You seem to be wagering that the police in question are very good in bed, or at least better in bed than those who would prefer more widespread dissemination (not to be confused with other terms ending in "ination") of this sort of information. I question the wisdom of that bet.
Did I miss some sort of/b/ or film reference here? I've been out of the loop for a while owing to more pressing concerns.
VirtualBox isn't representative of the majority of the use cases under discussion here. I work with large KVM and VMware ESX deployments every day, and every single file and database server I use in enterprise environments is virtualized. Performance is not a problem, even for heavy workloads. Latency is not an issue, either. I won't beat a dead horse in this thread, but I will offer my advice via email if you'd like a few additional ideas regarding your stated use case.
Things happen. Sometimes very nasty things happen. Attempts at suppression of information related to nasty things will inevitably fail, and such attempts will only serve to cast those advocating for suppression in a nasty light themselves. "Authorities" might find their time better spent pursuing criminals instead of engaging in an odd attempt to force the populace to bury its head in the sand on threat of imprisonment. The information itself isn't the problem; direct harm caused against human beings is.
TLDR: Scotland Yard can go fuck itself, and I think this is a great time to make a personal project of facilitating the spread of this information as widely as possible. Thank goodness I've got a great deal of resources available to assist in that endeavor. Cheers, mates.
I like how you didn't bother to directly respond to any of the points listed. Your apparent inability to properly tune a virtualization host and its guests is your problem, and not reflective of the current abilities offered by modern virtualization systems. To address your point regarding GPU losses, if you're really that concerned about such issues on server systems, you're welcome to give host passthrough a shot with one of your guests; a lot of nice work has been done in that area lately. That said, these are indeed server systems we're talking about, and for the majority of use cases the only displays involved are the odd VNC/RDP session. What was your point, again?
Modern virtualization doesn't have the overhead the GP cited; the 20% RAM loss and 30% CPU capacity loss numbers cited by the AC you responded to are absurd fabrications. I use KVM on Debian hosts to power a large number of VMs running a variety of operating systems, and the loss of CPU bandwidth and throughput with guests is negligible due to hardware virt extensions in modern CPUs (where "modern" in fact means "most 64-bit AMD and Intel CPUs from the last few years, plus a small number of 32-bit CPUs"). Using the "host" CPU setting in guests can also directly expose all host CPU facilities, resulting in virtually no losses in capabilities for mathematically-intensive guest operations. As far as memory is concerned, far from resulting in a 20% loss of available RAM, I gain a significant amount of efficiency in overall memory utilization using KSM (again, used with KVM). On a host running many similar guests, extremely large gains in memory deduplication may be seen. Running without KSM doesn't result in significant memory consumption overhead either, as KVM itself hardly uses any RAM.
The only significant area of loss seen with modern virtualization is disk IO performance, but this may be largely mitigated through use of correctly tuned guest VM settings and updated VirtIO drivers. The poster you replied to is ignorant at best, and trolling at worst.
yeah so I can take over all wifi and bluetooth devices in vicinity?
Given a reasonable toolbox, that's arguably a reasonable proposition these days, at least for many devices in your immediate vicinity. Yes, things really are that bad.
You seem to be making the implication that it's not okay for Linus to loudly complain about a compiler that produces a broken Linux kernel. Why is that?
ASCII was incorporated into the Unicode character set as the first 128 symbols, so the 7-bit ASCII characters have the same numeric codes in both sets. This allows UTF-8 to be backward compatible with 7-bit ASCII, as a UTF-8 file containing only ASCII characters is identical to an ASCII file containing the same sequence of characters. Even more importantly, forward compatibility is ensured as software that recognizes only 7-bit ASCII characters as special and does not alter bytes with the highest bit set (as is often done to support 8-bit ASCII extensions such as ISO-8859-1) will preserve UTF-8 data unchanged.
Please describe all the platforms you presently use which do not support ASCII, and please provide statistics on the market presence for such platforms.
How shall we define importance? In terms of scope, are we talking about kernel space, userland code that humans directly interact with, systems/infrastructure code, data processing systems, or something else entirely?
Does your shop have a relatively narrow development scope? Over the course of my career, I've found that single language shops are either fairly tightly tied to a small set of problem domains, or they're full of people who see every problem as a nail so to speak. The latter condition is an unfortunate state of inflexibility that tends to extend into other areas, including higher level systems work and network architecture. I'm not saying your organization suffers from that affliction, but I would like to understand a bit more about the sort of development your team does. For the record, I'm a big fan of mature systems in general, and for most of my work various combinations of Perl, Bash, C, and Python gets the job done (usually in that order).
I'm 33 and have three children, two daughters and a son. I am interested in teaching them science, mathematics, literature, history, and how to think for themselves. I'm also interested in teaching each of them how to grow food, clean and shoot a rifle, clean and cook small game, and build things with their own hands. Political and economic conditions aside, I believe these are all things children should learn. What are you teaching your children?
