With processor, ethernet etc that fits into 35mm×19mm×19mm of space[1]. Basically the same OS as your file, printer, web and database servers...
This means that anything that size or bigger, could be running a set of software perfectly able to be compromised, and used as a springboard into other systems. Anything with a network port should have the same security policies applied as a server.
Resources there refers to _physical_ resources. I repeat... In what way does that NOT describe Microsoft Office, sed or even fsck? The distinction you are attempting to make is arbitrary. If you are talking about code which directly manipulates physical hardware, then you are talking only about device drivers, and device drivers, are only part of an operating system. The OS filesystem code sits on top of the IDE, SCSI device drivers, using their APIs. Are you trying to say that a filesystem is not part of the operating system?
"An operating system (OS) is the software that manages the sharing of the resources of a computer and provides programmers with an interface used to access those resources."
In what way does that not describe Microsoft Office, or sed, or even fsck?
User Interface is a superset of Graphical User Interface...
It is the system you use to operate the computer... It's what makes the silicon and copper do what you want. Yes, that means MS Word is part of an operating system. The distinction we make between MS Office and sed or fsck is arbitrary.
Having said that. I don't really want a GUI. And, no. I don't really want a command line either.
I want to be able to simply tell a computer what to do. I want a way of operating the computer that is completely natural. "Hey computer, send that video over to my brother"... In that, all of the existing user interfaces/operating systems are not only, completely wrong, but also pretty much consistently and determinedly running in the wrong direction just as fast as they can as well.
Well. I suppose you could have a shit load of annoying widgets spinning in the background, but really, most people simply don't need more than a single CPU. Most rarely use more than 5% of the one they already have.
What I find rather humorous is that we currently try to consume any excess CPU performance by using less efficient languages... We make 100 million people spend another $1,000 each in order to save $500,000 worth of cost in programmer time... Then justify it as cost efficiency.
To really make use of N CPUs, the whole idea we have about the way we communicate with computers has to change.
We've got powerful computers with tons of RAM and hard drive space, and high-speed internet connections that can transmit vast amounts of data in mere seconds; why waste (valuable programmer) time and energy over-optimizing everything? We tax human work but not machine work. It's a huge tax avoidance system.
Sorry. America can't get out of Saudi. The Saudis are propping up the US dollar by accepting paper as payment for oil, and thereby the whole US economy and military machine.
What I find ironic is that all this goes back to Nixon.
This is what enrages me about the Bush tax cut proposal. It is much the same as if your boss told you he was giving you a raise by letting you charge $1000 more on your own credit card. Are people really that stupid? Um... Before I answer that question, I should point out that this has been bog standard practice for hundreds of years.
This is how money works, so basically, yes, people are exactly that stupid. Look around you man.
2 cables simultaneously : 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100. 1 in 10,000
3 cables simultanously: 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100. 1 in 1,000,000
This is why we use redundant systems. The chances of 3 simultaneous accidental cable cuts is minuscule. Add a 4th offline and...
4 cables offline simultaneously: 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100. 1 in 100,000,000...
1 in a hundred million, even assuming a 1 in 100 chance of a cable cut. I'd be willing to bet that the real chance of a single cable cut in any one week is something like 1 in 10,000.
judging by slashdot posts that particular crowd seems to dislike the idea of someone tracking where they are all the time. Really? Some of us subscribe to services which do exactly this, and gps enabled phones are available for free today.
Slashdot Mirror
Peer to peer... The single largest distribution network for files and other information.
This is why government isn't always a good thing.
Oh rubbish. The only thing you have to do to stop this bollocks is kick off a loop which checks every possible combination of letters.com.
Is one of the more serious crimes in the UK. Even a minor crime can turn into a long prison sentence if you disposed of evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perverting_the_course_of_justice
I assume there is something analogous in the US.
You have a peer to peer protocol built in which'll happily accept Microsoft signed packages?
Isn't this simply a case of someone not understanding the real meaning of the words "is kind of like"?
That depends... Did you use ash as /sbin/init?
http://www.checkpoint.com/products/datasecurity/pc/index.html
Hell...
http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/?s=system-encryption
I wonder when stupidity actually became an asset in our society.
With processor, ethernet etc that fits into 35mm×19mm×19mm of space[1]. Basically the same OS as your file, printer, web and database servers...
This means that anything that size or bigger, could be running a set of software perfectly able to be compromised, and used as a springboard into other systems. Anything with a network port should have the same security policies applied as a server.
[1] e.g. http://www.picotux.com/techdatae.html
Starbucks, double latte, iPhone lifestyle...
They must be absolutely TERRIFIED now!
By that definition, the 101 sexual positions in the Kama Sutra are inventions, and thereby patentable...
"An operating system (OS) is the software that manages the sharing of the resources of a computer and provides programmers with an interface used to access those resources."
In what way does that not describe Microsoft Office, or sed, or even fsck?
User Interface is a superset of Graphical User Interface...
It is the system you use to operate the computer... It's what makes the silicon and copper do what you want. Yes, that means MS Word is part of an operating system. The distinction we make between MS Office and sed or fsck is arbitrary.
Having said that. I don't really want a GUI. And, no. I don't really want a command line either.
I want to be able to simply tell a computer what to do. I want a way of operating the computer that is completely natural. "Hey computer, send that video over to my brother"... In that, all of the existing user interfaces/operating systems are not only, completely wrong, but also pretty much consistently and determinedly running in the wrong direction just as fast as they can as well.
Well. I suppose you could have a shit load of annoying widgets spinning in the background, but really, most people simply don't need more than a single CPU. Most rarely use more than 5% of the one they already have.
What I find rather humorous is that we currently try to consume any excess CPU performance by using less efficient languages... We make 100 million people spend another $1,000 each in order to save $500,000 worth of cost in programmer time... Then justify it as cost efficiency.
To really make use of N CPUs, the whole idea we have about the way we communicate with computers has to change.
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/banal?view=uk
It's used among slightly more educated English speakers.
The "leaders" of the free world have been given instructions to implement ID cards by... 2020 or so.
Sorry. America can't get out of Saudi. The Saudis are propping up the US dollar by accepting paper as payment for oil, and thereby the whole US economy and military machine.
What I find ironic is that all this goes back to Nixon.
This is how money works, so basically, yes, people are exactly that stupid. Look around you man.
1 cable: 1 in 100?
...
2 cables simultaneously : 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100. 1 in 10,000
3 cables simultanously: 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100. 1 in 1,000,000
This is why we use redundant systems. The chances of 3 simultaneous accidental cable cuts is minuscule. Add a 4th offline and
4 cables offline simultaneously: 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100 multiplied by 1 in 100. 1 in 100,000,000...
1 in a hundred million, even assuming a 1 in 100 chance of a cable cut. I'd be willing to bet that the real chance of a single cable cut in any one week is something like 1 in 10,000.
That is. This is not simple coincidence.
e.g.
http://shop.carphonewarehouse.com/pay-monthly/nokia/n82-titanium/o2/n3018/