I like the way in the Run (Windows key+R) dialog you can press Ctrl+Shift+Enter and get a UAC privilege escalation dialog and then a prompt with Admin rights.
I've worked at places that use IPSec or VPN. A common problem is that the server is loaded down so the secure connection is rather slow. So people will use VPN to pick up email/access the intranet when they need to and plain IP for internet access. Or people will bring laptops home and use plain IP on their unsecured home wireless network. Problem with this scheme is that if one of the machines with the files on is abused like this you could potentially have a problem. And if the files end up on pirate bay or you'll probably get fired no matter how encrypted they are.
Now in an ideal world everyone would understand things enough to not connect a secure machine to the public internet and also that it doesn't matter if files leak if they are sufficiently encrypted. Or that as you put it "if a competitor wanted the information there are easier ways to get it".
But we don't live in that world.
Mind you I'd define sufficiently encrypted as something much more secure than a passworded ZIP file.
DHT or the like might seed your files outside the company. Ok, I'm too lazy to work out if that really is a threat, but I'm not sure that bitorrent is appropriate for data that you don't want to end up in the public domain.
You could probably rig up a system where scripts check secure FTP servers for updates, and download them. Cascade the SFTP servers so that each one feeds out to two more, geographically close ones and you'll be ok. If possible only download diffs, not the whole thing. And find an SFTP client which will pull several files at a time since that gives better throughput on high latency connections which are window size limited.
Or we could just do like Taiwan and pull-out of the treaty.
What treaty is that? It doesn't sound plausible to me. Taiwan is a bit like Japan - it is very rare to see pirated software here. Also because Taiwan always looks for international recognition of its statehood, it spends lots of time trying to sign treaties since being able to sign treaties is evidence of it is a state as part of the declarative theory of statehood.
In testing. You need to be able to verify the testing mechanism. Open Source will win there because of the ability to view and modify the code. Just verify that you are testing with the same stuff that you reviewed.
USB2 promised 480Mbps and never delivered it. You get 250Mbps on a good day. Now we have marketing claims that USB3 will be "10x faster," yet a video demo shows it's 3.5x faster. That's 1.5Gbps, not 5Gbps.
From the article
The Windows demo saw around 318 MBps, while the Linux demo typically showed 125 MBps. I saw as high as 233 MBps while formatting the disk. dd is not the best application to use for performance testing; I only used to whip up a simple demo.
Application layer measurements showed poor performance (around 2 MBps). I think two things added fixed latencies between the application layer and the host controller hardware. First, there was a massive amount of debugging output in the host controller driver and mass storage driver. Second, I had placed some msleep() calls in the USB MSD driver so that I could see the debugging output and trigger a PCI analyzer at the same time. I didn't have time to take those out before I ran my demo. I need to run more tests to disable debugging and profile the upper layer stack for other bottlenecks.
i.e. the 3.5x figure is from something which is not optimized. Actually it doesn't sound like the host controller or mass storage hardware is optimized either, she said it could use longer burst sizes. Plus it's an FPGA, not an ASIC. It's too early to judge performance yet.
Still the Windows demo figure of 318MB/s is quite close to the 350MB/sec projected max speed for USB 3.0 from the video.
Honestly, Intel didn't have much choice, the NT kernel can't exactly be obtained, modified and distributed for free
At the moment Windows supports three host controller drivers. OHCI and UHCI for USB 1.0 and EHCI for USB 2.0. There's nothing special about host controller drivers, anyone can write one. If they wanted they could write a host controller driver for xHCI and then Windows would support USB 3.0.
Yup the host sets up a structure in memory which lists all the USB endpoints. When a driver wants to do some IO it asks the host controller driver which adds a request into the structure with a pointer to a buffer. The host controller hardware reads the structure with busmaster DMA and generates the USB packets. When the device answers the host controller DMAs the data into the the driver's buffer interrupts the CPU. Then the host controller can pass the buffer back to the driver. Polling is done by leaving the request in the structure, it doesn't require any CPU activity. Intel like USB because they invented it, not as some sort of conspiracy to load your CPU.
Or perhaps someone could modify mkisofs to produce an image that doesn't actually have data around the picture area.
That's what DiscT@2 did - the disk could either have graphics or data in any particular place but not both. My scheme isn't like that - you can have both graphics and data in the same place because the error correction is set up to remove the graphics bits from the raw data when the disk is read.
