point 1 I will leave alone. that is a subjective isue though with true-type, I think the fonts do look better.
Point 2: if you don;t like the way space is used up, use something like FVWM. my setup just has a black screen. everything is handles through keyboard shortcuts. even the windows only have 3 pixel borders and no title bar because I have no use for a title bar. is even possible to get such a setup of windows and still have it be usable?
oh yes. no kernel based drivers. now... how do you plan on getting that nice software like openVPN work? or how about those file-system readers such as e2fsd? locking the kernel is a very good thing but only to a certain extent.
Microsoft provides hooks for that very purpose.
Mocrosoft provides hooks for arbitrary drivers and hardware I/O? because that is what would be needed to allow the complete functionality to be exported into userspace.
Micro-kernels are like RISC processing, no modern processor is a RISC design but the principle of RISC inform the design of all modern processors. No second generation processor was ever a pure RISC design. Even the ARM and the Alpha are no longer pure RISC.
Windows NT has always had elements that are Micro-Kernel like. The original PRISM architecture at DEC was much more of a Microkernel. The Windows Kernel will always be much larger than the Micro-Kernel ideal but eliminating third party code is a good step in the right direction.
Indeed. NT is not pure micro-kernel and that is exactly why there needs to be a method of inserting kernel hooks.In a pure micro-kernel design there would be no such need. Moving to the micro-kernel design is all good and nice but losing (sometimes crtical) functionality in the process is not.
I wasn't referring to the capabilities of micro-kernels vs. monolithic kernels but rather referring to how the locked down kernel was going to be a problem. still you make a valid point.
P.S. Device drivers DO NOT need to have a specific kernel component. Look at FUSE where drivers for FS devices like sshfs are entirely in userspace and run through thanks to the kerneluserspace module.
wtf are you talking about. are the NT network interfaces implemented in userspace? are the NTFS file system drivers implemented in userspace either? NO. are there even facilities to implement them im userspace in windows? to my knowledge, NO. In a monolithic kernel, should device drivers and file system drivers ever really be in userspace, NO. Sometime, it is useful, suh as with a driver with a high chance of faliure but in general, it is not done for root file systems etc. Read my comment for once. In a micro-kernel, what you say would be right but NT and VISTA are NOT MICRO-KERNEL DESIGNS.
flamebait but i'll bite. 64 bit isn't just about the larger numbers that could be stored. heck, that could already be done through the use of the x87 ISA (upto nearly 80 bit I think actually) and the vector registers (think sse1,2,3 and 3dnow) could all work with 64 bit numbers. that wasn't the issue at all. what is great about 64bit is
1)the amount of register space literally doubles. Optimized properly, that can go a long ways.
oh yes. no kernel based drivers. now... how do you plan on getting that nice software like openVPN work? or how about those file-system readers such as e2fsd? locking the kernel is a very good thing but only to a certain extent. nobody can tell what a piece of software will ultimately be used for and thus designing it completely is impossible. if you want a kernel which only does the minimum and lets userspace do the rest (thus actually making a black box kernel usable) you need a micro-kernel and last time I checked, no MS OS used a micro-kernel design. The closest the micro-kernel design has come to PCs is in OS X but even that is not really a complete micro-kernel (notably, there are some micro-kernel designs in production uses such as QNX and vxWorks but those are speciality products restricted mostly to embeded products like routers).
mod parent up. I think that this is a very good point. IMHO the press should be required to reveal all sources to the public as well as refrain from stating opinions not directly supported by the evidence present in the article. enforcing this properly would be a major problem.
in case you didn't know, in check fraud/credit card fraud etc. it is the banks which are liable not the person using the services of the bank. by law. As for passing on the cost, that is only doable with debit cards. otherwise, there is no way to pass the cost on to the customers.
from what I know, above about 10 chars and the password is pretty secure. in my case, I use phrases or sentences with all the spaces removed and then random substitutions for letters with numbers and signs (replace o with 0, s with $ etc.). Unless the someone is the NSA, it shouldn't be much of a problem. as for the remembering passwords problem, with LUKS, its possible to have multiple passwords so on in a safety deposit box and another in your head should work pretty well. at worst, place the key on a USB drive (LUKS also allows this) and carry the stuff around. encryption is pretty good now, unless the oponent has exorbitant resources.
