Agreed, I don't spend any additional time coding AJAX type things, it's just a different technique to deal with the data. I've never thought it was more time consuming or more difficult.
Agreed, there is no absolute answer here. In many cases the overhead involved with malloc() or whatever you're using is too high, or if the data structure is simple enough you don't need it in the first place. I'm used to dealing with 2-4K of memory, in which case the cards are pretty much all laid out in front of me, only in special situations would I use dynamic allocation..
However, if you're doing a complex application and have 16 megs of memory (HUGE!) with an ARM or some higher end processor that has the headroom, I doubt it matters much, you might as well be lazy and do the easiest thing.
I own an X5, and it plays OGG great, sounds as good or better than any other player out there, and also will display images, text files, video (15fps), records to MP3/WAV - Tons of really nice features.
The built in microphone does pretty good at getting clear recordings of what is going on around you, I've been using it to interview people and record events, if you're concerned about quality, you can buy a couple of microphones for stereo, a mic-pre, and send it to the X5 as line-level input.
Rockbox has an X5 port project going, when that gets closer you could tweak on it to your heart's content.. although I suspect video support is way off still..
My only complaint is that the little joystick is a bit hard to deal with sometimes, but all in all, it's the best player I found when shopping.
No, that's not my point. Embedded devices shouldn't need a firewall if they're made correctly. Also due to limitations in processing power, memory, and other such things, it's better to build something that doesn't need a firewall, rather than pay the extra unit cost, development cost, and current consumption that follows with the overhead of an additional layer of functionality that the firewall imposes.
A blanket solution is just bloat, not such an issue with say a workstation, but it's a huge issue with a small embedded device.
If I have a service running, and I'm connected to both the local network, and the internet, I should be able to tell the service which kind of interfaces to accept connections on. I have a local development box for example running Apache, it accepts local 192.168.x.x connections, but nothing else. No firewall in place.
You're correct about intrustion detection and prevention, but that, as you mentioned isn't strickly a firewall. It's a software response that may include a firewall.
Firewalls, are okay, but especially for embedded devices (you'll recall I made a distinction) they are a poor reaction to the problem.
You can hack through a NAT, not being l33t, I'm unfamiliar with the exact practice, but I've seen security reports about this.
My real point is though, If you have a device like your toaster on the internet, and it's vulnerable to an attack that a firewall fixes, the problem is with your toaster, not the internet. That whole example is totally weak.
Why do you want to connect your toaster to the internet, so that you can connect to it, right? Or make connections out from the toaster. Either way, you need ports open. If someone can connect to ports that you don't want open, the software/hardware in the toaster is to blame. Not the absense of a firewall, or NAT. If your toaster can be hacked through the toaster port, then a firewall ain't going to help you.
This overreliance on the firewall is disturbing to me, it makes people not fix the real issues. Granted with certain general purpose machines (i.e. your Desktop workstation) this is more difficult than others, but there's no reason why an embedded internet-aware processor can't be very secure with no firewall or NAT fo that matter. If it's not, fix the problem, don't mask it with a firewall.
Uhm.. okay, I see what you're getting at, but that assumes that it's always equidistant from the center of the earth, which, although I'm no expert, I'm pretty sure is a false assumption.
That's a nice ideal, but the question is: Does the planet have enough resources for everyone to have that high of a standard of living? Don't forget there are billions of people living at a much lower standard than Americans or Eurpoeans both are used to.
Perhaps not, by why restrict ourselves to one planet?
Sure, I agree it seems like this effort is in place, but I have a lot of faith in the worker, inevitably, they'll win, although practices like this make things worse.
Do you know of any practices specifically that they are using to prevent this? So far they don't seem to be working, I was reading the other day about how the influx of money into India is causing the wages to slowly increase due to capitalist pressures. I'll see if I can dig up the article, I think it was in the Economist..
Although, this may be discouraging, I think most that are complaining about the plight of the worker just have a short-term point of view.
This is nothing more than growing pains, and in the long run, capitalism SHOULD (unless someone screws it up) raise everyone's standards up. Even Ethiopia, so that everyone can have 5 weeks vacation, and 3 hour lunches.
That is unless anti-capitalist forces interviene to make it take longer than it should.
For the same reason that Europeans worked for diddly squat and finally managed to require the working environment that they're now used to, the Indians will eventually do the same, and when IBM, or whomever, fires the Indians, and hires the next third world country to work for 10 cents an hour, they will in turn raise their standard of living.
As scary as some of the implications of Globalism are, this particular process isn't one of them.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed, I don't spend any additional time coding AJAX type things, it's just a different technique to deal with the data. I've never thought it was more time consuming or more difficult.
