Do you have any proof that there might be violations or are you just proposing that any large, successful software project must be infringing on GPL software?
Proposing that "no threat to the company" implies they somehow comb their code to find GPL violations (how?), or they don't check so they might well exist. Or they think they're big enough to ignore any legal issues that might exist, which is frankly most likely to be true.
Its kind of pompous to declare someone elses code is no threat when you almost certainly have no idea if it is or not. That's what makes it hilarious if and/or when they're proven wrong.
Its about as bad as publicly declaring a piece of code to be bug-free, that's like calling wolves to raw meat. Come and get it!
Once it gets escalated up to 2nd, 3rd, 4th tier support at the ISP that $bigcustomer has no GOOG access, and the 4th tier engineer checks his BGP and its all good and is scratching his head in mystification as to why $bigcustomer can't access certain GOOG ip addrs, maybe, just maybe, he'll remember this/. thread and catch a MITM in progress. Maybe.
The solution is more resilient servers and services, not eliminating the checking.
Such as, say, having the Mighty GOOG distribute that "CRL in all but name". Which brings us full circle back to the original article, and what they're doing.
So basically he wants CRLs? I thought he didn't want CRLs?
Not want CRLs distributed from sites no one cares about.
CRLs fail unlocked, so to speak. So if you can't pull a CRL from a CA the browser goes on its merry way. So if you're pulling a MITM attack using a known compromised cert, "everyone knows" you just block access to the CA. End users will never notice. 99.9999% of end users will never visit anything with a *.verisign.com domain.
However, if you block access to www.google.com or plus.google.com or gmail.com because they're distributing a meta-CRL THEN "most" users will notice the might GOOG is dead.
So you start with a web of trust where no one cares if any of the threads are cut. Thats not gonna work. So how bout piggybacking the web of trust on top of a Very Popular Site. Being a GOOG guy (I think?) he suggests his employer, although I know of no technical reason why itunes.apple.com or microsoft.com couldn't also distribute CRLs.
Now if you want to pull a MITM attack its not enough to null route the CAs, you can't null route the Mighty GOOG without the users noticing, so you have to do something much more sophisticated to block access to the most recent CRL.
The funny part is now all the noobs who report internet outages as "google is down" are going to have to wonder, is someone trying to pull a MITM or is it just noob-speak for an internet outage...
.... Anonymous leaked... the source code company's PCAnywhere program... Symantec has responded... all the information the hackers have released... poses no threat to the company....
Its like they're tempting the world to diff their source code up against GPLed prior art to find license violations. I think it would be hilarious if it turns out pcanywhere was just a wrapped version of one of the numerous GPLed VNC implementations or similar.
Yeah that was exactly my point, I was not shocked by what I read. Oh look, it has a very-nearly 16550-compatible UART, be still my shuddering heart.
Supermarkets are a competitive marketplace too... but a fairly bland commodity does not need to be kept secret. The grocery market business is pretty cutthroat, but you don't need to make it a secret that the 3 pound bag of gala apples contains gala apples, just need to sell it cheap and good condition.
Now if the chip had something utterly unexpected, like a hardware PID temperature controller for a makerbot extruder, that would be weird and worth keeping quiet until wide scale release. Or had weird embedded DRM. Or a new design for a hardware AES encryption onboard. But the SoC seems pretty standard and pedestrian at first glance... anyone find something interesting, unexpected, in there yet?
Does it actually matter what CPU your platform is running when the OS is totally locked down?
Yes, I still haven't gotten rid of my last ppc mac, darn thing just won't die, all the intels are upgraded to the most recent OS and software but the old ppc is the odd man out. Runs itunes just fine, and not worth the money to upgrade it (Not going to spend hundreds to thousands of dollars to merely do what it already does just fine). Now we'll have equally incompatible ARMs floating around too. Great.
I made a quick check and if you have a replicator or access to one or a friend with one, thingiverse seems to be flooded with different case designs for the pi. I would not be surprised if a replicator owner would squirt one out for you in exchange for a six pack.
I have noticed over the years that/. is stereotypically wimpy about basic handyman skills... Buy a box at radio shack or home depot electronics dept and drill a couple holes in it, no problemo...
