Drones I can understand, they're primarily detailed to doing surveillance or limited to small munitions, but now we're talking about a full bomber that could be remote controlled? Seriously? There's nothing that can't be hacked! If it's controllable by something outside of the craft itself, it is vulnerable to hacking! Oh let's give enemies the opportunity to hack our BOMBERS, with a Nuclear option no less!
Friendly fire is currently a big source of US casualties and the right application of automation can decrease it. Current cruise and ballistic missiles can already be remotely controlled. I'm sure the "optionally manned" part is to allow future military leaders to choose the appropriate tradeoffs.
"The FastCGI protocol supports a feature, described in the specificiation as "multiplexing", that allows a single client-server connection to be simultaneously shared by multiple requests. This is not supported."
You seem to be confusing multiplexing with persistent connections, which mod_fastcgi and mod_fgcid certainly do support. Since you're such buddies with Google, I'm sure you're aware that the entire point of FastCGI is to avoid having to create a new application or script process and connection to it for every HTTP request. These persistent processes and connections are what both mod_fastcgi and mod_fcgid make easy and if nginx cannot do the same, it is not a good replacement. Why would you make an incorrect comment when you can just Google something simple like this?
The current stable release of nginx does support FastCGI fully, just not the latest FastCGI spec that added a bunch of new abilities to further streamline the FastCGI protocol and reduce bottlenecks further. It also supported upstream proxy requests, but it only used HTTP 1.0 requests to them to keep the code simple.
Apache 2.2 didn't support those latest features either, FYI.
The latest development versions of nginx *DO* support more of the latest FastCGI specs/features now, and also adds HTTP/1.1 (I.E. pipelining) requests to upstream servers when needed, so if nothing else nginx can now mask/convert multiple HTTP 1.0 requests into a single stream of HTTP 1.1 pipelined requests.
I wasn't referring to version of HTTP, but to the previous claim that nginx makes a new connection to a FastCGI server for every request. I don't know enough about nginx to prove or disprove that claim, but if it's true, nginx is quite deficient compared to Apache's mod_fcgid.
Actually, you have to run them side-by-side. Canonical failed to deliver their "Android Execution Environment" that they announced withi such a big splash in 2009.
It's simple, really - you use the existing hypervisor in the Atrix, and just replace the desktop os with the os of your choice.
If you're right, that's disappointing. I want to be able to run ordinary GNU/Linux programs on my Android device without special hardware requirements or running a separate VM.
The Motorola Atrix was launched last year, and this was supported out of the box. It was the major selling point of the phone
The Atrix was launched with Android, HDMI output and Webtop, which is certainly not a full-featured desktop Operating System. If Motorola said it was running Ubuntu or any other full-featured GNU/Linux desktop OS, they were lying.
And within a few months of its release the fine hackers at xda-developers.com unlocked the webtop to work as a fully-featured desktop operating system. Hence, this is not new. This is simply Canonical claiming credit for re-packaging what's already been done.
OT: Come to think of it, what has Canonical done in Ubuntu Desktop lately besides forcing Unity, adding an installer and a few configuration GUIs that isn't already in Debian? (Note: I do think Ubuntu does a great job of neatly packaging Linux for new users with user-friendly installers and such, but for myself I've been a lot happier since I switched over to Debian Squeeze.)
Thanks for supplying more evidence for my assertion that Motorola did not provide a full-featured GNU/Linux destkop system on the Atrix as shipped. I'm not surprised that others have succeeded in getting a real GNU/Linux system working on the Atrix despite Motorola's attempts to prevent it.
I think Canonical has done a lot of good by polishing Debian and making it easier to use in some ways, which is why I still use Ubuntu. I am not terribly impressed by Unity and am currently using GNOME Shell, but I'm sure Unity is a good choice for some. The suggestion that Canonical may be trying to keep some of this Android development proprietary is deeply disturbing. Despite a number of mistakes, I thought they were pretty committed to keeping all their contributions to Ubuntu Free Software.
