Re: Thanks, so-called Linus
The trick is to use "make oldconfig" and then press Enter. More than few times.
2859 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Sep 2007
The thing with linux kernel is that you have few older (and currently maintained & supported) versions to choose from, notably 4.4 and 4.9 as GKH mentioned. There is absolutely no reason to jump to 4.10 on the day it is released, that is unless you like living on the bleeding edge or have unusual hardware requirements.
I was referring to a firewall at the network boundary, blocking outgoing SMB traffic. If I have malicious server inside the firewall I'm f*d anyway, no matter whether or not my SMB client layer is buggy (e.g. because such server could hijack DHCP and then apply MitM rather than exploit SMB, to list one of many possible attack scenarios). To prevent against that threat, a half-solution could be to setup IPsec + DNSsec on the internal network, but really? Do I have to go there in the context of the vulnerability discussed here, I am not even full-time network administrator for f* sake! If I was I wouldn't be asking stupid questions, like the one above.
All these " employee perks, largely to keep difficult-to-replace technical talent from leaving for greener pastures. Google has climbing walls. Facebook has on-site barbers" are not relevant, if the hard problems remain unsolved. Things such as long build times, poor workflow, poor dependency management, undisciplined colleagues etc. And the thing is, these do not have to be outright "solved" because developers understand these are hard problems. Usually it is enough for developers to see that these problems are being addressed or at least understood by management.
oh c'mon. As long as this proviso stands "... provided that it is consistent with its terms of service" there is no chance in hell AAISP would apply filtering. Because that would be flagrant violation of their own ToS .
As for other ISPs? I can imagine some ISP might want to put an USP "child friendly, only manually handpicked websites will be available to you". Would that sell, I do not know, but the law being considered would allow an ISP to sell such a service. Apparently it is not allowed now?
I respectfully submit that a self-contained industrial control system, written in machine code and running on an extensively and carefully documented PDP-11 hardware is fairly easier to understand and maintain
Surely it is. But that does not change the fact that software which can only run on a difficult to replace piece of hardware is itself at the risk of becoming non-functional at any moment, due to said hardware suddenly becoming non-functional itself. That's where the management role is to look for replacement, to remove that particular risk. Of course one needs to have deep understanding of the subject not to allow to get dragged down a multi-million-LOC project, and that's another area where managlement is known to have weak points ...
... and while we are pointing to lack of self-regulation in press, perhaps it is time to see the mote in our own eye.
"You need to catch up." with what exactly? The only one which matter is ITU and they have nothing to say about 5G. The link you provided does not mention Qualcomm, which is heading towards different standard, from the same organization which developed LTE. But then again, since ITU keeps schtum there is nothing to talk about, anything to do with 5G is at this time purely speculation (or marketing talk, which is the same).
It is really embarrassing that government gets involved into this whole hype and someone needs to talk them out of it - just shows how clueless they are.
EDIT: on second thought - if someone explained that 5G is expected to be nothing else but incremental improvement on 4G, that would be lovely.
@Voland's right hand, while I share your sentiment about social function of eating, I am also offended by the suggestion that eating alone might be a sign of a troubled mind. Some of us simply do not have a company to eat with, nor appropriate place to seek such company. Or simply prefer eating alone for whatever reason. While such preference might be justifiably called "unsocial", I feel you have crossed the line here.
The volatility of Bitcoin, or any minor currency, is mostly down to the volume of real-economic transaction conducted in it; the greater volume, the more stable the currency. Bitcoin is in it's infancy here.
and, quite likely, it will stay in infancy until some other cryptocurrency replaces it (or alternatively, it simply dies out) . This is because number of transactions per second is limited by block size, and there is no consensus to increase the block size.
... merge window for Linux 4.10 will be shorter than usual., not longer as "predicted" in the article
I do not think there would be much of a virtualisation overhead, since the technology does not virtualize a machine, only an OS. As you move up the abstraction layers, the optimization opportunities are more obvious. In other words, it is system calls which are virtualized now, not the CPU. For majority of Windows APIs there is a very simple relation to Linux system calls (especially if you control also the application code, i.e. SQL Server itself). This means a wrapper will add very little overhead. This also includes IO (at least with the most popular options, including asynchronous IO) which is the largest source of virtualization overhead and coincidentally also major source of database performance issues (next to CPU cost of running queries). Also, Microsoft is obviously aiming this as competition to Oracle on Linux, so they cannot really afford large overhead.
I found elsewhere these are meant to fly only ~1500km above Earth. This means a radio link would be probably less than 6000km (you will not track fast-moving satellite all the way to horizon, so likely distance will be even less than that - which is exactly the reason why so many satellites are needed). This distance translates to 20ms. Add another 20ms for connection from satellite back to Earth and you have 40ms overhead, at most. This is much better than 35,800km for geostationary orbit with round-trip latency ~240ms.
I think all satellite internet providers are currently using only geostationary orbit. A large number of low-flying satellites is definitely breaking the mould.