theonewolf

With TCP_REPAIR, presumably they could...but both ends need to implement the REPAIR option I think, so maybe not in practice yet.

Or if the SDN of your cloud is good enough, even TCP_REPAIR might not be needed!

Precisely. Also perhaps why Telegram didn't respond.

This is an OS-/device-level attack---not an app exploit/attack.

Yeah...it doesn't feel like a true vulnerability...feels like just padding the "vulnerability" counter :p

Perhaps because the attacks/exploits were more against the device/OS and not against the app itself?

It is unsurprising that text can be found unencrypted in memory---even while during rendering it has to be decrypted somewhere.

The only mildly surprising/troubling thing was unencrypted data stored in the file one disk on the phone.

As others have chimed in, while working extremely well for _libraries_, which I believe Semantic Versioning was really proposed for in the first place anyways, it does not work or necessarily make sense for Kernels which are kind of a very special kind of library.

Once matured, kernels tend to never break backwards compatibility (or try very hard not to), and rarely track bug fixes with individual numbering. Often many changes are lumped into a single version update, because so many changes are already happening across many different subsystems.

I suppose also, now that I think about it, Semantic Versioning works much better for smaller scoped and smaller scale projects (like well scoped and designed libraries). The kernel is such a large piece of software almost like a collection of libraries hidden behind a single set of matures APIs that incrementing counters for every bug fix or tiny change doesn't make sense---and as has been established, major numbers would just never bump.

Yes, "ridding the world" of the GPL is a bit too strong of a stance to take. Almost like a knee-jerk reaction.

I think it would be better to catalog the licenses into categorical types so that we could then more intelligently decide which license to use, and also understand our own "chosen" licenses better.

In some cases, the GPL may be desired or even necessary to achieve the vision/goals of the authors of some software.

What about The Noun Project http://thenounproject.com/?

What about System76? Aren't they in the exact market space/niche you're describing?

https://system76.com/

Yeah, this is a surprise and awesome :-)

Im thinking close to zero: https://letsencrypt.org/

Oh this isn't an organizational webpage.

This is the web page of an individual (a researcher).

As another commenter said, he is focused a lot more on research than building websites ;-)

If anyone would like to help put together a nice looking version of this I could help coordinate with you.

Looks like he's almost headed in the direction of a Kickstarter, which hasn't really happened in the scientific world on a large scale yet. If some designers could volunteer, we get rolling on building a real Baymax sooner!

I think for things like WiFi networks this could help immensely.

Extremely long tail latencies are observed which reach a second or more in those networks when some interference causes loss.

It would be much better to react quicker than the eternity of 200ms (if that is the default).

They actually claimed/stated that if you want these features, go code them yourself.

Everything always goes away, given a long enough timeline.

You might believe it will last your lifetime, and that is semi-reasonable given our short generational lifespans.

But I find it hard to believe in any engineered by human hands system claiming to last "forever."

Also, please describe the technical details better---maybe eventually having a whitepaper showing some performance graphs with different workloads?

Criticizing you from a pulpit is easy, kudos to you if you fix things up over time :-)

Basic math issues and vague description of the technique make me worry about the technical veracity of the described approach.

I am also worried about fairness: do SuperTCP streams muscle out other streams? Is that how they grab all the bandwidth?

TCP has back-off built-in for a reason: if everyone is as greedy as possible, massive congestion occurs.

But it does involve command-line bullshittery which is more what the article is about.

The article isn't bemoaning the state of programming languages or their tooling necessarily---more all the steps to get a programming language toolchain off-the-ground and working (like an Android dev environment etc. or a cross-compiling environment).

@jeffbarr I just wanted to say thanks for not only posting this, but also sticking around in the comments section. Makes you + Amazon seem way more human :-)

Also, in case you have any "cloud servers" you want to decommission: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8373394

Actually I think Lua is a great candidate because of its openness and its similarity to C (predominant systems OS programming language).

Lua is open, as their about page (http://www.lua.org/about.html) states:

Lua is free

Lua is free open-source software, distributed under a very liberal license (the well-known MIT license). It may be used for any purpose, including commercial purposes, at absolutely no cost. Just download it and use it.

Totally agree, as a hobby eBay is fine.

I avoided these guys (and others like them) because of the premium cost on top.

Off and on, little threads like this:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-05/msg016...

How much did your 20gig of RAM cost you?

We don't run 24/7, only when we need to do our experiments.

So the power bill is much lower than what a lot of people are worried about.

This setup is definitely used on-demand :-)

Also, my setup is a private cloud (in the NIST definition).

There are two tenants: myself, and my fiancee.

We use VM technology to share the same set of physical resources.

Our VMs are managed via Vagrant.

VM technology does not imply cloud, you are right; however, it is often used to implement clouds as an abstraction layer over hardware.

I don't believe redundancy, what I think you mean---fault tolerance---is implicit in the definition of cloud computing.

The most general form of the term 'cloud' in my mind is elastic access to computational resources.

There is no guarantee of high availability (in fact, we see failed AWS instances and horror stories all the time), nor automated failover/redundancy/fault tolerance.

Chaos Monkey by Netflix is a great example of the shortcomings of the modern cloud in terms of fault tolerance and redundancy.

The cloud doesn't give it to you, you have to build that yourself.

I'm a very open-minded person, perhaps because of my academic background, so I would be happy to say that I agree that a subtype of the fundamental cloud could be a redundant/fault-tolerant one.

But the fundamental definition of cloud does not include fault tolerance.

Don't trust me.

Check out the more formal definition from US NIST (years of work, 15 drafts), there is no mention of redundancy or fault-tolerance:

http://faculty.winthrop.edu/domanm/csci411/Handouts/NIST.pdf

Cloud research.

Working with modified hypervisor (QEMU), and modified cloud software (OpenStack in my research).

That makes sense.

Unless you need, like me, 24-32 GB++ of RAM. Dual HDDs, and a whole lot of cores to run 3-4 VMs at a time.

Then the laptop is so resource-poor that it is rendered useless for the workloads I described in the article.

This article wasn't about how to make a "cheap home server"---it was about replicating real data-center-class hardware in the home and how to do that cheaply.

We are using this server sporadically, essentially wake-on-lan.

Especially with the BMC console, we can remotely power it on, off, reset, etc.

And the whole point of the article is cheapness.

As in, some people buy old clunker cars and fix them up as a hobby and also sometimes for cheapness.

Sure, they pollute more, get less MPG, etc. etc.

But they can be dirt cheap, and fun to restore if you like that kind of thing.

Precisely. We leave it in a more unused space, and the BMC is useful in remotely powering up and checking on it :-)

So the SATA/SAS ports are low enough that the hard drives fit fine in there and connect nicely. They're at a very slight angle.

Are you worried about vibration? Or something else? I am a little bit.