[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: high galvanic skin response vs os's



On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 09:43:04PM -0800, stefan long wrote:
>    i have interfered with computers to a greater or lesser degree all my
>    life.
>     
>    i have been led to believe that Linux OS may be less susceptible to me
>    that
>    gates'.
>     
>    is there anyone out there that can shed some light here? offer
>    suggestions?
>     
>    i have burned up watches, cell phones, and laptops;  prevented input to
>    DeVry's computers (Long Beach Ca 90's); and crashed banks of computers
>    by logging on @ Golden West College (Huntington Beach, Ca 70's).
>     
>    a fairly common suggestion is to wear a grounding strap, which i haven't
>    done.
>     
>    thank you

I would imagine that the primary cause of failure would be the hardware,
rather than the software per se. That said, you have two courses of
action if you want the software to keep running.

A) Have software that is more tolerant to hardware failures. This is
possible on Linux. Linux gives you easy access to features such as RAID,
network bonding, bad RAM avoidance and so on that may be costly or
impossible on Windows (I'm not aware, for example, of Windows having an
equivalent to the BadRAM patch).

B) Have hardware that is more resistant to failures in the first place.
Most PCs are built to a budget, so components are usually as cheap as
they can get away with. However, industrial computers are often designed
with a different environment in mind, so different engineering decisions
are taken (e.g. automotive computers, factory-floor computers... I have
even heard of a computer being attached via a long pole to a nuclear
device). You may find something like this suitable.

-- 
Darac Marjal

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: