The kernels for those systems were similar because a great deal of them was authored by David Cutler and the engineers he brought along from DEC, previously responsible for VMS. It represented a large architectural shift from the DOS kernel and operating system previously used for Microsoft. If the theft of intellectual property involved there can be considered a leak, it might be comparable in size. It was certainly a large economic impact for DEC and Microsoft.
Excuse me, but "para-virtualization" is an optional feature and an effective performance enhancement for virtualization: Every virtualization technology supports hardware virtualization.
Xen supports para-virtualization, which was built into the original GPL version of Xen and remains useful to approach "bare-metal" speed for the virtual machines. Much of the need for this has been reduced through the development of "docker", which can be treated much like a Xen based para-virtualized VM with instances of even lighter weight.
The very active CentOS Xen community has, as I've observed, been much larger and much more active than KVM in dealing with new server and guest environments. My information may be out of date: this may also just mean KVM worked well since then. But I've seen a number of clients simply give up on KVM and just switch to Xen or Citrix Xen. due to unexpected limitations and the time necessary to spend valuable engineering time tuning their own virtualization servers. It's no longer on my recommended product list.
Indeed, for small environments, VirtualBox has proven much better due to its cross-platform services for the virtual servers and its ties to Vagrant testing tools. I'd be very surprised to see another new virtualization toolkit enter the already crowded market.
As much as I agree with you, and as helpful as good training can be, that is the answer to a _different question_. Negotiating with your client that they really need to solve a distinct problem is a skill, and a rare skill for IT leaders. We're often tasked with "solve this very specific problem I asked you about" rather than "make things work well". Learning to work with that and live with it is a challenge that drives people out of IT in droves.
> replaced by a few companies that understand the value that IT delivers.
A competitor does not have to have good IT to drive a company with poor IT out of business. It merely has to have enough market presence to cause the first company to fail to stay in business. Competitors can be cheaper (since good IT costs money and resources). Competitors can be better in other ways, especially in a flooded market. Competitors can steal from the company with good It: this happened to DEC with the theft of the Alpha technologies for the Pentium chips and the theft of the Ultrix kernel for NT.
The idea that quality or ethics will automatically win in the open market is a common one, but it has _many_ exceptions. I'm sorry to say it is not a reliable basis for a business plan or hiring practices.
It can be very difficult to fire a union worker without a strong track record of failure. It can also be unfair to fire someone for a single bad mistake if they have years of good productivity, or are under enormous work stress. This is why managers write "recovery plans", to give an employee a chance to improve.
Also, "The Peter Pinciple" still applies today, especially in unionized work. The book of that name described how people progress and get promoted until they are no longer competent enough to get promoted anymore. Many people have learned to refuse to be demoted back to where they _were_ competent and productive, because it poisons your resume and limits your income.and seniority in workplaces where that matters. I've had to be _very_ careful in my own career to avoid getting promoted to work I'd not do well: it startles many managers when an employee refuses a promotion.
This was a government announcement that scared millions of people, cost time and money for millions as they had to deal with the false alert, and will contribute to mistrust of _real_ announcements of danger. This is also not the employee's first major mistake. If that is not grounds for firing someone, what would be?
No one apparently died, as they rushed to handle the emergency. But that is happenstance: emergency vehicles getting into place, or phones tied up at emergency services as they deal with the social fallout, are measurable risks for that kind of mistake.
> You can also buy a $10 can of compressed air and light the stream on fire with a 50 cent lighter.
An ad video of the device is at https://www.instagram.com/p/Be... . It's rifle sized, so it carrries considerably more fuel than a typical "compressed air" can, and has a much longer range and overall burning flame volume. I admit to being tempted to get one, but children sometimes visit my home. I'd want to keep it in a good gun safe with space for the device and the fuel.
I agree that it's an expensive toy with limited practical uses. That doesn't mean I don't want one.
The _eviodence_ need not be in dispute for a lawsuit or criminal prosecution to need to go to court. Whether an act is illegal can be in dispute. I'm particularly reminded of Edward Snowden, whose leaking of classified documents on NSA domestic spying is not in dispute. Whether he should be tried for treason, or given a Medal of Honor as a brave whistleblower is in dispute.
I welcome this. It's a chance to share knowledge and to mentor others. I'll also admit that I _do_ prefer having an actual office rather than a cubicle to work from. It allows an "open door policy" to mean something, and to close the door for a private meeting if needed. Since I sometimes discuss security sensitive projects, or NDA material with clients or colleagues, it's been very helpful. The ability to see their faces and reactions can be invaluable: it can carry subtle excitement, or shock, that does not come across easily on a chat or a video conference.
> Well, short of making them illegal, there'll always be a market for piston-engined/internal combustion-engined vehicles. They're so much fun to drive.
Combustion engines tend to also have a notably better power/mass ratio for the whole vehicle, due to the mass of the batteries and the mass of the motor for electric vehicles. Diesel can approach the power and performance of piston fired engines. Rotary engines can do as well _in theory_, but have never worked out commercially.
Of all authors, Terry Pratchett and his scientific co-authors covered it very well in "Science of Discworld", volumes I and II. Douglas Hofstadter also did a more mathematical, and not as funny, but also entertaining explanation of how complexity evolves from simpler structures in his book "Goedel, Escher, Bach". They each made the point, each in their own way, that it is not "random chance". It's chance filtered through evolution, where chances that benefit survival are preserved and amplified with effective feedback.
Space is demonstrably not "flat". There are fascinating questions about its curvature being explored even now, but there seem to be definite limits to the edge of "the universe" as currently defined. The currently estimated distance to the edge of the universe is approximately 45 billion light years. So I'm afraid that there are some limits to the universe, and thus some limits to the probability of two exact instances of any object.
I'm also afraid that it would take me considerable time to give a decent estimate of the likelihood of a duplicate of your exact physical form, in a place stable enough to support that physical form. But the chance is ridiculously small.
I do apologize for spoiling a lovely image, but as engineers and sensible people, let's discourage people from deriving subtle theological points from erroneous math. It's as erroneous as Descartes insistence that God must exist because human thought could only be inspired from something outside the realm of physical existence.
I would not expect the Dutch intelligence to announce publicly that they had hacked a Russian hacker group. There are articles that suggest that they did, indeed, tell the NSA about the successful infiltration years ago.
You seem to be suggesting that they should have immediately announced it in the press at the time so that you, personally would be aware of it. Why would they do this, rather than leak it quietly and as necessary to allied nations' security agencies? As soon as the break in is publicized, it's over.
> Why would Dutch intelligence infiltrate a random hacker space nor associated with Kremlin.....
I'd agree that the a Russian government funded and sponsored hacker group would be an intelligence prize. But why would they _not_ infiltrate a large hacker space of any nation? Such a group may break into spaces the intelligence officers have no legal authority to investigate directly, such as their own nation's private email or other agencies of their own government. Discovering and harvesting information, including technical information about available vulnerabilities and political information of allies and enemies alike is all part of what intelligence agencies are for.
You've raised an interesting question. It can be well worth checking your assumptions in security work. But the "Cozy Group" hacker group had offices in Red Square. If another nation or private hacker group had the resources to do that, I would be very interested in them as well.
This kind of situation is precisely why good SWAT departments _practice_ telling friend from foe in training. How much time can an officer allocate for assessing targets on such a call? And how can they distinguish that?
A police officer is not likely to face prosecution, much less jail time, for an accidental killing unless they were guilty of _gross_ misconduct at the scene. Nor should they, it seems, based on what they could reasonably have believed when they entered the home.
The audio of the 911 call is available at http://www.kansas.com/news/loc... . The call sounded like a confused man who had just shot one of his parents dead, with other live people in the house. That is a frightfully dangerous situation for everyone, officers and potential victims alike. For an officer on the scene, who is informed of one dead victim already and informed that the caller refuses to put down their weapon before police arrive, slow response puts many people at risk, including other potential victims in the house.
>> It's different because most companies realise this and try to underpromise and overdeliver publicly.
> It's different because Tesla is operating on hype
Oh my. I'd agree that most companies realize this, but I've dealt with many startups and some very large companies that are operating on hype. They're not good long term customers, or partners, but they're certainly not rare.
> He's the least popular US President in recorded history.
It seems that you are seeing the popular analyses that show him the least popular _after his first 100 days_, which was a popular message in various media. America has had Presidents become far more loathed and disliked:at various points in their career. In living memory, Richard M. Nixon at the end of his presidency comes to mind.
Slashdot Mirror
We also need a trusty XKCD universal connector box.
https://xkcd.com/1406/
The kernels for those systems were similar because a great deal of them was authored by David Cutler and the engineers he brought along from DEC, previously responsible for VMS. It represented a large architectural shift from the DOS kernel and operating system previously used for Microsoft. If the theft of intellectual property involved there can be considered a leak, it might be comparable in size. It was certainly a large economic impact for DEC and Microsoft.