Just because Webtop was "based on Ubuntu" doesn't mean I can run Thunderbird, Emacs or Nethack on it. Everything I see indicates it is intended to run a browser and nothing else.
If nginx can't do FastCGI properly, it is far from a replacement for Apache. If you want to run one web server, whether in a single configuration or several complementary ones, Apache continues to be the best choice overall. However, I imagine some setups would find the best tradeoffs with nginx out front and Apache talking to the FastCGI servers.
The Motorola Atrix was launched last year, and this was supported out of the box. It was the major selling point of the phone
The Atrix was launched with Android, HDMI output and Webtop, which is certainly not a full-featured desktop Operating System. If Motorola said it was running Ubuntu or any other full-featured GNU/Linux desktop OS, they were lying.
the Ubuntu for Android system runs both OSes side by side
Nice trick. Anyone knows if this scheme respects battery life?
I strongly suspect this is a mischaracterization of what happens. Since both Android and Ubuntu are based on Linux, there's no need to run two kernels side by side. Most likely, Canonical just added their userspace, which is mostly general GNU/Linux stuff packaged by Debian. It's not the OSes running side by side, but the ordinary processes. When "Ubuntu" apps aren't running, they aren't consuming anything but secondary storage space.
Canonical first officially released Unity as part of Ubuntu Netbook Remix. Currently, they call it "A powerful desktop and netbook environment that brings consistency and elegance to the Ubuntu experience." I don't think Canonical has said it was intended for tablets and phones, but others have incorrectly assumed that.
I don't hate Unity as so many others seem to, but neither have I found it particularly useful. What I'd like to see is a way to run arbitrary Free *nix apps on an Android system in as seemless and integrated way as possible. At a bare minimum, this would require an X11 server, but integration of notifications would be another obvious thing to do.
...I can plug in a printer to my computer and without a single dialog box ever coming up asking/telling me about configuration, drivers, or anything else other than asking how many copies do I want, they need to keep trying.
Printers have been stuck in the early 80s for the last three decades.
I've been able to plug printers into my Ubuntu systems and use them without any questions about configuration or drivers for several years now. Most of what makes this work is CUPS. Ironically, the exact same printers plugged into an OSX system typically require drivers to be installed, though OSX does this mostly automatically. Obviously, Apple is trying to improve that situation by pushing the "driverless" printing but I wonder why they haven't also done what Ubuntu and other distributions have and install the majority of drivers by default.
Perhaps it's because those drivers are Free Software and the proprietary equivalents from HP and others are too big to install them all. It must have galled Steve Jobs to no end that CUPS is released under the GPL. I assume it hasn't been made all proprietary because of the large amount of potential backlash, but it's also interesting that it hasn't been switched to a permissive BSD-style license. Maybe Apple is only opposed to Copyleft when they don't hold the copyrights.
When I play a game, I certainly expect a great user experience since that's the only reason to do it at all. When I use other technology such as my PVR system, I expect it to be convenient enough that I don't have a bad experience. That's the kind of user experience a TV designer should aim for: one that the user doesn't think much about beyond being satisfied. This is no longer as simple as allowing the user to select channels and adjust the volume since video is coming from increasingly diverse sources under the control of various entities. I'm still looking for a good way to combine access to recordings on my MythTV system with Internet sources like Netflix in one user interface.
I assume this is a troll since higher resolution than 1920x1080 in a TV is currently pointless. Where can you get any video at a higher resolution unless you shoot it yourself with a professional camera? HD broadcast signals have been available for over fifty years in some parts of the world but it's only in the last ten years that people have started buying HDTVs in large numbers. Monitors used for text, games and other purposes beyond simple video viewing are useful in higher resolutions but nobody needs a TV with higher than 1080p capability until broadcast, disc or Internet video becomes available at such a resolution.
