Reverent, yes, but in a tooting-his-horn sort of way, i.e. "What hath God wrought through me, Samuel Morse" He knew what he was doing was important, and he felt like a great prophet or emmissary for heaven. The hacker in this story, though, just invented email and moved on to the next project....
I find it rather appropriate that the first email was "QWERTYIOP"... Marconi & Morse had some flowery crap about how this invention was a blessing from God akin to the gift of fire, and meanwhile the hacker, sitting alone in front of a couple computers, just banged on his keyboard to test the thing.
Right, but plex86 still has to virtualize the peripheral hardware, just not the instructions. For example, if the "guest" OS makes a BIOS INT 13 call, the emulated BIOS inside plex86 is what actually handles the call. I find it kind of odd that none of the emulators handle the right hardware combination to allow Darwin to boot (of course, Darwin is notoriously picky about such things on Intel hardware)
I would love to see plex86, bochs, or even VMware support Apple's Intel version of Darwin (aka OS X). I haven't been able to get it running on any CPU emulators or physical machines. It seems to me that these emulators would find quite a niche in the OS development market.
Can anybody explain, exactly, why some OS/emulator combinations don't work? I assume it has to do with unsupported hardware (i.e. Darwin only work with Intel PIIX IDE controllers, and maybe all the emulators emulate a VIA controller)
The point was speech recognition on cell phones, presumably because these MRAM chips are so tiny and energy efficient that you can cram 256 megs into a phone. I'm baffled by the "easier downloads" thing though... maybe MRAM will we very very fast, speeding up computers in general....
Or its just marketing crap. One Best Buy ad for an HP with a Pnetium IV claimed that MP3 downloads would go faster on the new chip....
That makes me wonder about "closed system" games like Playstation or N64. Are the beta cycles on these things incredibly intense, or are the coder just that good? Or is it something inherent to the closed, proprietary nature of the platform that makes it easier to qrite bulletproof code (ie. a PC game has to support 3 different CPU types, dozens of video cards, input devices, sound cards, video modes, etc, whereas the feature set of a console is pretty much etched in stone)
You're right, but that's not necessarily the problem. Think about Windows 3.1 - its been around for what, 8 years now, so it must be nearly perfect, right? The problem is that the development focus in the tech industry is on the bleeding edge, and stuff thats more than one year or so off the bleeding edge gets virtually no attention. Sure, there are exceptions (the 2.1.x series Linux kernel comes to mind - Alan Cox is still releasing new versions, and even though the series in ~5 years old), but on the whole, the industry tends to lose interest in older tech, because the money is on the bleeding edge.
We already had a big software disaster - remember Y2K? Arguably one of the largest engineering "projects" in history, and its seems we got through it with nary a scratch. And who is most suprised of all... the engineers themselves. Most of us geeks expected at least a little bit of hell to break loose when the clock struck midnight on January 1st, even though we were the ones who apparently fixed the problem. I'm utterly shocked that things went as smoothly as they did, considering most Y2K repair work was probably horribly hacky. And have we matured much because of it? Nope.....
You blame AMD for a Linux kernel bug? If it was indeed panicing on the CPUID call, that is clearly Linux's fault. There are alot of commands that are supported on one CPU and not on another (MMX, 3DNow, SSE, etc), even when comparing all Intel chips. The kernel should trap it and move on, not panic. This is just sloppiness on Red Hat's part, not AMD.
That's his point, dumbass. It says "MMX 'F0 0F' Math bug", when in fact it has nothing to do with math or MMX. He was point out that they probably confused FDIV and F00F
I've heard that Darwin boots on Intel, and I'd love to check it out for myself, but I haven't been able to actually find any way of doing it. Anybody here been able to get it working? If so, how?
If you're interested in seeing Apple pursue this further, make sure to check out the OSX on Intel petition. Also, read the Register article about rumors that Apple is actually porting OSX to Intel, and their article about Apple's recent Darwin update.
It is possible that its related to hardware. Check out http://www.bitwizard.nl/sig11/ - grep the page for "K6". If you get a signal 11 (no, not the Signal 11), its almost always CPU or memory related. I have an AMD-K6 350 that exhibits the same symptoms, unless I disable the CPU cache in the BIOS. ----
Not quite.. on the fastest RAID, RAID 0, you use the entire drive (assume they are all the same size). You must be referring to RAID 5, which does use at least on parity drive, but is not as fast as RAID 0 (all else being equal). ----
Here's a nifty product - 1.8 Tb (thats 1843 gigs, kiddies) in 3U. And its got dual Fibre Channel ports (as opposed to Network Engine's single U160 SCSI), for a max throughtput of about 200MB/s. I don't thinks its released yet, but I've seen some beta units and this thing rocks. ----
actually, from what i've heard, the digits of pi pass all statistical tests for "randmoness" (whatever that means). The problem is, nothing is truly random, except possibly brownian motion (
I have my doubts about that). The digits of pi, while not truly random, are pretty damn close. ----
aha.. a david byrne/talking heads reference. Good for you. My favorite: "We are just flowers in God's garden, that is why he spreads the shit around" ----
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure its just ATA, since the problem is actually with the chipset driver
----
hey, maybe he dumped a cup of coffee on his box last week! that would be pretty damn catastrophic for me..
----
ssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.... someone will use the DMCA to ban vmware :)
----
do you have a link to these "Finnish assembly competitions"? sounds pretty cool..
----
...and inevitable :)
I'm glad to hear that. I was a bit uncomfortable paying $7.50 to watch what I perceived to be an extended Fed Ex commercial....
