Compared to its predecessor, Multics, from which it drew inspiration. Unix was a mess:
We went to lunch afterward, and I remarked to Dennis that easily half the code I was writing in Multics was error recovery code. He said, "We left all that stuff out. If there's an error, we have this routine called panic, and when it is called, the machine crashes, and you holler down the hall, 'Hey, reboot it.'"
I was just wondering how many of them are going to be stolen/traded for crack. And not just by the kids either, but also their parents. After all, this is LA we're talking about.
As a programmer, I find systemd horrible. It breaks compatibility with Unix. It's a nightmare that will shrink the open source landscape to just linux. The rest of us must now reinvent basics like toolkits, web browsers, etc because Linux zealots want to take over the world.
Pre-emptive multitasking with 1000hz scheduler, multiprocessor, multithreading, ring-3 protection
Responsive GUI with resolutions up to 1920x1080, 16 million colours
Free-form, transparent and skinnable application windows, drag'n drop
SMP multiprocessor support with currently up to 8 cpus
IDE: Editor/Assembler for applications
USB 2.0 HiSpeed Classes: Storage, Printer, Webcam Video and TV/Radio support
USB 1.1 Keyboard and Mouse support
TCP/IP stack with Loopback & Ethernet drivers
Email/ftp/http/chess clients and ftp/mp3/http servers
Hard real-time data fetch
Fits on a single floppy, boots also from CD and USB drives
Since the blurb was writtten, browser, digital tv, webcam, movies, etc. have been added.
Or you can play around with Plan9 - runs by itself or as an application atop linux, windows, etc.
The poster you're replying to wasn't me, you insensitive clod.
Now, the poster was correct. The original unix was a mess when it came to security. Things evolve, and our understanding of the problem evolves as well. Something that was designed to be secure 5 years ago and passed scrutiny then could very well be swiss cheese today. You HAVE to be able to add security - the alternative is rewriting from scratch every time.
The last I looked, Apple didn't make much of what they sell - it's made in China by low-margin companies like Foxconn. That's why you'll only see stickers that say "Designed in the USA" and not "Made in the USA".
And each time the level of abstraction is increased the average level of education must follow. I.e. coders with low education might be at risk. Not saying that without having a higher degree means you can't go to higher level of abstraction, bu people who can tend to get a higher academic degree.
I doubt that a php programmer has to be more educated than someone who can do the same problem in assembler, or even c.
Not really. Take the current situation vis MAD and the cold war. At one point, the US figured they could win with a pre-emptive strike. With the way things are evolving today, the argument could be made that maybe they should have been more aggressive.
More energy doesn't necessarily equate to more dispersal and more damage to a larger area. Bunker-busters are a good example of that. So are lasers. Weapons that put the same amount of energy into a smaller area more accurately are usually much more effective.
Of course, that ignores the fact that, even if I am a simulation, "I think, therefore I am" is still true - same as it will be if we ever get to the point of uploading ourselves. "I" is not just the physical me. Same as "I" am more than the sum of my genes.
Sure. Just put on your cockroach-killer shoes (you know, the ones with the pointy toes to get 'em in the corners) and start stomping.
Unfortunately, you can't eliminate programmer errors the same way.
(programmer errors are not "bugs". they didn't mysteriously creep into the code on their own when nobody was looking. saying "it's a bug" is just a way to avoid responsibility for a mistake, and leads to both a slack attitude and a feeling of non-responsibility).
As Heinlein noted, TANSTAAFL, just like there's no such thing as free beer. Everything has a cost. Even free software.
And when you have such a fragmented ecosystem, the attack surface is going to be huge (after all, an OS is more than just a kernel), and the idea that "with enough eyes all bugs are shallow" is patently false. So it turns out that open source has been to a large extent relying on the same "security through obscurity" model. This was fine a decade ago, but the competition have stepped up their game and can afford to throw money and bodies at the job without begging.
The solution would be to do a code freeze for 2-3 years while the developers of the various projects audit their code and the ways other projects interact with their code - not just for security problems, but to get rid of bloat and cruft. That's not going to happen, because it makes too much sense. Everyone wants the newest shiny.