Who would seriously dispute Jobs did things of great significance? The interesting question is whether the significant things he did were more positive or negative. I'm conflicted about the impact of iTunes and iTMS. They have challenged the powers that be in the recording industry and given customers more affordable access to DRM-free music, which is great. However, while challenging RIAA members' stranglehold on music distribution, Apple has become a powerful force in that space and succeeds in controlling how customers use the devices that play the music to an even greater extent than the RIAA has been able to.
While I will not spend any money on Apple devices or music, I do acknowledge that without Jobs' effort to sell music without DRM on iTMS, I may not have as easy access to DRM-free music via services like Amazon. Similar to the banning of the Flash plugin on iOS devices, pressure from Apple has sometimes improved the situation for everyone even if it was done for the wrong reasons.
He said the services, which browsers are supposed to query before trusting a credential for an SSL-protected address, don't make end users safer because Chrome and most other browsers establish the connection even when the services aren't able to ensure a certificate hasn't been tampered with.
So he admits Chrome is broken, so he doesn't fix it and blames the CA's . . makes sense.
Chrome will instead rely on its automatic update mechanism to maintain a list of certificates that have been revoked for security reasons. Langley called on certificate authorities to provide a list of revoked certificates that Google bots can automatically fetch.
So basically he wants CRLs? I thought he didn't want CRLs?
You've made the classic mistake of taking the Slashdot headline seriously. The actual post doesn't say Chrome will stop using CRLs. It says they will be pushed to Chrome directly from Google. No one "admitted" that Chrome is broken. The entire system is broken. All major browsers will load an HTTPS site even if they cannot get the CRL via OCSP because doing otherwise would cause huge amounts of unnecessary breakage and just make users angry and confused. From the actual post:
So soft-fail revocation checks are like a seat-belt that snaps when you crash. Even though it works 99% of the time, it's worthless because it only works when you don't need it.
Current laws don't address encryption specifically, so it's not that clear whether compelling a defendant to render the passphrase to unlock an encrypted devices is more analagous to compelling her to provide a key to open a safe or to give up self-incriminating information from her own mind. A situation like this has parallels to both situations. The former has precedent supporting its constitutionality and the latter has precedent supporting its unconstitutionality.
I'm fairly certain the "signing" was legally meaningless in the US at least. Only the US Senate has the power to approve international treaties. Of course, the fact that US Congress hasn't declared war since WWII hasn't prevented US involvement in countless wars.
Bend over, grab your ankles, and hold your breath.
This is why those scumbags let SOPA sputter so easily. They knew this was in the pipe. How's that "victory" taste now? Yeah, thought so.
Until there's actually some tangible consequences to stop them doing so, you'd all (and that goes for everyone in any country) best come to grips with the fact that you exist to be boned in the bottom by your governments.
SOPA and PIPA have been stopped for now because many big corporations with a lot of money were against it in addition to ordinary Internet users. I haven't heard of many big corporations against ACTA.
C++ is horrifically complex and difficult to use safely. As a high level programmer, I'd be much more inclined to learn Rust, which is almost certainly simpler and easier to use safely.
Extremely accurate GPS fixes needed for tasks such as this need many samples without moving the receiver and sometimes use ground stations with known positions.
Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery. But now, what's the point to windows if there's no GUI?
The fact that there's never been any point in running Internet services on Windows hasn't stopped millions from doing it. Do you really think MS would still be in business if people chose its products on merit?
Those who do not understand UNIX are doomed to reinvent it, poorly.
Indeed, it seems to be taking decades for MS to realize this mistake. Supposedly, NT was originally heavily influenced by VMS, but VMS services didn't rely on GUIs either. Perhaps most MS programmers understood neither Unix nor VMS.
So we are going back to command line and dumb terminals... how very retro
Real sysadmins never left the command line. User interfaces are moving from native GUIs to web ones. It's never made sense to have a native GUI on a web server.
