I can't believe this was modded insightful. In other words this local exploit is an issue because of imaginary remote exploits? WTF? That's like being worried about local exploits when I don't have physical security. If I don't have physical security, nothing else matters. If I don't have remote security, nothing else matters.
Simple fact is, first order concerns always are and always will be physical security and remote exploits; assuming a system with network connectivity. Period. Everything else is secondary.
This is why we need to move to the new secure NextGen satellite based ATC that AOPA and the other corporate jet jockeys are fighting against.
No one wants it because it is too expensive and provides little to no value. There are already better solutions available. Which is exactly what AOPA is pushing.
And using your own words to make you look like an even bigger idiot, this article isn't about securing ATC. The article is about the FAA. The FAA does a lot more than ATC.
Made worse, you're completely uninformed. The majority of GA pilots are not "rich corporate fatcats".
If you are truly interested in "SAFE skies", make the FAA do their job by allowing safer technologies into planes by allowing competition for certified technology, rather than getting in bed with airlines and working hard to get out from under Congress' oversight while still unable to account for millions and millions of dollars. The only thing holding back safer skies is the FAA.
Hmmm...looking at your post again, it is pretty clear you didn't have anything of value, or even correct information, to add to the subject.
And in case you missed it, you need to read this reply again so you completely understand why you're completely ignorant on everything you posted about. I guess it is easy to see why you posted anonymously.
The verbiage there is mind numbingly stupid. I quote, "Ubuntu became the latest Linux vendor to patch a vulnerability in the open-source operating system's kernel". In other words, a kernel fix was made available and it was applied. They make it sound like it has far reach consequences and by have multiple distros, the problem is somehow made far, far worse.
Huge difference between local and remote exploits. The fact you seem to not understand the difference squarely places you into your own worst scenario, "False sense of security is the worse security."
Since I'm the only user on my box I don't think I have to worry about me exploiting my self and doing unknown harm.
Sendmail is infinitely more configurable and complex than Exchange Server's SMTP MTA. Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending sendmail's history, but using flaws in something as complex as humans to justify flaws in unrelated bacteria doesn't cut it.
No, you are mistaken. Going your approach leads to less than optimal results. Thread pools have nothing to do with they types of threads (user/OS) it manages.
If you are on a single cpu, single core box and you start 4 threads, it will take longer to finish; requiring four units of time. If you are on a quad cpu box or single cpu box with quad cores, in theory, those four threads can all run concurrently and finish in one unit of time.
In this case, the pool is simply a mechanism which sets an upper limit on the number of threads allowed to run concurrently. A pool size of one on a single cpu/core means the time to complete a given task will take only slightly longer than one unit. And there are ways to work around the "slightly longer" part to actually be less than one unit - in contrast with a pool larger than one.
Then it sounds like they ONLY have authority to give priority to financial transactions. Everything else is beyond their right to legislate. Since that can't be readily done, they have no authority here.
Perhaps they can give priority to TLS/SSL connections?? That's about the only option I see available to them. And even so, that's questionable at best.
If senators, as originally, were appointed by state legislators or governors - there would be focused on more than winning the next election.
I couldn't agree more. The entire process makes these people beholden to those that give them money; be it to assume power or to remain in power. Thus by extension, it is [almost] impossible to have someone in government, at these levels, who are not bought and paid for. From Senate to House to Congress, to the President someone owns them. And these problems are only magnified by lobbyists.
The government will never again be, "for the people", until significant reform takes place.
That's why you design it as a thread pool and size the pool based on local resources. The performance impact is negligible for low end systems and it becomes a huge win on high end systems.
The bigger problem is the lacking skillset. Far too many programmers have a poor understanding of multithreaded coding and therefore have no idea how to approach it, how to break up the work, or how to even properly test it.
You should have paid more attention to nobodylocalhost's posting. How do you think Zheng He's massive fleet managed to navigate almost half the world? Answer: with compasses.
I believe it is you that should have paid more attention. After the the Chinese understood they held a navigation device in their hands, they then used it as a compass. Is it really that hard to follow?
Yeah, it's 1.5-2x faster but it also draws 50% more power
That means if it is under clocked to draw the same power it's still likely 50% faster. That's still a win for VIA. Heck, even if you under clock it and its only 20% faster, faster is still faster. I'm not sure how you see that as a lose.
