I've noticed over the past six months in Web content and corporate e-mail a fascinating increase in verb contractions. What used to be a two-word verb form, "set up", has contracted to a single word, "setup", which hitherto had been used only as a noun (e.g., "hey, look at my cool computer setup here").
This is a meme that's spreading quickly. I'm curious how far it will go. Do those people who write "setup" as a verb also write "throwup" as one yet?
Yes, I know about the comparable German verb forms.
Linux allocates a page (or contiguous set of aligned pages) to hold both the "struct task" and the kernel stack. The struct task is at the beginning of the page and the kernel stack grows downward from the end. So a kernel stack overflow is really deadly, since the "struct task" gets overwritten with stack data when that occurs.
Also, the address of this page (or set thereof) is just a regular kernel-space address. Even if the "struct task" weren't at the beginning of the page, a kernel stack overflow wouldn't cause any kind of page fault event; you'd just start writing over the last bytes of the previous page.
We're talking about kernel stacks here, which aren't swappable virtual memory. Prior to the addition of the 4KiB stack option to kernel 2.5, Linux on i386 always allocated two contiguous 4KiB pages to hold the task structure and the kernel stack. (In Linux, the "current()" macro works by just taking the value of the stack pointer and aligning it downwards to find the task struct.)
Cache line sizes vary between architectures and their implementations, but nobody has a 4KiB cache line size!
And as far as "better performance" goes, not really, unless memory is full.
The old nVidia driver must have had a largish buffer declared as an "auto" variable local to a function, or maybe used alloca(). By cleaning out such usage from the kernel, the hassle of allocating a contiguous pair of pages per process on i386 can now be avoided.
(In the machine I've been porting the kernel to, the minimal page size is 64KiB, so this feature hasn't been much of an issue.:-)
The two-volume Shorter Edition is a necessity of life.
And no, it's not just so that I can understand me mates across the pond when the blokes are on the telly whinging about the decimalisation of a zebra crossing, or whatever.
Walk-on: "I'd like to work here at your hotel, please." Basil: "Do you have any references?" Walk-on: "Yes, I know your waiter." Basil: "Manuel!" (desk bell) Manuel: "Si, Mr Fawlty?" Basil: "Good lord, you're full of typos!" (whack) Manuel: "Waa!" (laugh track here)
(Based on memory of Bruce Schneier's description in Applied Cryptography)
Alice sends Bob a series of polarized photons. There are four possibilities: -, |,/, and \.
Bob sets up his polarization detector randomly so that each "qbit" is measured either for horizontal/vertical polarization or diagonal polarization. If a - or | photon hits the detector and it was set up for horizontal/vertical, he gets a good bit, otherwise a bad bit. And if a / or \ photon hits the detector and it was set up for diagonal polarization, same story. The key point is this: if the detector was set one way and the photon is polarized the other, it is in principle impossible to know its true polarization.
So Bob has a sequence of photons, some of which he knows, and some he doesn't, and he knows which are which. He sends Alice a clear-text message saying which ones he knows. Alice then encrypts the true plaintext by XOR'ing it with the values of the photons that Bob knows, using some convention like "- and / are 0, | and \ are 1".
Slashdot Mirror
Forty years ago, we looked to the stars and put flags on the moon.
Now we spend all our time worrying about countries that tend to put the moon and stars on their flags.
This would seem to substantially increase the chance that life once existed on the red planet.
No. Life did or did not exist on Mars, but either way, its chances are over.
What these results might increase, if true, is the chance of our discovering evidence that life has existed on Mars.
35 years ago, we put flags on the moon.
Now we spend our efforts dealing with folks with moons on their flags.
Amazingly, the average IQ in both nations will drop!
I guaranty you that this post has two misspellings.
spell check and grammer check
Heh heh heh heh.
I've noticed over the past six months in Web content and corporate e-mail a fascinating increase in verb contractions. What used to be a two-word verb form, "set up", has contracted to a single word, "setup", which hitherto had been used only as a noun (e.g., "hey, look at my cool computer setup here").
This is a meme that's spreading quickly. I'm curious how far it will go. Do those people who write "setup" as a verb also write "throwup" as one yet?
Yes, I know about the comparable German verb forms.
hes dumbed down the manual to make room for the computer illiterate..
a sepperate class
If only "computer illiteracy" were the only kind we had to worry about...
... is an incredible feet
What, it's got extra toes or something?