Slashdot Mirror
Drones I can understand, they're primarily detailed to doing surveillance or limited to small munitions, but now we're talking about a full bomber that could be remote controlled? Seriously? There's nothing that can't be hacked! If it's controllable by something outside of the craft itself, it is vulnerable to hacking! Oh let's give enemies the opportunity to hack our BOMBERS, with a Nuclear option no less!
Friendly fire is currently a big source of US casualties and the right application of automation can decrease it. Current cruise and ballistic missiles can already be remotely controlled. I'm sure the "optionally manned" part is to allow future military leaders to choose the appropriate tradeoffs.
mod_fastcgi doesn't support multiplexing either. Why would you make an incorrect comment when you can just Google something simple like this?
http://www.fastcgi.com/mod_fastcgi/docs/mod_fastcgi.html
"The FastCGI protocol supports a feature, described in the specificiation as "multiplexing", that allows a single client-server connection to be simultaneously shared by multiple requests. This is not supported."
You seem to be confusing multiplexing with persistent connections, which mod_fastcgi and mod_fgcid certainly do support. Since you're such buddies with Google, I'm sure you're aware that the entire point of FastCGI is to avoid having to create a new application or script process and connection to it for every HTTP request. These persistent processes and connections are what both mod_fastcgi and mod_fcgid make easy and if nginx cannot do the same, it is not a good replacement. Why would you make an incorrect comment when you can just Google something simple like this?
The current stable release of nginx does support FastCGI fully, just not the latest FastCGI spec that added a bunch of new abilities to further streamline the FastCGI protocol and reduce bottlenecks further. It also supported upstream proxy requests, but it only used HTTP 1.0 requests to them to keep the code simple.
Apache 2.2 didn't support those latest features either, FYI.
The latest development versions of nginx *DO* support more of the latest FastCGI specs/features now, and also adds HTTP/1.1 (I.E. pipelining) requests to upstream servers when needed, so if nothing else nginx can now mask/convert multiple HTTP 1.0 requests into a single stream of HTTP 1.1 pipelined requests.
I wasn't referring to version of HTTP, but to the previous claim that nginx makes a new connection to a FastCGI server for every request. I don't know enough about nginx to prove or disprove that claim, but if it's true, nginx is quite deficient compared to Apache's mod_fcgid.
Actually, you have to run them side-by-side. Canonical failed to deliver their "Android Execution Environment" that they announced withi such a big splash in 2009.
It's simple, really - you use the existing hypervisor in the Atrix, and just replace the desktop os with the os of your choice.
If you're right, that's disappointing. I want to be able to run ordinary GNU/Linux programs on my Android device without special hardware requirements or running a separate VM.
The Motorola Atrix was launched last year, and this was supported out of the box. It was the major selling point of the phone
The Atrix was launched with Android, HDMI output and Webtop, which is certainly not a full-featured desktop Operating System. If Motorola said it was running Ubuntu or any other full-featured GNU/Linux desktop OS, they were lying.
And within a few months of its release the fine hackers at xda-developers.com unlocked the webtop to work as a fully-featured desktop operating system. Hence, this is not new. This is simply Canonical claiming credit for re-packaging what's already been done.
OT: Come to think of it, what has Canonical done in Ubuntu Desktop lately besides forcing Unity, adding an installer and a few configuration GUIs that isn't already in Debian? (Note: I do think Ubuntu does a great job of neatly packaging Linux for new users with user-friendly installers and such, but for myself I've been a lot happier since I switched over to Debian Squeeze.)
Thanks for supplying more evidence for my assertion that Motorola did not provide a full-featured GNU/Linux destkop system on the Atrix as shipped. I'm not surprised that others have succeeded in getting a real GNU/Linux system working on the Atrix despite Motorola's attempts to prevent it.
