4,885 karma · joined August 1, 2017
https://lwn.net/Articles/1088991/ has all the relevant links. Probably somewhwere there is also a more detailed "neutral" article.
The article doesn't say and I know nothing about India. I could guess consumers are oaying using their smartphones. So Google/Apple duopoly are still the gatekeepers to use UPI making huge profits. Of course using one of the American backends would make their control and profits orders of magnitudes bigger.
Which rules do you think are particularly outdated?
Yes, my employer strongly encourages me to act unethically. And in cases like in TFA I do.
A difference could be that Germany might not have such blocking law as France. At least I have never heard of it.
Seems more entertaining than suitable for real analysis. At least I did not see any collected data. You can just watch what happens at this moment.
From watching it a while I came to the conclusion that adding a new authorized ssh key is a common first step.
The message you obviously refer to as just an educated guess by a forum user who seems to be experienced in email topics. It could be that the guess is correct. It could be hat the consumtants are too overloaded to configure things differently. Another user has that guess. We don't know as long as the provider does not answer.
Should check what it does with branch names starting with a dash.
Of course that wouldn't be a security vulnerability, but a user error. It asks user approvals to execute those things and has disclaimers to check results. Which of course every user does all the time... /s
Don't see that we get rid of either command lines in text or von Neumann any time soon.
It's probably an exception in EU.
That the notice comes every 6 months is just to meet the letter of the original international treaty.
I have a Finnish bank account that use a completely standalone, purely time-based code generator.
Alternatives exist. But with current know your customer requirements it's increasingly difficult to open new ones if you are a foreigner and/or non-resident.
Q1: Let's start with a single core machine. The explanations always say: The scheduler does this and does that. As if the the scheduler would be some external entity. In the single core machine there is only one actor. The core that executes instructions. One after another. Where the next one is either determined by the program counter or an interrupt. I would really like a text that never changes perspective. It's the CPU that does things (sometimes it executes code belonging to the scheduler). It's never the scheduler that sits there in an outside supervising position and can do things.
So lets take this pure user space while(1) task. The CPU jumps into the timer interrupt code. The article says a flag will be set, but the real preemption will happen later at a safe spot. So what code is executed after the flag has been set? Where and how will it notice that now we are at a safe spot to preempt?
Q2: The multi-core case. All texts write about "the scheduler". As if we had n cores and 1 scheduler that supervises what they are doing. But that's certainly not what is happening. I guess all cores execute some scheduler code regularly (except the tickless ones, but that's yet another story and rare on a "typical" machine). But how does that work without creating a mess in the data structures? Well, some synchronization primitives are probably needed. But how does that scale for dozens and 100s of cores? I guess most structures are local to a core and the global ones are modified rarely?
Where are these 2 questions answered?
I would need to search the specs, but a N95 has 1 core and well below 1GB. A factor of dozens in the specs, but still you can get good user experience on the old devices if the software is written in a smart way.
The lower resolution of the N95 acts in favor of performance. But admittedly against user experience.