Disclamer: I am not a security expert, just someone who reads this stuff for fun. better advice can be found with a little more digging.
the password does not actually need to be that long. With hashing and low-entropy data algorithms, the problem can be elivated to a large degree. good passwords are still important but they no longer need to be 50 cars of random characters. LUKS implements such a scheme.
quite possibly yes. encrypted file systems + encrypted swap + encrypted ssl/VPN net connection = total encryption of data regardless of location and its not that hard to do it. encrypted FS and swap can be taken care of by LUKS and VPN is trivial with openVPN and ethernet TAP bridging.
look up LUKS. Probably far above any reasonable corporate standards and allows features such as multiple keys through slots, retiring of passwords, etc. very effective.
I was thinking of something along the lines of what I have setup on my FVWM2 system. [Super_l][Ctrl]{r,o,m,c,d...etc.} are window specific shortcuts and act on the current window (actions like resize, move, iconify, etc.) and [Super_l]{q,m,n,b,t,p,1,2,3,4 etc.} are global shortfuts used to start applications (like firefox, terminal etc.) and switch workspaces as well as some other random options (i.e. b,n,m decreate vol., increase vol., and mute respectively). All in all, I have around ~25 to 30 total keyboard shortcuts. the only time I use the mouse now is for firefox.
politics. like an earlier post said, "a government program works so it must be stopped." When a gov. prog succeeds, it makes the rest of the gov. look bad. therefore, it must be trashed.
well... TCPA is not exempt under (US) cartel rules since it discriminates against non-members (they cant comm with anything TCPA) but that is only in an ideal world. I hope it never comes to pass. The applications and CPU have no buisiness hiding RAM from the OS unless that is BIOS RAM and applications have no buisiness encrypting files to the point where only that application and hardware config. can read it. If TCPA trashed these portions (i.e. there was no hidden RAM from the OS and encryption could accomodate hardware and software changes or atleast always have a garantee of exporting an unencrypted file) I would be more accepting but doesn't seem like that is going to happen.
thanks for the wikipedia article link. At the bottom of the page, some interesting numbers are listed (though I do not know of their reliability). These seem to be nearly 29.4%. If that is anywhere close to the true number, it smokes normal PV cells (norm efficiency from 8% to ~15% unless you are willing to spend extraordinary amounts for marginal gains to get the lab max of 30%). Maybe google should be using these instead of solar panels?
actually last time I checked, SGML parsers were actually faster than XML parsers (even though SGML is a pure superset of XML). why I am not so sure of.
Re:Red Hat has no worries with this
on
Oracle Linux?
·
· Score: 1
May I suggest looking at postgres postgresql.org. you would be amazed by what it has to offer for free.
Slashdot Mirror
but gentoo is even better than sliced bread...
Point 2: if you don;t like the way space is used up, use something like FVWM. my setup just has a black screen. everything is handles through keyboard shortcuts. even the windows only have 3 pixel borders and no title bar because I have no use for a title bar. is even possible to get such a setup of windows and still have it be usable?
seems like it. sweet. I want one of those things.
P.S. Device drivers DO NOT need to have a specific kernel component. Look at FUSE where drivers for FS devices like sshfs are entirely in userspace and run through thanks to the kerneluserspace module.
wtf are you talking about. are the NT network interfaces implemented in userspace? are the NTFS file system drivers implemented in userspace either? NO. are there even facilities to implement them im userspace in windows? to my knowledge, NO. In a monolithic kernel, should device drivers and file system drivers ever really be in userspace, NO. Sometime, it is useful, suh as with a driver with a high chance of faliure but in general, it is not done for root file systems etc. Read my comment for once. In a micro-kernel, what you say would be right but NT and VISTA are NOT MICRO-KERNEL DESIGNS.
1)the amount of register space literally doubles. Optimized properly, that can go a long ways.
2)simpler memory model: 52 physical bits for physical RAM (don't believe me, look at http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/DevelopWithAMD /0,,30_2252_869_875%5E7044,00.html) and 64 bits of virtual addressing space. No segments, just a flat memory model.
3) removal of the old priveledge system and intro of a new user/kernel page allocation scheme to simplify the memory model.
