Anyone car to point me to one of these mythical video cards with 128 processors and 1.5 gig of fast on board memory? Also, at the price point they are asking for this software (1200USD per seat) it seems like this is hardly cost competitive with doing this same sort of thing using commercially available FPGA dev/prototype boards and open source software designed for this EXACT task.
Whoops! My bad, I didn't even realize that GPUs had power saving modes, I guess that makes sense. For what it is worth, I haven't noticed any reduced battery life on my laptop with all the wiggle and fade enabled. I'd recommend this particular brand/model to anyone looking for a laptop with full linux support, Toshiba Satellite A105-4014, the only bit that doesn't seem are the "media" keys to the left of the keyboard.
This is patently false. I've run compiz, beryl, and compiz fusion on my Core duo laptop for quite sometime and the frequency scaling features of my CPU remain active. I did however find that using the kde power applet vs the gnome one provided more functionality and easier config.
I have a pair of mtron SSD 32gb drives in a test bench to the left of me being zeroed.
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda
Returns a reported 71MB/s sequential write speed. Random access beats the pants of my seagate magentic drives by a considerably larger margin. And the speeds aren't location dependent.
The early adopters of this technology aren't die hard gamers... Well maybe they account for some small portion.
I can tell you right now that by leveraging the random access time (2-3 orders of magnitude faster than magnetic media when using SLC Nand flash devices) I'm able to move about 6-7 times as much mail into/outof delivery queues on new massively parallel server hardware. This is not an insignificant improvement; my mail cluster shrinks in size from 5 full telco racks of sun v210 machines running 15k rpm scsi drives to 1.5 racks of T1000 coolthread machines running MTron SSD sata drives on their internal SAS controllers. Just wait till we see these same SSD drives with native SAS client controllers in place of SATA and we'll see an additional jump in speed as command queuing and other storage technologies generally not of interest to gamers and desktop users comes into play. Heck, with the millions of emails I move a day it is quite possible that many people in this very Slashdot thread are already seeing benefits from me, and my company's, early adoption.
P.S. they are silent, cool, and consume a fraction of the power of the drives they are replacing too. Not a big plus for a desktop machine where you can barely hear the drive anyways and the power consumption isn't even a blip on your monthly bill. But when you are able to replace 6 15k scsi drives with 1 SSD and you are talking about racks vs laps and desks it is a different beast entirely.
*Some* of them *may* break chroot in *some* ways, but not all are required to be enabled (nor likely intended to be). Your example of using chroot to rescue a system from a live-CD for instance is a clear red herring, as the compile time options of the kernel being rescued have ZERO impact on the chroot functionaility of the kernel on your rescue CD. And who runs 32bit daemons on a 64 bit server AND runs a 64 bit kernel with multi-libs configured? You are making a very strange argument and not actually addressing what vserver or jails provide in the way of security that would be mutually exclusive to having stronger chroot jails through additional limits on the chroot environment.Your argument seems to be something like, race cars are built for speed, so even though a modified car can go as fast it is worthless because race cars exist.
Are you perhaps intending to mean something which I have completely missed?
Seems like the people arguing against chroot as a security layer are arguing something like, "don't trust your users, so you should stick them in root and concentrate on fundamentals" which isn't entirely flawed, but just a few tweaks to the chroot environment will have blackhats scratching their heads and not even realizing they are in a chroot jail even if they are able to shake out a privilege escalation. Things like "mkdir foo;chroot foo;cd../.." as cited in the lkml thread will be useless and "Your princess is in another castle!"
For equivalents or close approximations I *believe* that linux + grsec can accomplish the task of creating a chroot which can be used as a security tool. In as much as you can create one that cannot be easily escaped, even as a root user.
I think you are pretty much out of luck on changing the standard ports numbers for 1024. That is one of the older and more sticky RFC memes upon which the internet is built upon. Wait for the next internet to get rid of some of the kludgier house of cards type constructions.
Some of this is patched up in gr security patched versions of the linux kernel.
