let's Encrypt can go fuck itself. If the functionality of your system depends on yet another third party, then it isn't free.
Last month bitcoin was the new fad. These silicon valley types must have been drinking too much Raw Water(TM) picked up some brain parasites.
Very little needs to be encrypted or authenticated. Not everything that needs to be encrypted when going through the open internet needs to be encrypted or authenticated when happening on a closed LAN. Encryption isn't for free. SSL certificate management isn't for free. When stepping away from the half of web browser use that happens on the open internet and into the other half that happens on closed networks, it is wasted effort for no benefit.
not to patch shit just because some code money says to. Security and functionality are in direct opposition to each other. Increasing security lowers availability and increases the number of points of failure. This is a trade that real engineers (as opposed to software weenies) make in the presence of limited computational resources. Things that face the public and run unattended in remote installations? Err on the side of security. Things that never see the light of day and run inside a steel vault with two guards stationed outside at all times? Fuck IT security.
That requires the monkeys who make the website to be talking with the monkeys who run the DNS and the firewall.
The worst (or best) is when the monkeys load in the calls from jquery.org or somewhere without actually hosting a copy locally. This is especially a problem on corporate networks where a firewall policy of "Thou shalt not go outside the network" will now break the internal website. This means you now have to open up requests to the outside making another hole for proprietary data to leak out undetected, either with a compromised jquery.org or just making it look like normal traffic.
You can't objectively measure the more important things about reality to complete exactness. You can, however, make a measurement and it is useful to do so if an honest analysis concludes that the information content of that measurement is useful for the purpose. SATs and standardized tests tend to do that better than some wishy-washy BS. The only reason more schools are going test-optional is that they're embarrassed by the studies that say their graduates aren't learning skills or facts as measured by test scores. Deal.
You didn't get the memo. There are no more hard problems. The science is settled. In 2018, how could you think otherwise? Any output you don't like is evidence of racism. Appreciation for complexity gets you nowhere when you're on a mission from God.
"What does it do when it spots a black pedestrian?" is a much better way to troll.