Anyone read the broadcom SOC doc in detail? I won't lie and claim I read the whole two hundred pages in detail but I did page thru it. Has anyone found any reason why it was secret? Superficially I've found nothing shocking or amazing. Sometimes there is something "new" which is cool and amazing. Think back to the first time you wrote a 16550 driver. The funniest thing I've found so far is a little example on page 11 where a 250 meg clock with a too-small implementation divider means you literally cannot run 300 baud RS232 with this dude. I liked reading about the GPIO system and the clocks that can drive them and spent at least 15 seconds thinking about how to drive a RC servo in hardware (not synthesizing level transitions in software, perhaps in an interrupt routine, but completely in hardware). I did something like that with a 68hc11 (I think?) back in the early 90s. The "real UART" vs the "mini UART" is kind of interesting/weird/worth looking at.
I'm not saying that the iPhone isn't a good phone, but it has no physical keyboard. Many employees use their phone for answering email; to me the iPhone seems like it would really inconvenient for use in this manner. Does anybody else use an iPhone as their primary work device?
Yeah that was my point. The point is that is a "research" graph not a "I can buy it at home depot or at least over the internet from a website" graph. The best research I've seen to this point is 47% so that would be a "realistic" goal for biological systems to reach. In fact they have to reach at least that, or people will probably install silicon systems instead to get more power and more reliable power (lower maint, etc).
Right now, literally off the shelf over the internet, "commodity grade" COTS panels run in the 10-15% range. There are some cheapies that are just under 10%, the infamous ? cheap per watt solyndra panels were 8%ers. There are pretty exotic 16% 17%, I've even heard of a 18% panel that only sailboaters will pay the premium for (because their deck space is limited, and if you Really want 400 watts instead of 300 and you've obviously got a bottomless pit of cash because you own a boat so you don't care if it costs several times as much...)
Frankly most of the difference in efficiency in COTS panels seems to come from glass, packing efficiency/tiling issues, mounting border and bracket issues, etc. You may as well simplify it to the theoretical maximum for a perfectly assembled system of infinite size with infinitely perfect glass and perfect infinitely thin mounting brackets and edge protection brackets would be somewhere just above 15% at this time. I'm sure in the future that will continue its slow rise...
Bell labs was only functional because the AT&T monopoly had quite a bit of cash to blow, and was, well, a monopoly. Google is a hairs breath away from that point, but still...
Close but the really important lesson is basic research is hyperprofitable if you are and will always remain a govt granted monopoly. However we have at least one real world example of a govt granted monopoly being broken up in the 80s into the baby bells and small etc (later to recombine like a horror movie, much to the horror of their customers). Therefore basic research is a terrible idea, because despite megacorps owning the govt, there is a chance they'll be broken up before being able to cash in on the research. Its almost a "jump the shark" moment, if google is setting up something like bell labs, the odds are the govt will be breaking them up soon.
It's worth remembering that the V2 effort helped Germany lose WW2 - the energy needed to produce the fuel meant shortages of fuel for aviation and transport.
That is a LOL moment. If you're going to rewrite engineering history as part of tiresome environmental guilt trip prattle, don't do it on a website populated with engineers. Wrong both at the microscale in that A4/V2 didn't burn avgas or diesel or petrochemicals at all, wrong at the macroscale that every A4/V2 ever launched added together adds up to frankly not very much fuel. Those were relatively tiny SRBMs roughly similar performance to a modern MLRS not a thundering herd of saturn-5s.
fundamental physics research would simply awe the likes of Feynman... if they were around to see it.
He didn't die that long ago, you know. Yes he chilled out with the manhatten project dudes as an extremely young man hanging with middle aged and old men. You may have missed he was on the Challenger loss commission in the 80s, etc. Even Dirac didn't die until the early 80s. If you want to surprise a physicist, find someone who croaked before WWII not a recently deceased.
Showing bacteria and virii evolving to resist certain drugs is proof of evolution
Nope. God did that.
You lose.
Confusion of cause and effect. Statement 1 is an effect, saying nothing about cause (who created the universe such that evolution is the best known theory to predict what happens inside it?). Statement 2 is a cause stating almost nothing about the effect. (God did something. Well supposedly he can do anything, so what does doing something prove about a being that can do anything? Not a heck of a lot, other than he/she/it did it)
If its made out of grass clippings, then by April or May at worst I'll have enough to make another cell-roof.
