This is using a completely non unix oriented system (a mainframe) running a VM (which is not an emulator, virtualization is built into mainframes) to run many instances of linux (which isn't emulated either, linux runs natively on mainframes).
Not quite, though the effect is similar. Both VM and Linux are supported by a combination of software and microcode. However, IBM has been very successful in putting almost all performance critical code sections in microcode. Thus, VM and Linux are 'emulated', but the overall performance usually ends up being quite close to what could be achieved if the support was indeed natively supported.
is the U.S. the only place where this problem exists?
The U.S. is a market where this problem has been reduced. One of the few areas where MS has actually complied with anti monopolistic rulings is that they no longer insist that OEMs install Windows on every single computer they sell. That is, they are complying in the U.S.: in countries such as Japan, it is business as usual...
I have two immediate reactions. The first is that, on the face of it, there is nothing very revolutionary here. On the other hand, maybe all that is needed is a high quality implementation of techniques that are already known. I have read in several places recently that (excluding false alarms) rapid detection of attacks was not actually that difficult.
My second reaction is that the focus needs to be at the level of the ISPs. To expect all users to reliably protect themselves against attacks is just naive. Technology that could immediately detect attacks and prevent their propogation to individual users in the first place seems to me feasible and desirable.
Can anyone explain ...
on
MIT Roofnet
·
· Score: 1
... why there seems to be little research on adapting this kind of technique to a new generation of radio transmission? We hear all the time about the shortage of radio frequencies. If such techniques can handle all the varied demands of Internet access, surely it would be possible to develop relay techniques for delivery of radio signals.
Re:This idea is genius.
on
MIT Everyware
·
· Score: 1
Ultimately, the success of any institute of learning and research is significantly influenced by its reputation. Student fees, btw, are not the only (or, with such an institution as MIT, even the main) form of income. MIT, justly, has about the best reputation in the world in its core subjects. MIT will, justly, only reinforce its image as a pillar of the scientific community as a result of this initiative.
look at how many Patents IBM have, if I was to write a clever bit of code that affected their business, I would probably infringe some of their patents
I will bet 90% of the sites on the Internet probably, in theory, infringe IBM patents. In practice, IBM only ever uses software patents in self defense. Of course, this is not true of some other companies. Grrrr...
You may well be right. Sigh! But there is a more optimistic scenario. Perhaps by reducing the costs of production, it may give small independent companies a chance to compete and use market pressure to force the big guys to back off.
I think a protest of some description is highly appropriate. However, I think an equivalent effect on public opinion could be achieved by a 30 second delay screen before allowing access to the site. Particularly for news organisations (and I put slashdot in this category) it may be too extreme to completely close the site.
Nobody patented or restricted the use of hammers and nails in construction.
This would be a dangerous point to raise in certain quarters. Wrap up the patent application in enough jargon, and the current patent office might well grant a patent now. Yes, I guess someone would be able to show prior art eventually, but this would probably be after a two year plus legal fight.
Have you noticed that big Japanese companies seem comfortable working with IBM? I find it difficult to think of any other large US corporation about which we can say the same. IMHO, it is because (while a hard nosed competitor) they deal in a straight fashion with partners. They are seen as trustworthy.
According to a story at the embedded Linux portal, this project is still on track. It is amazing how little hard data there is available. On the face of it, this should be a pretty major product, at least in the entertainment market. Imagine what the film editing and production companies could do with this.
For many applications, it seems unlikely to me that compilers can do the job without help from programmers. Often, the programmer can identify sections of code that do not interfere with each other when no reasonable compiler could know this. I suspect we need new methods of software design that highlight these situations combined with compiler features that make it easy for the programmer to identify them. Specifics? Hey, on this one I am in marketing: the implementation is the job of the engineers!
How could they NOT sue the distributors of the infamous IP infringing products, while they ARE more than willing to sue users...
If you think about it, the answer is simple. The distributers are all too knowledgeable to consider settling any claim. There are at least a few user companies with PHBs stupid enough to pay SCO's extortion on the basis that all litigation must always be avoided. There are many individual users who cannot consider defending a legal action for economic reasons. SCO is putting pressure on users in the hope of short term revenue that they can use to boost their stock price, while avoiding actions that incite immediate vigorous counter claims. If you are completely unprincipled and have a good knowledge of the American legal system, it all makes perfect sense.
Do not worry. That must be the wrong answer. Remember that "if we should ever figure out what everything means, it will instantly be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable" or words to that effect.
But I've got to tell you, I couldn't have built my business without Microsoft, so I thank them. Now that I'm not so bitter, I'm glad I'm in the position I'm in. They made that possible, and I thank them.
