A microkernel minimizes the amount of code you have to trust. MINIX as of 3.0 is also designed to be fault-tolerant, able to recover to almost any sort of bug. You tend to get a lot of transactional and message passing overhead though. For example the filesystem modules isn't allowed to access the disk controller, it has to ask the block layer to do it and pass the result. But the block layer can't actually pass the result directly, it has to check in with the microkernel to make sure it's okay.
But the future isn't bleak, not only has hardware in general become faster, there has been quite a bit of design advance around these sorts of messaging system that reduce the overhead micro-kernels generate.
I think the original argument was about design complexity though, not performance or security as linux started as a hobbyist desktop system. Linus's counterargument as that a microkernel design simply moved complexity to a different level and didn't actually decrease the complexity of a practical and working system.
The only provably secure OS (L4) is written in C.
I think there are good languages out at the application or platform level (Rust, Haskell, Scala) but systems level programming it's mostly just C. Alternatives are mostly just dressed up C (C++, D). Java and Haskell offer was to wrap application in a standalone VM, but largely due to the fact it uses shims in a controlled enviroment, it doesn't actually have to work with the messy hardware stuff.
You can even buy laptops now that are OSS from the firmware on up. There are dozens of OSS u-boot based dev boards availible. You can run a system of a CPU design loaded onto an FGPA. There are cellphones built with basebands you can load OSS firmware onto, or are not linked into DMA with main memory and have CPU controlled hard off switches. These aren't flagship consumer products, but they are available. Security is rarely convenient.
Intel's management engine and the like are not some vast conspiracy, There really is a demanded use case. And as way they are used is less intrusive than the alternative, which is to lock the computer to a particular OS and configuration that calls home anyways. A big issue is that stuff at the firmware level tends to be implemented poorly at best. Write once and forget.
And there are processors and boards you can be without these features. It just tends to be more convenient for corporations to have these feature. At least 90% of the desktop market are corporations or those that don't have a clue. 95% or more of the cell phone market is wireless carriers (via deciding what phones to offer subsidies on and to carry in their store). They have legitimate use cases for these security-poor features. The logic of the business case overrides any concern over the common good. They don't even stop to think about it, which is why OSS will generally be more secure, but less accessible to the average joe.
Not automatically. If your only building security is the lock on the front door it's not going to help you against targeted attacks of it you let employees have any sort of guest that they want in the office.
Even if abandoned the state would likely keep the right of way. A lot less paperwork if they need to rebuild. You can still graze/farm on the land, just no permanent structures.
"And who pays for his medical injuries"... Actually it depends. A property owner does have a certain duty of care to trespassers though it's still less than that towards guests
And these policy decision are? And are they due to a clear clack of viable alternative mechanism? From what I understand systemD only has a small number of hard dependencies (even if you consider each module separately. , Smaller even that to old bare-bones init to multiuser
http://www.nrl.navy.mil/media/...
Navy capturing the CO2 and H2 in the same process.
You could put it on a new tanker as well, anything big enough out on the water should work.
Maybe for light vehicle electric can win if range, cost, refuel time, and the problem of a jump start if you run out of gas on the roads is solved.
Now design a battery that can pull a 440,000 pounds or 200,000 kilograms triple trailer configuration across hundreds of miles of highway. Also look at aviation, liquid fuel is going to be the practical choice far into the future. The motors and batteries also require rare earths with are in short supply and require massive mining operations to supply.
An it's just not a matter in installing fast chargers, widespread adoption would require an overhaul in the electric grid. Especially if you want to source from renewable. It would work best if you could plug in most of the time, but opportunistically recharge when power was available or as needed to stabilize the grid demand, however as more and more EV's come online it gets harder to do this. If you were willing to let the grid borrow from your battery to stabilize fluctuation it would help some, but shifting entirely to non-nuclear renewable is a gargantuan engineering issue. You are still going to need a reliable baseline, be that a superconducting worldwide grid, nuclear, carbon capture coal (which isn't renewable but you can sequester the C02 or use it for synthetic fuels), or biomass (which is environmentally destructive in it's own right).
Additionally with liquid fuels you can keep a months worth or more in the supply pipeline to you don't need to produce the fuel when it is demanded. With EV's you can store some in the vehicle itself but the grid as it is now the power has to be produced as it's pulled into the battery. If 5% of a cities population fueled over the lunch hour no big deal. I 5% were fast charging from the grid you'd get rolling blackouts.
Definitely thorium, and it would be even more eficient as you can use the high heat to split water efficiently, but other high temp reactors would work great as well.