Linux was definitely better when there were fewer distros. What a mess.
We meet an alien species in the middle of nowhere in space. They don't know us, we don't know them. You don't know if they are aggressive or not, they don't know if you are. Can either one of them afford to take the chance of letting the other one survive? The winner is the one who shoots first.
This is not the "prisoner's dilemma" for several reasons. (1) The "prisoners" in this case have no reason to trust each other; (2) they are not being held hostage by a third party who they have to cooperate with each other to win.
That would be the point though. 2 races that actually manage to get into space would realize that they don't need to obliterate each other. Aggression and destruction is the domain of earthbound humans.
Right - just like all the other times in human history that two segments of humanity encountered each other for the first time and everything was milk and honey... (cue laughter)
1. If you're a human, there will always be a reason to compete. We over-breed. Everyone seems to think that their genes are special.
2. Why would we go for unarmed combat for the first time in our species history?
3. More advanced doesn't mean pacifist. We're more advanced than at any time in the past - and look around you. You don't have to look at international problems - just go to your local jail or ER.
Say 90% of the space-faring races are non-aggressive. Do you think they'll be able to withstand the 10% that are? Aggression means using force and other means to impose your will on others who do not want to go along with your wishes, whether it's war over borders and mineral rights, rape, or a toy.
So these non-aggressive races, when meeting up with an aggressive race, can either become aggressive themselves in imposing their will (pacifism) on the aggressive race, or yield.
Electronics are a low-margin business. Sony is making huge money from Sony Entertainment. Movies, licensing syndicated TV shows, music... they don't need PlayStation.
Well, he proposes that the people who want less aggression might want to leave the planet. Bad news - anyone out there that we encounter is very likely to be even more aggressive if they've survived longer than us. Survival of the fittest isn't just for puny earthlings.
The possibility that intelligent aliens who are pacifistic cannot be ruled out.
Then they won't last long after meeting up with us.
So two space-faring races meet... who is going to come out on top, all other things being equal? The more aggressive. Aggression is a survival trait. Ask the dodo bird...
Well, he proposes that the people who want less aggression might want to leave the planet. Bad news - anyone out there that we encounter is very likely to be even more aggressive if they've survived longer than us. Survival of the fittest isn't just for puny earthlings.
Unfortunately, the two are not mutually exclusive.
Now, "filled" doesn't mean a majority, but enough to make a sizable impression - so this probably applies to all human activities involving a large more-or-less heterogeneous group. Now this is a good thing, because it implies that there are probably good and/or smart people in the groups as well.
But there’s one quote in particular that resonates with us here at Linux Voice. It was partly responsible for the inception of the magazine, and it’s one we think encapsulates the spirit of open source: “Create more value than you capture.”
This "philosophy" has ZERO to do with open source. When people vote with their wallets, they're saying that what they pay for is worth at least as much as what they're paying. This applies to everything in the marketplace.
People will say "but open source creates more value because it's shared." Not to the millions who pay for closed-source programs and operating systems, obviously, and they're still in the majority.
And then there's the "it's open, so you can see, audit, and modify the code." Most users don't want to be bothered with having to look at the code when something breaks, do code audits, or modify the code - they just want someone to complain to.when it goes wrong.
It's the same value proposition as music - anyone is free to make music, but most people prefer the stuff coming from real musicians, professionally produced. They don't want to hear their neighbors sing, even if it's free and they can modify it and sing themselves. And how "free" is it when everyone has to be dragged into using systemd?
For some things, open source software does a better job for the job at hand. THAT is the only value proposition 99% of the people making the decisions care about; closed systems sell a lot because to users, they have more value than free/open ones. Android surged ahead because of the value proposition to their customers - the phone manufacturers - no license fees. But if it hadn't been able to do the job, it would have been DOA because the number one criterion for people is still "does it work", not "is it free or open".
I would just slowly pour water onto the disk until there was a nice coating everywhere, then play it. At 33-1/3 rpm, the water stayed in place. Made for pop-free transfers from disk to tape.
Slashdot Mirror
We went to lunch afterward, and I remarked to Dennis that easily half the code I was writing in Multics was error recovery code. He said, "We left all that stuff out. If there's an error, we have this routine called panic, and when it is called, the machine crashes, and you holler down the hall, 'Hey, reboot it.'"
