Apparently only in the specific case of having the "other ones" be distributed across the network and with the "closest" server to the client chosen to download the content from. Without having read the patent (mea culpa) your description sounds damning in terms of obviousness and probability of prior art.
I have two issues with Akamai now: first, sitting front and centre in the evil patents problem, playing a starring role as a patent troll. Second, being a Linux freeloader. A grep of my lkml mailbox reveals zero Akamai email addresses. Not at all becoming a multibillion dollar business that built itself largely on the back of low cost Linux servers.
In spite of FUD to the contrary, it seems AMD is still better in mips/watt. Please correct me if I am wrong. You are wrong. And I should believe why?
I would snap up a quietized Phenom-based SFF media machine in an instant. As it is, the least distasteful entrant I see in that space is the AOpen Core-2 machine. I really have my doubts about how quiet it can be. Prejudiced? Core 2 (especially the new 45nm versions) is a much lower power CPU at any given performance point than AMD's processors. AMD's geode in the Fit PC draws 1.9 watts and compiles a Linux kernel with default config in 45 minutes. The Pentium M draws 27 watts and does the same job in 9 minutes 18 seconds. To match the geode it would have to do the job in 3 minutes, 16 seconds. So the Pentium M has nearly 3 times worse power efficiency for this common task.
The Core 2 draws 64 watts. It therefore needs to compile the kernel in 1 minute 20 seconds. I doubt that it can, but prove me wrong. Numbers this time please.
As someone who works for Sun, I feel the need to point you to our lovely UltraSPARC T2. You will soil yourself. Well no, but I still think your post deserves mod points.
I was wondering if anyone could explain to me why they purchased ATI Easy, they need a laptop chipset that includes graphics, like Intel's GMA but hopefully not sucking as much due to more advanced ATI GPU design and perhaps a better memory design. That still makes sense, the only question is whether they can survive pricing pressure from the old monopolist long enough for this sensible strategy to take hold.
In spite of FUD to the contrary, it seems AMD is still better in mips/watt. Please correct me if I am wrong. Over here, mips/watt is the deciding point for which chip gets to live in my home. The latest was an AMD by the way, a 5 watt Fit PC that turns out to function very well as a general purpose computer, though it was purchased to be a server. I might have to get another one of those.
The next most satisfactory machine over here is a pentium-M machine from Shuttle with an external power supply. Then there is an Athlon 64, still a very nice machine, and an older shuttle with a Pentium 4, which has never been turned on since the Fit-PC arrived, due to the noise.
I would snap up a quietized Phenom-based SFF media machine in an instant. As it is, the least distasteful entrant I see in that space is the AOpen Core-2 machine. I really have my doubts about how quiet it can be.
Anyway, that's all by way of saying that I have been an AMD fan and I will continue to be one as long as they keep putting out power efficient chips. What probably matters more than anything to AMD at the moment is a successful outcome of the anti-trust lawsuit. If all else fails, the natural buyer is IBM. No intel-compatible chip in their lineup at the moment. There are other potential purchasers with deep enough pockets, like Siemens. I would much prefer an independent AMD, but I just do not see how the little guy can compete on production line costs in the long run. Rambled a little more than intended there, sorry.
Games consoles are generally sold on a similar principle to inkjets and cartridges or razors and blades. The console is sold cheap (sometimes at a loss sometimes at a small profit) and the real money is made from the games. That afaict is why the linux system is locked out of the 3D graphics. If it wasn't locked out people would be able to develop and market games without going through the official channels. That would be bad for the game revenue stream. So why is Microsoft doing it? Oh right, they need more content for the box, fast. And if that works for Microsoft then Sony has to respond.
It would be easy for Sony to keep control of the content distribution just as they do now while opening the hardware entirely. Just license the keys needed to unlock the GPU. Give away keys for non commercial use, and continue to make the usual deal with anybody who wants to do a release. Voila, nothing changes for commercial releases, but gadget hackers get to have fun with the toy and probably create a lot of value for Sony in the process.
Yes, it's great that they have *limited* support for Linux on the PS3. Now, if only they'd allow GPU access. I remember reading that someone had unofficially figured out a way around being blocked out of it - anyone have any updates on this? I would be installing Linux on my PS3 right now, if not for this fact. Even without access to the GPU, the PS3 makes a powerful Linux compute node and an inexpensive platform for cell development.
I too hope that Sony will drop the other shoe and open access to the GPU. And while they're at it, NVidia should open their chip specs as well. Maybe Sony will do the right thing a littler closer to the end of the product cycle. One factor in favor: Sony is going to have to answer Microsoft's opening up the XBox last week. Actually, this is competition working properly, Microsoft is doing some good by applying pressure to Sony over the current development restrictions that in practice gain Sony nothing, and which if removed could gain them a lot of mind share, never mind bringing in a new wave of cell engine programmers.
Yes, but to decrypt it, it has to have the key in memory. So if your open source program has access to the key in memory, you could just change the source to display it on the screen. If you can't change the source, there's no point in calling it open source. You have no idea how easy it is to change a closed source, binary program to do something other than it was originally intended to, without any access to the source. You seem to be unaware of how drm algorithms operate. Software is prevented by hardware from having access to the keys, it does not matter whether the software is open or closed source.
32 percent is actually low growth in that sector for Linux. Linux would have a much larger share of POS today if Microsoft had not pulled out all the stops a few years back when Linux threatened to make major gains.
So Microsoft succeeded in slowing Linux in the retail sector by that and other means. But by no means stopping it. Linux's success in the cell phone, umpc and embedded applications of all description plus IBM's support will no doubt contribute to a resurgence of Linux growth in that sector.
Considering it's Sony and Blu-Ray that won, I think at least one person should have the stones to mod the parent +1 insightful. You mean the Sony that went with all standard interfaces on the PS3 and supports Linux on it?
Personally, I like BluRay's higher density and I like the fact that Microsoft had nothing to do with it.
People are quick to slam Microsoft again here. For those reading TFKBA, most of the apps are either:
1. Anti-virus programs. AV programs have a reputation of hooking on undocumented kernel stuff, so of course a major OS update is going to break them off.
2. Other programs which abuse undocumented functions or quirks/bugs in Windows, and these get changed/fixed in a subsequent release.
In conclusion, move along, nothing to see here. Seems unambiguously damning to me that Microsoft's antivirus internal developers were able to get the info they needed in time to be compatible with SP1 while independent software vendors were not. Perhaps if Microsoft were not selling a product that competes with those vendors it could be explained away more easily.
You can't combine open source and DRM. DRM relies on a secret. Once it's open source, and you can change the code, DRM is useless. Wrong. Only the DRM encryption keys are secret, the encryption algorithms can be as open source as you like.
They are pointing out a general fact about research funding... Oh really? The article also says:
Since it is not safe or practical to give Fansidar constantly to babies because it is a sulfa drug that can cause rare but deadly reactions and because Fansidar-resistant malaria is growing, World Health Organization scientists had doubts about it. Nonetheless, Kochi wrote, although it was "less and less straightforward" that the health agency should recommend it, the agency's objections were met with "intense and aggressive opposition" from Gates-backed scientists and the foundation.
It is of course quite possible that the person responsible for malaria efforts at the Gates foundation is a certified bitch - that alone does not justify the retarded "some oddly familiar-sounding tactics and attitudes" bullshit in the submission. That alone? From the article: Since it is not safe or practical to give Fansidar constantly to babies because it is a sulfa drug that can cause rare but deadly reactions and because Fansidar-resistant malaria is growing, World Health Organization scientists had doubts about it. Nonetheless, Kochi wrote, although it was "less and less straightforward" that the health agency should recommend it, the agency's objections were met with "intense and aggressive opposition" from Gates-backed scientists and the foundation.
So this is either truth or lies. If truth, it is alarming.
Why is anyone surprised. These foundations are nothing but cash cows, money sinks and tax write-offs. Never mind foundations in general. Bill Gates is the source of the moral bankruptcy.
I bet all the money in the world that the patent holder is heavily contributing to both parties. It is not as simple as that. From the article: Political action committees of financial institutions were the largest single category of industry donors to Sessions, with $52,300 in the current election cycle...
Never mind what could be flowing beneath the surface.
Unless you or a friend owns stock in the patent troll, then it's fuckin' brilliant. Al Capone was brilliant too, never mind the part about being a morally bankrupt thug and net drain on society.
The sad thing is that sheer disgust is pretty much the most insightful way to look at this.. What worries me is how a couple of scumsucking bottom feeders with mod points modded down the parent.
Think of the people that patents DO benefit... I'm thinking any lawyer fighting to abolish patents won't exactly be pushing themselves to win the case Knowing some of those lawyers personally, I have to say that your insinuation is unfair and incorrect. Even with software patents gone there will remain more than enough stupidity to keep any lawyer with a conscience busy to the end of time. Besides, winning the good fight is always highly satisfactory.
You're still paying for support and stability -- just that you have a little more flexibility and control over your software, which usually does not matter all that much in enterprise production applications Says you. If your closed/binary Microsoft application breaks, you can't fix it, you are at the mercy of the vendor. Who may not give a rodent's fuzzy behind how long it takes to bail you out, you are after all only a single sale.
The European Commission is not the same as the European Parliament. The latter has the real power, though not often exercised, while the latter is able to act autonomously in many respects, provided they do not attract too much attention from the general public. The main function of the European Commission thus would appear to be pandering to private interests, while the European Parliament is responsible for upholding the law and acting in the interest of the general population.
Looking at the comments at the top of the code, it's described as "quite old code" (assuming you believe the author). I believe the author, but I think he was referring to the boilerplate exploit code, which is pretty awful code to tell the truth. The vmsplice bit looks brand new to me, but who knows, perhaps somebody out there really did know about the hole for the last year and a half. If so, they kept it to themselves and damage was not widespread.
If you look at the discussion around the introduction of vmsplice() and the ensuing flamewar after Linux flamed COW and FreeBSD into a crisp at the time a number of people pointed out that making vmsplice() secure will be a very entertaining proposition. Anything else aside COW is a devil we know while this is a devil which is yet to show itself.
Can't give you exact pointers, but the argument was definitely raised as a part of the COW vs vmsplice() flamewar ^W discussion... Well, you do not get to say I told you so this time, the hole was just a simple failure to check that the caller has permission to access the target address. Not a fundamental design problem, just a missing check, and not grounds for passing judgment on the merits of the design.
I still do not know whether splice is a good design approach or not, but I would s
You cannot separately disable the part of the kernel that contains the hole using a config option, you need the latest stable or development kernel, or a patched kernel which you can patch yourself or get from your distributor (the patch just adds a check that was missing, two lines).
"Ah, shit" is correct. I would like to add a gracious 'Thank You nenolod' for not being a tool and keeping this little nugget to yourself. Good point, however releasing the exploit without notifying kernel developers in advance is hardly praiseworthy.
Slashdot Mirror
I have two issues with Akamai now: first, sitting front and centre in the evil patents problem, playing a starring role as a patent troll. Second, being a Linux freeloader. A grep of my lkml mailbox reveals zero Akamai email addresses. Not at all becoming a multibillion dollar business that built itself largely on the back of low cost Linux servers.
You are wrong. And I should believe why? I would snap up a quietized Phenom-based SFF media machine in an instant. As it is, the least distasteful entrant I see in that space is the AOpen Core-2 machine. I really have my doubts about how quiet it can be. Prejudiced? Core 2 (especially the new 45nm versions) is a much lower power CPU at any given performance point than AMD's processors. AMD's geode in the Fit PC draws 1.9 watts and compiles a Linux kernel with default config in 45 minutes. The Pentium M draws 27 watts and does the same job in 9 minutes 18 seconds. To match the geode it would have to do the job in 3 minutes, 16 seconds. So the Pentium M has nearly 3 times worse power efficiency for this common task.
The Core 2 draws 64 watts. It therefore needs to compile the kernel in 1 minute 20 seconds. I doubt that it can, but prove me wrong. Numbers this time please.
In spite of FUD to the contrary, it seems AMD is still better in mips/watt. Please correct me if I am wrong. Over here, mips/watt is the deciding point for which chip gets to live in my home. The latest was an AMD by the way, a 5 watt Fit PC that turns out to function very well as a general purpose computer, though it was purchased to be a server. I might have to get another one of those.
The next most satisfactory machine over here is a pentium-M machine from Shuttle with an external power supply. Then there is an Athlon 64, still a very nice machine, and an older shuttle with a Pentium 4, which has never been turned on since the Fit-PC arrived, due to the noise.
I would snap up a quietized Phenom-based SFF media machine in an instant. As it is, the least distasteful entrant I see in that space is the AOpen Core-2 machine. I really have my doubts about how quiet it can be.
Anyway, that's all by way of saying that I have been an AMD fan and I will continue to be one as long as they keep putting out power efficient chips. What probably matters more than anything to AMD at the moment is a successful outcome of the anti-trust lawsuit. If all else fails, the natural buyer is IBM. No intel-compatible chip in their lineup at the moment. There are other potential purchasers with deep enough pockets, like Siemens. I would much prefer an independent AMD, but I just do not see how the little guy can compete on production line costs in the long run. Rambled a little more than intended there, sorry.