CDs use CIRS error correction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-Interleaved_Reed-Solomon_Coding Reed-Solomon codes are specifically useful in combating mixtures of random and burst errors. CIRC corrects error bursts up to 3,500 bits in sequence (2.4 mm in length as seen on CD surface) and compensates for error bursts up to 12,000 bits (8.5 mm) that may be caused by minor scratches
I think DVDs use a similar algorithm. With CDs someone worked out you could theoretically drill a 1mm hole in the CD and the error correction could recover the bits *. Essentially the label is using that.
Now writing a label on the disk in a 10pt font for example will leave some errors (the dark bits of the font) longer than 2.4mm. But that's no problem, you can just add some of the data bits back in. In fact the CD/DVD mastering software would take the label bitmap, mask it onto the data bitmap and then check if the error correction algorithm would be able to still read the data. If not it would remove some of the label bits and replace them with data bits and try again. It would keep doing this until the disc was readable. You'd have a bunch of algorithms which would be user selectable, and a preview function for the resulting image with a zoom in a GUI.
An obvious algorithm would be to just remove 50% of the the label bits and replace them with data bits. The image would be dimmed but it would be computationally cheap. You could do much more complex things that would work out which parts of the image needed to be dimmed (presumably large dark areas) and do it selectively.
* This is a bit misleading. In the digital domain this is true. In practice a 1mm hole would mess up the tracking so the CD would skip. Of course in my scheme the bits are removed digitally without affecting the tracking. However it shows you that you can have large dark areas added for a label and have them removed. So barcodes, labels in a small font and so on would be fine.
Cheap MLC disks don't have a long lifespan if you write to them flat out. Using the same formula the same guy works out a lifetime of 6 months for an MLC disk.
Actually that makes me think of a hair brained scheme. The finger print is essentially a mask applied to the data. Your eyes can see it but the DVD drive error corrects it away because there are enough gaps in the mask where the original data 'shows through' for the error correction to correct away the errors.
Now it seems like if you could record raw data you could make a DVD with a pattern visible to the naked eye but invisible to the DVD reader. So rather than waiting ages and buying expensive media for things like Lightscribe or Labelflash you could burn both the data and the label at the same time and on any media. Unlike DiscT@2 which burned logos on the data side of the disk, the space can be used for both logo and data at the same time.
You could do it with arbitrary bitmaps too - take the bitmap and make holes in it through which enough data shows through to make the disk readable. The burning software could do this with a mask cunningly constructed to make enough holes even in a solid bitmap to make the disk readable. Hell you could let the user select the tradeoff between image quality and error margin.
There's a a downside of course, the more solid the image the more the error correction will be stressed even for a disc which can be read perfectly. It seems like a disc burned with this technology would be less resistant to scratches and fingerprints.
That's about all good that can be said about it. This genre is inherently unworkable: it's a solution looking for a problem, it's a "virtual world" for the sake of being "virtual" and futuristic. Home addresses no need of the average consumer, it has very little entertainment value, and any applications to organizational tasks are better suited to simpler systems like IM.
When will these companies realize that you generally tend to invent things to make things easier, not abstract them in a confusing mess of real-life analogies and bloated 3D interfaces? Reminds me of the AOL-esque portals of the 90s.
It would have been better to create the world with a few computer controlled furries and reward people for killing them. It would create a sense of community for one. The leaders of the lynch mobs could become important political leaders of the virtual world, massive photos of them would hang from buildings, lesser minions would get stuffed furry heads to decorate their apartments. Later on you could have plagues of Miis too, which would need to be eradicated to encourage patriotism toward the platform and hatred of its competitors.
Yeah, watch some documentaries about pack animals or life in prison. That should give you some ideas for ways to communicate that you are the Alpha Male.
A true BOFH would remote shutdown any machines that weren't actively in use and tell people they were causing global warming that drowned polar bears if they complained.
Slashdot Mirror
I like the way in the Run (Windows key+R) dialog you can press Ctrl+Shift+Enter and get a UAC privilege escalation dialog and then a prompt with Admin rights.
That's like escaping from prison and then spending all your time in a small basement apartment.
mov dx, offset msg
mov ah, 9
int 21h
mox ax, 4c00h
int 21h
msg db 'Get off my lawn',13,10,'$
I've worked at places that use IPSec or VPN. A common problem is that the server is loaded down so the secure connection is rather slow. So people will use VPN to pick up email/access the intranet when they need to and plain IP for internet access. Or people will bring laptops home and use plain IP on their unsecured home wireless network. Problem with this scheme is that if one of the machines with the files on is abused like this you could potentially have a problem. And if the files end up on pirate bay or you'll probably get fired no matter how encrypted they are.