Why is this modded, "Flamebait"? His the parent's post is correct. The gp post is iffy at best.
I'm going to assume the moderator was ignorant of the Cultural Revolution rather than just being spiteful.
Also, saying the Chinese invented the compass is about as accurate as saying the Greeks invented the steam engine. While technically true, in both cases they were clueless as to what they had discovered or how to leverage it. In the Greek's case, the invention went completely under developed. In the Chinese case, it was actually foreigners who adopted it for navigation and taught the Chinese to use it for something other than Chi lines and harmony.
No, that absolutely is NOT "hair of the dog." Lending should not be confused with fraud; which these institutions previously enforced.
You want a real solution? Lock up the SOBs that knowingly and FRAUDULENTLY caused this whole problem. Fraud is fraud. They should be in jail and all of their assets seized. Their families evicted to fend for themselves. But since these crooks suck dick of our Congressmen, Senators, Representatives, and all their friends, no one wants to hold the responsible parties responsible.
There is good lending practises and then there is the fraud committed on the world by these guys. Good lending will rapidly help everyone's economies recover. As is, they are committing fraud on top of fraud by not lending the money they received to do exactly that - lend. These fuckers need to be put in jail and the key thrown away.
That's easy but no one has the balls to do the right, smart thing here.
Tell them to start lending or we'll take all our money back which was given to them under the sole understanding it was given for them to lend, thusly stimulating the economy. And better than that, put in jail everyone not doing their job and seize all of their assets to be auctioned off within 60-days. Anyone caught moving funds or assets to avoid the repercussions will immediately be arrested and their assets seized. Then, all the monies taken back and the seized assets can then be used to redistribute the wealthy from the bottom up rather than the time tested, fraudulent failure that is trickle down economics.
When suddenly thousands of the richest Americans are suddenly stripped of their fraudulently obtained wealth are placed in prison and their families are sitting on the curb as they've forced so many other Americans, you can bet monies will start flowing as they said they should.
Maybe American should hold off on the bon bons and Mickey D's so they can fit on planes.
The FAA standard weight for passengers is 180lbs. When that standard was created it was more often than not true. These days, it is very unlikely to fly with passengers who meet or beat the 180lbs per passenger standard. It means the weight difference has to come from someplace else. In some cases, if means you carry fewer passengers than seats. In other cases it means less fuel or simply less cargo.
Both of these planes are capable of much greater speeds, the limiting factor..... the sound barrier...and to limit air frame fatigue.
That's certainly true. Citations are not certified for mach speeds but test pilots routinely take them right beyond the barrier, as an experimental flight, immediately before being certified. Remember, each plane is tested before delivery by a test pilot. This is true of all planes. In an accident it is pretty easy to exceed their Vmax speed, which is near the barrier, and they want to know for sure the plane will hold together before they place it in the hands of less experienced pilots.
Certification speed should not be confused with what an airframe is capable of.
Exactly. And to be in the position where the "Deployment Options Specialist" has nothing but boilerplate means someone has already gone through the dizzying set of options and configuration possibilities. Many without a moniker such as, "Deployment Options Specialist", are often left with a large set of possibilities to choose from.
Since my original post was moded troll, to be absolutely clear, I was not being snide with that statement either. For many, having a very large set of options is simply too many options, creating confusion. It has frequently been a complaint levelled against Linux. Some consider it an advantage - others a disadvantage.
Its surprising how often Windows users truly believe Windows is ahead of Linux - at everything. Simple fact is, excluding game play and perhaps game development, Linux is far, far ahead on everything else and it is Windows which has proved to be in a chronic state of catch-up.
Of course the down side is, Linux has so many configuration and deployment options it tends to make many people's head spin thinking about them all.
Slashdot Mirror
That's pretty dang funny and insightful.
I can't believe this was modded insightful. In other words this local exploit is an issue because of imaginary remote exploits? WTF? That's like being worried about local exploits when I don't have physical security. If I don't have physical security, nothing else matters. If I don't have remote security, nothing else matters.
Simple fact is, first order concerns always are and always will be physical security and remote exploits; assuming a system with network connectivity. Period. Everything else is secondary.
