Ring 0: kernel level
Ring 1: apps level
Ring 2: user level
Microsoft did something similar to this with NT 3.5/3.51, and these releases were quite robust.
However, for NT 4.0 they moved the display drivers and GUI to ring 0 to increase performance. This created huge stability issues as buggy display drivers (and coincidentally a sub-optimal IP stack) caused NT 4.0 systems to be extremely fragile. The anticipated performance increases were eclipsed by downtime caused by reboots and BSODs. Some of these issues were not patched sufficiently until the release of Service Pack 6/6a. There's an unintentionally funny article here that talks about the changes. I love this particular quote:
"In all my testing with NT 4.0, I haven't encountered a graphic-induced crash. Moving the heap to the kernel makes sense. Upgrade!"
Making the engineering change from "Windows AntiSpyware" to "Windows Defender" took a lot of careful coordination across our team to ensure that the strings in the UI got changed, the help files all got updated, registry keys, file names and properties, as well as a couple of images all got changed.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
It is not welcome. Linux is about Open Source, and allowing people to link-in binary closed drivers goes against this.
Actually Linux is about the freedom to do what one wishes with one's own systems; the Open Source aspect is a [large] facet of this freedom.
To put it another way, if I want to use a vendor's closed-source, binary drivers on my own machines, who are you to say anything to the contrary? As long as no one is forcing you to do the same, why is it any of your business?
You talk about "allowing" people to do things as if you (or anyone in particular) should be the arbiter. "I don't agree with it so I don't think anyone should have the option" - such misguided arrogance...
I have never understood the appeal of those portable DVD players
They are very handy for long (e.g. cross-country) flights. I have a Toshiba portable, and the battery life is quite good: so far the longest I have used it is ~2.5 hours.
Yes, the screen is smaller, but this is quite helpful when the jackass in front of you decides to recline his seat all the way back without notice and as violently as possible. A laptop [with a larger screen] is more likely to be damaged in this case.
Do you want the job of analyzing all 18 million messages? If they are only analyzing 10% its probably because they figure that the other 90% probably have the same source.
Fair enough, but if they are doing the analysis manually then they have already lost.
How is this fighting this in thier own way? Don't lots of other orgs do this same thing...?
Well, it's their own way in that other organizations are not so irresponsible as to allow the machine to send 18 million &#$% spam messages while they ooh and aahh over their creation. Microsoft "embraces and extends" yet again...
From The Fine Article:
"In those 20 days, this one computer received 5 million connection requests from spammers, and sent 18 million spam messages," said Cranton.
That amount of data was impossible to analyze, so Microsoft focused on the three most-active spamming days, when 470,00 connection requests were made of the PC, and about 1.8 million messages were sent through it.
How nice: they allowed 18M junk messages to go through, but could be bothered to look at only 10% of the data. Unbelievable.
I've been using it exclusively for well over a year now. I keep a dual boot in case I ever need to do something in Windows, which is a rarity these days.
So which is it: do you use Linux exclusively or do you use Windows rarely? One or the other, please.
"Exclusively" != "generally" or "usually". Exclusively means "to the exclusion of all others", among other definitions.
Not flaming - just pointing out a common linguistic issue. People tend to show up on/. and proclaim "I use Linux exclusively!" and then add parenthetically "(except when I need Windows)".
Wouldn't they have to be 'secured' to compy with HIPAA regulations in any way?
You didn't even read the summary, did you? "There's a nice little story on CNN about a doctor in Geneva..."
That should have been your first clue, but either way you should have RTFA. If you had, you would have seen that the first paragraph of the article includes
GENEVA, Switzerland (CNN). To the very best of my knowledge, Switzerland is not subject to HIPAA.
Old hacker? heck I started on Linux with Yggdrasil... I've been running Linux ever since!
I figured there would be some chest-puffing in this thread ("Well, I started with Linux in nineteen-ought-three..."). Lots of people started with Yggdrasil: it was available on CD-ROM at computer shows when dial-up ruled the land. You are not a unique snowflake.
You seem to have a problem with the "old hacker" as mentioned in the article. Here is a hint: the definition of "hacker" != "Linux user". Yes, there are hackers that run Linux; not all Linux users are hackers. There are also plenty of old hackers who have never touched Linux. You should read this.
[I did RTFA, though it's entirely possible I missed something.]