One weird issue is if its pitifully 0.1% efficient, it might be more productive overall to simple TDP the collected grass clippings into gasoline and dump it into a generator. Or ferment into ethanol. Just simply burn as biomass?
I think a solar powered electric self growing fence would be pretty cool, at least until it shorts out and starts itself on fire. Which brings up the other idea of a self growing survival tool, a mushroom grown in pitch blackness which when placed in sunlight eventually bursts into flame using self generated photosynthetic electricity.
From the fine article they're getting 0.1% efficiency right now. In other words, about a thousandth. Conveniently, you get about a KW of light per sq meter. So, you get about one watt per square meter. So I could get about 40 watts at noon off my roof, well, other than that tree being in the way which shades me from the summer sun. That is somewhat more than the naysayers claim (barely enough to run a watch, etc) but is not enough to be useful.
Its unlikely they'll exceed the best plants which have had hundreds of millions of years to optimize their design... so figure 5% or so would be quite an achievement. So in Star Trek miracle land, a KW or two is quite possible off a typical roof. Of course in Star Trek miracle land, you'd have 47% efficient cells thus generating about 40 KW. I donno what I'd do with 40 KW laying around, I guess air condition my entire open air backyard, replace my beer fridge with a supermarket open display case so I don't have to waste time opening the door?
The crack about painting it on is laughable. conductive acid rain and bird poop will short it out. You're still going to need glass/plastic/etc and the cost of that will probably make high efficiency silicon more economical.
I say we start a new religion, and have as our holy symbol a rectangle with three horizontal stripes; orange, white, and green.
I'm thinking more like a green square with a white diagonal slash from lower left to upper right and a white dot at the lower right corner. Often seen flying in close formation with the skull and crossbones flag. Holy prophets are RMS, Linus and maybe the goatse guy. Extremely heavily overstaffed with male vestal virgins. Holy sites beyond the obvious are the googleplex, apple hq, 4chan, kuro5hin, and mom's basement. Every religion has weird restrictions and sins, our will be microsoft, all other religions, all 1% political parties (all of them?), showering or other forms of bathing, and the all forms of computerized electronic gaming are sinful and untouchable except boring FPS remakes/sequels. Rather than a hierarchical power structure, lower UIDs are higher up in the organization (kneel before my five digits, lowly 1163751)
1) Your god is too weak/inferior/doesn't exist thus cannot punish me... you're not serious suggesting you are more powerful/all knowing that your own god and therefore usurping his power and position to judge, are you? This is the change of venue strategy.
2) The holy texts of religion X basically mock religion Y therefore lets ban religion X before wasting time on the inter-tubes. This is the distraction strategy.
3) Share the links. Mass civil disobedience strategy. Sooo.... lets go for it. Lemme guess, its something really creative like a link to the new testament at PG...
that smokers, drinkers and gamblers are predisposed to...
predisposed to addictive behavior, which (inevitably?) leads to poverty.
Let me propose a science experiment. Past evidence indicates an insane high correlation between smoking, drinking, and gambling... simply walk thru a casino and look around... My hypothesis is that a modern casino either is full of people checking their FB status on their smartphone, or there are preconditions that prevent it like installation of phone jammers, or a posted rule that phones are not allowed to prevent cheating or card counting or some BS which is really to force addictive behavior into more profitable channels like gambling, smoking, drinking, etc.
There seems to be a reasonable realistic theory, and its certainly a falsifiable experiment... anyone out there who works in/near/around a casino, or perhaps went to defcon recently (I haven't been to any cons since like the 90s other than HOPE once in the 00s and smartphones were not popular then)
Slashdot Mirror
Yes the rumored 40-something inch TV with the built in $99 box, not the stand alone $99 box which has been available for a long time.
My sister in law has one of the 27 inch all in the monitor imacs. Not hard to imagine a larger model with a remote control.
Do you have any proof that there might be violations or are you just proposing that any large, successful software project must be infringing on GPL software?
Proposing that "no threat to the company" implies they somehow comb their code to find GPL violations (how?), or they don't check so they might well exist. Or they think they're big enough to ignore any legal issues that might exist, which is frankly most likely to be true.
