I love how emphasize is given to accessibility for older adults, such as the orange man. But I guess he gets his printouts with few words and big fonts anyways.
The way he writes indicates that he has very little experience with reading in the first place. Weird wording, strange capitalization and punctiation, etc.
Funny how they make this joke about Trump when biden got caught on camera using cue cards and having reporters questions and headshots on a cheat sheet...
Can he read? No doubt he can read some. I can't say he's illiterate. But functionally, he's nowhere near the reading and comprehension skills of what we should expect from a national leader.
Kind of tells you something about how timidly and/or begrudgingly it’s been accepted.
IMO the attitude is warranted. There is no good that comes from having higher-level code than necessary at the kernel level. The dispute is whether the kernel needs to be more modern, but it should be about what is the best tool for the job. Forget the bells-and-whistles and answer this: does the use of Rust generate a result that is more performant and more efficient than the best result using C?
This isn’t about what people want to use because it’s a nice language for writing applications. The kernel is about making things work with minimum overhead.
By analogy, the Linux kernel historically has been a small shop mentored by a fine woodworker. Microsoft historically has been a corporation with a get-it-done attitude. Now we’re saying Linux should be a “let’s see what the group thinks- no they don’t like your old ways, and you don’t have the energy anymore to manage this” shop, which is sad, but that is the story everywhere now. This isn’t some 20th century revolution where hippies eating apples and doing drugs are creating video games and graphical operating systems, it’s just abandoning old ways because they don’t like them and think the new ways are good enough and are easier to manage and invite more people in than the old ways. That’s Microsoft creep.
> Forget the bells-and-whistles and answer this: does the use of Rust generate a result that is more performant and more efficient than the best result using C?
Where did you read that? The article says 5 minutes. Which is fine because it meant to transfer directly to the phone app. And the battery is said to "lasts for up to years of average use".
Any service that is exposed as a website that has data which you would like to keep secure = potentially hacked through attacks like these. It's usually not possible to choose to not have data available on internet connected services sadly.
Of course, by why not access those particular services in a more secure way? With other browser settings, another browser, or another machine altogether?
Turning off JS permanently is like keeping your wallet in a safe you carry around all the time because once in a while you need to visit the dangerous parts of the town.
I have JS off by default and click one button to turn it on per website. You might be surprised how much faster the web is and how often you don't need JS.
> This is actually based on "The Kernel in The Mind" by Moon Hee Lee.
This looks like a really interesting resource. Can anybody here vouch for its accuracy or usefulness? I can't find a ton about it online. The fact that it's only published as a series of LinkedIn posts, or a PDF attached to a LinkedIn post, does not fill me with confidence - but I guess we can't expect kernel devs to know how to create websites?
In particular, one of the first questions is "What is the fundamental difference between the kernel and a process?" It rejects "The kernel is a special process with elevated privileges" (which is essentially correct) and prefers "The kernel is not a process—it's the system itself that serves processes," which is sort of wrong? The kernel represents itself as a process (process zero), because kernel threads also need scheduling. And it is privileged, obviously.
> The kernel represents itself as a process (process zero)
This isn't true of any modern operating system. Kernel code isn't confined to a single process or even a limited number of processes. Transitioning to kernel mode doesn't necessitate switching to a dedicated process. Prior to the emergence of CPU speculative execution vulnerabilities, it was common for kernel code to be mapped directly into the virtual address spaces of userspace processes.
PID 0 is merely an implementation detail of the scheduler shared among many Unices. It doesn't function like a normal process, nor is it an accurate representation of how the large part of the kernel operates.
This article (and comment you’re replying to) is about Linux, which does represent its own threads as pid 0. Yes, there are concepts that aren’t threads. Nevertheless, in a very real sense the kernel is a special process zero.
Again, no it's not. Most kernel code doesn't run as PID 0. What you're talking about is the idle task, a very small part of the kernel.
I also did have Linux in mind when writing my comment, but this is basic to how any major general purpose operating system works. Besides, I can't possibly exclude Linux when I say "any modern operating system."
The kernel has many, many threads other than the idle task. Ok, some of them technically have pids other than zero because this is how Linux implements threads. But they all share address space, like threads in any other process. I count, you know, 265 kernel threads on a random Linux system.
Some kernel threads, besides the idle task, have PIDs other than 0? You mean literally all of them.
More crucially, kthreads are supplementary components of the Linux kernel. They represent just one method of running tasks asynchronously and don't represent the entirety of the kernel.
At this point you’re arguing over technicalities to somehow validate your objectively incorrect statements. The kernel isn't "special process zero," period. The kernel isn't a process. You can't rely on a process to implement the machinery required to run processes. Furthermore, the parts that do have PIDs aren't even assigned PID 0, except for the idle task.
If you don't believe me, just ask the kernel itself. There is no /proc/0.
Also in Chapter 6 1. What is the relationship between CPU state and kernel state?, it prefers "CPU is stateless; kernel manages state" instead of "They share state equally". I also wouldn't divide it down as "equally" as the kernel manages much more state, but CPUs have registers and cache lines so I wouldn't say they're stateless either.
Fair enough, it's protocol is open source and the apps are source available. Modifications can be made by individuals for their own uses, though. I think it's as close as you can expect to get with a mostly full-fledged Notion competitor.
In any case, I don't particularly enjoy AnyType, despite coming back to it a few times to test it out (and still maintaining my own sync server, despite not actively using it, in case I go back to try it out again after some demonstrably updates). Just pointing out that it's a less restrictive alternative.
reply