Recent navy research has shown it may be easier to concentrate oceanic C02 than atmospheric, meaning we could eventually retrofit old oil platforms with a nuclear core and fill up tankers with synthetic fuels.
Just the water rights are sold, the farmer actually has to operate a well or dig a trench to the nearest canal system.
Retail prices include treatment, long distance transport, and last mile piping, not just the water rights.
And you show your ignorance of water law, first to draw/settle has the highest rights. Urbanized centers without local sources of water actually have to go out and buy up existing rights. In the end Agriculture isn't able to pay the same price so urban can always displace Ag water use, but until it is actually purchased the 80% have the legal right to continue to draw a share of water at cost.
Lawns in places where there isn't enough water to support them is a silly notion in the first place. Kids and people nowadays are hardly outside anyways xeroscaping for the Win!. (Yet you do probably eat milk, hence are a downstream consumer of alfalfa) And the right varieties of grass won't die in low water situations, they just go dormant, and will perk back up when favourable conditions return.
For encryption, it may not be a bad idea to include an OS image in the clear with the necessary decryption programs. As you said it may be hard to find a copy of truecrypt in 15 years, but you should be able to find and x86 emulator fairly easily.
The best way to overthrow the government is just stop paying taxes and join in resilient economic communities. There may come a day when violent revolution is better than continuing to live under an oppressive regime, but yes there will be wailing and gnashing of the teeth if such a course becomes necessary.
Waco, even if you believe the government story was over a $200 dollar tax. And they called up dozens of agents per person in the compound, not just one tank. And you need to brush up on guerrilla tactics. You don't stand at the top of the hill shooting at planes and tanks. Take out strategic targets and fade back into the noise. Tanks and plains are expensive. Rifles and nitroglycerin are cheap.
Slashdot Mirror
A microkernel minimizes the amount of code you have to trust. MINIX as of 3.0 is also designed to be fault-tolerant, able to recover to almost any sort of bug. You tend to get a lot of transactional and message passing overhead though. For example the filesystem modules isn't allowed to access the disk controller, it has to ask the block layer to do it and pass the result. But the block layer can't actually pass the result directly, it has to check in with the microkernel to make sure it's okay.
But the future isn't bleak, not only has hardware in general become faster, there has been quite a bit of design advance around these sorts of messaging system that reduce the overhead micro-kernels generate.
I think the original argument was about design complexity though, not performance or security as linux started as a hobbyist desktop system. Linus's counterargument as that a microkernel design simply moved complexity to a different level and didn't actually decrease the complexity of a practical and working system.
Sound like a micro-kernel burnt into the microprocessor. It's almost kind of too specialized unless you already have a very strong use-case.
The only provably secure OS (L4) is written in C. I think there are good languages out at the application or platform level (Rust, Haskell, Scala) but systems level programming it's mostly just C. Alternatives are mostly just dressed up C (C++, D). Java and Haskell offer was to wrap application in a standalone VM, but largely due to the fact it uses shims in a controlled enviroment, it doesn't actually have to work with the messy hardware stuff.
You can even buy laptops now that are OSS from the firmware on up. There are dozens of OSS u-boot based dev boards availible. You can run a system of a CPU design loaded onto an FGPA. There are cellphones built with basebands you can load OSS firmware onto, or are not linked into DMA with main memory and have CPU controlled hard off switches. These aren't flagship consumer products, but they are available. Security is rarely convenient.
Intel's management engine and the like are not some vast conspiracy, There really is a demanded use case. And as way they are used is less intrusive than the alternative, which is to lock the computer to a particular OS and configuration that calls home anyways. A big issue is that stuff at the firmware level tends to be implemented poorly at best. Write once and forget.
And there are processors and boards you can be without these features. It just tends to be more convenient for corporations to have these feature. At least 90% of the desktop market are corporations or those that don't have a clue. 95% or more of the cell phone market is wireless carriers (via deciding what phones to offer subsidies on and to carry in their store). They have legitimate use cases for these security-poor features. The logic of the business case overrides any concern over the common good. They don't even stop to think about it, which is why OSS will generally be more secure, but less accessible to the average joe.
Not automatically. If your only building security is the lock on the front door it's not going to help you against targeted attacks of it you let employees have any sort of guest that they want in the office.
Even if abandoned the state would likely keep the right of way. A lot less paperwork if they need to rebuild. You can still graze/farm on the land, just no permanent structures.