Its kind of pompous to declare someone elses code is no threat when you almost certainly have no idea if it is or not. That's what makes it hilarious if and/or when they're proven wrong.
Its about as bad as publicly declaring a piece of code to be bug-free, that's like calling wolves to raw meat. Come and get it!
Once it gets escalated up to 2nd, 3rd, 4th tier support at the ISP that $bigcustomer has no GOOG access, and the 4th tier engineer checks his BGP and its all good and is scratching his head in mystification as to why $bigcustomer can't access certain GOOG ip addrs, maybe, just maybe, he'll remember this /. thread and catch a MITM in progress. Maybe.
First lets get this out of the way "Obligatory Dick Clark comment"
These plants haven't been cloning perfectly for 200,000 years, there is drift and errors in cloning too.
So is that why a billion year old amoeba supposedly doesn't count?
The solution is more resilient servers and services, not eliminating the checking.
Such as, say, having the Mighty GOOG distribute that "CRL in all but name". Which brings us full circle back to the original article, and what they're doing.
So basically he wants CRLs? I thought he didn't want CRLs?
Not want CRLs distributed from sites no one cares about.
CRLs fail unlocked, so to speak. So if you can't pull a CRL from a CA the browser goes on its merry way. So if you're pulling a MITM attack using a known compromised cert, "everyone knows" you just block access to the CA. End users will never notice. 99.9999% of end users will never visit anything with a *.verisign.com domain.
However, if you block access to www.google.com or plus.google.com or gmail.com because they're distributing a meta-CRL THEN "most" users will notice the might GOOG is dead.
So you start with a web of trust where no one cares if any of the threads are cut. Thats not gonna work. So how bout piggybacking the web of trust on top of a Very Popular Site. Being a GOOG guy (I think?) he suggests his employer, although I know of no technical reason why itunes.apple.com or microsoft.com couldn't also distribute CRLs.
Now if you want to pull a MITM attack its not enough to null route the CAs, you can't null route the Mighty GOOG without the users noticing, so you have to do something much more sophisticated to block access to the most recent CRL.
The funny part is now all the noobs who report internet outages as "google is down" are going to have to wonder, is someone trying to pull a MITM or is it just noob-speak for an internet outage...
Bergeron is well known in the community as she has most recently been the Fedora Program Manager
And a ton of other simultaneous jobs listed at:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rbergero
From the outside, I've never heard anything bad about her. So, good luck!
Edited short version:
.... Anonymous leaked ... the source code company's PCAnywhere program... Symantec has responded ... all the information the hackers have released... poses no threat to the company....
Its like they're tempting the world to diff their source code up against GPLed prior art to find license violations. I think it would be hilarious if it turns out pcanywhere was just a wrapped version of one of the numerous GPLed VNC implementations or similar.
Yeah that was exactly my point, I was not shocked by what I read. Oh look, it has a very-nearly 16550-compatible UART, be still my shuddering heart.
Supermarkets are a competitive marketplace too ... but a fairly bland commodity does not need to be kept secret. The grocery market business is pretty cutthroat, but you don't need to make it a secret that the 3 pound bag of gala apples contains gala apples, just need to sell it cheap and good condition.
Now if the chip had something utterly unexpected, like a hardware PID temperature controller for a makerbot extruder, that would be weird and worth keeping quiet until wide scale release. Or had weird embedded DRM. Or a new design for a hardware AES encryption onboard. But the SoC seems pretty standard and pedestrian at first glance... anyone find something interesting, unexpected, in there yet?
Assumption is its for the new mac book.
Would be funny if it turns out to be the much rumored apple tv.
Does it actually matter what CPU your platform is running when the OS is totally locked down?
Yes, I still haven't gotten rid of my last ppc mac, darn thing just won't die, all the intels are upgraded to the most recent OS and software but the old ppc is the odd man out. Runs itunes just fine, and not worth the money to upgrade it (Not going to spend hundreds to thousands of dollars to merely do what it already does just fine). Now we'll have equally incompatible ARMs floating around too. Great.
.. with no case (just bare board)...
I made a quick check and if you have a replicator or access to one or a friend with one, thingiverse seems to be flooded with different case designs for the pi. I would not be surprised if a replicator owner would squirt one out for you in exchange for a six pack.