* No attaching shared memory outside of chroot
* No kill outside of chroot
* No ptrace outside of chroot (architecture independent)
* No capget outside of chroot
* No setpgid outside of chroot
* No getpgid outside of chroot
* No getsid outside of chroot
* No sending of signals by fcntl outside of chroot
* No viewing of any process outside of chroot, even if/proc is mounted
* No mounting or remounting
* No pivot_root
* No double chroot
* No fchdir out of chroot
* Enforced chdir("/") upon chroot
* No (f)chmod +s
* No mknod
* No sysctl writes
* No raising of scheduler priority
* No connecting to abstract unix domain sockets outside of chroot
* Removal of harmful privileges via capabilities
* Exec logging within chroot
And that doesn't even get into the RBAC model and PAX memory protections which are also rolled into the grsec patches.
Rather easy to implement on gentoo, where I've used it before. I can't speak to other distros' though.
I don't claim to be a security guru, but it seems like many other administration tasks security is best applied in layers which butress one another and dovetail into a complete solution. While chroot is not in and of itself much of security enhancement it can be used to further enforce existing measures and removes some of the lower hanging fruit that less skilled crackers oft use to wrest control of an environment.
At any rate I'd be interested to see how many of your other "100 other ways" are easily protected against.
The difference is that not all NAND flash is created equally. The multi-layer cell type which is commonly used in commodity flash devices isn't nearly as fast nor as reliable as the single-layer cell type which is used in the highspeed drive replacements we are seeing hit the market now. The difference isn't trivial when an mtron SLC SSD can do about 5 times the throughput speed of competing higher density SSDs which use MLC nand flash.
I don't work for mtron, but I am a satisfied customer.
You are aware that the PS3 is able to run Linux right out of the box since at least the US launch day. This is ran from an option that Sony put in the PS3's interface and requires no hacking. This is not native support, linux runs on top of a hypervisor abstraction layer on the PS3. Just FYI.
I agree with the meat of your comment, but I don't entirely agree with the premise. The "smoothness" and relative performance increase I see on gentoo is primarily about CPU optimizations, which as you discovered are pretty negligible. I do however not have X support and Pango and OpenType and a million other unneeded libs linked to my applications as happens with the default packages on SUSE and Redhat. The result is applications which have a smaller memory footprint and don't require a shit ton of ancillary packages to be installed. This yields a real measurable benefit both in terms of performance and overall complexity of a given install. Just adding "USE= -ipv6 -X11 -multi-lib -doc" to a vanilla gentoo minimal build destined to be a server can shave a considerable amount of overhead from the finished product.
Somewhere in the world a sound engineer just started spinning in his grave fast enough to power a whole city. Separating frequencies out to individual speakers which are each able to more accurately reproduce the original recording makes sense, that is what a crossover network does. However spreading those separate frequencies spatially apart and then adding delay for "more 3d sound" makes no sense to me.
I guess different strokes for different folks or whatever. If you like the way it sounds then more power to ya. However, ask yourself this, how come no highend "audiophile" grade systems for stereo sources output more then 2 or 2.1 channels? How come DVD-A or another multi-channel sound format hasn't taken the world by storm?
if the engineers had more channels to play with, they wouldn't be cramming so much into the main stereo channels And this gem just confuses the hell out of me. Audio engineers can mix for more than 2 channels, Dolby Surround can mix 5.1 channels onto a standard 2 channel stream and then break them back out with a very small investment in mastering hardware/software yet very very very few albums are encoded in Dolby Surround. Seems like your speculation on what engineers would do is quite the opposite of the reality of what it is that they do.
Now I'm really confused... Why would you undo the mixing that has already been done by the artist, producer and engineer in order to separate channels which weren't meant to be separate in the original mix. Seems like this is "tainting" the music by adding additional spatial fields at the cost of making the reproduction less accurate.
So, how exactly is listening to a 2 channel stereo source in 5 channel surround going to improve the sound? I bet you're the same guy who in highschool thought that putting a 900cfm Holley Dominator 4 barrel carb on a stock 82 mustang was making it faster....
I'm confused why you would bother to use sooo many words to make both sides of an argument... Are you asking a question? It sures seems like you answer your own question... But, I'll take a crack at why this interests me.
I have a netflix and I often rent DVDs from them, however I am also entitled to 17 hours of their streaming service as part of my membership. I have many machines which are not capable of of playing nicely with windows DRM, also my machine which is capable of doing it the way netflix intended is not on a connection fast enough to stream the high bitrate version of the available content. So, I would like to download the high bitrate stream and then be able to watch it on any one of my several machines regardless of the OS and/or current internet connection. AND I don't always want to wait 3 days for a dvd to be delivered AND since the number of DVDs out at any given time are limited by the terms of my account I'd like to use the stream in concert with the physical deliver service to have reasonable access and fair use of all the media which my membership entails.