Still happens ...
I was just wondering how many of them are going to be stolen/traded for crack. And not just by the kids either, but also their parents. After all, this is LA we're talking about.
TANSTAAFB either.
As a programmer, I find systemd horrible. It breaks compatibility with Unix. It's a nightmare that will shrink the open source landscape to just linux. The rest of us must now reinvent basics like toolkits, web browsers, etc because Linux zealots want to take over the world.
Or you could just bang around on this.
Pre-emptive multitasking with 1000hz scheduler, multiprocessor, multithreading, ring-3 protection
Responsive GUI with resolutions up to 1920x1080, 16 million colours
Free-form, transparent and skinnable application windows, drag'n drop
SMP multiprocessor support with currently up to 8 cpus
IDE: Editor/Assembler for applications
USB 2.0 HiSpeed Classes: Storage, Printer, Webcam Video and TV/Radio support
USB 1.1 Keyboard and Mouse support
TCP/IP stack with Loopback & Ethernet drivers
Email/ftp/http/chess clients and ftp/mp3/http servers
Hard real-time data fetch
Fits on a single floppy, boots also from CD and USB drives
Since the blurb was writtten, browser, digital tv, webcam, movies, etc. have been added.
Or you can play around with Plan9 - runs by itself or as an application atop linux, windows, etc.
The poster you're replying to wasn't me, you insensitive clod.
Now, the poster was correct. The original unix was a mess when it came to security. Things evolve, and our understanding of the problem evolves as well. Something that was designed to be secure 5 years ago and passed scrutiny then could very well be swiss cheese today. You HAVE to be able to add security - the alternative is rewriting from scratch every time.
"Electronics are a low-margin business"
Someone should inform Apple.
The last I looked, Apple didn't make much of what they sell - it's made in China by low-margin companies like Foxconn. That's why you'll only see stickers that say "Designed in the USA" and not "Made in the USA".
And each time the level of abstraction is increased the average level of education must follow. I.e. coders with low education might be at risk. Not saying that without having a higher degree means you can't go to higher level of abstraction, bu people who can tend to get a higher academic degree.
I doubt that a php programmer has to be more educated than someone who can do the same problem in assembler, or even c.
> ... Maybe you are unaware of this, but Marx lived in the 18th century, ...
No. He lived in the 19th century: Karl Marx 1818-1883
That's economist math for you ...
More energy doesn't necessarily equate to more dispersal and more damage to a larger area. Bunker-busters are a good example of that. So are lasers. Weapons that put the same amount of energy into a smaller area more accurately are usually much more effective.
Of course, that ignores the fact that, even if I am a simulation, "I think, therefore I am" is still true - same as it will be if we ever get to the point of uploading ourselves. "I" is not just the physical me. Same as "I" am more than the sum of my genes.
Bugs can be made shallow?
Sure. Just put on your cockroach-killer shoes (you know, the ones with the pointy toes to get 'em in the corners) and start stomping.
Unfortunately, you can't eliminate programmer errors the same way.
(programmer errors are not "bugs". they didn't mysteriously creep into the code on their own when nobody was looking. saying "it's a bug" is just a way to avoid responsibility for a mistake, and leads to both a slack attitude and a feeling of non-responsibility).
As Heinlein noted, TANSTAAFL, just like there's no such thing as free beer. Everything has a cost. Even free software.
And when you have such a fragmented ecosystem, the attack surface is going to be huge (after all, an OS is more than just a kernel), and the idea that "with enough eyes all bugs are shallow" is patently false. So it turns out that open source has been to a large extent relying on the same "security through obscurity" model. This was fine a decade ago, but the competition have stepped up their game and can afford to throw money and bodies at the job without begging.
The solution would be to do a code freeze for 2-3 years while the developers of the various projects audit their code and the ways other projects interact with their code - not just for security problems, but to get rid of bloat and cruft. That's not going to happen, because it makes too much sense. Everyone wants the newest shiny.
Linux was definitely better when there were fewer distros. What a mess.
Even if both die, it's a win, since the secret of their existence as well as their home world remains intact.
