p_l

19 ms·

391.
by p_l 1y ago
When you consider that machine spirits in 40k are side effect of every thing computer being infected with bird of AI, and that she of the best cares are actually complete loyalist AI systems from before empire hiding in plain sight... Welco
392.
by p_l 1y ago
I miss that game, spent so much time playing it back in 1991 or so.
393.
by p_l 1y ago
Every major CPU ISA still in use can, in fact, address individual bytes (C and C++ standards even demand atomic access). It's just inefficient, but sometimes needed (MMIO, inter-cpu visible byte changes, etc)
394.
by p_l 1y ago
A significant part of it was that Strategic Air Command was essentially an apocalyptic death cult in many ways and despised anything that would slow down issuance and realisation of order to murder as many civilians as possible in shortest
395.
by p_l 1y ago
Only on IBM PC because it essentially always assumed presence of either MDA or CGA, and over time evolved to assume presence of VGA. UEFI does not require at all and supports and UI framework to enable work in both graphical and textual (wi
396.
by p_l 1y ago
It was sorta required by IBM PC compatibles, but is not required by UEFI which supports serial console (or other interfaces). IBM PC assumed existence of graphic output and sometimes Option ROMs did really too crazy things with it, I stil
397.
by p_l 1y ago
Binary attachments mostly started to work with less surprises by second half of 1990s, but 8bit unclean issues persisted in my experience... I wanted to say 2001, but I recalled getting hit by them until 2010 at least. And in some ways desi
398.
by p_l 1y ago
I am not up to date on latest ones, but it used to be that depending on chosen density you could have "air" cooled meaning sealed liquid cooling with on-rack radiators, and denser units with heat exchanger for external cooling loo
399.
by p_l 1y ago
And how long did it take for binary attachments to be reliable, encodings unfucked, etc? As for group addressing, distribution lists are pitiful in comparison especially on discovery side. Anyway, ultimately the big issue is that the DAP sc
400.
by p_l 1y ago
The biggest models are same size as biggest IBM Power machines, i.e. 2 four-post racks connected together. You then need liquid cooling connection, power (iirc the racks can contain internal UPS). You're still left with need for storag
401.
by p_l 1y ago
But profitable to IBM, and counts as OpEx not CapEx for accounting. A bit like cloud. But if you want they will ship it to you, or just setup a VPN or even a more dedicated connection (say, MPLS) to one of their datacenters. Or even sell it
402.
by p_l 1y ago
You don't have to pay upfront, IBM in fact prefers you don't Leasing, or frank out renting aka "cloud" that just happens to be IBM is the preferred form, especially as they can sell you on usage based pricing (good if
403.
by p_l 1y ago
Unless you need things like ability to address groups in flexible ways, which is why X.400 survives in various places (in addition to actually supporting inline cryptography and binary attachments). What people forget is that you do not hav
404.
by p_l 1y ago
There's the other story of corporate vendors saying "yes, we will implement OSI, give us X time but buy our product now and we will deliver OSI" then actually going "we mangled BSD Sockets enough to work if you squint
405.
by p_l 1y ago
Isn't PER or OER more compact? especially for the per-bit charging thing
406.
by p_l 1y ago
Protocol Wars are also a story of early enshittification of Internet, where attempts to push forward with solutions to already known problems were pushed back because they would require investment on vendor side instead of just carrying on
407.
by p_l 1y ago
SNMP OIDs are in 1.3.6 because TCP/IP stack was once more well known as "DoD Internet". And SNMP is explicitly a DoD Internet simplified alternative to CMIS
408.
by p_l 1y ago
And while certain telcos had packet network focused on that (Bell and Datakit, for example), and generally OSI cared about including QoS indicators , CLNS and its specific on-the-wire implementation CLNP is so similar to IP that IPv9 expli
409.
by p_l 1y ago
MIME/Content-Negotiation is essentially OSI Presentation Layer HTTP sorta acts as stump of ROSE with bit of ACSE. In addition it provides a bit of basic layer for passing some extra attributes that might be considered in-band or out (o
410.
by p_l 1y ago
Both Claude and Gemini can be integrated reasonably by informing them how to use JJ commands or even through MCP
411.
by p_l 1y ago
That's why there was an entire section for unassigned numbers. Binary protocols just meant you actually needed to implement serialiser/deserialiser and similar tooling instead of writing dumbest possible riff on strtok() and hopin
412.
by p_l 1y ago
It's not that Microsoft controls the issuance, it's that their keys are pretty much guaranteed to be installed and thus getting your keys signed with their CA means you can use the pre-existing trust roots. They are also the one p
413.
by p_l 1y ago
Reader got so much flak because it was not just niche techie thing, but also had a big footprint among... journalists. So you had extra backlash because the people who most felt it were also people way more vocal
414.
by p_l 1y ago
Another point is that the use of HTTP for everything, outside of the issue of middle boxes breaking protocols for everyone, is that it's essentially capitulation to the wisdom of OSI multi-layered protocols - we replicate their feature
415.
by p_l 1y ago
A lot of old RFCs explicitly mention running on top of TELNET. Additionally, as much people like to harp about "telcos focusing on connection-oriented protocols while we ran loops around them with packets", the reality is that NCP
416.
by p_l 1y ago
A lot of the textual nature of older IETF protocols, including the CR LF line endigns, can be probably traced to how easy it was to bang out a bad implementation full of subtle problems that could be debugged by sitting an undergrad student
417.
by p_l 1y ago
if DNT is absent you could show GDPR-compliant consent screen (ofc, it would still need to be actually compliant, i.e. with "reject all" button front and center)
418.
by p_l 1y ago
Relatively speaking GDPR at this point is just shy of 30 years old - that's when most of the effective rules came into play. What changed the most with GDPR is that enforcement now has teeth. Not as big teeth as say, NIS2, which actual
419.
by p_l 1y ago
IBM Power8 and Power9 used Centaur chips which had similar "last level cache" onboard. Because it is last level before the actual ram chips, no coherency involved.
420.
by p_l 1y ago
GDPR does not mandate specific technical solutions. But actually honoring DNT properly would immediately mean no consent banner, but the consent banner is there to fool you into giving up your rights while providing (flimsy) legal cover for

More ›