> If you believe something that the rest of society disagrees with, that is the definition of extremist.
If I may say, no. Violently enforcing your opinion would be extremist. Mere disagreement is hardly extremist.
> It is harder to trick college educated people into believing false statements.
It is certainly possible to do so.
You''re making very good sense. I don't personally have propane tanks or space for them near my home.
Are those working well? I'd not tried them the last time I worked with KVM.
Excuse me, but "para-virtualization" is an optional feature and an effective performance enhancement for virtualization: Every virtualization technology supports hardware virtualization.
Xen supports para-virtualization, which was built into the original GPL version of Xen and remains useful to approach "bare-metal" speed for the virtual machines. Much of the need for this has been reduced through the development of "docker", which can be treated much like a Xen based para-virtualized VM with instances of even lighter weight.
The very active CentOS Xen community has, as I've observed, been much larger and much more active than KVM in dealing with new server and guest environments. My information may be out of date: this may also just mean KVM worked well since then. But I've seen a number of clients simply give up on KVM and just switch to Xen or Citrix Xen. due to unexpected limitations and the time necessary to spend valuable engineering time tuning their own virtualization servers. It's no longer on my recommended product list.
Indeed, for small environments, VirtualBox has proven much better due to its cross-platform services for the virtual servers and its ties to Vagrant testing tools. I'd be very surprised to see another new virtualization toolkit enter the already crowded market.
As much as I agree with you, and as helpful as good training can be, that is the answer to a _different question_. Negotiating with your client that they really need to solve a distinct problem is a skill, and a rare skill for IT leaders. We're often tasked with "solve this very specific problem I asked you about" rather than "make things work well". Learning to work with that and live with it is a challenge that drives people out of IT in droves.
> replaced by a few companies that understand the value that IT delivers.
A competitor does not have to have good IT to drive a company with poor IT out of business. It merely has to have enough market presence to cause the first company to fail to stay in business. Competitors can be cheaper (since good IT costs money and resources). Competitors can be better in other ways, especially in a flooded market. Competitors can steal from the company with good It: this happened to DEC with the theft of the Alpha technologies for the Pentium chips and the theft of the Ultrix kernel for NT.
The idea that quality or ethics will automatically win in the open market is a common one, but it has _many_ exceptions. I'm sorry to say it is not a reliable basis for a business plan or hiring practices.
It can be very difficult to fire a union worker without a strong track record of failure. It can also be unfair to fire someone for a single bad mistake if they have years of good productivity, or are under enormous work stress. This is why managers write "recovery plans", to give an employee a chance to improve.
Also, "The Peter Pinciple" still applies today, especially in unionized work. The book of that name described how people progress and get promoted until they are no longer competent enough to get promoted anymore. Many people have learned to refuse to be demoted back to where they _were_ competent and productive, because it poisons your resume and limits your income.and seniority in workplaces where that matters. I've had to be _very_ careful in my own career to avoid getting promoted to work I'd not do well: it startles many managers when an employee refuses a promotion.
This was a government announcement that scared millions of people, cost time and money for millions as they had to deal with the false alert, and will contribute to mistrust of _real_ announcements of danger. This is also not the employee's first major mistake. If that is not grounds for firing someone, what would be?
No one apparently died, as they rushed to handle the emergency. But that is happenstance: emergency vehicles getting into place, or phones tied up at emergency services as they deal with the social fallout, are measurable risks for that kind of mistake.
> You can also buy a $10 can of compressed air and light the stream on fire with a 50 cent lighter.
An ad video of the device is at https://www.instagram.com/p/Be... . It's rifle sized, so it carrries considerably more fuel than a typical "compressed air" can, and has a much longer range and overall burning flame volume. I admit to being tempted to get one, but children sometimes visit my home. I'd want to keep it in a good gun safe with space for the device and the fuel.
I agree that it's an expensive toy with limited practical uses. That doesn't mean I don't want one.
The _eviodence_ need not be in dispute for a lawsuit or criminal prosecution to need to go to court. Whether an act is illegal can be in dispute. I'm particularly reminded of Edward Snowden, whose leaking of classified documents on NSA domestic spying is not in dispute. Whether he should be tried for treason, or given a Medal of Honor as a brave whistleblower is in dispute.