Mr. Asay did not clarify the distinction between revenue from product sales and revenue from support and other services. He mentioned Red Hat as an example of an OSS company that is making money, but he didn't indicate how much of that money came from selling RHEL and other products vice the consulting, etc. that RH also offers. He alludes to it briefly when he says "OSS has trended toward examples like the Red Hat Network and the MySQL network" but leaves it at that.
This is not a slam on Asay, btw; it's just something I thought would make the article more useful.
(AP) -- Scientists say they have found more bones in an Indonesian cave that offer additional evidence of a second human species -- short and hobbit-like -- that roamed the Earth the same time as modern man.
I thought the Hobbit reference was thrown [gratuitously] into the summary to grab the attention of the/. crowd. Lo and behold, the AP actually made the comparison - interesting.
Whilst I was in HS I saw my grades drop from straight A's to C's and D's because I was online so much I didn't do any homework or studying. So basically I had no social life (unless you count chat rooms and the like) and wasn't very productive at all.
Idle curiosity: where were your parents/guardians while this was happening? Why wasn't anyone guiding you during your formative years? This is a bigger looming problem than the perils of [alleged] "Internet addiction".
Much of the Federal government has a sub-optimal track record in the security arena. In March of 2004 Rick Forno published an article (with links) that summarized Uncle Sam's security issues:
Alternatively, build a seperate, external door to access the cockpit and replace the internal door with a solid wall. You can push the wall back a bit and create a little suite in there so they have food and facilities during long flights. Problem solved!
Yes, because it is a 100% trivial and completely uncomplicated task to retrofit a commercial airframe with an additional door. Every cockpit has loads of empty wall space that can be used for this very purpose. You can be assured that there are absolutely no cables, wires, or other conduits running through the wall, so feel free to break out the reciprocating saw and put the new door wherever. And air pressure? It's a myth - forget about it! Oooh, how about this: maybe we can weld the original door shut and the pilot and co-pilot can just climb in through the window. It seemed to work for those southern gentlemen in the orange car...
Yet further proof that almost all "security professionals" have about as much intelligence as a gnat.
I'm really tired of mediocre systems guys passing a CISSP exam
Wow - it looks like someone is bitter because he a) couldn't pass the CISSP exam, b) couldn't get a job in the security field, or c) both. My money is on c).
Anyway, using wikipedia and google to bolster your application may be stretching it a bit...but hey what do I know:).
Wikipedia is an interesting concept, but why oh why do people insist on treating it as some kind of authoritative source?? (Not directed at you, efuseekay)
Genuine authoritative sources are reviewed and re-reviewed by individuals whose credentials are verified, etc. to ensure they know the topic at hand. Think of the requirements for an expert witness, if that helps; pay particular attention to Rules 701 and 702*. Nutshell version: anyone - particularly a specialist in a given field - must be able to support and corroborate claims of deep and/or specialized knowledge before presenting such knowledge in court.
Compare this to Wikipedia: anyone with Internet access can submit [mis]information with relative ease. Yes, glaring omissions will probably be rectified shortly, but does that help the person who viewed an erroneous page before the correction was made?
(* IANAL, but have done a reasonable amount of work in this area.)
Take a course in biology and you'll learn that high-frequency noises are indeed related to loss of hearing.
They are related in the same way that the poor handling of an automobile is related to a flat tire. Yes, the handling does go away when a tire is flat, but saying "poor handling is caused by flat tires" is disingenuous at best. Compare this with the previous poster's statement that hearing loss is caused by high frequency sound.
The fact that the high-frequency hearing loss occurs first doesn't mean the loss was caused by the high-frequency sound.
Hearing loss is caused by a number of factors; yes, loud sound can do it, but high_volume != high_frequency. Where did you unearth this particular piece of mis-information??
Slashdot Mirror
Hopefully someone has the decentsy to stealth a digital camera in and post torrents before the premiere so it can be just like the features.
How would this constitute 'decency'?
Ring 0: kernel level
Ring 1: apps level
Ring 2: user level
Microsoft did something similar to this with NT 3.5/3.51, and these releases were quite robust.
However, for NT 4.0 they moved the display drivers and GUI to ring 0 to increase performance. This created huge stability issues as buggy display drivers (and coincidentally a sub-optimal IP stack) caused NT 4.0 systems to be extremely fragile. The anticipated performance increases were eclipsed by downtime caused by reboots and BSODs. Some of these issues were not patched sufficiently until the release of Service Pack 6/6a. There's an unintentionally funny article here that talks about the changes. I love this particular quote:
"In all my testing with NT 4.0, I haven't encountered a graphic-induced crash. Moving the heap to the kernel makes sense. Upgrade!"
Making the engineering change from "Windows AntiSpyware" to "Windows Defender" took a lot of careful coordination across our team to ensure that the strings in the UI got changed, the help files all got updated, registry keys, file names and properties, as well as a couple of images all got changed.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
It is not welcome. Linux is about Open Source, and allowing people to link-in binary closed drivers goes against this.
Actually Linux is about the freedom to do what one wishes with one's own systems; the Open Source aspect is a [large] facet of this freedom.
To put it another way, if I want to use a vendor's closed-source, binary drivers on my own machines, who are you to say anything to the contrary? As long as no one is forcing you to do the same, why is it any of your business?
You talk about "allowing" people to do things as if you (or anyone in particular) should be the arbiter. "I don't agree with it so I don't think anyone should have the option" - such misguided arrogance...
FP: The EU and several countries say that their "nuclear option" would be to set up a rival ICANN, resulting in two standards for the Internet.
Homer^W Dubya: "Nuke-u-ler. It's pronounced nuke-u-ler."
I have never understood the appeal of those portable DVD players
They are very handy for long (e.g. cross-country) flights. I have a Toshiba portable, and the battery life is quite good: so far the longest I have used it is ~2.5 hours.
Yes, the screen is smaller, but this is quite helpful when the jackass in front of you decides to recline his seat all the way back without notice and as violently as possible. A laptop [with a larger screen] is more likely to be damaged in this case.
In the UK, as other poster have nebtioned we have the TPS - Telephone Preference Service.
However, problems arise when some employees forget to put cover sheets on their TPS reports.
WELCOME to Cold War City (population: 4).
I hope one of those employees is the barkeep.
The only sentry is a garden gnome outside one of the entrances.
Dave: "'E's got gno-o-omes"
Gaz: "Aye, 'e bloody well would have."
Do you want the job of analyzing all 18 million messages? If they are only analyzing 10% its probably because they figure that the other 90% probably have the same source.
Fair enough, but if they are doing the analysis manually then they have already lost.
How is this fighting this in thier own way? Don't lots of other orgs do this same thing...?
Well, it's their own way in that other organizations are not so irresponsible as to allow the machine to send 18 million &#$% spam messages while they ooh and aahh over their creation. Microsoft "embraces and extends" yet again...
From The Fine Article:
"In those 20 days, this one computer received 5 million connection requests from spammers, and sent 18 million spam messages," said Cranton.
That amount of data was impossible to analyze, so Microsoft focused on the three most-active spamming days, when 470,00 connection requests were made of the PC, and about 1.8 million messages were sent through it.
How nice: they allowed 18M junk messages to go through, but could be bothered to look at only 10% of the data. Unbelievable.
I've been using it exclusively for well over a year now. I keep a dual boot in case I ever need to do something in Windows, which is a rarity these days.
So which is it: do you use Linux exclusively or do you use Windows rarely? One or the other, please.
"Exclusively" != "generally" or "usually". Exclusively means "to the exclusion of all others", among other definitions.
Not flaming - just pointing out a common linguistic issue. People tend to show up on
Wouldn't they have to be 'secured' to compy with HIPAA regulations in any way?
You didn't even read the summary, did you? "There's a nice little story on CNN about a doctor in Geneva..."
That should have been your first clue, but either way you should have RTFA. If you had, you would have seen that the first paragraph of the article includes GENEVA, Switzerland (CNN). To the very best of my knowledge, Switzerland is not subject to HIPAA.
Old hacker? heck I started on Linux with Yggdrasil
I figured there would be some chest-puffing in this thread ("Well, I started with Linux in nineteen-ought-three..."). Lots of people started with Yggdrasil: it was available on CD-ROM at computer shows when dial-up ruled the land. You are not a unique snowflake.
You seem to have a problem with the "old hacker" as mentioned in the article. Here is a hint: the definition of "hacker" != "Linux user". Yes, there are hackers that run Linux; not all Linux users are hackers. There are also plenty of old hackers who have never touched Linux. You should read this.
As an aside, here is a link to the printer-friendly version of the article.