I'll take that to mean that when he needed the software that Open Source wasn't around yet. But I wonder if we'll see that quote used by Microsoft anyway.
The way I interpreted it is: "thank you Microsoft; if you had not been such arseholes I'd still be paying you money hand over fist instead of using a better solution."
Will a criminal prosecution of McBride and co-conspirators happen if this lawsuit turns out unjustified?
I doubt it, given the fact that this is the US. IMHO, the lawyers should be accountable in a case like this. For them to push a case that they know to be a complete con ought to be considered professional misconduct.
That FCL implemenation will also have to behave very closely to the Microsoft's library for compatibility. I don't think Mono, or DotGNU is going to be able to pull that off and I suspect MS realizes this as well.
I suspect MS is relying on this. While the appearance of work to make.NET cross platform is important to MS's marketing, a real working Linux.NET implementation would be MS's worst nightmare.
All but the very large mainframes were air cooled in the 1960s and 1970s. The reason for all the hooplah over the Amdahl was that it was pushing the limits of performance without using water cooling.
I think water cooling for a typical PC suggests that desired PC performance mey be getting ahead of chip design. Commodity chips just should not generate this kind of heat. Though, P4 chips run pretty cool actually.
well, that exact piece of code was also published in a book with no restrictions on its use. (publication of the book was approved by SCO, who held the copyright on it at the time) It was also published in Kernighan and Ritchie's C programming book without restriction when AT&T owned the code.
Let me see: I do not want to be accused of assigning meaning to your post that you do not intend. Are you saying that using K&R C Programming as a reference when writing code lays me open to potential litigation on the basis that the authors used the same techniques in code they wrote for use in Unix? If so, I respectfully disagree. Any objections to publication of the code should have been made at the time, not decades later.
Gregory Blepp, born 1960, has been active in the IT sector for more than 20 years. He began his professional career in the Sales division of Mitsubishi Electric. Later, he served in executive positions in the Sales, Marketing, and Operations divisions at Seagate, Cheyenne Software, and Computer Associates. This was followed by a two-year period as Managing Director of Network Associates Germany. Before he joined SuSE, Gregory Blepp operated as an external consultant for IT companies.
What does he know that we do not? This is strange.
Believe me, a few top counters could take a lot of money from a casino if allowed to operate unchecked. It is true that the casino will probably still be making more from the other players than the counters are taking away (even this is not a guarantee) but counters will make a real hole in the casino's books. Depending on the rules used and bet spread allowed, a top counter can have anything up to a 3% advantage on the house. This compares to a house advantage of typically around 1% over a non counter who at least knows and follows basic strategy.
The best argument the casinos have for banning at least the top echelon of counters is that otherwise they would have to make more money from everyone else.
Why not track the cards? Simply shuffle when the odds favour the player too much.
I think you were joking, but the fact is that some casinos do just that. Gambling can be fun, but we should not lose sight of the fact that casinos tend to be unprincipled businesses. Some casinos will use tools like MindPlay to determine when to shuffle up.
I am not anti nuclear. In countries like Japan, France and Canada, nuclear has worked reasonably well, albeit still expensive. At its best, the extra costs are justifed by reduced (though still substantial) environmental effects.
I am, however, terrified at the idea of an extensive increase in the use of nuclear power in the US, in the current climate of unregulation (yes, I mean that: not deregulation). Nuclear power stations built with no effective oversight and the sole objective of making a quick buck... shudder!
Slashdot Mirror
Not quite, though the effect is similar. Both VM and Linux are supported by a combination of software and microcode. However, IBM has been very successful in putting almost all performance critical code sections in microcode. Thus, VM and Linux are 'emulated', but the overall performance usually ends up being quite close to what could be achieved if the support was indeed natively supported.
The U.S. is a market where this problem has been reduced. One of the few areas where MS has actually complied with anti monopolistic rulings is that they no longer insist that OEMs install Windows on every single computer they sell. That is, they are complying in the U.S.: in countries such as Japan, it is business as usual ...
My second reaction is that the focus needs to be at the level of the ISPs. To expect all users to reliably protect themselves against attacks is just naive. Technology that could immediately detect attacks and prevent their propogation to individual users in the first place seems to me feasible and desirable.
... why there seems to be little research on adapting this kind of technique to a new generation of radio transmission? We hear all the time about the shortage of radio frequencies. If such techniques can handle all the varied demands of Internet access, surely it would be possible to develop relay techniques for delivery of radio signals.
Ultimately, the success of any institute of learning and research is significantly influenced by its reputation. Student fees, btw, are not the only (or, with such an institution as MIT, even the main) form of income. MIT, justly, has about the best reputation in the world in its core subjects. MIT will, justly, only reinforce its image as a pillar of the scientific community as a result of this initiative.
I will bet 90% of the sites on the Internet probably, in theory, infringe IBM patents. In practice, IBM only ever uses software patents in self defense. Of course, this is not true of some other companies. Grrrr...
You may well be right. Sigh! But there is a more optimistic scenario. Perhaps by reducing the costs of production, it may give small independent companies a chance to compete and use market pressure to force the big guys to back off.
I think a protest of some description is highly appropriate. However, I think an equivalent effect on public opinion could be achieved by a 30 second delay screen before allowing access to the site. Particularly for news organisations (and I put slashdot in this category) it may be too extreme to completely close the site.
This would be a dangerous point to raise in certain quarters. Wrap up the patent application in enough jargon, and the current patent office might well grant a patent now. Yes, I guess someone would be able to show prior art eventually, but this would probably be after a two year plus legal fight.
Have you noticed that big Japanese companies seem comfortable working with IBM? I find it difficult to think of any other large US corporation about which we can say the same. IMHO, it is because (while a hard nosed competitor) they deal in a straight fashion with partners. They are seen as trustworthy.
According to a story at the embedded Linux portal, this project is still on track. It is amazing how little hard data there is available. On the face of it, this should be a pretty major product, at least in the entertainment market. Imagine what the film editing and production companies could do with this.
For many applications, it seems unlikely to me that compilers can do the job without help from programmers. Often, the programmer can identify sections of code that do not interfere with each other when no reasonable compiler could know this. I suspect we need new methods of software design that highlight these situations combined with compiler features that make it easy for the programmer to identify them. Specifics? Hey, on this one I am in marketing: the implementation is the job of the engineers!
Well, jail will no doubt solve that problem ...
If you think about it, the answer is simple. The distributers are all too knowledgeable to consider settling any claim. There are at least a few user companies with PHBs stupid enough to pay SCO's extortion on the basis that all litigation must always be avoided. There are many individual users who cannot consider defending a legal action for economic reasons. SCO is putting pressure on users in the hope of short term revenue that they can use to boost their stock price, while avoiding actions that incite immediate vigorous counter claims. If you are completely unprincipled and have a good knowledge of the American legal system, it all makes perfect sense.
Do not worry. That must be the wrong answer. Remember that "if we should ever figure out what everything means, it will instantly be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable" or words to that effect.
I'll take that to mean that when he needed the software that Open Source wasn't around yet. But I wonder if we'll see that quote used by Microsoft anyway.
The way I interpreted it is: "thank you Microsoft; if you had not been such arseholes I'd still be paying you money hand over fist instead of using a better solution."
I doubt it, given the fact that this is the US. IMHO, the lawyers should be accountable in a case like this. For them to push a case that they know to be a complete con ought to be considered professional misconduct.
I suspect MS is relying on this. While the appearance of work to make .NET cross platform is important to MS's marketing, a real working Linux .NET implementation would be MS's worst nightmare.
They can build a nuclear power station any way they please: no inspectors and no protests from local residents who do not want it near them.
I think water cooling for a typical PC suggests that desired PC performance mey be getting ahead of chip design. Commodity chips just should not generate this kind of heat. Though, P4 chips run pretty cool actually.
Let me see: I do not want to be accused of assigning meaning to your post that you do not intend. Are you saying that using K&R C Programming as a reference when writing code lays me open to potential litigation on the basis that the authors used the same techniques in code they wrote for use in Unix? If so, I respectfully disagree. Any objections to publication of the code should have been made at the time, not decades later.
Gregory Blepp, born 1960, has been active in the IT sector for more than 20 years. He began his professional career in the Sales division of Mitsubishi Electric. Later, he served in executive positions in the Sales, Marketing, and Operations divisions at Seagate, Cheyenne Software, and Computer Associates. This was followed by a two-year period as Managing Director of Network Associates Germany. Before he joined SuSE, Gregory Blepp operated as an external consultant for IT companies.
What does he know that we do not? This is strange.
The best argument the casinos have for banning at least the top echelon of counters is that otherwise they would have to make more money from everyone else.
I think you were joking, but the fact is that some casinos do just that. Gambling can be fun, but we should not lose sight of the fact that casinos tend to be unprincipled businesses. Some casinos will use tools like MindPlay to determine when to shuffle up.
I am, however, terrified at the idea of an extensive increase in the use of nuclear power in the US, in the current climate of unregulation (yes, I mean that: not deregulation). Nuclear power stations built with no effective oversight and the sole objective of making a quick buck ... shudder!