rumcajz

65 ms·

661.
Tragedy of the Commons and Tragedy of the Privately Owned Land(250bpm.com)
1 points by rumcajz 13y ago|0 comments
662.
by rumcajz 13y ago
The principle seems similar to organistrum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurdy_gurdy
663.
by rumcajz 13y ago
Original 0MQ author here. Pretty good analysis. The only real difference between 0MQ and sockets (i.e.traditional L4 transports such as TCP or UDP) is that it implements messaging patterns such as pub/sub or req/rep. You can think
664.
by rumcajz 13y ago
That's the question. Suppose you are part of 10%. You are a person with money. You spend 10% of your income to satisfy all your needs. How are you going to spend remaining 90%? Keep in mind that your needs are already satisfied -- you
665.
by rumcajz 13y ago
9% percent face the same problem. They need only 0.9% to feed them. So they leave 8.1% alone and make for themselves. But then only 0.09% is needed to produce all the stuff. Etc.
666.
by rumcajz 13y ago
You are assuming that people are able to consume 10x more to keep economy going. I would say there's a limit to how much a person is capable to consume. If nothing else you have only 24hrs a day to engage in consuming.
667.
by rumcajz 13y ago
If 10% wall themselves off, they'll need only 1% to feed them. So the 1% walls themselves off the remaining 9%. But then they'll need only 0.1%...
668.
by rumcajz 13y ago
If, thanks to technology, 10% of people are able to produce all the goods, 90% won't get paid. With most people not having money, only 10% of goods will be needed from that point on. And thanks to the new technology, only 1% of people
669.
Public Key Encryption for Kids(250bpm.com)
1 points by rumcajz 13y ago|0 comments
670.
by rumcajz 13y ago
There is such a thing as programming trance, with working 16hrs a day and very high productivity. But then, you need an environment fully devoid of distractions (like working from home if you are single or a locked personal office otherwise
671.
by rumcajz 13y ago
I always thought of 10x engineer not as one that writes 1000 LoC while others write 100 LoC. Rather, as one that says, at an early stage of development "let's do it this way" and the total amount of manyears spent on the proj
672.
by rumcajz 13y ago
SCTP has multihoming and is exposed via standard socket API. So, it's nothing new.
673.
by rumcajz 13y ago
Any pointer to explanation of the phenomenon?
674.
Backdoors in Encryption Standards and How To Fight Them(250bpm.com)
1 points by rumcajz 13y ago|0 comments
675.
by rumcajz 13y ago
Iran should be able to do that.
676.
by rumcajz 13y ago
Why not? Seems like fun.
677.
by rumcajz 13y ago
W3C or IETF are open by their nature. Thus, there can be multiple backdoors inserted by multiple parties. So if you use multiple such standards to encrypr, it may happen that there's an entity that has backdoor in all of them. A standa
678.
by rumcajz 13y ago
You mean like Obama giving a tool to read his email to Putin? Unlikely IMO.
679.
by rumcajz 13y ago
This is a procedural, not technical problem. It almost seems like the standardisation process open to everyone just enables everyone to insert their own backdoors into the standard. One interesting way to solve the problem would be to allow
680.
by rumcajz 13y ago
The interesting thing is that eduacation by play is not a novel idea. It dates back at least to Comenius and was re-iterated over and over again since. Yet, after almost four centuries it's still not widely implemented. One gets a feel
681.
by rumcajz 13y ago
Flight schedules should be secret. Also, dates of sporting events should be secret. Actually, keeping current time secret would help a lot. Seriously, the fact that information can be used by terrorists doesn't imply that it should be
682.
by rumcajz 13y ago
In ZeroMQ it was in user-space memory. Now it's in kernel-space (TCP rx/tx buffers). That actually makes it a little more reliable as tx buffers are not necessarily dropped when the application fails.
683.
by rumcajz 13y ago
The blog post was wirtten by Armin Ronacher. Here's today's tweet from Armin: "Oh wow. Looks like nanomsg fixes all my problems I have with ZeroMQ."
684.
by rumcajz 13y ago
The two are equivalent. The only difference is that in ZMQ the global state is created upon zmq_init() call. In nanomsg it's created upon first nn_socket() call.
685.
by rumcajz 13y ago
Yuck. Why would anyone want that kind of stuff. nanomsg does all its processing in the background threads, same way as TCP does. I doubt anyone would ask to have to call do_background_processing_step() to make TCP work. Also, that kind of t
686.
by rumcajz 13y ago
You are oversimplifying it. REQ/REP is not the same as TCP, unlike TCP it works with multiple requesters and multiple repliers. Same with other patterns. The main distinction between L4 and scalability layer is that L4 works between 2
687.
by rumcajz 13y ago
This comment may be relevant to MIT vs. LGPL discussion: https://github.com/zeromq/netmq/issues/96
688.
by rumcajz 13y ago
Good point. Would you mind bringing it up on nanomsg mailing list?
689.
by rumcajz 13y ago
Yes, that's exaclty what ZeroMQ is doing. Then check how the code looks like. It's a mess. Intrusive containers deliver same performance characteristics and the code actually looks clean.
690.
by rumcajz 13y ago
Nope. It's a platform for delivering packaged and reusable distributed algorithms, such as request/reply or publish/subscribe. The algorithms handle the issues like message routing, scaling up, handling partial failure etc.

More ›