Agreed, there is no absolute answer here. In many cases the overhead involved with malloc() or whatever you're using is too high, or if the data structure is simple enough you don't need it in the first place. I'm used to dealing with 2-4K of memory, in which case the cards are pretty much all laid out in front of me, only in special situations would I use dynamic allocation..
However, if you're doing a complex application and have 16 megs of memory (HUGE!) with an ARM or some higher end processor that has the headroom, I doubt it matters much, you might as well be lazy and do the easiest thing.
I own an X5, and it plays OGG great, sounds as good or better than any other player out there, and also will display images, text files, video (15fps), records to MP3/WAV - Tons of really nice features.
The built in microphone does pretty good at getting clear recordings of what is going on around you, I've been using it to interview people and record events, if you're concerned about quality, you can buy a couple of microphones for stereo, a mic-pre, and send it to the X5 as line-level input.
Rockbox has an X5 port project going, when that gets closer you could tweak on it to your heart's content.. although I suspect video support is way off still..
My only complaint is that the little joystick is a bit hard to deal with sometimes, but all in all, it's the best player I found when shopping.
No, that's not my point. Embedded devices shouldn't need a firewall if they're made correctly. Also due to limitations in processing power, memory, and other such things, it's better to build something that doesn't need a firewall, rather than pay the extra unit cost, development cost, and current consumption that follows with the overhead of an additional layer of functionality that the firewall imposes.
A blanket solution is just bloat, not such an issue with say a workstation, but it's a huge issue with a small embedded device.
If I have a service running, and I'm connected to both the local network, and the internet, I should be able to tell the service which kind of interfaces to accept connections on. I have a local development box for example running Apache, it accepts local 192.168.x.x connections, but nothing else. No firewall in place. You're correct about intrustion detection and prevention, but that, as you mentioned isn't strickly a firewall. It's a software response that may include a firewall. Firewalls, are okay, but especially for embedded devices (you'll recall I made a distinction) they are a poor reaction to the problem.
You can hack through a NAT, not being l33t, I'm unfamiliar with the exact practice, but I've seen security reports about this.
My real point is though, If you have a device like your toaster on the internet, and it's vulnerable to an attack that a firewall fixes, the problem is with your toaster, not the internet. That whole example is totally weak.
Why do you want to connect your toaster to the internet, so that you can connect to it, right? Or make connections out from the toaster. Either way, you need ports open. If someone can connect to ports that you don't want open, the software/hardware in the toaster is to blame. Not the absense of a firewall, or NAT. If your toaster can be hacked through the toaster port, then a firewall ain't going to help you.
This overreliance on the firewall is disturbing to me, it makes people not fix the real issues. Granted with certain general purpose machines (i.e. your Desktop workstation) this is more difficult than others, but there's no reason why an embedded internet-aware processor can't be very secure with no firewall or NAT fo that matter. If it's not, fix the problem, don't mask it with a firewall.
Uhm.. okay, I see what you're getting at, but that assumes that it's always equidistant from the center of the earth, which, although I'm no expert, I'm pretty sure is a false assumption.
That's a nice ideal, but the question is: Does the planet have enough resources for everyone to have that high of a standard of living? Don't forget there are billions of people living at a much lower standard than Americans or Eurpoeans both are used to.
Perhaps not, by why restrict ourselves to one planet?
Says who? That doesn't make any sense at all. Granted the orbit is elliptical, but this has nothing to do with the horizon whatsoever.
Sure, I agree it seems like this effort is in place, but I have a lot of faith in the worker, inevitably, they'll win, although practices like this make things worse.
Do you know of any practices specifically that they are using to prevent this? So far they don't seem to be working, I was reading the other day about how the influx of money into India is causing the wages to slowly increase due to capitalist pressures. I'll see if I can dig up the article, I think it was in the Economist..
Although, this may be discouraging, I think most that are complaining about the plight of the worker just have a short-term point of view.
This is nothing more than growing pains, and in the long run, capitalism SHOULD (unless someone screws it up) raise everyone's standards up. Even Ethiopia, so that everyone can have 5 weeks vacation, and 3 hour lunches.
That is unless anti-capitalist forces interviene to make it take longer than it should.
For the same reason that Europeans worked for diddly squat and finally managed to require the working environment that they're now used to, the Indians will eventually do the same, and when IBM, or whomever, fires the Indians, and hires the next third world country to work for 10 cents an hour, they will in turn raise their standard of living.
As scary as some of the implications of Globalism are, this particular process isn't one of them.