I have noticed over the years that /. is stereotypically wimpy about basic handyman skills... Buy a box at radio shack or home depot electronics dept and drill a couple holes in it, no problemo...
Anyone read the broadcom SOC doc in detail? I won't lie and claim I read the whole two hundred pages in detail but I did page thru it. Has anyone found any reason why it was secret? Superficially I've found nothing shocking or amazing. Sometimes there is something "new" which is cool and amazing. Think back to the first time you wrote a 16550 driver. The funniest thing I've found so far is a little example on page 11 where a 250 meg clock with a too-small implementation divider means you literally cannot run 300 baud RS232 with this dude. I liked reading about the GPIO system and the clocks that can drive them and spent at least 15 seconds thinking about how to drive a RC servo in hardware (not synthesizing level transitions in software, perhaps in an interrupt routine, but completely in hardware). I did something like that with a 68hc11 (I think?) back in the early 90s. The "real UART" vs the "mini UART" is kind of interesting/weird/worth looking at.
I'm not saying that the iPhone isn't a good phone, but it has no physical keyboard. Many employees use their phone for answering email; to me the iPhone seems like it would really inconvenient for use in this manner. Does anybody else use an iPhone as their primary work device?
Brevity of reply = feature not bug
Yeah that was my point. The point is that is a "research" graph not a "I can buy it at home depot or at least over the internet from a website" graph. The best research I've seen to this point is 47% so that would be a "realistic" goal for biological systems to reach. In fact they have to reach at least that, or people will probably install silicon systems instead to get more power and more reliable power (lower maint, etc).
Right now, literally off the shelf over the internet, "commodity grade" COTS panels run in the 10-15% range. There are some cheapies that are just under 10%, the infamous ? cheap per watt solyndra panels were 8%ers. There are pretty exotic 16% 17%, I've even heard of a 18% panel that only sailboaters will pay the premium for (because their deck space is limited, and if you Really want 400 watts instead of 300 and you've obviously got a bottomless pit of cash because you own a boat so you don't care if it costs several times as much...)
Frankly most of the difference in efficiency in COTS panels seems to come from glass, packing efficiency/tiling issues, mounting border and bracket issues, etc. You may as well simplify it to the theoretical maximum for a perfectly assembled system of infinite size with infinitely perfect glass and perfect infinitely thin mounting brackets and edge protection brackets would be somewhere just above 15% at this time. I'm sure in the future that will continue its slow rise...
Bell labs was only functional because the AT&T monopoly had quite a bit of cash to blow, and was, well, a monopoly. Google is a hairs breath away from that point, but still...
Close but the really important lesson is basic research is hyperprofitable if you are and will always remain a govt granted monopoly. However we have at least one real world example of a govt granted monopoly being broken up in the 80s into the baby bells and small etc (later to recombine like a horror movie, much to the horror of their customers). Therefore basic research is a terrible idea, because despite megacorps owning the govt, there is a chance they'll be broken up before being able to cash in on the research. Its almost a "jump the shark" moment, if google is setting up something like bell labs, the odds are the govt will be breaking them up soon.
It's worth remembering that the V2 effort helped Germany lose WW2 - the energy needed to produce the fuel meant shortages of fuel for aviation and transport.
That is a LOL moment. If you're going to rewrite engineering history as part of tiresome environmental guilt trip prattle, don't do it on a website populated with engineers. Wrong both at the microscale in that A4/V2 didn't burn avgas or diesel or petrochemicals at all, wrong at the macroscale that every A4/V2 ever launched added together adds up to frankly not very much fuel. Those were relatively tiny SRBMs roughly similar performance to a modern MLRS not a thundering herd of saturn-5s.
fundamental physics research would simply awe the likes of Feynman ... if they were around to see it.
He didn't die that long ago, you know. Yes he chilled out with the manhatten project dudes as an extremely young man hanging with middle aged and old men. You may have missed he was on the Challenger loss commission in the 80s, etc. Even Dirac didn't die until the early 80s. If you want to surprise a physicist, find someone who croaked before WWII not a recently deceased.
I'm no English major, so if you have a term that better describes the situation, I try to add it my vocabulary.
How about "American". Its right up there with the old "we had to burn the village to save the village" from the Vietnam war.
The aliens warned us that if we didn't back off they would come back with much bigger probes.
