Most people feel this is reassuring. Whenever I hear it I think "man, what a complete waste of money they spend on safety.. no wonder ticket prices are so high."
I'm willing to get in a car. I'm willing to accept a certain amount of risk.. Why is it when it comes to air travel I don't have the option to accept the same amount of risk as I'm obviously willing to accept? That's a rhetorical question; I know the answer.. government regulations. The real question is, why are government regulations so much more strict for plane safety than they are for car safety?
I find the announcement about these VMs is from Linus himself. Besides, it is Linus who decides which components get into the main kernel tree, so he is answerable for any decisions made. Linus puts whatever he wants into his tree, yes. His tree is the defacto "main" kernel tree, yes.
If Vista has any idiosyncracies, it should be the job of the overpaid, bloated development team in Redmond to iron out the kinks and make it standards-compliant. Why should it be a concern of the Linux kernel development team? Besides, how did these developers gain access to quirky behaviour of Vista? What standards are you talking about exactly? The Intel x86 hardware documentation? I can assure you they are writing their code to those "standards" otherwise their code wouldn't work..
If anything the virtualization guys are the ones who are not implementing the "standards".. as not everything that will run on an x86 processor will run the same way under virtualization. That's simply because it's a lot of effort just to get the most common usage of x86 to virtualize.
No. But if/when there is ever an open source nvidia kernel driver with 3d support that isn't completely broken and is integrated into the kernel, you might see some people take an interest in virtualizing it.
Probably the first thing they'll do is make it so X running in a virtual machine can share the same DRM (Direct Rendering Module) as X running on the host. Of course, that's not much good to a Windows guest.
The people who work on this stuff really wouldn't call themselves kernel developers, but ok, whatever. Associating any of the VM stuff with Linus is even more retarded.. what they do in their own modules is none of his fault or concern. Anyway, some people want to run Vista in a VM on Linux. These VM solutions don't try to virtualize every nook and cranny of the x86 hardware. Vista uses the system level x86 hardware in a slightly different way to XP. As such, it takes some changes to make Vista work.
Should it not be the other way round - i.e. for closed-source Vista to be compatible and optimised for the open-source Linux kernel? Yeeaaaaaahhhh.. ok. Whatever dude.
Yes. Thing is, bare x86 metal can do virtualization.. you just gotta be creative. There's a lot of ways to do it, utilizing different parts of the hardware. So there's some solutions that work great for some things and some solutions that work great for others. It's like having two drivers for the same bit of hardware and choosing which one to use based on how you're using the device.
Then there's para-virtualization.. modifying the kernel of the guest OS so you don't even need anything in the kernel. Well, sometimes kernel support can help para-virtualization:)
If kqemu want to integrate their kernel components into the kernel they can. It's not the Linux developers going out looking for things to add to the Linux kernel... or them developing their own solutions.. or anything like that. All of these technologies have been added to the kernel tree by the people who maintain them.
Actually, it doesn't work like that. What actually happens is that the code which is maintained poorly gets dropped. So if there are dedicated people working on KVM but no-one actually working on lguest, eventually something will change that results in lguest not working anymore. Eventually people will drop the broken code from their tree until someone fixes it. If no-one fixes it, then it'll never be picked up again. There's no "oh, lguest is actually faster than KVM, we should all work on that".. it's individuals making their own decisions on what to work on (be it that they find it interesting, or they find that bit of code more pretty, or they are paid by someone to work on it) and those individuals are responsible for what happens to that code.
As long as N solutions are maintained there will be N solutions in the kernel. A solution won't be dropped because it performs worse.. or any other "technical" reason.
That said, you mentioned KVM.. KVM (for Kernel-based Virtual Machine) is a full virtualization solution for Linux on x86 hardware containing virtualization extensions (Intel VT or AMD-V). (from here). It *is* a hardware driver.
Where you video tape yourself walking up to a complete stranger and walloping them? Where I come from it's called assault. Actually, it's called attempted assault. You have to cause actual harm for it to be assault.
The whaler analogy was stupid, deliberately so, but it was explaining my point, which was that asking RMS how you are going to pay your rent/mortgage is just irrelevant. The only answer you will get is: do it some other way. Which you already knew. If you agree with RMS's view that making proprietary software is immoral then the only question you have to ask is, am I a moral person or can I be bought? The only person you can ask that question is yourself.
Thing is, most people don't like thinking of themselves as being someone who ignores their beliefs and lives an immoral life. So it's easy to convince yourself that you don't really believe in any of the RMS crap anyway. Especially if there's no negative repercussions.
You're just mad cos you acted a twat and I called you out on it. Is that how you get by? Just making up want you want to believe and declaring it to be so?
Yes, of course, by 'members' I meant 'agents'. And if you're suggesting that somehow the shareholders can dictate the actions of the agents.. no, those days have long past.
There are no people in corporations. Seriously. There are no rational, ethical people in corporations. It's the law that the members of a corporation must do whatever is legally possible to increase shareholder value. Failure to do so is a crime. That is inhuman.. that is robotic adherence to greed.
Thanks for not picking holes in my stupid analogy.. it's clearly not for your benefit.
I think I understand what you are saying, but I'm still curious why anyone would ask RMS how they are supposed to earn a living. He feels it is amoral, it's the wrong question to ask him.