I think Canonical has done a lot of good by polishing Debian and making it easier to use in some ways, which is why I still use Ubuntu. I am not terribly impressed by Unity and am currently using GNOME Shell, but I'm sure Unity is a good choice for some. The suggestion that Canonical may be trying to keep some of this Android development proprietary is deeply disturbing. Despite a number of mistakes, I thought they were pretty committed to keeping all their contributions to Ubuntu Free Software.
Just because Webtop was "based on Ubuntu" doesn't mean I can run Thunderbird, Emacs or Nethack on it. Everything I see indicates it is intended to run a browser and nothing else.
If nginx can't do FastCGI properly, it is far from a replacement for Apache. If you want to run one web server, whether in a single configuration or several complementary ones, Apache continues to be the best choice overall. However, I imagine some setups would find the best tradeoffs with nginx out front and Apache talking to the FastCGI servers.
The Motorola Atrix was launched last year, and this was supported out of the box. It was the major selling point of the phone
The Atrix was launched with Android, HDMI output and Webtop, which is certainly not a full-featured desktop Operating System. If Motorola said it was running Ubuntu or any other full-featured GNU/Linux desktop OS, they were lying.
the Ubuntu for Android system runs both OSes side by side
Nice trick. Anyone knows if this scheme respects battery life?
I strongly suspect this is a mischaracterization of what happens. Since both Android and Ubuntu are based on Linux, there's no need to run two kernels side by side. Most likely, Canonical just added their userspace, which is mostly general GNU/Linux stuff packaged by Debian. It's not the OSes running side by side, but the ordinary processes. When "Ubuntu" apps aren't running, they aren't consuming anything but secondary storage space.
Canonical first officially released Unity as part of Ubuntu Netbook Remix. Currently, they call it "A powerful desktop and netbook environment that brings consistency and elegance to the Ubuntu experience." I don't think Canonical has said it was intended for tablets and phones, but others have incorrectly assumed that.
I don't hate Unity as so many others seem to, but neither have I found it particularly useful. What I'd like to see is a way to run arbitrary Free *nix apps on an Android system in as seemless and integrated way as possible. At a bare minimum, this would require an X11 server, but integration of notifications would be another obvious thing to do.
...I can plug in a printer to my computer and without a single dialog box ever coming up asking/telling me about configuration, drivers, or anything else other than asking how many copies do I want, they need to keep trying.
Printers have been stuck in the early 80s for the last three decades.
I've been able to plug printers into my Ubuntu systems and use them without any questions about configuration or drivers for several years now. Most of what makes this work is CUPS. Ironically, the exact same printers plugged into an OSX system typically require drivers to be installed, though OSX does this mostly automatically. Obviously, Apple is trying to improve that situation by pushing the "driverless" printing but I wonder why they haven't also done what Ubuntu and other distributions have and install the majority of drivers by default.
Perhaps it's because those drivers are Free Software and the proprietary equivalents from HP and others are too big to install them all. It must have galled Steve Jobs to no end that CUPS is released under the GPL. I assume it hasn't been made all proprietary because of the large amount of potential backlash, but it's also interesting that it hasn't been switched to a permissive BSD-style license. Maybe Apple is only opposed to Copyleft when they don't hold the copyrights.
Yeah, it's idiots like that we have to thank for the partially failed conversion to the Metric system.
That was indeed foolish to throw the coin away. Whatever it was, it sounds rare and interesting.
When I play a game, I certainly expect a great user experience since that's the only reason to do it at all. When I use other technology such as my PVR system, I expect it to be convenient enough that I don't have a bad experience. That's the kind of user experience a TV designer should aim for: one that the user doesn't think much about beyond being satisfied. This is no longer as simple as allowing the user to select channels and adjust the volume since video is coming from increasingly diverse sources under the control of various entities. I'm still looking for a good way to combine access to recordings on my MythTV system with Internet sources like Netflix in one user interface.
