"I'm shocked that/. would select this report of YouTube censorship instead of another article from a more reputable news source"
I replied:
"Ah...so we're deciding what a "reputable" news source is, eh?"
And now you've just said:
"I have no idea if YouTube is censoring anything. If it is, a factual article claiming that, such as the one you provided, might have provided an interesting discussion."
You've just proved you didn't even bother to read the article, yet slammed it because of the source. Further proving my original point.
In follow on articles, NYTimes confirms what the original article was saying: The video was censored by people that didn't like what was being said, which was my point earlier saying: "This is *exactly* what people are complaining about. Free Speech is ALL speech, not just those you agree with."
Some people only want to hear speech that they agree with, and want to squash those that don't agree with them. That's not what "Free Speech" is. But that's exactly what people tried to do on YouTube.
In a "classic" unix kernel, only one process is in kernel context at a time. That's because if you have more than one process in kernel context at once, there's a good chance that they'll step on each other.
Say that two processes were in kernel context at the same time, and one wanted to delete data from a data structure and the other wanted to read from it. If the process that wanted to read from the data structure got a pointer to it, and then before it could do anything with it, the process that wanted to delete it came in and did delete it, when the process that wanted to read from that pointer it just grabbed came back, it would fail, and probably cause a kernel panic.
If all the data structures in the kernel are protected by semaphores (and spin locks in case of interrupt routines), and all the paths through the code prevented deadlocks (that's one of the tricky parts), then multiple process could be in kernel context at the same time.
You'll get the speed up because in a classic UNIX system if a process in kernel context took a long time with what it was doing, it effectively locks out all the other processes that want to go into kernel context until it's complete. When you have everything set up so that multiple processes can be in kernel context at the same time, you move the contention from the entire kernel down to individual data structure manipulation, and the wait times are much lower.
I believe (and someone that's actually still reading this correct me if I'm wrong), they do have semaphoring of code within the Linux kernel right now, but it's over big parts of the code, rather than individual data structures. There is some benefit of doing that, but not nearly the benefit of doing those individual data structures.
It's tough, but worth it in the end. I think the hardest part of this will be the drivers, and making sure that they behave well in a system like that.
Yes, I understand what a realtime OS is. I worked on kernel teams (for non-embedded UNIX systems) for several in the 90s. I didn't mention anything about embedded real-time OSes, because it's irrelevant to this discussion.
Anyway, that was exactly my point.
The realtime process in a realtime UNIX kernel can help an audio application by being able to field interrupts in a deterministic fashion.
Furthermore, a fully preemptive kernel (ie, all the kernel data structures protected) with multiple processes being able to be in kernel context at the same time can bring even regular (non-realtime) computer tasks.
If you think Linux is zippy now, wait until they do the really hard work to make that kernel fully preemptive. The systems will REALLY fly then.
Ah, name calling. The fallback of the left, when they're backed up against the wall. It really degrades from your supposed argument.
Sorry, but I'm not impressed with your arguments. Just because YOU don't agree with it, doesn't make it a lie. It might be a lie in your little world, but you can't deny facts, no matter how hard you try.
Again, you might not like the source, but it is a legimate new outlet. It just sounds like it doesn't conform with your little view of the world.
And, what's your answer? "It's a lie! Let's stop them!"
Censorship is a very ugly thing. Thanks for proving that point.
You're not going to see anything really great until they finally bite the bullet and make the kernel fully pre-emptive. The hacks in there now to have multiple processes in kernel context aren't nearly as effective as fully semaphoring the data structures in the kernel but 1) It's hard, and 2) the kernel jocks doing the kernel these days haven't been too happy about it.
But sooner or later, they'll have to. Multi-core/multi-processor single box systems will greatly benefit from it.
"The present-day insurgents weren't in Iraq until after we removed Saddam from power."
No, that would be incorrect. The Saddam's ousted party is part to blame for what's going on over there. They didn't like getting kicked out after so many years in power, and now they're doing everything to get it back.
You are correct that some of them are from out of the country, which is another part of the problem. They're doing everything they can to make sure that place is turned into an ultra-conservative Islamic state.
And not many presidents can claim they gave the technology for nuclear weapons to another country.
Thank Clinton for that.
War for oil.... That always make me think that people that say that are either (1) stupid, or (2) lying. Maybe both. That's just a blind talking point, and has nothing to do with reality. Do you have ANY idea how the oil market works in the world?