Now in an ideal world everyone would understand things enough to not connect a secure machine to the public internet and also that it doesn't matter if files leak if they are sufficiently encrypted. Or that as you put it "if a competitor wanted the information there are easier ways to get it".
But we don't live in that world.
Mind you I'd define sufficiently encrypted as something much more secure than a passworded ZIP file.
DHT or the like might seed your files outside the company. Ok, I'm too lazy to work out if that really is a threat, but I'm not sure that bitorrent is appropriate for data that you don't want to end up in the public domain.
You could probably rig up a system where scripts check secure FTP servers for updates, and download them. Cascade the SFTP servers so that each one feeds out to two more, geographically close ones and you'll be ok. If possible only download diffs, not the whole thing. And find an SFTP client which will pull several files at a time since that gives better throughput on high latency connections which are window size limited.
Or we could just do like Taiwan and pull-out of the treaty.
What treaty is that? It doesn't sound plausible to me. Taiwan is a bit like Japan - it is very rare to see pirated software here. Also because Taiwan always looks for international recognition of its statehood, it spends lots of time trying to sign treaties since being able to sign treaties is evidence of it is a state as part of the declarative theory of statehood.
In testing. You need to be able to verify the testing mechanism. Open Source will win there because of the ability to view and modify the code. Just verify that you are testing with the same stuff that you reviewed.
Live Free or Diebold!
He actually WASN'T a plumber. You do know that right? Being a plumber in Ohio requires a license. He didn't have one (ever).
That just shows how big government is oppressing small businesses.
Burn him! Burn the HERETIC!
I think you're missing the point. Intellectual decline! Falling standards! The Chinese are coming! They will make us into soup!
Buy guns and make nukes in your basement*.
* Cornell undergrads might want to try something less technically challenging like a mentos / diet coke binary weapon.
USB2 promised 480Mbps and never delivered it. You get 250Mbps on a good day. Now we have marketing claims that USB3 will be "10x faster," yet a video demo shows it's 3.5x faster. That's 1.5Gbps, not 5Gbps.
From the article
The Windows demo saw around 318 MBps, while the Linux demo typically showed 125 MBps. I saw as high as 233 MBps while formatting the disk. dd is not the best application to use for performance testing; I only used to whip up a simple demo.
Application layer measurements showed poor performance (around 2 MBps). I think two things added fixed latencies between the application layer and the host controller hardware. First, there was a massive amount of debugging output in the host controller driver and mass storage driver. Second, I had placed some msleep() calls in the USB MSD driver so that I could see the debugging output and trigger a PCI analyzer at the same time. I didn't have time to take those out before I ran my demo. I need to run more tests to disable debugging and profile the upper layer stack for other bottlenecks.
i.e. the 3.5x figure is from something which is not optimized. Actually it doesn't sound like the host controller or mass storage hardware is optimized either, she said it could use longer burst sizes. Plus it's an FPGA, not an ASIC. It's too early to judge performance yet.
Still the Windows demo figure of 318MB/s is quite close to the 350MB/sec projected max speed for USB 3.0 from the video.
Honestly, Intel didn't have much choice, the NT kernel can't exactly be obtained, modified and distributed for free
At the moment Windows supports three host controller drivers. OHCI and UHCI for USB 1.0 and EHCI for USB 2.0. There's nothing special about host controller drivers, anyone can write one. If they wanted they could write a host controller driver for xHCI and then Windows would support USB 3.0.
Yup the host sets up a structure in memory which lists all the USB endpoints. When a driver wants to do some IO it asks the host controller driver which adds a request into the structure with a pointer to a buffer. The host controller hardware reads the structure with busmaster DMA and generates the USB packets. When the device answers the host controller DMAs the data into the the driver's buffer interrupts the CPU. Then the host controller can pass the buffer back to the driver. Polling is done by leaving the request in the structure, it doesn't require any CPU activity. Intel like USB because they invented it, not as some sort of conspiracy to load your CPU.
Or perhaps someone could modify mkisofs to produce an image that doesn't actually have data around the picture area.
That's what DiscT@2 did - the disk could either have graphics or data in any particular place but not both. My scheme isn't like that - you can have both graphics and data in the same place because the error correction is set up to remove the graphics bits from the raw data when the disk is read.