I assume this is a troll since higher resolution than 1920x1080 in a TV is currently pointless. Where can you get any video at a higher resolution unless you shoot it yourself with a professional camera? HD broadcast signals have been available for over fifty years in some parts of the world but it's only in the last ten years that people have started buying HDTVs in large numbers. Monitors used for text, games and other purposes beyond simple video viewing are useful in higher resolutions but nobody needs a TV with higher than 1080p capability until broadcast, disc or Internet video becomes available at such a resolution.
Who would seriously dispute Jobs did things of great significance? The interesting question is whether the significant things he did were more positive or negative. I'm conflicted about the impact of iTunes and iTMS. They have challenged the powers that be in the recording industry and given customers more affordable access to DRM-free music, which is great. However, while challenging RIAA members' stranglehold on music distribution, Apple has become a powerful force in that space and succeeds in controlling how customers use the devices that play the music to an even greater extent than the RIAA has been able to.
While I will not spend any money on Apple devices or music, I do acknowledge that without Jobs' effort to sell music without DRM on iTMS, I may not have as easy access to DRM-free music via services like Amazon. Similar to the banning of the Flash plugin on iOS devices, pressure from Apple has sometimes improved the situation for everyone even if it was done for the wrong reasons.
So he admits Chrome is broken, so he doesn't fix it and blames the CA's . . makes sense.
So basically he wants CRLs? I thought he didn't want CRLs?
You've made the classic mistake of taking the Slashdot headline seriously. The actual post doesn't say Chrome will stop using CRLs. It says they will be pushed to Chrome directly from Google. No one "admitted" that Chrome is broken. The entire system is broken. All major browsers will load an HTTPS site even if they cannot get the CRL via OCSP because doing otherwise would cause huge amounts of unnecessary breakage and just make users angry and confused. From the actual post:
So soft-fail revocation checks are like a seat-belt that snaps when you crash. Even though it works 99% of the time, it's worthless because it only works when you don't need it.
The fifth amendment has already been addressed in this case and others:
Colorado Judge Denies Fifth Amendment Applies to Encryption Passphrases.
Current laws don't address encryption specifically, so it's not that clear whether compelling a defendant to render the passphrase to unlock an encrypted devices is more analagous to compelling her to provide a key to open a safe or to give up self-incriminating information from her own mind. A situation like this has parallels to both situations. The former has precedent supporting its constitutionality and the latter has precedent supporting its unconstitutionality.
I'm fairly certain the "signing" was legally meaningless in the US at least. Only the US Senate has the power to approve international treaties. Of course, the fact that US Congress hasn't declared war since WWII hasn't prevented US involvement in countless wars.
Bend over, grab your ankles, and hold your breath.
This is why those scumbags let SOPA sputter so easily. They knew this was in the pipe. How's that "victory" taste now? Yeah, thought so.
Until there's actually some tangible consequences to stop them doing so, you'd all (and that goes for everyone in any country) best come to grips with the fact that you exist to be boned in the bottom by your governments.
SOPA and PIPA have been stopped for now because many big corporations with a lot of money were against it in addition to ordinary Internet users. I haven't heard of many big corporations against ACTA.
C++ is horrifically complex and difficult to use safely. As a high level programmer, I'd be much more inclined to learn Rust, which is almost certainly simpler and easier to use safely.
Extremely accurate GPS fixes needed for tasks such as this need many samples without moving the receiver and sometimes use ground stations with known positions.
Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery. But now, what's the point to windows if there's no GUI?
The fact that there's never been any point in running Internet services on Windows hasn't stopped millions from doing it. Do you really think MS would still be in business if people chose its products on merit?
Those who do not understand UNIX are doomed to reinvent it, poorly.
Indeed, it seems to be taking decades for MS to realize this mistake. Supposedly, NT was originally heavily influenced by VMS, but VMS services didn't rely on GUIs either. Perhaps most MS programmers understood neither Unix nor VMS.
So we are going back to command line and dumb terminals... how very retro
Real sysadmins never left the command line. User interfaces are moving from native GUIs to web ones. It's never made sense to have a native GUI on a web server.