1 Sep 2007 02:29
Re: [tt] World's most powerful supercomputer goes online
Jim Lux <James.P.Lux <at> jpl.nasa.gov>
2007-09-01 00:29:55 GMT
2007-09-01 00:29:55 GMT
At 02:21 PM 8/31/2007, Peter St. John wrote: >I'm imaging this system as a computer, and the headaches of it's >operator (the guy who scripted the worm, maybe) whose million nodes >are infested by a million hostile users (the refeverse of a users >desktop infested by a worm, is a worm's virutual supercomputer >infested by users). I'm sure that the architect sees the value of the Beowulf mailing list for such things. After all, we all like a challenge, right? Heterogenous hardware configurations, non-deterministic latency interconnects with an ever changing topology, configuration management issues galore. By the time we're done, rgb will have to add another chapter to his book on building Beowulfs. >>So besides preferring to call it a "Virtual Special-purpose (mail-bombing) Supercomputer" instead of a "(General purpose) Supercomputer" I'd also be skeptical of all performance metrics. If you can't measure the number of nodes within an order of magnitude then other metrics are perforce dubious. Well, there IS that, but then, it's more a matter of scale of dubiousness rather than whether any sort of single cluster metric is "truth". >And I'm pretty sure that Deep Blue could beat it at chess, if >someone managed to MPI a chess program on Storm Bot. But I"m sure I >can't prove it. Come on.. someone needs to throw down the guantlet. Challenge the botnet to a smackdown duel. race for pinks* or something.(Continue reading)
).
And for successful reading a list of variables (in Linux w/ifc) from
created in Windows w/cvf "binary" file, as I remember, it was
necessary to perform some tricks like insertion of dummy variables in
the list.
Now ifort and cvf are the same compiler, but I don't know how they
realized 'binary' format 
Yours
Mikhail
it was necessary
>_______________________________________________
>Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf <at> beowulf.org
>To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
>
is a lot easier...
Let's see. RSA and DES and MD5 are considered "probably uncrackable" by
anyone with less than NSA-class resources, but of course this bot-cloud
is several orders of magnitude more powerful than NSA's probable setup.
If we go with the gaudy end of the estimate and give it 10^7
node/members, MDA is done -- one can pretty much crack anything one
could have cracked with the old crypt library, even if one can only test
1 password per second per node -- nearly 10^12 passwords a day.
Similarly lots of other problems become tractible to a brute force
search algorithm when you can displose of order of 20 petaclocks worth
RSS Feed