[I did RTFA, though it's entirely possible I missed something.]
Mr. Asay did not clarify the distinction between revenue from product sales and revenue from support and other services. He mentioned Red Hat as an example of an OSS company that is making money, but he didn't indicate how much of that money came from selling RHEL and other products vice the consulting, etc. that RH also offers. He alludes to it briefly when he says "OSS has trended toward examples like the Red Hat Network and the MySQL network" but leaves it at that.
This is not a slam on Asay, btw; it's just something I thought would make the article more useful.
(AP) -- Scientists say they have found more bones in an Indonesian cave that offer additional evidence of a second human species -- short and hobbit-like -- that roamed the Earth the same time as modern man.
I thought the Hobbit reference was thrown [gratuitously] into the summary to grab the attention of the
Whilst I was in HS I saw my grades drop from straight A's to C's and D's because I was online so much I didn't do any homework or studying. So basically I had no social life (unless you count chat rooms and the like) and wasn't very productive at all.
Idle curiosity: where were your parents/guardians while this was happening? Why wasn't anyone guiding you during your formative years? This is a bigger looming problem than the perils of [alleged] "Internet addiction".
Much of the Federal government has a sub-optimal track record in the security arena. In March of 2004 Rick Forno published an article (with links) that summarized Uncle Sam's security issues:
The farce of federal cybersecurity
(That's the title Rick used, btw.)
An engineer who jumps on the lathe and starts welding
Welding... on a lathe? Such an engineer is either very, very talented or someone to avoid at all costs - quite possibly both.
Alternatively, build a seperate, external door to access the cockpit and replace the internal door with a solid wall. You can push the wall back a bit and create a little suite in there so they have food and facilities during long flights. Problem solved!
Yes, because it is a 100% trivial and completely uncomplicated task to retrofit a commercial airframe with an additional door. Every cockpit has loads of empty wall space that can be used for this very purpose. You can be assured that there are absolutely no cables, wires, or other conduits running through the wall, so feel free to break out the reciprocating saw and put the new door wherever. And air pressure? It's a myth - forget about it! Oooh, how about this: maybe we can weld the original door shut and the pilot and co-pilot can just climb in through the window. It seemed to work for those southern gentlemen in the orange car...
Yet further proof that almost all "security professionals" have about as much intelligence as a gnat.
I'm really tired of mediocre systems guys passing a CISSP exam
Wow - it looks like someone is bitter because he a) couldn't pass the CISSP exam, b) couldn't get a job in the security field, or c) both. My money is on c).
Anyway, using wikipedia and google to bolster your application may be stretching it a bit...but hey what do I know
Wikipedia is an interesting concept, but why oh why do people insist on treating it as some kind of authoritative source?? (Not directed at you, efuseekay)
Genuine authoritative sources are reviewed and re-reviewed by individuals whose credentials are verified, etc. to ensure they know the topic at hand. Think of the requirements for an expert witness, if that helps; pay particular attention to Rules 701 and 702*. Nutshell version: anyone - particularly a specialist in a given field - must be able to support and corroborate claims of deep and/or specialized knowledge before presenting such knowledge in court.
Compare this to Wikipedia: anyone with Internet access can submit [mis]information with relative ease. Yes, glaring omissions will probably be rectified shortly, but does that help the person who viewed an erroneous page before the correction was made?
(* IANAL, but have done a reasonable amount of work in this area.)
Take a course in biology and you'll learn that high-frequency noises are indeed related to loss of hearing.
They are related in the same way that the poor handling of an automobile is related to a flat tire. Yes, the handling does go away when a tire is flat, but saying "poor handling is caused by flat tires" is disingenuous at best. Compare this with the previous poster's statement that hearing loss is caused by high frequency sound.
The fact that the high-frequency hearing loss occurs first doesn't mean the loss was caused by the high-frequency sound.
3. marriage = selective hearing loss
I can neither confirm nor deny that this is really, really, utterly and verifiably true...
hearing loss is caused by high frequency sound
Hearing loss is caused by a number of factors; yes, loud sound can do it, but high_volume != high_frequency. Where did you unearth this particular piece of mis-information??
According to the the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association there are at least seven causes of hearing loss in adults. PS, "high frequency sound" is not on the list.
Neither is "marriage", but that's a topic for another time...
I think you mean cochlear implant. There is a good writeup here on cochlear implants and how they work.