CDs use CIRS error correction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-Interleaved_Reed-Solomon_Coding
Reed-Solomon codes are specifically useful in combating mixtures of random and burst errors. CIRC corrects error bursts up to 3,500 bits in sequence (2.4 mm in length as seen on CD surface) and compensates for error bursts up to 12,000 bits (8.5 mm) that may be caused by minor scratches
I think DVDs use a similar algorithm. With CDs someone worked out you could theoretically drill a 1mm hole in the CD and the error correction could recover the bits *. Essentially the label is using that.
Now writing a label on the disk in a 10pt font for example will leave some errors (the dark bits of the font) longer than 2.4mm. But that's no problem, you can just add some of the data bits back in. In fact the CD/DVD mastering software would take the label bitmap, mask it onto the data bitmap and then check if the error correction algorithm would be able to still read the data. If not it would remove some of the label bits and replace them with data bits and try again. It would keep doing this until the disc was readable. You'd have a bunch of algorithms which would be user selectable, and a preview function for the resulting image with a zoom in a GUI.
An obvious algorithm would be to just remove 50% of the the label bits and replace them with data bits. The image would be dimmed but it would be computationally cheap. You could do much more complex things that would work out which parts of the image needed to be dimmed (presumably large dark areas) and do it selectively.
* This is a bit misleading. In the digital domain this is true. In practice a 1mm hole would mess up the tracking so the CD would skip. Of course in my scheme the bits are removed digitally without affecting the tracking. However it shows you that you can have large dark areas added for a label and have them removed. So barcodes, labels in a small font and so on would be fine.
Actually it's not a problem if you use SLC chips. This paper works out the life with wear levelling at 51 years
http://www.storagesearch.com/ssdmyths-endurance.html
Cheap MLC disks don't have a long lifespan if you write to them flat out. Using the same formula the same guy works out a lifetime of 6 months for an MLC disk.
http://www.storagesearch.com/ssd-slc-mlc-notes.html
Any results on queries about global warming (er, climate change)? Sorry, the next media panic scheduled is the availability of fresh water.
Studies show that the ice caps are melting too slowly! Hybrid cars must be BANNED to save the planet!
Most people arguing on the internet cite wikipedia so democratically they are correct and you are wrong.
Actually that makes me think of a hair brained scheme. The finger print is essentially a mask applied to the data. Your eyes can see it but the DVD drive error corrects it away because there are enough gaps in the mask where the original data 'shows through' for the error correction to correct away the errors.
Now it seems like if you could record raw data you could make a DVD with a pattern visible to the naked eye but invisible to the DVD reader. So rather than waiting ages and buying expensive media for things like Lightscribe or Labelflash you could burn both the data and the label at the same time and on any media. Unlike DiscT@2 which burned logos on the data side of the disk, the space can be used for both logo and data at the same time.
You could do it with arbitrary bitmaps too - take the bitmap and make holes in it through which enough data shows through to make the disk readable. The burning software could do this with a mask cunningly constructed to make enough holes even in a solid bitmap to make the disk readable. Hell you could let the user select the tradeoff between image quality and error margin.
There's a a downside of course, the more solid the image the more the error correction will be stressed even for a disc which can be read perfectly. It seems like a disc burned with this technology would be less resistant to scratches and fingerprints.
No furries.
That's about all good that can be said about it. This genre is inherently unworkable: it's a solution looking for a problem, it's a "virtual world" for the sake of being "virtual" and futuristic. Home addresses no need of the average consumer, it has very little entertainment value, and any applications to organizational tasks are better suited to simpler systems like IM.
When will these companies realize that you generally tend to invent things to make things easier, not abstract them in a confusing mess of real-life analogies and bloated 3D interfaces? Reminds me of the AOL-esque portals of the 90s.
It would have been better to create the world with a few computer controlled furries and reward people for killing them. It would create a sense of community for one. The leaders of the lynch mobs could become important political leaders of the virtual world, massive photos of them would hang from buildings, lesser minions would get stuffed furry heads to decorate their apartments. Later on you could have plagues of Miis too, which would need to be eradicated to encourage patriotism toward the platform and hatred of its competitors.
This page may help you out
http://www.exile.ru/transient/151/europeans-chart.html
The one for the Balkans is hilarious.
I think it was an attempt at self deprecatory humour.
add isn't retarded either some of the smartest pe ooh a kestrel! look out the window!
Yeah, watch some documentaries about pack animals or life in prison. That should give you some ideas for ways to communicate that you are the Alpha Male.
A true BOFH would remote shutdown any machines that weren't actively in use and tell people they were causing global warming that drowned polar bears if they complained.
Americans love the cliché of "outcast made good".
Here in North Korea we prefer the cliché of "outcast crushed by the omnipotent Party"