You could use the shared ring buffers scheme to replace essentially all syscalls and similar things in any context. Think gpu drivers, memory controllers, etc. It could be a universal interface for all communication that has to go through some kind of expensive security barrier.
With cross-core interrupts and user-mode interrupt handlers (as in some new intel cpus), you could even do something without polling (interrupt for submission) where the core user-mode code is running on _never_ context switches (obviously except for scheduling) and you just have a dedicated kernel core or cores off doing kernel things.
yup, though that means you're wasting that core's compute; something with green threads where language runtime does a cross-core interrupt to submit syscall then continues execing other green threads until it gets a user interrupt for syscall completion would be pretty neat.
I usually go at 75-80 on a "55" highway for my daily commute, never had issues even while passing cop cars. In general, as long as you're not driving like an idiot (switching 3 lanes without signalling) or running old tags, or basically have a red flag hanging, they won't bother you. Although if they do stop your for one of these reasons, they'll probably also ticket you for speeding. Speed limits are enforced far more strictly in residential areas though.
Git supports multiple remote repositories. Have github be your main repo, keep a mirror locally or on another service (updated using hooks), and switch to it if github fails.
I'm not doubting that the NSA would have figured out the source eventually, yellow dots or not, but I think it's a fair criticism to say the Intercept did not have to publish a picture of the document in full, instead of transcribing the contents.
A power company can't charge you extra or give you a discount because you used an LG washer, because LG is a competitor to their sister company GE, or something like that. That's exactly what Net Neutrality regulations were trying to enforce. Without enforcement, you have things like Comcast or TMobile giving extra speed to their own streaming portals, or charge other service providers for higher speed tiers. I don't understand why there is so much contention regarding this, regardless of political affiliation.
Got data on this? In my anecdotal experience price per square foot has shot up in urban places, which is where the jobs for young people tend to be concentrated.
Maybe true in aggregate, but not true of many cities these days. For example, you can't touch a new home of any size in the Bay Area for less than about 750k, and that's even a long stretch. 250k for 2,000sqft would be a dream for many here.
It looks like they applied CPI directly to the cost of housing. That is not correct.
CPI has a component of "owner's equivalent rent", which should be removed before cost-correcting the price of housing. Otherwise, you are removing the increase of the item you are searching for an increase of (Housing accounts for 1/3 of the CPI correction.) Their graph is instead showing that the buying power of a dollar is roughly constant when 1/3 of the CPI basket-of-goods is corrected with CPI.
Calculated Risk has a more sane analysis, you will note that the graphs are corrected with "CPI less Shelter": http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2016/11/real-prices-and-pr... He doesn't include price/sqft, but note that there is a 44% increase in real prices between the 90s and now. Square footage has not gone up by that much in 20 years.
As a side note: AEI is a fairly political org, I wouldn't rely on their accuracy for anything involving stats, or math in general.
Within these restrictions, I don't think they expect your written code to compile. They just want to ensure the integrity of the test itself. Is it worth the invasion of privacy? Personally, I don't think so.
About 8 years ago, I interviewed w/ Amazon & I chose to do my interview in C++. Although there was no actual compilation, I did get called out for small pedantic syntax errors. Maybe it depends on the individuals that are interviewing you.
Well if you participate in an on-site test which the person was willing to do you are essentially tested under the same conditions, so I'd not really consider this to be a privacy invasion.
You're presumably giving them a view into your home and its location. You'd potentially be required to change security settings on your computer, to re-enable things that had been explicitly disabled. You're likely to also want to close whichever browser tabs or open programs that might be deemed unprofessional.
Those are all things that I'd consider invasive that I don't have to deal with during an in-person interview. And the wording is just creepy anyhow.
True enough, but not everybody actually lives in places where on-site testing is an option, and they'd probably prefer cleaning their room up to not having the ability to apply for a job.
And given that all of this happens voluntarily, and assuming that Amazon isn't going to infect you with malware(which seems very unlikely) this kind of testing is a great opportunity for people who have the resources or time to show up in person.
There's some kind of privacy chauvinism involved in these discussions that ignores the realities of people who don't live next to the Amazon HQ.
What I wrote was just a reaction to when you said that the arrangement wasn't a privacy invasion. I don't have any problem with off-site testing, just this particular implementation of it, which seems uncomfortably distrustful, like a harbinger of what working there would be like.
> And given that all of this happens voluntarily
There's voluntary in the sense of willingly (I have no reservations about doing this; heck, I'd offer even if you didn't ask me to), there's voluntary (I choose to do a thing that sucks because I don't seem to have another choice), and there's everything in between. My problem is when the "voluntary" action is more on the negative side of that scale, which it often is when someone's looking for a job.
I'm not trying to criticize candidates' choices. I'm trying to criticize Amazon's implementation of their hiring process. The point isn't that "candidates should be principled enough not to stand for it", but that Amazon should decide "this way sucks, let's find something better".
> assuming that Amazon isn't going to infect you with malware(which seems very unlikely)
True, they just have you voluntarily install someone else's malware.
An year ago I started dualbooting Elementary as my daily *nix OS. All was well, until one day, with no hardware change or OS update, the touchpad stopped working. I'm back to VMs now.
If I wasn't dualbooting I might have spent more than a day to figure out what happened - but I was too lazy and scrapped dualbooting.
My understanding is that there was a kernel change that borked touchpads this year on many distros and that the change was related to the Synaptics driver seeing little love over the past several years. [1] It looks like the folks who care (like Alps) have been patching over corner cases off and on and as recently as last month.
