Just because *you* don't get SPAM doesn't mean that it isn't a problem in a number of ways.
I get 10,000+ SPAM attempts per day. I;d have to give up well-known and memorable emails addresses to begin to trim it.
Legit inbound and outbound mails get lots in the SPAM wars, eg people miss important mails of mine, and I miss theirs.
SPAM traffic also wastes bandwidth and power in my networking equipment and servers; visible and significant for a partly off-grid system for example.
SPAM filters are a poor fix for a pernicious problem that has destroyed what was a wonderful communications service. I was using email before SPAM existed.
But you're not powerless to influence the subject of this debate, you're just throwing in the towel for no good reason it seems to me, and are therefore actively avoiding getting the best outcome, which is negligent.
It is a silly demand because the scarcity is artificial and unless you are a fisherman (and possibly not even then) it is by no means an essential.
We can all just make up demands for things like 10t of precious metal each that might also be highly desirable because of how we happen to price them, but artificial scarcities are not meaning for a discussion.
Confirmation bias is strong even when people try to avoid it, but I have once or twice even here on/. said words to the effect "thank you for that explanation I didn't have a clue" and "yes, I take your point".
It can happen, just not often, and changing an opinion is often a slow and gradual (and sometimes embarrassing) process, unlikely to be visible in the course of a single response.
One of the reasons that I have not run my own forums, even as one of the first people with Internet connectivity in the UK for example, is the horror of dealing with that effect. I sincerely believe most people around me to be decent human beings, with some rougher edges exposed when not talking face to face.
But what is it that happens with discussion threads?
Possibly I *could*, but as it's running on our custom hardware writing the emulation would be... time consuming.
But being able to bootload over serial with all the compilation (etc) happening on the laptop is still a huge boon. I still have burnt in my memory the sound of the grind grind of the floppies compiling and assembling on CPM, and with my one contact with Bill Gates (by telex) because of a boneheaded misfeature in the Microsoft tools... %-P
The key virtue, such as it is, of the do {... } while(false), better wrapped up in a macro, is that it makes it harder to get the nesting wrong by accident, which is critical.
Lots of 'Internet of Things' code will be written in C (with some ASM and C++) as the 'things' tend to be resource constrained. That's a big market coming up.
I'm enjoying using C again on devices with similar performance to those I was using 30 years ago (now: ATMega328P running with 1MHz CPU, ie 1 MIPS; then Z80A with 4MHz clock making for ~1MIPS) but with lots better development tools this time, and several GHz of laptop to run them on.
OK, good, I already understand that linking Apache and GPL code is a bad idea (though Apache and LGPL much less bad to completely OK depending on the details).
I thought that you were suggesting some problem between Eclipse and Apache that had completely passed me by.
(FWIW, I try to license code Apache 2 as far as possible to maximise the number of places that that code can be used.)
Would you please expand on "The same applies to anything Apache licensed." for me?
Rgds
Damon
Re:Obligatory reminder that an alternative exists
on
OpenSSL 1.0.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
If you look at my code for example at random.hd.org then you'll notice that it's something that user space can do just as well. The kernel has no magic other than direct access to a few more noisy things.
The security should work independently of details of the underlying medium and without relying on its exact implementation. A byte stream (observed or not) is just that. Likewise an unreliable packet stream.
This is what we have abstraction for.
Rgds
Damon
Re:Obligatory reminder that an alternative exists
on
OpenSSL 1.0.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
We don't have peak demand from aircon in the UK (GB grid) either. Ours comes on (winter) evenings when, for example, meals are being cooked for kids home from school.
Do you have a link to your utility's site?
Yes, of course you shouldn't take my word on spec over your local guy's, but I'm stubbornly continuing to assert that your local load profile can't be completely flat and with rock-steady frequency even if not as tortured as elsewhere.
For reference here's my 'local' grid (GB) live balancing stats:
I am truly sympathetic to your wish to overcomplicating things and making them more complex and fragile: I just don't think this stuff will be 'over'-complexity for a huge chunk of the purchasers, it will be more like an essential and pay for itself in upfront balancing payments off the purchase cost in many cases.
Here are a few of my wacky ideas on the topic, one of which got me through the first round of a competition sponsored by National Grid and another of which has been discussed with an electricity supplier:
I will still try to turn some of these into niche (but simple) versions of consumer products. You only buy these ones if they meet a need for you and no one else is lumbered with the extra complexity...
Flattening demand would reduce costs of infrastructure that otherwise has to cope with unrestrained peaks; we already do this so it is only a matter of degree and where exactly we do it. Further, allowing demand to follow non-dispatchable load will also help make better use of renewables as well as cope with failure of conventional plant more gracefully.
Also, different parts of the grid will have different problems, eg while the grid may be fine overall at a given moment one substation may be having a torrid time with its much smaller consumer sample, eg that may have a bunch of locals arriving off the same bus or train putting the water for a cuppa, or have a cable fault in one phase, or whatever.