I've seen the goatse; he was neither black nor (visually obviously) military. Just saying.
Showing bacteria and virii evolving to resist certain drugs is proof of evolution
Nope. God did that.
You lose.
Confusion of cause and effect. Statement 1 is an effect, saying nothing about cause (who created the universe such that evolution is the best known theory to predict what happens inside it?). Statement 2 is a cause stating almost nothing about the effect. (God did something. Well supposedly he can do anything, so what does doing something prove about a being that can do anything? Not a heck of a lot, other than he/she/it did it)
and will it last through the winter?
If its made out of grass clippings, then by April or May at worst I'll have enough to make another cell-roof.
One weird issue is if its pitifully 0.1% efficient, it might be more productive overall to simple TDP the collected grass clippings into gasoline and dump it into a generator. Or ferment into ethanol. Just simply burn as biomass?
I think a solar powered electric self growing fence would be pretty cool, at least until it shorts out and starts itself on fire. Which brings up the other idea of a self growing survival tool, a mushroom grown in pitch blackness which when placed in sunlight eventually bursts into flame using self generated photosynthetic electricity.
From the fine article they're getting 0.1% efficiency right now. In other words, about a thousandth. Conveniently, you get about a KW of light per sq meter. So, you get about one watt per square meter. So I could get about 40 watts at noon off my roof, well, other than that tree being in the way which shades me from the summer sun. That is somewhat more than the naysayers claim (barely enough to run a watch, etc) but is not enough to be useful.
Its unlikely they'll exceed the best plants which have had hundreds of millions of years to optimize their design... so figure 5% or so would be quite an achievement. So in Star Trek miracle land, a KW or two is quite possible off a typical roof. Of course in Star Trek miracle land, you'd have 47% efficient cells thus generating about 40 KW. I donno what I'd do with 40 KW laying around, I guess air condition my entire open air backyard, replace my beer fridge with a supermarket open display case so I don't have to waste time opening the door?
The crack about painting it on is laughable. conductive acid rain and bird poop will short it out. You're still going to need glass/plastic/etc and the cost of that will probably make high efficiency silicon more economical.
I say we start a new religion, and have as our holy symbol a rectangle with three horizontal stripes; orange, white, and green.
I'm thinking more like a green square with a white diagonal slash from lower left to upper right and a white dot at the lower right corner.
Often seen flying in close formation with the skull and crossbones flag. Holy prophets are RMS, Linus and maybe the goatse guy.
Extremely heavily overstaffed with male vestal virgins. Holy sites beyond the obvious are the googleplex, apple hq, 4chan, kuro5hin, and mom's basement.
Every religion has weird restrictions and sins, our will be microsoft, all other religions, all 1% political parties (all of them?), showering or other forms of bathing, and the all forms of computerized electronic gaming are sinful and untouchable except boring FPS remakes/sequels.
Rather than a hierarchical power structure, lower UIDs are higher up in the organization (kneel before my five digits, lowly 1163751)
More seriously:
1) Your god is too weak/inferior/doesn't exist thus cannot punish me... you're not serious suggesting you are more powerful/all knowing that your own god and therefore usurping his power and position to judge, are you? This is the change of venue strategy.
2) The holy texts of religion X basically mock religion Y therefore lets ban religion X before wasting time on the inter-tubes. This is the distraction strategy.
3) Share the links. Mass civil disobedience strategy. Sooo.... lets go for it. Lemme guess, its something really creative like a link to the new testament at PG...
that smokers, drinkers and gamblers are predisposed to ...
predisposed to addictive behavior, which (inevitably?) leads to poverty.
Let me propose a science experiment. Past evidence indicates an insane high correlation between smoking, drinking, and gambling... simply walk thru a casino and look around... My hypothesis is that a modern casino either is full of people checking their FB status on their smartphone, or there are preconditions that prevent it like installation of phone jammers, or a posted rule that phones are not allowed to prevent cheating or card counting or some BS which is really to force addictive behavior into more profitable channels like gambling, smoking, drinking, etc.
There seems to be a reasonable realistic theory, and its certainly a falsifiable experiment... anyone out there who works in/near/around a casino, or perhaps went to defcon recently (I haven't been to any cons since like the 90s other than HOPE once in the 00s and smartphones were not popular then)