As for his strategy for promoting free software. Yes, we all agree that RMS doesn't have the best strategy. Although, you have to admit, he's done a heck of a lot with that bad strategy. And yeah, he's never had trouble getting people to listen to him. They pay him to do it. Of course, they all go home and continue to use Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you have any idea, at all, how little I care how "stupid and childish" I look to some random asshole on Slashdot?
Guess where I live fuckstick.
Most people feel this is reassuring. Whenever I hear it I think "man, what a complete waste of money they spend on safety.. no wonder ticket prices are so high."
I'm willing to get in a car. I'm willing to accept a certain amount of risk.. Why is it when it comes to air travel I don't have the option to accept the same amount of risk as I'm obviously willing to accept? That's a rhetorical question; I know the answer.. government regulations. The real question is, why are government regulations so much more strict for plane safety than they are for car safety?
it's that if your time has come there's nothing you can do.
Which is good, cause it fits in nicely with a bit of wisdom that a lot of people should take to heart:
don't worry about stuff you have no control over.
If anything the virtualization guys are the ones who are not implementing the "standards".. as not everything that will run on an x86 processor will run the same way under virtualization. That's simply because it's a lot of effort just to get the most common usage of x86 to virtualize.
No. But if/when there is ever an open source nvidia kernel driver with 3d support that isn't completely broken and is integrated into the kernel, you might see some people take an interest in virtualizing it.
Probably the first thing they'll do is make it so X running in a virtual machine can share the same DRM (Direct Rendering Module) as X running on the host. Of course, that's not much good to a Windows guest.
bus error: driver not found.
Yes. Thing is, bare x86 metal can do virtualization.. you just gotta be creative. There's a lot of ways to do it, utilizing different parts of the hardware. So there's some solutions that work great for some things and some solutions that work great for others. It's like having two drivers for the same bit of hardware and choosing which one to use based on how you're using the device.
:)
Then there's para-virtualization.. modifying the kernel of the guest OS so you don't even need anything in the kernel. Well, sometimes kernel support can help para-virtualization
If kqemu want to integrate their kernel components into the kernel they can. It's not the Linux developers going out looking for things to add to the Linux kernel... or them developing their own solutions.. or anything like that. All of these technologies have been added to the kernel tree by the people who maintain them.
The hardware support for virtualization is in the kernel.
Just like the hardware support for webcams is in the kernel.
Actually, it doesn't work like that. What actually happens is that the code which is maintained poorly gets dropped. So if there are dedicated people working on KVM but no-one actually working on lguest, eventually something will change that results in lguest not working anymore. Eventually people will drop the broken code from their tree until someone fixes it. If no-one fixes it, then it'll never be picked up again. There's no "oh, lguest is actually faster than KVM, we should all work on that".. it's individuals making their own decisions on what to work on (be it that they find it interesting, or they find that bit of code more pretty, or they are paid by someone to work on it) and those individuals are responsible for what happens to that code.
As long as N solutions are maintained there will be N solutions in the kernel. A solution won't be dropped because it performs worse.. or any other "technical" reason.
Which is why I mentioned file systems...
That said, you mentioned KVM.. KVM (for Kernel-based Virtual Machine) is a full virtualization solution for Linux on x86 hardware containing virtualization extensions (Intel VT or AMD-V). (from here). It *is* a hardware driver.
Yeah, like all those file systems the kernel supports. What's with that? You only need one. Man. Choice is good and all, but it sounds like overkill.
Don't get me started on buses.. PCI, USB, SCSI, IDE, how many do you need?!
Umm.. go look it up.
Fuckin' hell.
Why does the US have such great laws in regards to copyright of works produced by government agencies and yet no similar laws for patents?
The whaler analogy was stupid, deliberately so, but it was explaining my point, which was that asking RMS how you are going to pay your rent/mortgage is just irrelevant. The only answer you will get is: do it some other way. Which you already knew. If you agree with RMS's view that making proprietary software is immoral then the only question you have to ask is, am I a moral person or can I be bought? The only person you can ask that question is yourself.
Thing is, most people don't like thinking of themselves as being someone who ignores their beliefs and lives an immoral life. So it's easy to convince yourself that you don't really believe in any of the RMS crap anyway. Especially if there's no negative repercussions.
Uhh, Microsoft have stated their reasons for wanting patent reform. They're the biggest target for patent trolls.
You mean Microsoft.
Yes, of course, by 'members' I meant 'agents'. And if you're suggesting that somehow the shareholders can dictate the actions of the agents.. no, those days have long past.
Yes, true.
There are no people in corporations. Seriously. There are no rational, ethical people in corporations. It's the law that the members of a corporation must do whatever is legally possible to increase shareholder value. Failure to do so is a crime. That is inhuman.. that is robotic adherence to greed.
Thanks for not picking holes in my stupid analogy.. it's clearly not for your benefit.
I think I understand what you are saying, but I'm still curious why anyone would ask RMS how they are supposed to earn a living. He feels it is amoral, it's the wrong question to ask him.
As for his strategy for promoting free software. Yes, we all agree that RMS doesn't have the best strategy. Although, you have to admit, he's done a heck of a lot with that bad strategy. And yeah, he's never had trouble getting people to listen to him. They pay him to do it. Of course, they all go home and continue to use Windows.