OpenVMS works on computers the size of gymnasiums. OpenBSD doesn't even officially have SMP support yet. That's why.
And actually, I'm pretty sure that OpenVMS is still more secure than OpenBSD. To the best of my knowledge, OpenBSD's strong points are preventing incidents and logging them, but OpenVMS has a lot more mature stuff for forensics and recovery, as well as more active security countermeasures. It's a weird OS.
Re:Linux And The BSDs
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I don't know how closely you've been following the BSDs, but NetBSD 2.0 added some very smooth SMP support and impressive scheduler activations-based native threads. It's only a matter of time before those things are ported to the other BSDs and matured.
You're probably right that they don't scale as well on the really large systems, but that seems to mostly be due to lack of developer and corporate support. This is unfortunate, because honestly, the BSDs rock.
2) Old tv's are a lot harder to come by than old cameras, and again, those caps probably aren't made to discharge quickly. Discharge current is the whole point.
3) The same effect won't happen with a low voltage car thing and a step up transformer, because the (large) inductance of the transformer coils will sharply reduce the rise time. For a gauss cannon you want one very short, very big pulse.
Some of the class A amplifiers (ie, not push-pull) include their quiescent power in the numbers on the box: 300W speakers! output 6W for each sattelite and 30W for the center channel.
This kind of gauss cannon wouldnt compare to stuff the US can make, and the idea is already well documented. Also, he's doesnt have the REALLY crazy capacitors (I have access to ones that are 1F, 10kV, but they're "kinda huge") and he doesnt have the budget for some really insane power switching. The army would also develop some seriuosly cool ordinance for it too.
Oops, that's wrong. The lovely high level code you write still becomes machine language. Even with Java. If a program does real work, there's real machine code. Even if it doesnt, there's still calls, which are still opcodes.
Well said: it's laziness, but it's far sighted laziness. Reading through the man page for sed way back in the day took longer than going through the code I had to do a search and replace, but it's more than made up for it now that I can do "1G!Gsed -e s///"
Technically, all programmer types are supposed to be lazy. Personally, I try to keep my code clean and commented because when I come back to it in a month, I know I'll be too lazy to read through it and figure out what I was doing. Also, being lazy aboud doing work is what leads to reduced algorithmic complexity, right?
Necessity is the mother of invention, but laziness is the father.
"Proper decompilers" have been in the works for a loooong time, but dont expect any of them to appear anytime soon. The problem is that the executable put out by different compilers is too different to have a fairly generic way of recovering C code. Something that can decompile gcc will be unlikely to work with the madness of gcc -O2 and with the opposite kind of madness from MSVC.
Java and Visual Basic are different stories, they can be decomiled fairly easily because: 1) all of the compilers are made by Sun and MS respectively. 2) they are interpreted languages with abstract instruction sets.
Assuming that a mission costs roughly $50 million, and that there are approximately 300 million US tax payers.
Per capita, each mission consumes $50/300 ~= 17c of your tax money.
Assuming a snow blower costs about $100 (I'm converting from local currency here and not accounting for price differences), NASA would have to give you your money for 600 missions to buy your snow blower.
Also, get off your lazy ass and shovel the snow yourself if your wife can't do it quickly enough.
Slashdot Mirror
OpenVMS works on computers the size of gymnasiums. OpenBSD doesn't even officially have SMP support yet. That's why.
And actually, I'm pretty sure that OpenVMS is still more secure than OpenBSD. To the best of my knowledge, OpenBSD's strong points are preventing incidents and logging them, but OpenVMS has a lot more mature stuff for forensics and recovery, as well as more active security countermeasures. It's a weird OS.
I don't know how closely you've been following the BSDs, but NetBSD 2.0 added some very smooth SMP support and impressive scheduler activations-based native threads. It's only a matter of time before those things are ported to the other BSDs and matured.
You're probably right that they don't scale as well on the really large systems, but that seems to mostly be due to lack of developer and corporate support. This is unfortunate, because honestly, the BSDs rock.
2) Old tv's are a lot harder to come by than old cameras, and again, those caps probably aren't made to discharge quickly. Discharge current is the whole point.
3) The same effect won't happen with a low voltage car thing and a step up transformer, because the (large) inductance of the transformer coils will sharply reduce the rise time. For a gauss cannon you want one very short, very big pulse.
Some of the class A amplifiers (ie, not push-pull) include their quiescent power in the numbers on the box: 300W speakers! output 6W for each sattelite and 30W for the center channel.
This kind of gauss cannon wouldnt compare to stuff the US can make, and the idea is already well documented. Also, he's doesnt have the REALLY crazy capacitors (I have access to ones that are 1F, 10kV, but they're "kinda huge") and he doesnt have the budget for some really insane power switching. The army would also develop some seriuosly cool ordinance for it too.
Oops, that's wrong. The lovely high level code you write still becomes machine language. Even with Java. If a program does real work, there's real machine code. Even if it doesnt, there's still calls, which are still opcodes.
Well said: it's laziness, but it's far sighted laziness. Reading through the man page for sed way back in the day took longer than going through the code I had to do a search and replace, but it's more than made up for it now that I can do "1G!Gsed -e s///"
Technically, all programmer types are supposed to be lazy. Personally, I try to keep my code clean and commented because when I come back to it in a month, I know I'll be too lazy to read through it and figure out what I was doing. Also, being lazy aboud doing work is what leads to reduced algorithmic complexity, right?
Necessity is the mother of invention, but laziness is the father.
"Proper decompilers" have been in the works for a loooong time, but dont expect any of them to appear anytime soon. The problem is that the executable put out by different compilers is too different to have a fairly generic way of recovering C code. Something that can decompile gcc will be unlikely to work with the madness of gcc -O2 and with the opposite kind of madness from MSVC.
Java and Visual Basic are different stories, they can be decomiled fairly easily because: 1) all of the compilers are made by Sun and MS respectively. 2) they are interpreted languages with abstract instruction sets.
Let's do some quick calculations.
Assuming that a mission costs roughly $50 million, and that there are approximately 300 million US tax payers.
Per capita, each mission consumes $50/300 ~= 17c of your tax money.
Assuming a snow blower costs about $100 (I'm converting from local currency here and not accounting for price differences), NASA would have to give you your money for 600 missions to buy your snow blower.
Also, get off your lazy ass and shovel the snow yourself if your wife can't do it quickly enough.