No, just common sense.
We meet an alien species in the middle of nowhere in space. They don't know us, we don't know them. You don't know if they are aggressive or not, they don't know if you are. Can either one of them afford to take the chance of letting the other one survive? The winner is the one who shoots first.
This is not the "prisoner's dilemma" for several reasons. (1) The "prisoners" in this case have no reason to trust each other; (2) they are not being held hostage by a third party who they have to cooperate with each other to win.
That would be the point though. 2 races that actually manage to get into space would realize that they don't need to obliterate each other. Aggression and destruction is the domain of earthbound humans.
Right - just like all the other times in human history that two segments of humanity encountered each other for the first time and everything was milk and honey ... (cue laughter)
1. If you're a human, there will always be a reason to compete. We over-breed. Everyone seems to think that their genes are special.
2. Why would we go for unarmed combat for the first time in our species history?
3. More advanced doesn't mean pacifist. We're more advanced than at any time in the past - and look around you. You don't have to look at international problems - just go to your local jail or ER.
Say 90% of the space-faring races are non-aggressive. Do you think they'll be able to withstand the 10% that are? Aggression means using force and other means to impose your will on others who do not want to go along with your wishes, whether it's war over borders and mineral rights, rape, or a toy.
So these non-aggressive races, when meeting up with an aggressive race, can either become aggressive themselves in imposing their will (pacifism) on the aggressive race, or yield.
There is no middle ground over the long term.
Electronics are a low-margin business. Sony is making huge money from Sony Entertainment. Movies, licensing syndicated TV shows, music ... they don't need PlayStation.
Well, he proposes that the people who want less aggression might want to leave the planet. Bad news - anyone out there that we encounter is very likely to be even more aggressive if they've survived longer than us. Survival of the fittest isn't just for puny earthlings.
The possibility that intelligent aliens who are pacifistic cannot be ruled out.
Then they won't last long after meeting up with us.
Better watch it - he might run you over with his wheelchair, then blame it on a "glitch" caused by Howard Wollowitz.
So two space-faring races meet ... who is going to come out on top, all other things being equal? The more aggressive. Aggression is a survival trait. Ask the dodo bird ...
Well, he proposes that the people who want less aggression might want to leave the planet. Bad news - anyone out there that we encounter is very likely to be even more aggressive if they've survived longer than us. Survival of the fittest isn't just for puny earthlings.
Unfortunately, the two are not mutually exclusive.
Now, "filled" doesn't mean a majority, but enough to make a sizable impression - so this probably applies to all human activities involving a large more-or-less heterogeneous group. Now this is a good thing, because it implies that there are probably good and/or smart people in the groups as well.
But there’s one quote in particular that resonates with us here at Linux Voice. It was partly responsible for the inception of the magazine, and it’s one we think encapsulates the spirit of open source: “Create more value than you capture.”
This "philosophy" has ZERO to do with open source. When people vote with their wallets, they're saying that what they pay for is worth at least as much as what they're paying. This applies to everything in the marketplace.
People will say "but open source creates more value because it's shared." Not to the millions who pay for closed-source programs and operating systems, obviously, and they're still in the majority.
And then there's the "it's open, so you can see, audit, and modify the code." Most users don't want to be bothered with having to look at the code when something breaks, do code audits, or modify the code - they just want someone to complain to.when it goes wrong.
It's the same value proposition as music - anyone is free to make music, but most people prefer the stuff coming from real musicians, professionally produced. They don't want to hear their neighbors sing, even if it's free and they can modify it and sing themselves. And how "free" is it when everyone has to be dragged into using systemd?
For some things, open source software does a better job for the job at hand. THAT is the only value proposition 99% of the people making the decisions care about; closed systems sell a lot because to users, they have more value than free/open ones. Android surged ahead because of the value proposition to their customers - the phone manufacturers - no license fees. But if it hadn't been able to do the job, it would have been DOA because the number one criterion for people is still "does it work", not "is it free or open".
I would just slowly pour water onto the disk until there was a nice coating everywhere, then play it. At 33-1/3 rpm, the water stayed in place. Made for pop-free transfers from disk to tape.