They have already proved in court, many many times, that you have no expectation of privacy in such things as email and instant messaging. I'm not sure why were even discussing this.
"Law and Order"? If I thought you where an US citizen (sorry, but there are many more Americans than US citizens) I would have to believe that you are serious. But since you clearly are European (you know, from the "old Europe" where governments actually listen to the population), I'll have to mod you as +1 Funny.
For a company you want to have sufficent capacity to handle spikes of download, even though normally you just use a tiny fraction of said capacity. This excess unused capacity cost money.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE bittorrent and don't mind using it for isos or distros. The problem I have is with someone makeing a big profit out of me AND using my upstream to limit their bandwidth costs.
Then, of course, you don't mind paying more to cover the cost of a direct download only connection. Right?
If I was a developer, I'd be very wary around GPL'd code. I believe the GPL is unnecessarily restrictive, and OSS would be better off without ANY restrictions on use.
If a company does not want to show their source code, they should use a BSD (or similar) licensed software or quite simply write their own. Some manufacturers of wireless access points would not have been on the recieving end of the GPL stick if they'd used something like OpenBSD with their own drivers.
Solaris treats each process as a single thread in the kernel. It makes little difference from a scheduling point of view whether you have a 32-thread application or a 32-process application, except the latter might consume more memory.
With threads you have to syncronize access to common data that resides in the same memory adress space. With processes you don't have to do this as they have their own copy of the data at fork.
Not really. If you've been using SMP servers, what's different about SMP on a chip? Even if you only have a few dozen Apache processes running, Solaris will schedule them onto Niagara just like if you had lots of separate CPUs.
A crucial difference between a processes and threads are that threads are sharing (concurrently) that same data in the same adress space. So, having many processes are not anything like having multiple threads.
As far as threading is concerned, one of the few languages I've dealt with that makes mutexes, semaphores, etc. easy to deal with is Java. Most other languages bury the stuff too deep into the proprietary APIs to make them useful. Consider multithreading in win32 [microsoft.com]. We need better programming languages before we can ever start reaping the benefits of good multithreading hardware.
Following design patterns like they're some kind of formal rules to always obey are a sure way to disaster. Design patterns are a kind of generalized solution to a particular problem, and they are intended as a starting point for application to your specific problem.
There are several patterns that are very useful for safe multithreaded programming. Properly applied they can greatly reduce the risks of multithreaded programming while reap some of the benefits.
Multi-threaded programming in complex applications is very hard to do correctly. I know, I do this type of programming daily. Heck, even trivial programs have real problems with this. And why is that? Because we have problems thinking in parallell all the time. A good system architecture will make it easier to do this correctly.
The new Attorney General is the very same man who was asked what the US could legally do to terrorists captured by the military. He gave a legal answer. Does the fact that something's legal make it right? No. But he wasn't asked what the US can morally do to al Qaeda prisoners.
Do you feel comfortable with an Attorney General that is looking for legal loopholes to torture of people with impunity? This type of "legality" is what you can expect from corporate laywers trying to rationalize (after the fact) crimes committed by their CEO's.
Now, compare that to the Americans, and you'll notice the difference: for a Bush administration official would say something like that is pretty much telling the truth.
Sure, we all know that the Bush Administration is telling always the truth, like about Iraqi WMD.
if I had $12,500 I'd have to offer it as a bounty for an original *BSD is dieing troll. The variation on a theme are just not as funny as they once were.
It's well know that the troll community is suffering greatly from excessive inbreeding. It's really noticable that this inbreeding is seriously impairing their already scant intellectual skills. They are not even capable to do a simple copy/paste/replace/post. They'll quite simply breed themselves to extinction, so you can donate that bounty to OpenBSD instead.
The FBI and CIA routinely take the "extreme circumstance" route and use common loopholes to justify citizen and non-citizen monitoring. I would argue, however, that I have yet to see an ill-intented abuse of their power.
There is an old saying that "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."
Make no mistake, NSA can and will perform its missions consistent with the fourth amendment and all applicable laws.
There is some concern at least. This would mean nothing if it were a public statement, but it's a bit reassuring that they think this even in documents not meant for public consumption
The accellerating attacs on civil liberties and human rights, in particular under Bush II, are very worrysome. The new General Attorney is the very same man that wrote in a memorandum that the Geneva Convention is obsolete when it come to "the war on terror". That torture could be done. Who are now the bad guys? It's sure is
getting
confusing :
"This so-called ill treatment and torture in detention centers, stories of which were spread everywhere among the people, and later by the prisoners who were freed... were not, as some assumed, inflicted methodically, but were excesses committed by individual prison guards, their deputies, and men who laid violent hands on the detainees."
Most people who hear this quote today assume it was uttered by a senior officer of the Bush administration. Instead, it comes from one of history's greatest mass murderers, Rudolf Hoess, the SS commandant at Auschwitz. Such a confusion demonstrates the depth of the United States' moral dilemma in its treatment of detainees in the war on terror.
I've never used Kazaa or similar P2P programs as they where ripe with security problems. I'm old fashioned enough to quite simply go to a music store and listen for my self, and buy it if I like it.
I'd like to think that the French National Security Directorate (or equivalent) will overrule this asinine ruling.