4)Direct addressing of a very large amount of ram directly accessible.
Those are just some of the advantages. if you want to look them up in detail, go look at the link that I have given in this post to the AMD64 manuals.
please see my earlier post about the need for kernel hook thorugh some form of modules.
oh yes. no kernel based drivers. now... how do you plan on getting that nice software like openVPN work? or how about those file-system readers such as e2fsd? locking the kernel is a very good thing but only to a certain extent. nobody can tell what a piece of software will ultimately be used for and thus designing it completely is impossible. if you want a kernel which only does the minimum and lets userspace do the rest (thus actually making a black box kernel usable) you need a micro-kernel and last time I checked, no MS OS used a micro-kernel design. The closest the micro-kernel design has come to PCs is in OS X but even that is not really a complete micro-kernel (notably, there are some micro-kernel designs in production uses such as QNX and vxWorks but those are speciality products restricted mostly to embeded products like routers).
mod parent up. I think that this is a very good point. IMHO the press should be required to reveal all sources to the public as well as refrain from stating opinions not directly supported by the evidence present in the article. enforcing this properly would be a major problem.
mod parent up.
no kidding. seems like a souped up and formalized version of the status quo.
in case you didn't know, in check fraud/credit card fraud etc. it is the banks which are liable not the person using the services of the bank. by law. As for passing on the cost, that is only doable with debit cards. otherwise, there is no way to pass the cost on to the customers.
Disclamer: I am not a security expert, just someone who reads this stuff for fun. better advice can be found with a little more digging.
the password does not actually need to be that long. With hashing and low-entropy data algorithms, the problem can be elivated to a large degree. good passwords are still important but they no longer need to be 50 cars of random characters. LUKS implements such a scheme.
quite possibly yes. encrypted file systems + encrypted swap + encrypted ssl/VPN net connection = total encryption of data regardless of location and its not that hard to do it. encrypted FS and swap can be taken care of by LUKS and VPN is trivial with openVPN and ethernet TAP bridging.
look up LUKS. Probably far above any reasonable corporate standards and allows features such as multiple keys through slots, retiring of passwords, etc. very effective.
I was thinking of something along the lines of what I have setup on my FVWM2 system. [Super_l][Ctrl]{r,o,m,c,d...etc.} are window specific shortcuts and act on the current window (actions like resize, move, iconify, etc.) and [Super_l]{q,m,n,b,t,p,1,2,3,4 etc.} are global shortfuts used to start applications (like firefox, terminal etc.) and switch workspaces as well as some other random options (i.e. b,n,m decreate vol., increase vol., and mute respectively). All in all, I have around ~25 to 30 total keyboard shortcuts. the only time I use the mouse now is for firefox.
hmm. seems nice. what about keyboard shortcuts?
politics. like an earlier post said, "a government program works so it must be stopped." When a gov. prog succeeds, it makes the rest of the gov. look bad. therefore, it must be trashed.
well... TCPA is not exempt under (US) cartel rules since it discriminates against non-members (they cant comm with anything TCPA) but that is only in an ideal world. I hope it never comes to pass. The applications and CPU have no buisiness hiding RAM from the OS unless that is BIOS RAM and applications have no buisiness encrypting files to the point where only that application and hardware config. can read it. If TCPA trashed these portions (i.e. there was no hidden RAM from the OS and encryption could accomodate hardware and software changes or atleast always have a garantee of exporting an unencrypted file) I would be more accepting but doesn't seem like that is going to happen.
not just mac. I would like to extend this to UNIX in general. the rest however are crap (except for some niche products like vxworks etc.)
thanks for the wikipedia article link. At the bottom of the page, some interesting numbers are listed (though I do not know of their reliability). These seem to be nearly 29.4%. If that is anywhere close to the true number, it smokes normal PV cells (norm efficiency from 8% to ~15% unless you are willing to spend extraordinary amounts for marginal gains to get the lab max of 30%). Maybe google should be using these instead of solar panels?
actually last time I checked, SGML parsers were actually faster than XML parsers (even though SGML is a pure superset of XML). why I am not so sure of.
May I suggest looking at postgres postgresql.org. you would be amazed by what it has to offer for free.