Further, sensible secure schemes will devolve as much as possible of the detailed timing to the appliance so that they cannot all be commanded to 'come on' or 'go off' at once but apply a randomisation algorithm much as Ethernet does for example.
Just because you may have decided up front that there are no good solutions doesn't mean there aren't any. Some of the people that have them know a lot more about stats than you and I both, so can we at least accept that there are entire chunks of maths and computing that have interesting secure distributed randomised algorithms that deal with exactly these sorts of issues all the time?
So, I'm all in favour of efficiency, but it's invariably seen as some kind of left wing conspiracy at least in the US and UK in certain sections of the population and politics.
Thanks to that improved efficiency my (somewhat larger and nicer) fridge/freezer uses half the energy of my previous one and I don't call being gouged on price, for example, though I remain cross with some misrepresentation by the manufacturer.
Our government has been rather cynically watering down building efficiency standards for very short term and minimal savings while condemning people to a future of inflated bills, which it also complains about. Also our trades seem often to regard the care required to improve building performance as an assault on their manliness or something.
Remember also that shifting and reduction are separate worthy goals. A more efficient device that drew all its power at the least good moments would be sub-optimal.
If you want to claim absolute rights to kill or maim others in order not to bother putting a sweater on, then I'd go along with that.
The world is not binary and we don't have absolute rights to do unnecessary things that hurt others.
72F is warmer than I would like a house, and might be foolish if you haven't bothered insulating and/or are expecting others to subsidise you, eg with external effects of burning coal on their health, but I can't really see 72F as being a felony on its own.
Slashdot Mirror
Just because *you* don't get SPAM doesn't mean that it isn't a problem in a number of ways.
I get 10,000+ SPAM attempts per day. I;d have to give up well-known and memorable emails addresses to begin to trim it.
Legit inbound and outbound mails get lots in the SPAM wars, eg people miss important mails of mine, and I miss theirs.
SPAM traffic also wastes bandwidth and power in my networking equipment and servers; visible and significant for a partly off-grid system for example.
SPAM filters are a poor fix for a pernicious problem that has destroyed what was a wonderful communications service. I was using email before SPAM existed.
Rgds
Damon
The reductio ad absurdum is obvious.
Sad, and I suspect, just lazy.
Rgds
Damon
But you're not powerless to influence the subject of this debate, you're just throwing in the towel for no good reason it seems to me, and are therefore actively avoiding getting the best outcome, which is negligent.
Do you bother to vote?
Rgds
Damon
It must be lovely to be so cool and detached about such things. Do wars and pandemics and poverty also induce belly laughs in you?
Rgds
Damon
Hi
It is a silly demand because the scarcity is artificial and unless you are a fisherman (and possibly not even then) it is by no means an essential.
We can all just make up demands for things like 10t of precious metal each that might also be highly desirable because of how we happen to price them, but artificial scarcities are not meaning for a discussion.
Rgds
Damon
And I'd like two entire universes please.
Just because you can make a silly demand, doesn't make it anything other than that.
Rgds
Damon
Well, your sig "I am a crackpot" leads me to hope that you don't actually believe the mental contortions in that item!
Rgds
Damon
Confirmation bias is strong even when people try to avoid it, but I have once or twice even here on /. said words to the effect "thank you for that explanation I didn't have a clue" and "yes, I take your point".
It can happen, just not often, and changing an opinion is often a slow and gradual (and sometimes embarrassing) process, unlikely to be visible in the course of a single response.
Rgds
Damon
One of the reasons that I have not run my own forums, even as one of the first people with Internet connectivity in the UK for example, is the horror of dealing with that effect. I sincerely believe most people around me to be decent human beings, with some rougher edges exposed when not talking face to face.
But what is it that happens with discussion threads?
Rgds
Damon
Possibly I *could*, but as it's running on our custom hardware writing the emulation would be ... time consuming.
But being able to bootload over serial with all the compilation (etc) happening on the laptop is still a huge boon. I still have burnt in my memory the sound of the grind grind of the floppies compiling and assembling on CPM, and with my one contact with Bill Gates (by telex) because of a boneheaded misfeature in the Microsoft tools... %-P
Rgds
Damon
The key virtue, such as it is, of the do { ... } while(false), better wrapped up in a macro, is that it makes it harder to get the nesting wrong by accident, which is critical.
With goto there is no such safety net.
But I think we're agreeing furiously.
Rgds
Damon
Bingo: you win tonight's Internets...
Rgds
Damon
PS. Like all that Y2K work I wasn't doing in a bank that wasn't necessary except that it was...
Lots of 'Internet of Things' code will be written in C (with some ASM and C++) as the 'things' tend to be resource constrained. That's a big market coming up.
I'm enjoying using C again on devices with similar performance to those I was using 30 years ago (now: ATMega328P running with 1MHz CPU, ie 1 MIPS; then Z80A with 4MHz clock making for ~1MIPS) but with lots better development tools this time, and several GHz of laptop to run them on.
https://sourceforge.net/p/open...
