datenwolf
Joined 15 years ago
Joined 15 years ago
Ohhh yes!
So, a couple of weeks ago I came across a discussion where some distro (I don't remember which one) contemplated removing 32-bit user space support, suggesting to users to simply run a VM running a 32 bit Linux instead. It was a stupid suggestion then, and this statement is a nice authorative answer from the kernel side, where such suggestions can be shoved to.
With respect to OpenGL with the current de-facto standard toolkits Qt and GTK you can't really get away from them for the time being, since at the moment they pull in some implementation of OpenGL as a runtime dependency; crossing fingers for that going away soon.
Also for that matter, although OpenGL is a legacy API, it's a well understood, well documented, and well tested environment. And as much as Vulkan makes certain things – well – not easier, but more straightforward, it isn't without issues. Heck, only recently Matías N. Goldberg found a long standing issue with swapchain reuse that got finally resolved with VK_EXT_swapchain_maintenance1
https://docs.vulkan.org/guide/latest/swapchain_semaphore_reu...
With respect to "technical costs" in the context of Wayland: IMHO it's mostly pushing around responsibilities and moving goalposts. Granted, setting up an on-screen frame buffer to draw on incurs a lot less moving parts in Wayland compared to X11. However, it comes at the cost of multiplying rather basic graphics machinery that's required for drawing the most simple things into each and every client. Of course shared libraries will somewhat ease the requirements on .text and .rodata segments, which can be shared; but all the dynamic state that's generated on initialization ending up in .bss and .data is redundantly kept around. And then there's the issue that Wayland also forgoes things like efficient use of screen frame buffer memory that cuts all windows from the same region of memory and managing pixel ownership. The "every window gets its own wholly sized framebuffer" only worked well for that small time window (pun intended) in which screen resolutions weren't as big as they now are becoming commonplace.
"4k", i.e. 3840×2160 @ 10R10G10B2A resolution takes up about 64MiB in a double buffered configuration (256MiB in an 8k format), if there's only a single window on screen. And every additional full screen application (even if minimized) will add another 32 MiB (128 MiB) to that. Those gigabytes of GPU VRAM don't look as plenty from that view.
The old and dusted (but not busted) way of using a single frame buffer and cutting windows from that doesn't look as outdated anymore.
12. The forensic analysis also revealed that Elez sent an email with a
spreadsheet containing PII to two United States General Services Administration
officials. The PII detailed a name, a transaction type, and an amount of money.To me this gives a strong impression of history rhyming with itself. Back in the early 1980ies NASA engineers "close to the hardware" were raising warning, above warning about reliability issues of the shuttles, ultimately being overruled by management, leading to the Challenger disaster.
Then in 2003 again engineers were raising warnings about heat shield integrity being compromised from impacts with external tank insulation material. Again, management overruled them on the same bad reasoning, that if it did not cause problems in the past, it will not in the future. So instead of addressing the issue in a preventative action, the Columbia was lost on reentry.
Fool me once …, fool me twice …; I really hope the engineers will put their foot down on this and clearly and decisively overrule any mandate directed from management.
When the trap is in place deploy a crafted package file that appears invalid on the surface level triggers this trap. In that moment fetch the payload from the (already opened) archive file descriptor, execute it, but also patch the internal state of libarchive so that it will process the rest of the archive file as if nothing happened, and the desired outcome also appearing in the system.
The only thing that Reddit did – on the interaction level – was replacing the Usenet experience with a visually more appealing and easier to access web frontend. In that regard it's a continuation of Eternal September, with the side effect of draining the user pool from Usenet, leading to the shut down of many Usenet servers world wide because "nobody is using it anymore".
Unfortunately there are only so many GDPR compliance officers around, and they have to focus on the bigger fish to fry.
It can just as well mean, that the compiler will attempt to execute a proof, that memory is never accessed out of bounds, without well defined ownership and within the lifetime of the underlying object. Which is what Rust does, for example.
Of course it can also mean, that the compiler will then additionally add internal failure checks and safeguards at critical places (Rust does not do this, but it would be nice to have in systems where one might worry about in-register bit-flips (high radiation environments, like X-ray scanners), i.e. stuff not caught by – say – e.g. ECC memory).
https://git.datenwolf.net/codesamples/tree/samples/X11/x11at...
then it's Kolmogorov complexity is also extremely low.
Look if you have a well enough hash function, it output should be near the Shannon limit and hardly compressible, and ideally contain as much entropy as it has bits. But you can feed in just a single bit or the entire knowledge of humanity, in the end you're going to get a fixed amount of bits, and entropy near of that, and if you throw any form of lossless compression at it, it will hardly compress.
But quantum mechanics tells us, that information cannot be destroyed. So when you feed it more bits, than it emits, then its mostly the entropy of the information you feed in, that you get out of the hash. But if you feed it just a single bit, the additional entropy comes from the computational process.
I know, this is now getting really philosophical, but here's something to ponder on: How would you implement a hash function for a reversible computing architecture?