It would be easy for Sony to keep control of the content distribution just as they do now while opening the hardware entirely. Just license the keys needed to unlock the GPU. Give away keys for non commercial use, and continue to make the usual deal with anybody who wants to do a release. Voila, nothing changes for commercial releases, but gadget hackers get to have fun with the toy and probably create a lot of value for Sony in the process.
I too hope that Sony will drop the other shoe and open access to the GPU. And while they're at it, NVidia should open their chip specs as well. Maybe Sony will do the right thing a littler closer to the end of the product cycle. One factor in favor: Sony is going to have to answer Microsoft's opening up the XBox last week. Actually, this is competition working properly, Microsoft is doing some good by applying pressure to Sony over the current development restrictions that in practice gain Sony nothing, and which if removed could gain them a lot of mind share, never mind bringing in a new wave of cell engine programmers.
32 percent is actually low growth in that sector for Linux. Linux would have a much larger share of POS today if Microsoft had not pulled out all the stops a few years back when Linux threatened to make major gains.
"We began the year projecting 300-400% growth for Linux," says Greg Buzek, President of IHL Consulting Group. "But two large retail defections from planned rollouts of POS units greatly hampered the growth of the operating system. Musicland was just about ready to roll with Linux when they were purchased by Best Buy, a Windows NT shop. Best Buy changed those Linux plans. And Home Depot also was looking to roll with Linux at the POS, but those plans were nixed when the company made several management changes."
So Microsoft succeeded in slowing Linux in the retail sector by that and other means. But by no means stopping it. Linux's success in the cell phone, umpc and embedded applications of all description plus IBM's support will no doubt contribute to a resurgence of Linux growth in that sector.
Personally, I like BluRay's higher density and I like the fact that Microsoft had nothing to do with it.
1. Anti-virus programs. AV programs have a reputation of hooking on undocumented kernel stuff, so of course a major OS update is going to break them off.
2. Other programs which abuse undocumented functions or quirks/bugs in Windows, and these get changed/fixed in a subsequent release.
In conclusion, move along, nothing to see here. Seems unambiguously damning to me that Microsoft's antivirus internal developers were able to get the info they needed in time to be compatible with SP1 while independent software vendors were not. Perhaps if Microsoft were not selling a product that competes with those vendors it could be explained away more easily.
Since it is not safe or practical to give Fansidar constantly to babies because it is a sulfa drug that can cause rare but deadly reactions and because Fansidar-resistant malaria is growing, World Health Organization scientists had doubts about it. Nonetheless, Kochi wrote, although it was "less and less straightforward" that the health agency should recommend it, the agency's objections were met with "intense and aggressive opposition" from Gates-backed scientists and the foundation.
Sounds like a specific allegation to me.
Since it is not safe or practical to give Fansidar constantly to babies because it is a sulfa drug that can cause rare but deadly reactions and because Fansidar-resistant malaria is growing, World Health Organization scientists had doubts about it. Nonetheless, Kochi wrote, although it was "less and less straightforward" that the health agency should recommend it, the agency's objections were met with "intense and aggressive opposition" from Gates-backed scientists and the foundation.
So this is either truth or lies. If truth, it is alarming.
Never mind what could be flowing beneath the surface.
What are the chances that the money trail does not lead back to Microsoft or Bill Gates or both?
The European Commission is not the same as the European Parliament. The latter has the real power, though not often exercised, while the latter is able to act autonomously in many respects, provided they do not attract too much attention from the general public. The main function of the European Commission thus would appear to be pandering to private interests, while the European Parliament is responsible for upholding the law and acting in the interest of the general population.
Can't give you exact pointers, but the argument was definitely raised as a part of the COW vs vmsplice() flamewar ^W discussion... Well, you do not get to say I told you so this time, the hole was just a simple failure to check that the caller has permission to access the target address. Not a fundamental design problem, just a missing check, and not grounds for passing judgment on the merits of the design.
I still do not know whether splice is a good design approach or not, but I would s
You cannot separately disable the part of the kernel that contains the hole using a config option, you need the latest stable or development kernel, or a patched kernel which you can patch yourself or get from your distributor (the patch just adds a check that was missing, two lines).