When not writing C (and developing hardware) I knock out (parts of) huge mission-critical Java systems for banks.
Each is good: each for its niche.
Rgds
Damon
Some sort of nested do { ... } while(false); and break; would be my first suggestion.
Rgds
Damon
OK, good, I already understand that linking Apache and GPL code is a bad idea (though Apache and LGPL much less bad to completely OK depending on the details).
I thought that you were suggesting some problem between Eclipse and Apache that had completely passed me by.
(FWIW, I try to license code Apache 2 as far as possible to maximise the number of places that that code can be used.)
Rgds
Damon
Would you please expand on "The same applies to anything Apache licensed." for me?
Rgds
Damon
If you look at my code for example at random.hd.org then you'll notice that it's something that user space can do just as well. The kernel has no magic other than direct access to a few more noisy things.
Rgds
Damon
+1
The security should work independently of details of the underlying medium and without relying on its exact implementation. A byte stream (observed or not) is just that. Likewise an unreliable packet stream.
This is what we have abstraction for.
Rgds
Damon
That's at least three sorts of nonsense:
https://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbi...
https://www.random.org/
http://random.hd.org/
The OS has no magic either, or are you saying that it's random seeds all the way down?
Rgds
Damon
Oooooo, thanks for that. Damaged one of my eyes falling off a Segway (1st world geek problem or what?) and anything that helps is welcome!
Rgds
Damon
We don't have peak demand from aircon in the UK (GB grid) either. Ours comes on (winter) evenings when, for example, meals are being cooked for kids home from school.
Do you have a link to your utility's site?
Yes, of course you shouldn't take my word on spec over your local guy's, but I'm stubbornly continuing to assert that your local load profile can't be completely flat and with rock-steady frequency even if not as tortured as elsewhere.
For reference here's my 'local' grid (GB) live balancing stats:
http://www.bmreports.com/bsp/b...
I am truly sympathetic to your wish to overcomplicating things and making them more complex and fragile: I just don't think this stuff will be 'over'-complexity for a huge chunk of the purchasers, it will be more like an essential and pay for itself in upfront balancing payments off the purchase cost in many cases.
Here are a few of my wacky ideas on the topic, one of which got me through the first round of a competition sponsored by National Grid and another of which has been discussed with an electricity supplier:
http://www.earth.org.uk/domest...
I will still try to turn some of these into niche (but simple) versions of consumer products. You only buy these ones if they meet a need for you and no one else is lumbered with the extra complexity...
Rgds
Damon
Goodness, that's rather offhand and completely wrong at lots of levels.
Clearly there a peaks at national and supra-national level. Have a look at some of these for just one example:
http://www.bmreports.com/bsp/b...
Flattening demand would reduce costs of infrastructure that otherwise has to cope with unrestrained peaks; we already do this so it is only a matter of degree and where exactly we do it. Further, allowing demand to follow non-dispatchable load will also help make better use of renewables as well as cope with failure of conventional plant more gracefully.
Also, different parts of the grid will have different problems, eg while the grid may be fine overall at a given moment one substation may be having a torrid time with its much smaller consumer sample, eg that may have a bunch of locals arriving off the same bus or train putting the water for a cuppa, or have a cable fault in one phase, or whatever.
Further, sensible secure schemes will devolve as much as possible of the detailed timing to the appliance so that they cannot all be commanded to 'come on' or 'go off' at once but apply a randomisation algorithm much as Ethernet does for example.
Just because you may have decided up front that there are no good solutions doesn't mean there aren't any. Some of the people that have them know a lot more about stats than you and I both, so can we at least accept that there are entire chunks of maths and computing that have interesting secure distributed randomised algorithms that deal with exactly these sorts of issues all the time?
Rgds
Damon
So, I'm all in favour of efficiency, but it's invariably seen as some kind of left wing conspiracy at least in the US and UK in certain sections of the population and politics.
Thanks to that improved efficiency my (somewhat larger and nicer) fridge/freezer uses half the energy of my previous one and I don't call being gouged on price, for example, though I remain cross with some misrepresentation by the manufacturer.
Our government has been rather cynically watering down building efficiency standards for very short term and minimal savings while condemning people to a future of inflated bills, which it also complains about. Also our trades seem often to regard the care required to improve building performance as an assault on their manliness or something.
Remember also that shifting and reduction are separate worthy goals. A more efficient device that drew all its power at the least good moments would be sub-optimal.
We have to work on all fronts, even if not ideal.
Rgds
Damon
Have you looked at the credit ratings of, for example, the big EU utilities?
The tone of your text is unnecessarily harsh and I think that you are also completely wrong factually.
Rgds
Damon
If you want to claim absolute rights to kill or maim others in order not to bother putting a sweater on, then I'd go along with that.
The world is not binary and we don't have absolute rights to do unnecessary things that hurt others.
72F is warmer than I would like a house, and might be foolish if you haven't bothered insulating and/or are expecting others to subsidise you, eg with external effects of burning coal on their health, but I can't really see 72F as being a felony on its own.
Rgds
Damon