To be perfectly clear, Snowden is actually in possession of some emails. That much has been known for some time. You know exactly what I'm talking about when I speak to the probability that he is in possession of copies of all his correspondence (extremely low), especially copies which could be authenticated via certain means. Again, you know exactly what I'm talking about here, and you're simply being disingenuous.
Owing to my prior service in uniform and long standing experience in both private and public sector information security, I have a very good idea of why he isn't in possession of those emails. I'm fairly certain you have the same understanding, but you've elected to take the disingenuous route of raising this rather ridiculous question, being secure in your belief the populace at large doesn't have the same benefit of experience. I'll ask the same question I asked you in my last reply: what do you presently do for a living, and what have you done in the past?
What's truly sad to me is the fact that you and I have agreed on so many things in the past. It's sad because I am in vehement opposition to your views in this discussion. I must ask you a simple question: what do you presently do for a living, and what have you done in the past? Thank you.
A federal judge has ruled the mass (meta)data collection activities of the NSA to be unconstitutional. The RNC has pushed for legislation to explicitly declare it so. The more disturbing point here is that the Constitution, which explicitly defines limits to the powers of government, existed long before the NSA. It has simply been ignored, and entirely too many people seem to be ignorant of this fact or simply don't care. Given the protections afforded in the Constitution, I challenge you to justify the legality of massive collection of private information on United States citizens by government agents without warrant or due process.
To clarify my last response, I once wore a uniform for this nation and swore an oath uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I have no interest in staying in a nation full of people who are completely ignorant of their rights and obligations as citizens, a nation where the majority of the population is far too apathetic to care about those rights being trampled. I'll be here as long as it takes to build a solid foundation elsewhere, which is a work in progress, and I'm gone after that. I'm a fairly smart guy, and I have fairly diverse skills that I can utilize anywhere on the planet to provide for my loved ones. There are still a few places left where people care about individualism and rights. Not many, but a few.
Fully agreed. As a father of three children, I've been decidedly unhappy about the way things have been heading for a long time now. My first inclination is to simply leave, taking my loved ones with me. In fact, that's the current plan, although I have a habit of making lots of noise about Constitutional rights on a daily basis, and I may well get myself into trouble because of it. Should that happen, so be it. I may be on the way out, but I'm not backing down while I'm still here.
Slashdot Mirror
You seem to be wagering that the police in question are very good in bed, or at least better in bed than those who would prefer more widespread dissemination (not to be confused with other terms ending in "ination") of this sort of information. I question the wisdom of that bet.
Did I miss some sort of /b/ or film reference here? I've been out of the loop for a while owing to more pressing concerns.
Certainly.
Or perhaps you were looking for something entirely different.
VirtualBox isn't representative of the majority of the use cases under discussion here. I work with large KVM and VMware ESX deployments every day, and every single file and database server I use in enterprise environments is virtualized. Performance is not a problem, even for heavy workloads. Latency is not an issue, either. I won't beat a dead horse in this thread, but I will offer my advice via email if you'd like a few additional ideas regarding your stated use case.
Things happen. Sometimes very nasty things happen. Attempts at suppression of information related to nasty things will inevitably fail, and such attempts will only serve to cast those advocating for suppression in a nasty light themselves. "Authorities" might find their time better spent pursuing criminals instead of engaging in an odd attempt to force the populace to bury its head in the sand on threat of imprisonment. The information itself isn't the problem; direct harm caused against human beings is.
TLDR: Scotland Yard can go fuck itself, and I think this is a great time to make a personal project of facilitating the spread of this information as widely as possible. Thank goodness I've got a great deal of resources available to assist in that endeavor. Cheers, mates.
I like how you didn't bother to directly respond to any of the points listed. Your apparent inability to properly tune a virtualization host and its guests is your problem, and not reflective of the current abilities offered by modern virtualization systems. To address your point regarding GPU losses, if you're really that concerned about such issues on server systems, you're welcome to give host passthrough a shot with one of your guests; a lot of nice work has been done in that area lately. That said, these are indeed server systems we're talking about, and for the majority of use cases the only displays involved are the odd VNC/RDP session. What was your point, again?
Modern virtualization doesn't have the overhead the GP cited; the 20% RAM loss and 30% CPU capacity loss numbers cited by the AC you responded to are absurd fabrications. I use KVM on Debian hosts to power a large number of VMs running a variety of operating systems, and the loss of CPU bandwidth and throughput with guests is negligible due to hardware virt extensions in modern CPUs (where "modern" in fact means "most 64-bit AMD and Intel CPUs from the last few years, plus a small number of 32-bit CPUs"). Using the "host" CPU setting in guests can also directly expose all host CPU facilities, resulting in virtually no losses in capabilities for mathematically-intensive guest operations. As far as memory is concerned, far from resulting in a 20% loss of available RAM, I gain a significant amount of efficiency in overall memory utilization using KSM (again, used with KVM). On a host running many similar guests, extremely large gains in memory deduplication may be seen. Running without KSM doesn't result in significant memory consumption overhead either, as KVM itself hardly uses any RAM.
