Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:We B OS (Score 1) 226

Are they similar to the old Xenix and Unix drivers, 'cause those were fun. :-/

Thank you for reminding me. I'll be twitching for the rest of the day. Funny how much outright crap one can remember -- I thought those neurons have long died off out of sheer disgust.

For the mercifully uninitiated, SCO Unix had a baroque system of little configuration files, object modules, a severely handicapped C compiler, and a similarly crippled linker for the purpose of modifyng kernel parameters and installing third-party drivers, both of which required re-linking the whole kernel (sysctl? dynamic data structures? run-time linkable modules? never heard. OK, it was the early '90s, but still.)

SCO, in their infinite wisdom, tried to make driver installation "user friendly": you would unpack the archive, start the installation script, and a few minutes later reboot to a freshly built kernel. Of course this failed to account for buggy scripts, weird configurations, and cargo-cult admins, any of which could make an unholy mess of the system and/or render it unbootable. I've had the dubious pleasure of cleaning up a number of such messes.

Comment Re:Oops (Score 3, Informative) 299

Oops, you mis-used a word there. You mean a 'critical mass' would not be caused and no nuclear detonation would result. The much more likely 'criticality' condition is a non-critical mass that causes the thermal explosion that has the same effect as a 'dirty' bomb.

Criticality -- the point at which a fuel assembly can sustain a nuclear chain reaction by itself.

Critical mass -- the smallest mass of fuel for which the criticality is reached; depends on geometry, density, temperature etc.

So the GP's usage is correct. To be really precise, one could note that weapon fuel should go from subcritical to prompt critical to achieve explosion, but that would be nitpicking in this context.

Technology

Submission + - Data General's Tom West dies (channelregister.co.uk)

IAN writes: Tom West, the leader of the Data General's 32- bit minicomputer development project chronicled in Tracy Kidder's book The Soul of a New Machine, died on May 19th in Westport, MA. He was aged 71.

Comment Re:Before everyone freaks (Score 1) 1122

In terms of scale it seems like we might just be able to get away with blasting our refuse into the sun and not see any significant consequences.

Scale-wise, the Sun could probably swallow the whole Earth and get only mild indigestion. However, launching anything into the Sun is a waste of energy; it's cheaper to punt it into interstellar space, as discussed here.

Science

Scientists Invent World's First Anti-Laser 241

Velcroman1 writes "Two scientists at Yale University have built the laser's first doppelganger: the anti-laser. While a conventional laser emits a constant beam of light in one direction, the anti-laser simply does the opposite. It takes that same steady light stream and interacts with it in such a way that it absorbs and cancels out the light. And scientists hope the strange creation could help the fight against cancer. A. Douglas Stone, one of the two researchers behind the project, said he came up with the idea for a 'nega-laser' when working with equations for a random laser with his partner in crime, Hui Cao. 'I figured, if we just somehow illuminated the cavity, and replaced the gain medium with something that tends to absorb light, we could essentially reverse the process,' Stone said. Oh, that makes sense."

Comment Re:I don't think they care. (Score 1) 380

Not really.

Something like 90% of end users are running behind nat already.

Existing users won't be affected much: what works for them now will work for the foreseeable future. But that smartphone you're going to buy a year or so down the road -- it's quite possible that it will be IPv6-only on the cellular-radio side (3G or whatever the provider uses for data).

Why? Existing mobile data networks are a mess, addressing-wise. There aren't enough public IPv4 addresses to go around, so you get a private one. Not only it's NATed to hell and back, there is a chance that it will clash with the address received on the WiFi interface when you're connected to your home or office network. So you get creative solutions like using bogons... Shudder.

It's so much easier with IPv6. No possible address clashes. No need for gross kludges. Yes, NAT64/DNS64 is necessary if your destination is IPv4-only, but that is actually a nice carrot for web sites and content providers: "enbale IPv6 on your customer-facing servers and our users will reach you directly, without workarounds".

So IMO the IPv4 exhaustion will affect end users rather soon, just not necessarily in the way that will be visible to them.

Comment Re:IPv6 "brokenness" =/= lack of IPv4 support (Score 3, Interesting) 290

[...] if a website advertises itself as simultaneously IPv4/IPv6 compliant, and someone's computer/browser thinks they are IPv6 compliant but their attempts to connect via IPv6 don't make it through (ISP? router? modem? who knows), their connection times out and the site is unreachable.

More precisely: if the DNS has both v6 (AAAA) and v4 (A) records for the site's name, and the client prefers v6 connectivity over v4, and a v6 connection can't be established for some reason, the site will appear to be broken. Most large sites have measured this kind of brokenness, but haven't published their methodology nor results; there is an exception, but it's limited to Scandinavian users. It is nevertheless a very interesting analysis, which basically suggests that eliminating just two sources of brokenness (OS X < 10.6.5 and Opera < 10.50) would practically eliminate client loss.

Comment Re:Each region could have its own /8 (Score 1) 320

How big is a service region? Each region could get its own /8 of sixteen million IPv4 addresses in 10.* for connections back to the IPv4 net.

Verizon already has this, times 40: see their presentation at the Google IPv6 Implementor's Conference (p.3). They're not too happy about it.

Or they could just require a land-based proxy server between phones for phone-to-phone applications where neither side is on an "enterprise" service level agreement. According to acceptable use policies that I've read, "running a server" isn't something that one is supposed to do on a telephone.

So, what about 4G, which is supposed to be IP end-to-end? More NAT and proxies? I don't think so. IPv6 is the only sane solution for that, and if anyone can push for its adoption, it will be the large mobile operators.

Comment Re:Seriously? (Score 1) 275

It's been around for what? 10 years now? Give me a break.

12 years pretty much exactly:

IPv6 was developed by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), and is described in Internet standard document RFC 2460, published in December 1998.

Make it 15 years: RFC 1883, the first IPv6 specification, was published in December 1995.

Comment Re:This is well known to a small community (Score 1) 123

Ahhh... This is the essence of what occasionally makes Slashdot great. An unexpectedly expert post (and beautifully written, the sound you heard was that of a million grammar Nazis shrieking in frustration after scouring the text, not finding anything to complain about, and falling silent), followed by what I can only call "respectful irreverence". Splendid.

Slashdot Top Deals

"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire

Working...