-- Liberals: We're for free speech unless we disagree with your views, then it's just fine for us to proclaim your views illegitimate and do whatever is needed to silence you.
Back in the day, I was a big Amiga fan. And like most Amiga folks, I had multiple machines. They were great.
Commodore really screwed up with the marketing. It was like plot of "The Producers"... do everything you can to make it fail.
Now it's yet again, "Wait until you see what we have planned!" Reminds me of the old days.
Whatever this company is doing, it's "Amiga" in name only. They really need to change the name and let "Amiga" die with whatever shred of respect that great machine once had.
Just picking and choosing facts, and leaving out things that don't fit in with your agenda doesn't win people to your side.
Every time I see this argument, they leave out every mention of the fact that the wire taps happen when there's a known terrorist on the end of the line.
Every time.
Why is that? Afraid to mention that because it weakens your argument?
I find it really ironic that a Kennedy, of all people, should be warning people about election fraud.
Especially with what happened in Chicago when "John F" was "elected".
And I find it particularly sad that the people who are warning about election fraud don't want to do a damn thing to prevent people from voting twice (or more....Just witness what happens in Wisconsin).
Don't want fraud? Simple: Give people free state-issued id cards, and make them prove who they are when they vote. Do it by paper ballot. And enforce the election fraud laws when someone is caught tampering with ballots.
Other countries at least make you dip your finger in ink that lasts a few days when they vote. They should at least do that here.
It's now they have to keep traffic up at the site. Post an article like this, get both sides to point out that the other side is at fault. I'm sure you'll see something about the 8 years and 10 chances Clinton at to do something, and supposedly had a "comprehensive strategy" that he left when he left office, to complement this story where they're still trying to blame Bush.
But again, any story that blames Bush for things gets posted, since it is Slashdot.
Notice there haven't been any stories proving or disproving everything Clinton said last week. Guess that wouldn't have been too favorable, so they ignore it.
Besides, if you want real news, this is not the place to come. This is where the digital street fights happen. You need to read a large variety of sources, BOTH left and right, and then decide for yourself.
Don't buy in to someone else's agenda. Think for yourself.
Well, they can start by offering solutions that aren't either "run away" or just standing around bitching and not offering any other solutions. If they have been offering solutions, they sure don't have the answer.
If they did that, a lot more people would take them seriously.
People aren't going to vote for Democrats on this issue if they don't have a solution.
At this point, a vote for a Democrat is just to stop everything is the "solution". That's the hope of a lot of those on the left.
It's not going to make the terrorists that want to kill Americans go away. The US not doing anything during the 1990s didn't stop them from bombing the Cole or the first unsuccessful World Trade Center bombing. We didn't do anything then, and they just kept coming.
"This isn't about terrorists, it's about my privacy and my rights as an American."
This is pure FUD, and and best a half truth.
If you're making phone calls to terrorists, or they're making phone calls to you, your lines will get tapped.
If you're not and they try something like that, you can sue the living crap out of the people that are doing it, and you'll have lawyers out the door to back you up. And you'll win.
Your civil rights are NOT being violated. In fact, they probably don't give two craps about you, other than trying to prevent your butt from getting blown up. Nothing you're doing is of the slightest interest to them.
If you want to see what a real stolen election looks like, take a close look at what happened in Washingon State when they tried to elect the last governor. They kept recounting until they got the result they desired, and then told everyone to stop.
Slashdot Mirror
Paying taxes on virtual goods that are exchanged for real money... That I can understand.
Paying taxes on virtual goods where you don't exchange for real money is stupid.
What, are they going to start looking through my character's inventory, evaluating how much my +10 Sword of Uberness is worth?
This whole discussion started because you said:
"I'm shocked that
I replied:
"Ah...so we're deciding what a "reputable" news source is, eh?"
And now you've just said:
"I have no idea if YouTube is censoring anything. If it is, a factual article claiming that, such as the one you provided, might have provided an interesting discussion."
You've just proved you didn't even bother to read the article, yet slammed it because of the source. Further proving my original point.
In follow on articles, NYTimes confirms what the original article was saying: The video was censored by people that didn't like what was being said, which was my point earlier saying: "This is *exactly* what people are complaining about. Free Speech is ALL speech, not just those you agree with."
Some people only want to hear speech that they agree with, and want to squash those that don't agree with them. That's not what "Free Speech" is. But that's exactly what people tried to do on YouTube.
