Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:I am no vegan (Score 1) 317

Well, from my experience, it is a form of self-sufficiency. Hens are sourced from local places, because keeping roosters is not very polite for neighbours. Yes, feed can be needed to supplement their food source, but chickens will eat all sorts of kitchen scraps, including egg shells themselves, and will eat bugs around the garden, and also any pulled weeds. Much better than throwing it in the garden waste bin. You don't want to rely on grain for their feed, as a wide variety of food will benefit them more. If you have a family that generate a good amount of food scraps, your reliance on feed will be minor.

Raising hens for eggs is not for everyone, that we can agree on. But it is an option, and is open to quite a large number of people. Also, I think it's a positive activity, and worth the effort. It's also a great family activity.

Comment Re:I am no vegan (Score 1) 317

You will not make self-sufficiency obsolete and unnecessary. Eggs from chickens will always occupy that segment, that is, until people can produce their own artificial eggs.

The recipe to make eggs obsolete: artificial yolk contained in a fine membrane, surrounded by artificial whites, in a convenient container, for a price point significantly less than what the egg industry can farm it. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's likely a very long way off. Until then, the egg industry will still be there.

There's always a way for one will. But one way for many? Sure, why not. I look forward to trying out my first artificial egg breakfast. If they can make egg yolks coagulate at a higher temperature, I may even prefer them.

Comment Re:I am no vegan (Score 1) 317

Yep, I agree that backyards aren't going to feed the whole US. But, it will feed the house that has the backyard, which is kind of the point of such a setup. Hence the original query has been answered.

As for rolling chicken coops, where there's a will, there's a way, my friend. Do a google search on what people have built. Ingenuity abounds.

If Hampton Creek pull off a near indistinguishable liquid yolk/white product at a price point below eggs, I'm sure we'll be moving to their product pretty quickly. It'd actually be quite convenient when producing cakes and such. Though, the liquid stuff can't replace a sunny side up egg on toast, with a rich yolk that flows like molten nutrition when the sac is cut. Nor can it be used in a Korean restaurant, when you order a bibimbap. Plenty of other types of meals that require that certain mix of whites and yolk that only eggs can give.

The other "need" is for self-sufficiency. All good and fine if a company wants to produce eggs for you. If you want to make them yourself, your only option is to raise chickens.

Comment Re:I am no vegan (Score 1) 317

All excellent points. I agree with most of them, well, except for the backyard space. Canada/US are both quite big. There would be plenty of people with backyards big enough to support a few hens.

There are solutions to the cleaning up issue. You can get a rolling cage that effectively spreads the waste around the yard. This deals with the stink problem too, as the waste is dispersed and is allowed to break down before it becomes offensive. Has a good side-effect of providing fertilisation for the yard.

I've got no experience with dealing with racoons and coyotes, so can't really comment. I'm sure a sufficiently sturdy cage could fend them off, though.

Care, feed, cost per egg, and all that jazz, well, that's a bit of a strawman argument, as the original question was how to avoid dealing with those associated with the egg lobby. If you have to work a bit more, pay a little extra, then that's the cost of trying to achieve your ideal.

I applaud Hampton Creek for doing what they're doing. There's certainly a place in this world for their products. Though they will never completely replace the need for eggs, or the need for some people to raise hens for self-sufficiency, consequences of such notwithstanding.

Comment Re:I am no vegan (Score 1) 317

Well, it wasn't a suggestion for every single person in the US. I'd imagine that it'd be quite difficult raising hens in a studio apartment, or any apartment, for that matter. Given enough backyard space, though, it's feasible for anyone to do. Especially if you cook at home and produce a good amount of green waste.

Comment Re:Startup management subsystem (Score 1) 416

From what I've read, systemd has seen a number of code audits. Not only from numerous individuals, but from Redhat as well. Redhat also regularly run it through code analysis software.

The network connectivity in systemd is a simple inetd-like setup. No network data is processed by systemd code. It only listens on the port, starts up the service and hands it the socket. Yeah, you could argue that you may as well use inetd instead, but then you're missing out on the features that systemd provides for managing services.

If there's a way to attack systemd, I'd be quite confident that its simple network code will not provide a vector.

Also, systemd isn't a huge blob of code. It's actually a suite of programs; the init system being just one component. It's a common misconception.

Comment Re:Systemd, pass II (Score 1) 187

Excellent! It's nice to get a decent response from someone on this issue, instead of the usual emotive decry that seems to be typical of many systemd detractors.

The controversy with systemd is pretty interesting. There's a fair bit of misinformation flying around, which does muddy the water. I think this misinformation seems to be the source of many people's objections to it. Unfortunately, the only way I can see to solve this is to get people using it.

What's so great about systemd? Well, going from your post, you seem to be in product development. I would think you'd be all over systemd! No need to load a shell for the boot process. That there is an immediate security improvement, as well as an improvement in memory use. Integration with CGroups makes it possible to tighten up resource allocation for subsystems, ensuring that your device doesn't crash/become resource deprived due to a runaway process. An API! Surely you can't object to an API for systemd.