I welcome this. It's a chance to share knowledge and to mentor others. I'll also admit that I _do_ prefer having an actual office rather than a cubicle to work from. It allows an "open door policy" to mean something, and to close the door for a private meeting if needed. Since I sometimes discuss security sensitive projects, or NDA material with clients or colleagues, it's been very helpful. The ability to see their faces and reactions can be invaluable: it can carry subtle excitement, or shock, that does not come across easily on a chat or a video conference.
> Well, short of making them illegal, there'll always be a market for piston-engined/internal combustion-engined vehicles. They're so much fun to drive.
Combustion engines tend to also have a notably better power/mass ratio for the whole vehicle, due to the mass of the batteries and the mass of the motor for electric vehicles. Diesel can approach the power and performance of piston fired engines. Rotary engines can do as well _in theory_, but have never worked out commercially.
> If you can feed your army grain then you're going to have a bigger better army than the guys eating venison and roots s
You can also grow far more food on less fertile land, transport it to troops, and store it for winter.
Years of this litigation were documented at https://www.groklaw.net/. The trustee is Edward Cahn.
http://www.groklaw.net/article...
Of all authors, Terry Pratchett and his scientific co-authors covered it very well in "Science of Discworld", volumes I and II. Douglas Hofstadter also did a more mathematical, and not as funny, but also entertaining explanation of how complexity evolves from simpler structures in his book "Goedel, Escher, Bach". They each made the point, each in their own way, that it is not "random chance". It's chance filtered through evolution, where chances that benefit survival are preserved and amplified with effective feedback.
Space is demonstrably not "flat". There are fascinating questions about its curvature being explored even now, but there seem to be definite limits to the edge of "the universe" as currently defined. The currently estimated distance to the edge of the universe is approximately 45 billion light years. So I'm afraid that there are some limits to the universe, and thus some limits to the probability of two exact instances of any object.
I'm also afraid that it would take me considerable time to give a decent estimate of the likelihood of a duplicate of your exact physical form, in a place stable enough to support that physical form. But the chance is ridiculously small.
I do apologize for spoiling a lovely image, but as engineers and sensible people, let's discourage people from deriving subtle theological points from erroneous math. It's as erroneous as Descartes insistence that God must exist because human thought could only be inspired from something outside the realm of physical existence.
I would not expect the Dutch intelligence to announce publicly that they had hacked a Russian hacker group. There are articles that suggest that they did, indeed, tell the NSA about the successful infiltration years ago.
* https://www.washingtonpost.com...
You seem to be suggesting that they should have immediately announced it in the press at the time so that you, personally would be aware of it. Why would they do this, rather than leak it quietly and as necessary to allied nations' security agencies? As soon as the break in is publicized, it's over.
> Why would Dutch intelligence infiltrate a random hacker space nor associated with Kremlin.....
I'd agree that the a Russian government funded and sponsored hacker group would be an intelligence prize. But why would they _not_ infiltrate a large hacker space of any nation? Such a group may break into spaces the intelligence officers have no legal authority to investigate directly, such as their own nation's private email or other agencies of their own government. Discovering and harvesting information, including technical information about available vulnerabilities and political information of allies and enemies alike is all part of what intelligence agencies are for.
You've raised an interesting question. It can be well worth checking your assumptions in security work. But the "Cozy Group" hacker group had offices in Red Square. If another nation or private hacker group had the resources to do that, I would be very interested in them as well.
This kind of situation is precisely why good SWAT departments _practice_ telling friend from foe in training. How much time can an officer allocate for assessing targets on such a call? And how can they distinguish that?
A police officer is not likely to face prosecution, much less jail time, for an accidental killing unless they were guilty of _gross_ misconduct at the scene. Nor should they, it seems, based on what they could reasonably have believed when they entered the home.
The audio of the 911 call is available at http://www.kansas.com/news/loc... . The call sounded like a confused man who had just shot one of his parents dead, with other live people in the house. That is a frightfully dangerous situation for everyone, officers and potential victims alike. For an officer on the scene, who is informed of one dead victim already and informed that the caller refuses to put down their weapon before police arrive, slow response puts many people at risk, including other potential victims in the house.
>> It's different because most companies realise this and try to underpromise and overdeliver publicly.
> It's different because Tesla is operating on hype
Oh my. I'd agree that most companies realize this, but I've dealt with many startups and some very large companies that are operating on hype. They're not good long term customers, or partners, but they're certainly not rare.
> He's the least popular US President in recorded history.
It seems that you are seeing the popular analyses that show him the least popular _after his first 100 days_, which was a popular message in various media. America has had Presidents become far more loathed and disliked:at various points in their career. In living memory, Richard M. Nixon at the end of his presidency comes to mind.