"And who pays for his medical injuries"... Actually it depends. A property owner does have a certain duty of care to trespassers though it's still less than that towards guests
I have an old SeaGate 478MB drive that was working last time a checked at least.
And these policy decision are? And are they due to a clear clack of viable alternative mechanism? From what I understand systemD only has a small number of hard dependencies (even if you consider each module separately. , Smaller even that to old bare-bones init to multiuser
http://www.nrl.navy.mil/media/... Navy capturing the CO2 and H2 in the same process. You could put it on a new tanker as well, anything big enough out on the water should work.
Just say no!
Yes, most electric infrastructure is just transfer,
Also a gas tank doesn't have a limited number of cycles. And liquid fuels don't require a lot of expensive infrastructure to store and transfer.
Maybe for light vehicle electric can win if range, cost, refuel time, and the problem of a jump start if you run out of gas on the roads is solved.
Now design a battery that can pull a 440,000 pounds or 200,000 kilograms triple trailer configuration across hundreds of miles of highway. Also look at aviation, liquid fuel is going to be the practical choice far into the future. The motors and batteries also require rare earths with are in short supply and require massive mining operations to supply.
An it's just not a matter in installing fast chargers, widespread adoption would require an overhaul in the electric grid. Especially if you want to source from renewable. It would work best if you could plug in most of the time, but opportunistically recharge when power was available or as needed to stabilize the grid demand, however as more and more EV's come online it gets harder to do this. If you were willing to let the grid borrow from your battery to stabilize fluctuation it would help some, but shifting entirely to non-nuclear renewable is a gargantuan engineering issue. You are still going to need a reliable baseline, be that a superconducting worldwide grid, nuclear, carbon capture coal (which isn't renewable but you can sequester the C02 or use it for synthetic fuels), or biomass (which is environmentally destructive in it's own right).
Additionally with liquid fuels you can keep a months worth or more in the supply pipeline to you don't need to produce the fuel when it is demanded. With EV's you can store some in the vehicle itself but the grid as it is now the power has to be produced as it's pulled into the battery. If 5% of a cities population fueled over the lunch hour no big deal. I 5% were fast charging from the grid you'd get rolling blackouts.
Definitely thorium, and it would be even more eficient as you can use the high heat to split water efficiently, but other high temp reactors would work great as well.
Recent navy research has shown it may be easier to concentrate oceanic C02 than atmospheric, meaning we could eventually retrofit old oil platforms with a nuclear core and fill up tankers with synthetic fuels.
Don't matter, china and India will have this hooked up to thorium cycle nuclear reactors withing twenty years.
" California is short on electricity and water, a perfect place for LFTR" If you ignore the political screaming of the greenies.
Just the water rights are sold, the farmer actually has to operate a well or dig a trench to the nearest canal system.
Retail prices include treatment, long distance transport, and last mile piping, not just the water rights.
And you show your ignorance of water law, first to draw/settle has the highest rights. Urbanized centers without local sources of water actually have to go out and buy up existing rights. In the end Agriculture isn't able to pay the same price so urban can always displace Ag water use, but until it is actually purchased the 80% have the legal right to continue to draw a share of water at cost.
Lawns in places where there isn't enough water to support them is a silly notion in the first place. Kids and people nowadays are hardly outside anyways xeroscaping for the Win!. (Yet you do probably eat milk, hence are a downstream consumer of alfalfa) And the right varieties of grass won't die in low water situations, they just go dormant, and will perk back up when favourable conditions return.
But what if.... Shark ATTACK!!!!!11!!11!1!!2
Cuniform tablets burried in your grandmother's garden.
For encryption, it may not be a bad idea to include an OS image in the clear with the necessary decryption programs. As you said it may be hard to find a copy of truecrypt in 15 years, but you should be able to find and x86 emulator fairly easily.
Don't think about the pink elephants on your lawn.
Waaaa Waaaaa Waaaaa, I can't find a job on my own so mommy and daddy shoud by one for me! FTFY
The best way to overthrow the government is just stop paying taxes and join in resilient economic communities. There may come a day when violent revolution is better than continuing to live under an oppressive regime, but yes there will be wailing and gnashing of the teeth if such a course becomes necessary.
Waco, even if you believe the government story was over a $200 dollar tax. And they called up dozens of agents per person in the compound, not just one tank. And you need to brush up on guerrilla tactics. You don't stand at the top of the hill shooting at planes and tanks. Take out strategic targets and fade back into the noise. Tanks and plains are expensive. Rifles and nitroglycerin are cheap.