So once elected, they do as they damn well please,
Minor correction.
So once elected, they do as their paying lobbyists damn well please,
Exactly. Does democracy still work if most of the electorate is ignorant?
No it does not. But that's exactly why we were created as a republic whereby, only the educated land owners were allowed to participate.
This is why we need to move to the new secure NextGen satellite based ATC that AOPA and the other corporate jet jockeys are fighting against.
No one wants it because it is too expensive and provides little to no value. There are already better solutions available. Which is exactly what AOPA is pushing.
And using your own words to make you look like an even bigger idiot, this article isn't about securing ATC. The article is about the FAA. The FAA does a lot more than ATC.
Made worse, you're completely uninformed. The majority of GA pilots are not "rich corporate fatcats".
If you are truly interested in "SAFE skies", make the FAA do their job by allowing safer technologies into planes by allowing competition for certified technology, rather than getting in bed with airlines and working hard to get out from under Congress' oversight while still unable to account for millions and millions of dollars. The only thing holding back safer skies is the FAA.
Hmmm...looking at your post again, it is pretty clear you didn't have anything of value, or even correct information, to add to the subject.
And in case you missed it, you need to read this reply again so you completely understand why you're completely ignorant on everything you posted about. I guess it is easy to see why you posted anonymously.
The verbiage there is mind numbingly stupid. I quote, "Ubuntu became the latest Linux vendor to patch a vulnerability in the open-source operating system's kernel". In other words, a kernel fix was made available and it was applied. They make it sound like it has far reach consequences and by have multiple distros, the problem is somehow made far, far worse.
Huge difference between local and remote exploits. The fact you seem to not understand the difference squarely places you into your own worst scenario, "False sense of security is the worse security."
Since I'm the only user on my box I don't think I have to worry about me exploiting my self and doing unknown harm.
Sendmail is infinitely more configurable and complex than Exchange Server's SMTP MTA. Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending sendmail's history, but using flaws in something as complex as humans to justify flaws in unrelated bacteria doesn't cut it.
Banging head on desk...
That means you agree with my original position!
Banging head on desk...
No, you are mistaken. Going your approach leads to less than optimal results. Thread pools have nothing to do with they types of threads (user/OS) it manages.
If you are on a single cpu, single core box and you start 4 threads, it will take longer to finish; requiring four units of time. If you are on a quad cpu box or single cpu box with quad cores, in theory, those four threads can all run concurrently and finish in one unit of time.
In this case, the pool is simply a mechanism which sets an upper limit on the number of threads allowed to run concurrently. A pool size of one on a single cpu/core means the time to complete a given task will take only slightly longer than one unit. And there are ways to work around the "slightly longer" part to actually be less than one unit - in contrast with a pool larger than one.
Then it sounds like they ONLY have authority to give priority to financial transactions. Everything else is beyond their right to legislate. Since that can't be readily done, they have no authority here.
Perhaps they can give priority to TLS/SSL connections?? That's about the only option I see available to them. And even so, that's questionable at best.
If senators, as originally, were appointed by state legislators or governors - there would be focused on more than winning the next election.
I couldn't agree more. The entire process makes these people beholden to those that give them money; be it to assume power or to remain in power. Thus by extension, it is [almost] impossible to have someone in government, at these levels, who are not bought and paid for. From Senate to House to Congress, to the President someone owns them. And these problems are only magnified by lobbyists.
The government will never again be, "for the people", until significant reform takes place.
I'd support the Libertarians, but their pro-drug plank makes them un-electable in mainstream America today
Sad but true. Only in America would the elimination of 80% of crime, while saving the nation billions every year be considered, "un-electable."
That's why you design it as a thread pool and size the pool based on local resources. The performance impact is negligible for low end systems and it becomes a huge win on high end systems.
The bigger problem is the lacking skillset. Far too many programmers have a poor understanding of multithreaded coding and therefore have no idea how to approach it, how to break up the work, or how to even properly test it.
Now put into proper context and you'll answer your own questions.
You should have paid more attention to nobodylocalhost's posting. How do you think Zheng He's massive fleet managed to navigate almost half the world? Answer: with compasses.
I believe it is you that should have paid more attention. After the the Chinese understood they held a navigation device in their hands, they then used it as a compass. Is it really that hard to follow?