The only significant area of loss seen with modern virtualization is disk IO performance, but this may be largely mitigated through use of correctly tuned guest VM settings and updated VirtIO drivers. The poster you replied to is ignorant at best, and trolling at worst.
Please see propagation delay.
I want to know who the hell shoots a rifle from the hip at all.
yeah so I can take over all wifi and bluetooth devices in vicinity?
Given a reasonable toolbox, that's arguably a reasonable proposition these days, at least for many devices in your immediate vicinity. Yes, things really are that bad.
Perhaps you should look into multiple accepted meanings for a word before you further embarrass yourself with ill-informed commentary.
You seem to be making the implication that it's not okay for Linus to loudly complain about a compiler that produces a broken Linux kernel. Why is that?
Quoting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...
ASCII was incorporated into the Unicode character set as the first 128 symbols, so the 7-bit ASCII characters have the same numeric codes in both sets. This allows UTF-8 to be backward compatible with 7-bit ASCII, as a UTF-8 file containing only ASCII characters is identical to an ASCII file containing the same sequence of characters. Even more importantly, forward compatibility is ensured as software that recognizes only 7-bit ASCII characters as special and does not alter bytes with the highest bit set (as is often done to support 8-bit ASCII extensions such as ISO-8859-1) will preserve UTF-8 data unchanged.
Please describe all the platforms you presently use which do not support ASCII, and please provide statistics on the market presence for such platforms.
Whoosh.
I'm curious why you capitalized "black man" as you would a proper noun, but failed to properly capitalize Perl.
How shall we define importance? In terms of scope, are we talking about kernel space, userland code that humans directly interact with, systems/infrastructure code, data processing systems, or something else entirely?
Does your shop have a relatively narrow development scope? Over the course of my career, I've found that single language shops are either fairly tightly tied to a small set of problem domains, or they're full of people who see every problem as a nail so to speak. The latter condition is an unfortunate state of inflexibility that tends to extend into other areas, including higher level systems work and network architecture. I'm not saying your organization suffers from that affliction, but I would like to understand a bit more about the sort of development your team does. For the record, I'm a big fan of mature systems in general, and for most of my work various combinations of Perl, Bash, C, and Python gets the job done (usually in that order).
You're a friend and a cosmonaut.
I'm 33 and have three children, two daughters and a son. I am interested in teaching them science, mathematics, literature, history, and how to think for themselves. I'm also interested in teaching each of them how to grow food, clean and shoot a rifle, clean and cook small game, and build things with their own hands. Political and economic conditions aside, I believe these are all things children should learn. What are you teaching your children?
To be perfectly clear, Snowden is actually in possession of some emails. That much has been known for some time. You know exactly what I'm talking about when I speak to the probability that he is in possession of copies of all his correspondence (extremely low), especially copies which could be authenticated via certain means. Again, you know exactly what I'm talking about here, and you're simply being disingenuous.
Owing to my prior service in uniform and long standing experience in both private and public sector information security, I have a very good idea of why he isn't in possession of those emails. I'm fairly certain you have the same understanding, but you've elected to take the disingenuous route of raising this rather ridiculous question, being secure in your belief the populace at large doesn't have the same benefit of experience. I'll ask the same question I asked you in my last reply: what do you presently do for a living, and what have you done in the past?
What's truly sad to me is the fact that you and I have agreed on so many things in the past. It's sad because I am in vehement opposition to your views in this discussion. I must ask you a simple question: what do you presently do for a living, and what have you done in the past? Thank you.
A federal judge has ruled the mass (meta)data collection activities of the NSA to be unconstitutional. The RNC has pushed for legislation to explicitly declare it so. The more disturbing point here is that the Constitution, which explicitly defines limits to the powers of government, existed long before the NSA. It has simply been ignored, and entirely too many people seem to be ignorant of this fact or simply don't care. Given the protections afforded in the Constitution, I challenge you to justify the legality of massive collection of private information on United States citizens by government agents without warrant or due process.
To clarify my last response, I once wore a uniform for this nation and swore an oath uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I have no interest in staying in a nation full of people who are completely ignorant of their rights and obligations as citizens, a nation where the majority of the population is far too apathetic to care about those rights being trampled. I'll be here as long as it takes to build a solid foundation elsewhere, which is a work in progress, and I'm gone after that. I'm a fairly smart guy, and I have fairly diverse skills that I can utilize anywhere on the planet to provide for my loved ones. There are still a few places left where people care about individualism and rights. Not many, but a few.
Fully agreed. As a father of three children, I've been decidedly unhappy about the way things have been heading for a long time now. My first inclination is to simply leave, taking my loved ones with me. In fact, that's the current plan, although I have a habit of making lots of noise about Constitutional rights on a daily basis, and I may well get myself into trouble because of it. Should that happen, so be it. I may be on the way out, but I'm not backing down while I'm still here.
I'm 33, and I've never seen a juvenile female mowing lawns for money. I have known grown women who run landscaping businesses, however.