I accidentally took down our corporate network multiple times ~20 years ago, because I was setting up virtual networks with Linux machines acting as l2 bridges, and with proxy_arp to on. The DHCP server only checked for an arp reply, and I caused our server to run out of IPs. It had a cache and nobody knew how to clear it, so we just had to wait it out.
What ethnicity are you? I went through an airport -- and nobody else got screened except me. What was special about me? I was the only non-white person in the airport. Upon complaining, this was the response:
> Random selection by our screening technology prevents terrorists from attempting to defeat the security system by learning how it operates. Leaving out any one group, such as senior citizens, persons with disabilities, or children, would remove the random element from the system and undermine security. We simply cannot assume that all terrorists will fit a particular profile.
I have wondered why the likes of McKinsey, KPMG, and PWC do not put up candidates (don't even sponsor them, just say you're electing _well known consultancy_).
The author (Cong Wang) is building all sorts of neat stuff. Recently, they built kernelscript: https://github.com/multikernel/kernelscript -- another DSL for BPF that's much more powerful than the C alternatives, without the complexity of C BPF. Previously, they were at Bytedance, so there's a lot of hope that they understand the complexities of "production".
I really like the manycores approach, but we haven’t seen it come to fruition — at least not on general purpose machines. I think a machine that exposes each subset of cores as a NUMA node and doesn’t try to flatten memory across the entire set of cores might be a much more workable approach. Otherwise the interconnect becomes the scaling limit quickly (all cores being able to access all memory at speed).
Erlang, at least the programming model, lends itself well to this, where each process has a local heap. If that can stay resident to a subsection of the CPU, that might lend itself better to a reasonably priced many core architecture.
Investment gap is what I'd say too. While Rust, Go, Python, etc... have had massive backers that have managed to invest a ton more into things like static analysis, type checking, and developer ergonomics, the Erlang ecosystem hasn't necessarily had the same love, and instead the major users have typically chosen to pivot, or build something outside of the BEAM.
No it wont. It's incredibly hard to build out a fully useful version of the Linux APIs, as shown to us by Cygwin, and WSL. Even if you built out a similar set of APIs, Linux itself offers a ridiculous set of interaction points where applications can tie together (for example, I can use inotifywatch to copy files out of my container as they're written). I feel like what you'll end up with is something like gvisor running on top of WASM. In which case, what did we gain from VMs at all?
Wasn't there a paper from Heidi Howard that stated you it's not actually f failures in 2f+1 nodes, but you can actually make the number of nodes that can fail a lot higher, if you have some nodes that have to take part in the quorum (or the prior proposal)? This feels roughly similar?
Personal: [email protected] Twitter: @sargun
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/sargun; my proof: https://keybase.io/sargun/sigs/bE_gwtoaH4HmzxxR_l2KDeRrPvYxjwW3LoK5SsS61Wg ]