Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Oh wow Forbes defends trolls what a surprise (Score 1) 191

The obvious distinction is whether they invest a engineering effort in developing things. Most patent trolls just buy up patents and then try to turn them into money. Companies like ARM also don't make things, but the stuff that they license has obvious value: creating it independently from scratch would require a lot of time and money. Typically, these companies don't just license patents, they also provide detailed designs, engineering support, and so on.

Comment Re:Doesn't matter (Score 2) 378

I only spent a few minutes looking last time I was in the US, but I found lots of mobile phone shops that were willing to give cheaper SIM-only deals and even more such deals were available online. Eventually I decided that since my phone had OSMAnd for offline maps and I had WiFi in the hotel (and a lot of coffee shops and so on), I didn't need to bother with mobile coverage.

Comment Re: Topology (Score 2) 378

When people say GSM, they mean the ETSI standards, including UMTS, HSPA and LTE. Most vaguely recent 'GSM' phones speak at least GSM and UMTS, many also do HSPA and the latest ones do LTE as well. All of the newer standards are also patented, but they're RAND licensed and so there's lots of competition among device makers.

Comment Re:say... WHAT? (Score 1) 335

The main advantage of VMs over processes is that they have a much smaller amount of OS state. In a VM, almost all of the state is within the VM. There's a tiny amount for the PV devices, but that's it. In a POSIX OS, even the state associated with the file descriptor table is huge and then there are things like locks that are blocking in the kernel and all of the state that is associated with the scheduler and so on. If you want to move a process from one host to another, it's decidedly nontrivial, especially if it has open files and sockets. Hypervisors, however, are designed to suspend, resume, clone, and migrate VMs.

Comment Re:Off the pig! Time to get rid of OSs on VMs. (Score 1) 335

No, what they've 'invented' is called a LibOS, and in combination with the hypervisor is called either a separation kernel or an exokernel, depending on which community you're in. And they aren't claiming to have invented it - academic literature is full of them - they're claiming to have implemented one that is BSD licensed, available now, and runs existing Linux binaries.

Comment Re:GPL trumps BSD as a usable open source licence (Score 1) 335

Additionally unfounded. Given that BSD sources can be downloaded, modified, and their changes never see the light of day the loss of information is virtually guaranteed. Not to say it doesn't happen with the GPL, but it's actually a legal risk to allow it to happen.

Take a look at the donors list to the FreeBSD Foundation and see how many of them are big companies (e.g. NetApp, Juniper) that ship proprietary products built on FreeBSD, yet still contribute back changes. And then look at companies like Google, which build their infrastructure on Linux but keep a lot of changes public. The GPL doesn't force them to give anything back unless they distribute the modified version, and they don't distribute the modified Linux that they run on their servers. It's only a legal risk if you are distributing the software, but given that 90% of all developers are working on in-house software that is never intended for distribution then that means that the GPL only ever forces the 10% of potential developers who are working on commodity off-the-shelf software to release code, and they are the ones who are least likely to touch the GPL in the first place.

Over the years, I've worked with companies that have maintained private forks of GPL'd projects, because they don't want the potential liability of distributing things under the GPL. When they take some of our BSDL code, however, they'll push back patches because there's no possible legal obligation arising from their doing so, and it's cheaper to have all of their changes upstream than maintain a private fork. I've also worked with companies that have done a clean-room reimplementation of a project rather than touch the GPL (in many cases, it's remained private, in some they've released it under a permissive license).

Comment Re:Where is the JVM source code (Score 1) 335

It's using a (heavily modified) FreeBSD kernel with the Linux compat layer, so it's not surprising. And the 1% speedup isn't the real win. The benefit is that you can make a very small VM image that can spool up new instances in about a second. It isn't that you can run a single instance 1% faster, it's that when you get load spikes you can start up 1000 new instances in between getting the SYN and sending the ACK...

Comment Re:So... no separation between system and userspac (Score 1) 335

That's well and good, until you realize that a typical email server usually has an MTA (postfix, courier, sendmail, whatever), some sort of spam trap/filter (in addition to external ones), maybe a means to more efficiently handle distie lists, SASL auth (postfix typically handles that nowadays, but...), and probably some sort of webmail thingy. That's way more than "one app".

And in the deployment scenarios that this is intended for, each one of those would be running in a separate VM. If you have lots more incoming mail, you might spin up more spam filter instances dynamically. You'd probably only have a single persistent VM for the storage, but everything else would be scaled dynamically.

Comment Re:Nah. (Score 1) 335

There is a big difference between getting a single process exploited (maybe just one of the httpd workers) and having a full system-breach.....

There really isn't on most cloud systems. You compromise the web server, and now you've got the credentials to access the db server. That's far more important than anything on the local filesystem. Sniffing all traffic going to the system? There isn't any traffic going to anything other than the (single) running app. And even with a compromised kernel, you can't put the interface in promiscuous mode because the paravirtualised device doesn't support it.

So the question is whether you'd rather have a slimmed-down FreeBSD kernel in your TCB or a full-featured Linux kernel and GNU userland. If you have an OS where you can spin up new instances in a second, that makes it possible to compartmentalise your system much more than if starting up a new VM takes a minute. It also makes scaling easier.

Slashdot Top Deals

Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it is too dark to read.