Look at what you're replying to here. You're the only one being racists.
Yeah, it's 1.5-2x faster but it also draws 50% more power
That means if it is under clocked to draw the same power it's still likely 50% faster. That's still a win for VIA. Heck, even if you under clock it and its only 20% faster, faster is still faster. I'm not sure how you see that as a lose.
Why is this modded, "Flamebait"? His the parent's post is correct. The gp post is iffy at best.
I'm going to assume the moderator was ignorant of the Cultural Revolution rather than just being spiteful.
Also, saying the Chinese invented the compass is about as accurate as saying the Greeks invented the steam engine. While technically true, in both cases they were clueless as to what they had discovered or how to leverage it. In the Greek's case, the invention went completely under developed. In the Chinese case, it was actually foreigners who adopted it for navigation and taught the Chinese to use it for something other than Chi lines and harmony.
No, that absolutely is NOT "hair of the dog." Lending should not be confused with fraud; which these institutions previously enforced.
You want a real solution? Lock up the SOBs that knowingly and FRAUDULENTLY caused this whole problem. Fraud is fraud. They should be in jail and all of their assets seized. Their families evicted to fend for themselves. But since these crooks suck dick of our Congressmen, Senators, Representatives, and all their friends, no one wants to hold the responsible parties responsible.
There is good lending practises and then there is the fraud committed on the world by these guys. Good lending will rapidly help everyone's economies recover. As is, they are committing fraud on top of fraud by not lending the money they received to do exactly that - lend. These fuckers need to be put in jail and the key thrown away.
but I have no idea how to get the banks lending.
That's easy but no one has the balls to do the right, smart thing here.
Tell them to start lending or we'll take all our money back which was given to them under the sole understanding it was given for them to lend, thusly stimulating the economy. And better than that, put in jail everyone not doing their job and seize all of their assets to be auctioned off within 60-days. Anyone caught moving funds or assets to avoid the repercussions will immediately be arrested and their assets seized. Then, all the monies taken back and the seized assets can then be used to redistribute the wealthy from the bottom up rather than the time tested, fraudulent failure that is trickle down economics.
When suddenly thousands of the richest Americans are suddenly stripped of their fraudulently obtained wealth are placed in prison and their families are sitting on the curb as they've forced so many other Americans, you can bet monies will start flowing as they said they should.
Maybe American should hold off on the bon bons and Mickey D's so they can fit on planes.
The FAA standard weight for passengers is 180lbs. When that standard was created it was more often than not true. These days, it is very unlikely to fly with passengers who meet or beat the 180lbs per passenger standard. It means the weight difference has to come from someplace else. In some cases, if means you carry fewer passengers than seats. In other cases it means less fuel or simply less cargo.
Both of these planes are capable of much greater speeds, the limiting factor..... the sound barrier...and to limit air frame fatigue.
That's certainly true. Citations are not certified for mach speeds but test pilots routinely take them right beyond the barrier, as an experimental flight, immediately before being certified. Remember, each plane is tested before delivery by a test pilot. This is true of all planes. In an accident it is pretty easy to exceed their Vmax speed, which is near the barrier, and they want to know for sure the plane will hold together before they place it in the hands of less experienced pilots.
Certification speed should not be confused with what an airframe is capable of.
Huh? I said something anti-Windows and marginal at that. It was a fairly pro-Linux posting.
Exactly. And to be in the position where the "Deployment Options Specialist" has nothing but boilerplate means someone has already gone through the dizzying set of options and configuration possibilities. Many without a moniker such as, "Deployment Options Specialist", are often left with a large set of possibilities to choose from.
Since my original post was moded troll, to be absolutely clear, I was not being snide with that statement either. For many, having a very large set of options is simply too many options, creating confusion. It has frequently been a complaint levelled against Linux. Some consider it an advantage - others a disadvantage.
What a great explanation!
Its surprising how often Windows users truly believe Windows is ahead of Linux - at everything. Simple fact is, excluding game play and perhaps game development, Linux is far, far ahead on everything else and it is Windows which has proved to be in a chronic state of catch-up.
Of course the down side is, Linux has so many configuration and deployment options it tends to make many people's head spin thinking about them all.