Hi all, Happy New Year. As it's now only eighteen months to the Unix 50th
Anniversary, I thought I'd poll you all to get an update of what is being
done to celebrate the anniversary, and/or what could we organise that has
not yet been organised.
Cheers, Warren
Sir Charles Antony Richard Hoare FRS FREng was born on this day in 1934; a
computer pioneer (one of the greats) he gave us things like the quicksort
algorithm and ALGOLW (a neat language).
--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer."
Computer pioneer Donald Knuth was born on this day in 1938; amongst other
things he gave us the TeX typesetting language, and he's still working on
"The Art Of Computer Programming" fascicles (I only got as far as the
first two volumes).
I really must have a look at his new MMIX, too; I love learning new
programming languages (I've used about 50 the last time I looked, and I'm
happy to post a list for my coterie of disbelievers).
--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer."
> I will be happy to forward pertinent suggestions.
Here's one. If Bell Labs holds some kind of symposium on
the lines of the dmr memorial, how about a plenary
session with TV participation from remote venues (think
Berkeley/Silicon Valley and Wollongong/Sydney--a nine-hour
span of time zones).
Any thoughts about this or other possibilities?
Doug
I don't think I'm violating anyone's confidentiality by revealing that
Marcus Weldon, current president of the Labs, at the suggestion of
Martin Carroll, expects the Labs to embark soon on plans to mark
the occasion. I, and no doubt Martin, will keep you posted. Meanwhile
I will be happy to forward pertinent suggestions.
Doug
We lost a co-inventor of ENIAC, John Mauchly, on this day (that's 8th
January like my headers say) in 1980. ENIAC is claimed to be the "first
general purpose electronic digital computer", but I guess it comes down to
a matter of definition[*], as every culture likes to be the "first" (just
ask the Penguins, for example); for "computer" you could go all the way
back to the Mk-I Antikythera (Hellenic variation, from about the 100BC
production run)...
[*]
Analogue/digital/hybrid
Mechanical/electrical/electronic/hybrid
General/special
Wired/programmable/Turing
Prototype/production
Harvard/Neumann/quantum
Etc...
--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer."
> From: Andy Kosela
> it appears this is a fundamental Intel bug that exists in all x86_64
> CPUs.
I'm highly amused by the irony. Intel throws bazillions of transistors at
these hyper-complex CPUs in an attempt to make them as fast as possible - and
(probably because of the complexity) missed a bug, the fix for which
involves... slowing things way down!
I wonder how many other bugs are lurking in these hyper-complex designs?
Didn't anyone at Intel stop to think that complexity is bad, in and of itself?
But I guess the market demands for faster and faster machines outweighed that
- until it bit them in the posterior. The real question is 'how many more times
will it have to happen before they get a clue'?
There's an interesting parallel between this, and uSloth's struggle with
security and bugs. For a long time, it seemed it was more important to the
market to add features (i.e. complexity), and security be damned - until poor
security really started to become an issue.
So now they're trying to catch up - but seemingly still haven't got there, in
terms of the fundamental architecture of the OS, as the never-ending stream of
bug patches attests.
The sad thing is that how to provide good security (not perfect, but much,
much better than what we have) was worked out a long time ago, and Intel hired
Roger Schell to add the necessary hardware underpinnings when they did the
386:
http://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/11299/133439/1/oh405rrs.pdf
Mutatis mutandis.
Noel