Fortunately, it was corrected.
I think my point is well outlined in this article, "A Slippery Slope of Censorship at YouTube"
n k.html?ex=1161230400&en=46200e58715eb0ad&ei=5070
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/09/technology/09li
People didn't like the facts presented, and their answer was the censor it. Fortunately, YouTube restored it.
So, bottom line, you're wrong.
No. I'm actually saying something different.
In a "classic" unix kernel, only one process is in kernel context at a time. That's because if you have more than one process in kernel context at once, there's a good chance that they'll step on each other.
Say that two processes were in kernel context at the same time, and one wanted to delete data from a data structure and the other wanted to read from it. If the process that wanted to read from the data structure got a pointer to it, and then before it could do anything with it, the process that wanted to delete it came in and did delete it, when the process that wanted to read from that pointer it just grabbed came back, it would fail, and probably cause a kernel panic.
If all the data structures in the kernel are protected by semaphores (and spin locks in case of interrupt routines), and all the paths through the code prevented deadlocks (that's one of the tricky parts), then multiple process could be in kernel context at the same time.
You'll get the speed up because in a classic UNIX system if a process in kernel context took a long time with what it was doing, it effectively locks out all the other processes that want to go into kernel context until it's complete. When you have everything set up so that multiple processes can be in kernel context at the same time, you move the contention from the entire kernel down to individual data structure manipulation, and the wait times are much lower.
I believe (and someone that's actually still reading this correct me if I'm wrong), they do have semaphoring of code within the Linux kernel right now, but it's over big parts of the code, rather than individual data structures. There is some benefit of doing that, but not nearly the benefit of doing those individual data structures.
It's tough, but worth it in the end. I think the hardest part of this will be the drivers, and making sure that they behave well in a system like that.
Yes, I understand what a realtime OS is. I worked on kernel teams (for non-embedded UNIX systems) for several in the 90s. I didn't mention anything about embedded real-time OSes, because it's irrelevant to this discussion.
Anyway, that was exactly my point.
The realtime process in a realtime UNIX kernel can help an audio application by being able to field interrupts in a deterministic fashion.
Furthermore, a fully preemptive kernel (ie, all the kernel data structures protected) with multiple processes being able to be in kernel context at the same time can bring even regular (non-realtime) computer tasks.
If you think Linux is zippy now, wait until they do the really hard work to make that kernel fully preemptive. The systems will REALLY fly then.
Ah, name calling. The fallback of the left, when they're backed up against the wall. It really degrades from your supposed argument.
Sorry, but I'm not impressed with your arguments. Just because YOU don't agree with it, doesn't make it a lie. It might be a lie in your little world, but you can't deny facts, no matter how hard you try.
Again, you might not like the source, but it is a legimate new outlet. It just sounds like it doesn't conform with your little view of the world.
And, what's your answer? "It's a lie! Let's stop them!"
Censorship is a very ugly thing. Thanks for proving that point.
You're not going to see anything really great until they finally bite the bullet and make the kernel fully pre-emptive. The hacks in there now to have multiple processes in kernel context aren't nearly as effective as fully semaphoring the data structures in the kernel but 1) It's hard, and 2) the kernel jocks doing the kernel these days haven't been too happy about it.
But sooner or later, they'll have to. Multi-core/multi-processor single box systems will greatly benefit from it.
Not if the process you're using is a realtime process, which is what you'd want anyway.
Here's the link: http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/13/D8KO2H7G4 .html
"The present-day insurgents weren't in Iraq until after we removed Saddam from power."
No, that would be incorrect. The Saddam's ousted party is part to blame for what's going on over there. They didn't like getting kicked out after so many years in power, and now they're doing everything to get it back.
You are correct that some of them are from out of the country, which is another part of the problem. They're doing everything they can to make sure that place is turned into an ultra-conservative Islamic state.
You know, the kind that kill women who are raped, because they break Islamic law, or kill men and women for being gay.
"a more reputable news source"
Ah...so we're deciding what a "reputable" news source is, eh?
This is *exactly* what people are complaining about. Free Speech is ALL speech, not just those you agree with.
"He's arrested for killing his wife and this post asks what's the deal with Reiser 4? Classy kdawson, very classy."
My thoughts exactly. If I had mod points right now, I'd mod you up.
And not many presidents can claim they gave the technology for nuclear weapons to another country.
Thank Clinton for that.