Heh, you don't even need to look to imaging equipment to see how much standard medical fair costs. A regular no frills hospital bed with rails 2 articulation points and pneumatic adjustment costs well over 20kUSD.
I was pointing out that something cannot be 2-3 times less than it's price. There is a key piece of information missing.
Lets try it. Using your example Lets say that the Jeep has a "market price" of 3000USD, and it sells for "waaay lower then market prices (2 or 3 times lower)" due to an ebay auction. Exactly what are we multiplying by 2 or 3 to reduce the price? 2-3 times the market price would be 6-9000USD and if the final price was lower than the expected price by that amount it would be a negative value...
My initial response was then a joke with regards to that. I'm all ears if you have some sort of alternate answer for what we are supposed to multiply by 2-3 times....
It has already happend a few times here in Poland that people were obligated by court to sell the auctioned stuff (cars) for the bid amount, that was usually waaay lower then market prices (2 or 3 times lower). What the hell is that supposed to mean exactly? 2 or 3 times what? 2-3 times less than the market price? You mean people in Poland can bid negative amounts on ebay? And you guys wonder why there are so many polish jokes...
Slashdot Mirror
I promise you that your excessive use of commas does not make you easier to understand...
Anyone car to point me to one of these mythical video cards with 128 processors and 1.5 gig of fast on board memory? Also, at the price point they are asking for this software (1200USD per seat) it seems like this is hardly cost competitive with doing this same sort of thing using commercially available FPGA dev/prototype boards and open source software designed for this EXACT task.
Whoops! My bad, I didn't even realize that GPUs had power saving modes, I guess that makes sense. For what it is worth, I haven't noticed any reduced battery life on my laptop with all the wiggle and fade enabled. I'd recommend this particular brand/model to anyone looking for a laptop with full linux support, Toshiba Satellite A105-4014, the only bit that doesn't seem are the "media" keys to the left of the keyboard.
This is patently false. I've run compiz, beryl, and compiz fusion on my Core duo laptop for quite sometime and the frequency scaling features of my CPU remain active. I did however find that using the kde power applet vs the gnome one provided more functionality and easier config.
I think parent was talking about a laptop with an off the shelf SSD thrown into it not a homebrew SSD.
I have a pair of mtron SSD 32gb drives in a test bench to the left of me being zeroed. dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda Returns a reported 71MB/s sequential write speed. Random access beats the pants of my seagate magentic drives by a considerably larger margin. And the speeds aren't location dependent.
The early adopters of this technology aren't die hard gamers... Well maybe they account for some small portion.
I can tell you right now that by leveraging the random access time (2-3 orders of magnitude faster than magnetic media when using SLC Nand flash devices) I'm able to move about 6-7 times as much mail into/outof delivery queues on new massively parallel server hardware. This is not an insignificant improvement; my mail cluster shrinks in size from 5 full telco racks of sun v210 machines running 15k rpm scsi drives to 1.5 racks of T1000 coolthread machines running MTron SSD sata drives on their internal SAS controllers. Just wait till we see these same SSD drives with native SAS client controllers in place of SATA and we'll see an additional jump in speed as command queuing and other storage technologies generally not of interest to gamers and desktop users comes into play. Heck, with the millions of emails I move a day it is quite possible that many people in this very Slashdot thread are already seeing benefits from me, and my company's, early adoption.
P.S. they are silent, cool, and consume a fraction of the power of the drives they are replacing too. Not a big plus for a desktop machine where you can barely hear the drive anyways and the power consumption isn't even a blip on your monthly bill. But when you are able to replace 6 15k scsi drives with 1 SSD and you are talking about racks vs laps and desks it is a different beast entirely.
Are you perhaps intending to mean something which I have completely missed?
Seems like the people arguing against chroot as a security layer are arguing something like, "don't trust your users, so you should stick them in root and concentrate on fundamentals" which isn't entirely flawed, but just a few tweaks to the chroot environment will have blackhats scratching their heads and not even realizing they are in a chroot jail even if they are able to shake out a privilege escalation. Things like "mkdir foo;chroot foo;cd ../.." as cited in the lkml thread will be useless and "Your princess is in another castle!"
For equivalents or close approximations I *believe* that linux + grsec can accomplish the task of creating a chroot which can be used as a security tool. In as much as you can create one that cannot be easily escaped, even as a root user.
I think you are pretty much out of luck on changing the standard ports numbers for 1024. That is one of the older and more sticky RFC memes upon which the internet is built upon. Wait for the next internet to get rid of some of the kludgier house of cards type constructions.
Grrrr.... submit!=preview, sorry about the lack of proper linebreaks there...
I don't claim to be a security guru, but it seems like many other administration tasks security is best applied in layers which butress one another and dovetail into a complete solution. While chroot is not in and of itself much of security enhancement it can be used to further enforce existing measures and removes some of the lower hanging fruit that less skilled crackers oft use to wrest control of an environment.
At any rate I'd be interested to see how many of your other "100 other ways" are easily protected against.
I don't work for mtron, but I am a satisfied customer.
Mod parent up! This is insightful.
err, that should say "is NOT about CPU optimizations"...
I agree with the meat of your comment, but I don't entirely agree with the premise. The "smoothness" and relative performance increase I see on gentoo is primarily about CPU optimizations, which as you discovered are pretty negligible. I do however not have X support and Pango and OpenType and a million other unneeded libs linked to my applications as happens with the default packages on SUSE and Redhat. The result is applications which have a smaller memory footprint and don't require a shit ton of ancillary packages to be installed. This yields a real measurable benefit both in terms of performance and overall complexity of a given install. Just adding "USE= -ipv6 -X11 -multi-lib -doc" to a vanilla gentoo minimal build destined to be a server can shave a considerable amount of overhead from the finished product.
I guess different strokes for different folks or whatever. If you like the way it sounds then more power to ya. However, ask yourself this, how come no highend "audiophile" grade systems for stereo sources output more then 2 or 2.1 channels? How come DVD-A or another multi-channel sound format hasn't taken the world by storm?
if the engineers had more channels to play with, they wouldn't be cramming so much into the main stereo channels And this gem just confuses the hell out of me. Audio engineers can mix for more than 2 channels, Dolby Surround can mix 5.1 channels onto a standard 2 channel stream and then break them back out with a very small investment in mastering hardware/software yet very very very few albums are encoded in Dolby Surround. Seems like your speculation on what engineers would do is quite the opposite of the reality of what it is that they do.Now I'm really confused... Why would you undo the mixing that has already been done by the artist, producer and engineer in order to separate channels which weren't meant to be separate in the original mix. Seems like this is "tainting" the music by adding additional spatial fields at the cost of making the reproduction less accurate.
So, how exactly is listening to a 2 channel stereo source in 5 channel surround going to improve the sound? I bet you're the same guy who in highschool thought that putting a 900cfm Holley Dominator 4 barrel carb on a stock 82 mustang was making it faster....
I have a netflix and I often rent DVDs from them, however I am also entitled to 17 hours of their streaming service as part of my membership. I have many machines which are not capable of of playing nicely with windows DRM, also my machine which is capable of doing it the way netflix intended is not on a connection fast enough to stream the high bitrate version of the available content. So, I would like to download the high bitrate stream and then be able to watch it on any one of my several machines regardless of the OS and/or current internet connection. AND I don't always want to wait 3 days for a dvd to be delivered AND since the number of DVDs out at any given time are limited by the terms of my account I'd like to use the stream in concert with the physical deliver service to have reasonable access and fair use of all the media which my membership entails.
Heh, you don't even need to look to imaging equipment to see how much standard medical fair costs. A regular no frills hospital bed with rails 2 articulation points and pneumatic adjustment costs well over 20kUSD.
1/3 of something is not the same thing as saying 2-3 times less than something.
Lets try it. Using your example Lets say that the Jeep has a "market price" of 3000USD, and it sells for "waaay lower then market prices (2 or 3 times lower)" due to an ebay auction. Exactly what are we multiplying by 2 or 3 to reduce the price? 2-3 times the market price would be 6-9000USD and if the final price was lower than the expected price by that amount it would be a negative value...
My initial response was then a joke with regards to that. I'm all ears if you have some sort of alternate answer for what we are supposed to multiply by 2-3 times....