How do you _know_ precisely that something is a secure system? You could do a personal security audit, I suppose, but even then, you may miss something which ends up being a security issue. Time can be a good indicator of secure software, but there are plenty of examples of time proven software which has turned out to be insecure. Even with presumably security conscious packages like libssl. You could run code auditing software on the source, but that's precisely what Red Hat do. You could release it as an open source, controversial, high profile package, and let thousands of eyes pick the code clean ... nah, that'd never work.

Logging to syslog, or the binary database, or both, is a simple config option. You're in control here.

Geez, I throw in one line in jest, and I get shot down as making a joke of the issue, and being symptomatic of what is supposedly wrong with systemd. Yep, the whole kit and kaboodle. Can't please everyone, I suppose. ;)

Comment Re: Thanks Linus! (Score 1) 187

Sure, no problem. If you dislike systemd that much, it certainly makes sense to move to a different software platform. I just disagree with your arguments. Your reasoning is flawed, and I believe this is about feeling. Which is fine; needing to enjoy the OS you use is a valid reason for changing.

Your Snowden argument isn't particularly applicable in this instance, as you have access to the full source code for systemd. If you're not comfortable looking through C code, then any init system would be a problem for you.

The configuration for systemd isn't buried. It's there for all to see and change, in plain text. Logging in binary form is _optional_. You can choose to direct logged messages to syslog, or use both syslog and binary, to have the "best of both worlds", albeit with the best of disk usage. Entangling diverse processes into an interlocking mass is what operating systems are all about! ;)

If you think that porting your laptop, home servers and desktops to a completely different operating system is less effort than learning how systemd works, then I can only conclude you haven't tried to learn how systemd works. Or you've severely underestimated the work involved in moving to another OS.

Don't mind me, I'm not trying to convince you to give up on the BSDs. Far from it. I like the idea of OS diversity. Used FreeBSD myself at one point, and though I wasn't convinced to stick with it, it certainly has a quality kernel. I just think your arguments against systemd need some more work.

Comment Re: Thanks Linus! (Score 1) 187

How did I guess that replies to this article would be dominated by systemd?! Always guaranteed to stir up a shit-storm of comments. Can be quite entertaining.

Anyway, I digress. Advantages of systemd are:

* Starting services in parallel, making for a more efficient bootup.
* Automatic dependency handling of services. No more need to manually change the order via symlinks.
* Monitors started services, and will automatically restart them if configured to.
* Centralised management of logged messages. No need to hunt through a multitude of different log files any more.
* Logs bootup messages. Did you see that error message flash past when you booted your systems? Couldn't scroll up because the tty login overwrote part of the console buffer you were interested in, or the message scrolled off the top of the buffer? This situation is no longer a problem with systemd.
* Completely binary init system, so less resource intensive on bootup. Maybe not a big deal for regular systems, but embedded systems will love it.
* Integrated with the Linux Cgroups feature, allowing fine tuning of resource usage for individual services or service groups.
* Services don't need to start on bootup. They can start via socket based activation.
* Can trigger services to start on system events.

That's a list off the top of my head. There's probably more.

The systemd config file INI-like syntax irks me a bit. Takes a little getting used to its way of doing things. Otherwise, it works well. You're welcome to join the BSD camp, if you feel the need. If you dislike systemd that much, it's only going to get more painful in the future.

Comment Re:No, they just need reliable Linux distros. (Score 5, Interesting) 187

Long time Linux system admin here, of over 20 years experience. Systemd is both stable and an improvement over sysv. The only instability I've ever heard of was through upgrading a system from sysv to systemd, and even then, it was only for certain edge cases. That is the fault of the upgrade process, not the end system. So, while systemd is stable, the upgrade process is still being tweaked. I presume this is why Debian still has sysv in their stable release.

I'm happy to run my production systems with systemd. In fact, I do already for some. They work reliably all of the time. Systemd works, and it works fine.

As for the dislike of systemd, I think it is partially rooted in the loss of a scriptable init system. The move from a scripted system to a binary system makes working around certain problems harder to manage. Of course, you can still use scripts to start up services, but it's not core to the process any more.

Comment Re:Visible controllers (Score 1) 105

I agree that if you're going to use a physical controller, you should hopefully see a virtual representation of it as well. It would make the experience of virtual reality less jarring.

The combination of the Xbox, Oculus, and the Kinect could be an interesting one though. The Kinect provides a method to control virtual reality through voice and gestures. No physical controller needed. It may be the way to work with virtual reality, and Microsoft have everything in place to take advantage of it. Done right, it could be a winner, and may even make me consider getting an Xbox.

Comment Re:"stealing just like stealing anything else" (Score 1) 408

They aren't "stealing" anything. How can one "steal" information? That's like stealing the number 4 or the color blue.

Well, the English language being as it is, you can have multiple meanings attributed to a single word. In this case, the word "steal" can certainly be applied to this situation. It is possible to "steal" an idea, data, attribution, and other intangible things. You can even steal a show, if you're a performer. The definition of the word supports this. As much as I dislike the rhetorical use of the word with copyright violations, it is valid.

May all your PUSHes be POPped.