War for oil.... That always make me think that people that say that are either (1) stupid, or (2) lying. Maybe both. That's just a blind talking point, and has nothing to do with reality. Do you have ANY idea how the oil market works in the world?
--
Liberals: We're for free speech unless we disagree with your views, then it's just fine for us to proclaim your views illegitimate and do whatever is needed to silence you.
Clinton had nothing to do with giving North Korea nuclear tech?
That picture of Albright and Kim Jong Il toasting each other is a fake?
Reread what I wrote.
"They" == "the Amigas".
Not "They == Commodore".
Understand? Amigas - good. Commodore - bad.
Back in the day, I was a big Amiga fan. And like most Amiga folks, I had multiple machines. They were great.
Commodore really screwed up with the marketing. It was like plot of "The Producers"... do everything you can to make it fail.
Now it's yet again, "Wait until you see what we have planned!" Reminds me of the old days.
Whatever this company is doing, it's "Amiga" in name only. They really need to change the name and let "Amiga" die with whatever shred of respect that great machine once had.
They should do what the rest of us do. Wait until they have to money to pay for it.
Otherwise it's just an excuse.
Just picking and choosing facts, and leaving out things that don't fit in with your agenda doesn't win people to your side.
Every time I see this argument, they leave out every mention of the fact that the wire taps happen when there's a known terrorist on the end of the line.
Every time.
Why is that? Afraid to mention that because it weakens your argument?
I find it really ironic that a Kennedy, of all people, should be warning people about election fraud.
Especially with what happened in Chicago when "John F" was "elected".
And I find it particularly sad that the people who are warning about election fraud don't want to do a damn thing to prevent people from voting twice (or more....Just witness what happens in Wisconsin).
Don't want fraud? Simple: Give people free state-issued id cards, and make them prove who they are when they vote. Do it by paper ballot. And enforce the election fraud laws when someone is caught tampering with ballots.
Other countries at least make you dip your finger in ink that lasts a few days when they vote. They should at least do that here.
It's now they have to keep traffic up at the site. Post an article like this, get both sides to point out that the other side is at fault. I'm sure you'll see something about the 8 years and 10 chances Clinton at to do something, and supposedly had a "comprehensive strategy" that he left when he left office, to complement this story where they're still trying to blame Bush.
But again, any story that blames Bush for things gets posted, since it is Slashdot.
Notice there haven't been any stories proving or disproving everything Clinton said last week. Guess that wouldn't have been too favorable, so they ignore it.
Besides, if you want real news, this is not the place to come. This is where the digital street fights happen. You need to read a large variety of sources, BOTH left and right, and then decide for yourself.
Don't buy in to someone else's agenda. Think for yourself.
"What can the Democratic Party can do?"
Well, they can start by offering solutions that aren't either "run away" or just standing around bitching and not offering any other solutions. If they have been offering solutions, they sure don't have the answer.
If they did that, a lot more people would take them seriously.
People aren't going to vote for Democrats on this issue if they don't have a solution.
At this point, a vote for a Democrat is just to stop everything is the "solution". That's the hope of a lot of those on the left.
It's not going to make the terrorists that want to kill Americans go away. The US not doing anything during the 1990s didn't stop them from bombing the Cole or the first unsuccessful World Trade Center bombing. We didn't do anything then, and they just kept coming.
"This isn't about terrorists, it's about my privacy and my rights as an American."
This is pure FUD, and and best a half truth.
If you're making phone calls to terrorists, or they're making phone calls to you, your lines will get tapped.
If you're not and they try something like that, you can sue the living crap out of the people that are doing it, and you'll have lawyers out the door to back you up. And you'll win.
Your civil rights are NOT being violated. In fact, they probably don't give two craps about you, other than trying to prevent your butt from getting blown up. Nothing you're doing is of the slightest interest to them.
Seriously.
Yep. That's exactly what they're doing.
It's a left-leaning site. I have NEVER seen a right-leaning article approved here. Ever.
It does drive traffic though, so they're still making money, which is why they do it in the first place.
If you want to see what a real stolen election looks like, take a close look at what happened in Washingon State when they tried to elect the last governor. They kept recounting until they got the result they desired, and then told everyone to stop.
THAT'S a stolen election.
Well, if you listen to the government, there have been at least 8 plots that have been broken up.
That's if you listen to the government.
If you don't, then when one finally gets through, you'll have your evidence.
Of course, if that happens, people will be blaming the government for not doing enough.