Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.lisp > #32948

Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP

Show all headers | View raw

a.daniel.eliason@gmail.com writes:

> On Thursday, April 25, 2019 at 7:22:34 PM UTC+2, informatimago wrote:
>> ...
>> Nowadays, unix
>> runs computers mostly for single-user computers (phones, tablets,
>> workstations), and very rarely for multiple users on big-iron.
>> ...
>> __Pascal J. Bourguignon__
>> http://www.informatimago.com
>
>
> AH, ahem, uh, (cough, cough)...  WHAT?!!!  I agree with all your
> overall discussion on this topic, but to take a slightly off-topic
> focus on the bit quoted above, "Are you sure that actually turns out
> to be the case??"
>
> I think counting hardware instances, with smartphones adding with
> laptops and desktops and all, it probably does weigh more heavily on
> the "single user computers" side.  But what about Google?  Amazon?
> IBM?  Even Microsoft?  These huge data center services, there's lots
> of machines there running Linux (I assume that counts as "Unix") and
> serving many, many users on each hardware frame.  Technologies like
> Docker are pulling users back onto a single Unix instance from VM
> technologies in these places.  Even in VM environments, each VM
> running Unix is serving so many users.
>
> We can get into semantics of the concept of "user" versus "service
> request context", but, well, my point is that the idea of a multi-user
> Unix box is hardly "rare" these days!  (Even if the single user
> instances are even more abundant.)
>
> (I don't want to contradict.. if you have a different interpretation,
> well OK, just wanted to add my point of view.)

Certainly a better metric would be in order. But in anycase, by
definition there will be fewer multi-user computers than single-user
computers.

The business value of companies like Google is in reducing the number of
computers they need to use to serve the 7 billion potential users.

The business value of companies like Apple or Samsung is to increase the
number of hand-held computers the sell to the 7 billion potential users.

Apple will never make a iUberPhone!  "Press a button, and some random
iPhone will be brought to your position in less than five minutes so you
make your call or send you tweet!"  Anybody?

-- 
__Pascal J. Bourguignon__
http://www.informatimago.com

Back to comp.lang.lisp | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Buffer Overflow in LISP yara.huss.113@gmail.com - 2019-04-25 03:52 -0700
  Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP shcv@sdf.org - 2019-04-25 09:21 -0400
  Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-04-25 15:21 +0200
    Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2019-04-25 11:04 -0400
      Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-04-25 19:22 +0200
        Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2019-04-28 08:34 +0000
          Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2019-04-29 12:31 -0400
        Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP a.daniel.eliason@gmail.com - 2019-05-23 08:35 -0700
          Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP Kaz Kylheku <847-115-0292@kylheku.com> - 2019-05-23 17:02 +0000
            Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2019-05-30 15:50 -0400
          Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-05-23 19:30 +0200
            Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP taruss@google.com - 2019-05-24 10:40 -0700
              Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2019-05-24 10:45 -0700
                Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-05-24 23:27 +0200
                [OT] was: Buffer Overflow in LISP Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-05-24 22:46 +0100
                Re: [OT] was: Buffer Overflow in LISP "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-05-25 01:00 +0200
                Re: [OT] was: Buffer Overflow in LISP Kaz Kylheku <847-115-0292@kylheku.com> - 2019-05-24 23:46 +0000
                Re: [OT] was: Buffer Overflow in LISP Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-05-25 01:35 +0100
                Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP Jason Cornez <jcornez@ravenpack.com> - 2019-05-29 16:10 +0200
                Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-05-29 20:25 +0200
      Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP Vladimir Sedach <vsedach@oneofus.la> - 2019-09-22 21:26 -0700
        Re: Buffer Overflow in LISP Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2019-09-23 00:45 -0400

csiph-web