Cray X1: 64/256 KiB, 1/4/16/256/1024/4096 MiB.
Linux allocates a page (or contiguous set of aligned pages) to hold both the "struct task" and the kernel stack. The struct task is at the beginning of the page and the kernel stack grows downward from the end. So a kernel stack overflow is really deadly, since the "struct task" gets overwritten with stack data when that occurs.
Also, the address of this page (or set thereof) is just a regular kernel-space address. Even if the "struct task" weren't at the beginning of the page, a kernel stack overflow wouldn't cause any kind of page fault event; you'd just start writing over the last bytes of the previous page.
We're talking about kernel stacks here, which aren't swappable virtual memory. Prior to the addition of the 4KiB stack option to kernel 2.5, Linux on i386 always allocated two contiguous 4KiB pages to hold the task structure and the kernel stack. (In Linux, the "current()" macro works by just taking the value of the stack pointer and aligning it downwards to find the task struct.)
:-)
Cache line sizes vary between architectures and their implementations, but nobody has a 4KiB cache line size!
And as far as "better performance" goes, not really, unless memory is full.
The old nVidia driver must have had a largish buffer declared as an "auto" variable local to a function, or maybe used alloca(). By cleaning out such usage from the kernel, the hassle of allocating a contiguous pair of pages per process on i386 can now be avoided.
(In the machine I've been porting the kernel to, the minimal page size is 64KiB, so this feature hasn't been much of an issue.
We'll be able to clean up the "intellectual property" law train wreck pretty easily once all the lawyers have starved to death, anyway.
Also, I predict that it will become illegal to import cheaper wheat from Canada due to "safety considerations".
The two-volume Shorter Edition is a necessity of life.
And no, it's not just so that I can understand me mates across the pond when the blokes are on the telly whinging about the decimalisation of a zebra crossing, or whatever.
I've often wondered what things will be like when Hurd is ready
We'll be flying our rocket backpacks around our Martian colony and speaking Esperanto.
the text bearly readable
Kind of a waste of time, too. I doubt that Smokey, Pooh, and Yogi would care enough about Linux filesystems to even read the article.
Hosted by the California League of Women Voters, in tribute to Dr. Who writer Jane Baker...
Now *that's* going to make the general public take the issue more seriously! I'll relax now.
Walk-on: "I'd like to work here at your hotel, please."
Basil: "Do you have any references?"
Walk-on: "Yes, I know your waiter."
Basil: "Manuel!" (desk bell)
Manuel: "Si, Mr Fawlty?"
Basil: "Good lord, you're full of typos!" (whack)
Manuel: "Waa!"
(laugh track here)
I've been using and hacking Linux for quite some time but haven't once been tempted to take up the viola.
'In short, without this exclusive franchise called the Windows API, we would have been dead a long time ago,' from Microsoft Sr. VP Bob Muglia.
It's not exclusive; there's wine.
The exclusive franchise without which Microsoft would be dead lies in OEM preinstall pricing.
Forget open source; what about Open Plumbing?
(Based on memory of Bruce Schneier's description in Applied Cryptography)
/, and \.
Alice sends Bob a series of polarized photons.
There are four possibilities: -, |,
Bob sets up his polarization detector randomly so that each "qbit" is measured either for horizontal/vertical polarization or diagonal polarization. If a - or | photon hits the detector and it was set up for horizontal/vertical, he gets a good bit, otherwise a bad bit. And if a / or \ photon hits the detector and it was set up for diagonal polarization, same story. The key point is this: if the detector was set one way and the photon is polarized the other, it is in principle impossible to know its true polarization.
So Bob has a sequence of photons, some of which he knows, and some he doesn't, and he knows which are which. He sends Alice a clear-text message saying which ones he knows. Alice then encrypts the true plaintext by XOR'ing it with the values of the photons that Bob knows, using some convention like "- and / are 0, | and \ are 1".
Example:
Alice sends...: - \ - | / - | (random)
Bob's detector: + + X + X X + (random)
Bob's result..: - ? ? | / ? |
Bob's response: 1 0 0 1 1 0 1
Key...........: 0 1 1 1
If Eve tries to listen in on the photons Alice sends to Bob, she perturbs them irrevocably.
A bad description -- go buy Bruce's book for a better one.
You don't need security if everyone is trustworthy, and you can't have openness is everyone is not.
The sad truth is that you can't have openness if anyone is untrustworthy.
Erewhay isay Igpay Atinlay?