Reverent, yes, but in a tooting-his-horn sort of way, i.e. "What hath God wrought through me, Samuel Morse" He knew what he was doing was important, and he felt like a great prophet or emmissary for heaven. The hacker in this story, though, just invented email and moved on to the next project....
Is that really true?
If it isn't, then I'm pretty impressed that you came up with it.
If it is, that's pretty damn cool. Do you have a link to back it up?
I find it rather appropriate that the first email was "QWERTYIOP"... Marconi & Morse had some flowery crap about how this invention was a blessing from God akin to the gift of fire, and meanwhile the hacker, sitting alone in front of a couple computers, just banged on his keyboard to test the thing.
Right, but plex86 still has to virtualize the peripheral hardware, just not the instructions. For example, if the "guest" OS makes a BIOS INT 13 call, the emulated BIOS inside plex86 is what actually handles the call. I find it kind of odd that none of the emulators handle the right hardware combination to allow Darwin to boot (of course, Darwin is notoriously picky about such things on Intel hardware)
I would love to see plex86, bochs, or even VMware support Apple's Intel version of Darwin (aka OS X). I haven't been able to get it running on any CPU emulators or physical machines. It seems to me that these emulators would find quite a niche in the OS development market.
Can anybody explain, exactly, why some OS/emulator combinations don't work? I assume it has to do with unsupported hardware (i.e. Darwin only work with Intel PIIX IDE controllers, and maybe all the emulators emulate a VIA controller)
The point was speech recognition on cell phones, presumably because these MRAM chips are so tiny and energy efficient that you can cram 256 megs into a phone. I'm baffled by the "easier downloads" thing though... maybe MRAM will we very very fast, speeding up computers in general....
Or its just marketing crap. One Best Buy ad for an HP with a Pnetium IV claimed that MP3 downloads would go faster on the new chip....
That makes me wonder about "closed system" games like Playstation or N64. Are the beta cycles on these things incredibly intense, or are the coder just that good? Or is it something inherent to the closed, proprietary nature of the platform that makes it easier to qrite bulletproof code (ie. a PC game has to support 3 different CPU types, dozens of video cards, input devices, sound cards, video modes, etc, whereas the feature set of a console is pretty much etched in stone)
You're right, but that's not necessarily the problem. Think about Windows 3.1 - its been around for what, 8 years now, so it must be nearly perfect, right? The problem is that the development focus in the tech industry is on the bleeding edge, and stuff thats more than one year or so off the bleeding edge gets virtually no attention. Sure, there are exceptions (the 2.1.x series Linux kernel comes to mind - Alan Cox is still releasing new versions, and even though the series in ~5 years old), but on the whole, the industry tends to lose interest in older tech, because the money is on the bleeding edge.
We already had a big software disaster - remember Y2K? Arguably one of the largest engineering "projects" in history, and its seems we got through it with nary a scratch. And who is most suprised of all... the engineers themselves. Most of us geeks expected at least a little bit of hell to break loose when the clock struck midnight on January 1st, even though we were the ones who apparently fixed the problem. I'm utterly shocked that things went as smoothly as they did, considering most Y2K repair work was probably horribly hacky. And have we matured much because of it? Nope.....
exactly
Interesting to point out that the sugar substitute he found was discovered while working on the mars mission
You blame AMD for a Linux kernel bug? If it was indeed panicing on the CPUID call, that is clearly Linux's fault. There are alot of commands that are supported on one CPU and not on another (MMX, 3DNow, SSE, etc), even when comparing all Intel chips. The kernel should trap it and move on, not panic. This is just sloppiness on Red Hat's part, not AMD.
That's his point, dumbass. It says "MMX 'F0 0F' Math bug", when in fact it has nothing to do with math or MMX. He was point out that they probably confused FDIV and F00F
I've heard that Darwin boots on Intel, and I'd love to check it out for myself, but I haven't been able to actually find any way of doing it. Anybody here been able to get it working? If so, how?
If you're interested in seeing Apple pursue this further, make sure to check out the OSX on Intel petition. Also, read the Register article about rumors that Apple is actually porting OSX to Intel, and their article about Apple's recent Darwin update.
It is possible that its related to hardware. Check out http://www.bitwizard.nl/sig11/ - grep the page for "K6". If you get a signal 11 (no, not the Signal 11), its almost always CPU or memory related. I have an AMD-K6 350 that exhibits the same symptoms, unless I disable the CPU cache in the BIOS.
----
Right, but for pure hard-core geek factor, the bad ass 3U, 24 drive, dual fibre channel exadrive is what i want in my living room :)
----
Not quite.. on the fastest RAID, RAID 0, you use the entire drive (assume they are all the same size). You must be referring to RAID 5, which does use at least on parity drive, but is not as fast as RAID 0 (all else being equal).
----
Here's a nifty product - 1.8 Tb (thats 1843 gigs, kiddies) in 3U. And its got dual Fibre Channel ports (as opposed to Network Engine's single U160 SCSI), for a max throughtput of about 200MB/s. I don't thinks its released yet, but I've seen some beta units and this thing rocks.
----
actually, from what i've heard, the digits of pi pass all statistical tests for "randmoness" (whatever that means). The problem is, nothing is truly random, except possibly brownian motion (
I have my doubts about that). The digits of pi, while not truly random, are pretty damn close.
----
aha.. a david byrne/talking heads reference. Good for you. My favorite: "We are just flowers in God's garden, that is why he spreads the shit around"
----