I would like to remind you that France is a democracy, and it does not have a
Department of Fatherland Security. Actually, the "Old Europe", as the present Administration like to talk about, are the European countries whose democratically elected Governments listened to the overwhelming majority public opinion.
Seems ta me that, by definition, the complexity of semaphores, hierarchies and multithreaded programs all lie in the interface.
That pretty much cover all software. Multihreaded programs can be quite hard to understand, despite good interfaces. In non-trivial multithreaded programs you'll often see much infrastructure dedicated just to make multithreaded programming more safe. These structures may at first glance seem very peculiar, but they are the results of many subtle mistakes made before. Proper documentation with rationale of these structures are important, of course.
There's that nice and vague word - harmful. Who gets to decide what's harmful? Their parents? The head of the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals? The local Nazi political party? The Parent Teacher Association? The local DFL?
The theory of evolution is clearly harmful, must be filtered away.;-)
Below is an example license to be used for new code in OpenBSD, modeled after the ISC license.
It is important to specify the year of the copyright. Additional years should be separated by a comma, e.g. Copyright (c) 2003, 2004
If you add extra text to the body of the license, be careful not to add further restrictions.
/* * Copyright (c) CCYY YOUR NAME HERE <user@your.dom.ain> * * Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any * purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above * copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies. * * THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES * WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF * MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR * ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES * WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN * ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF * OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE. */
The article misses the fact that Microsoft and Linux may be successful BECAUSE they make the Right tradeoffs between bug fixes and features and time to market.
Time to market? Alot of company money is going into Linux kernel development, but Linux kernel development is not quite that commercial.
Slashdot Mirror
"Law and Order"? If I thought you where an US citizen (sorry, but there are many more Americans than US citizens) I would have to believe that you are serious. But since you clearly are European (you know, from the "old Europe" where governments actually listen to the population), I'll have to mod you as +1 Funny.
For a company you want to have sufficent capacity to handle spikes of download, even though normally you just use a tiny fraction of said capacity. This excess unused capacity cost money.
Then, of course, you don't mind paying more to cover the cost of a direct download only connection. Right?
If a company does not want to show their source code, they should use a BSD (or similar) licensed software or quite simply write their own. Some manufacturers of wireless access points would not have been on the recieving end of the GPL stick if they'd used something like OpenBSD with their own drivers.
You sure missed the point. Syncronization is needed becase one thread may modify common data at the same time as another thread is reading it.
With threads you have to syncronize access to common data that resides in the same memory adress space. With processes you don't have to do this as they have their own copy of the data at fork.
A crucial difference between a processes and threads are that threads are sharing (concurrently) that same data in the same adress space. So, having many processes are not anything like having multiple threads.
Pure bullshit.
There are several patterns that are very useful for safe multithreaded programming. Properly applied they can greatly reduce the risks of multithreaded programming while reap some of the benefits.
Multi-threaded programming in complex applications is very hard to do correctly. I know, I do this type of programming daily. Heck, even trivial programs have real problems with this. And why is that? Because we have problems thinking in parallell all the time. A good system architecture will make it easier to do this correctly.
Do you feel comfortable with an Attorney General that is looking for legal loopholes to torture of people with impunity? This type of "legality" is what you can expect from corporate laywers trying to rationalize (after the fact) crimes committed by their CEO's.
Sure, we all know that the Bush Administration is telling always the truth, like about Iraqi WMD.
It's well know that the troll community is suffering greatly from excessive inbreeding. It's really noticable that this inbreeding is seriously impairing their already scant intellectual skills. They are not even capable to do a simple copy/paste/replace/post. They'll quite simply breed themselves to extinction, so you can donate that bounty to OpenBSD instead.
There is an old saying that "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."
The accellerating attacs on civil liberties and human rights, in particular under Bush II, are very worrysome. The new General Attorney is the very same man that wrote in a memorandum that the Geneva Convention is obsolete when it come to "the war on terror". That torture could be done. Who are now the bad guys? It's sure is getting confusing :
This might come as a big surprise to you, but GNOME runs just fine on any *BSD.
So... are you saying I got modded +4 Insightful for not reading the article?
Welcome, you must be new here.
I've never used Kazaa or similar P2P programs as they where ripe with security problems. I'm old fashioned enough to quite simply go to a music store and listen for my self, and buy it if I like it.
I would like to remind you that France is a democracy, and it does not have a Department of Fatherland Security. Actually, the "Old Europe", as the present Administration like to talk about, are the European countries whose democratically elected Governments listened to the overwhelming majority public opinion.
That pretty much cover all software. Multihreaded programs can be quite hard to understand, despite good interfaces. In non-trivial multithreaded programs you'll often see much infrastructure dedicated just to make multithreaded programming more safe. These structures may at first glance seem very peculiar, but they are the results of many subtle mistakes made before. Proper documentation with rationale of these structures are important, of course.
What makes you think that there should be a port available on Freshports.org at the same time as the release of OpenSSH?
The theory of evolution is clearly harmful, must be filtered away. ;-)
Of course, his bonuses might be "censored".
In contrast to other companies (say, SUN), Adobe choosed a license that is free and well understood.
The OpenBSD license is even shorter :
Time to market? Alot of company money is going into Linux kernel development, but Linux kernel development is not quite that commercial.