mattbauer

I think kernel modules will go away at some point. Having no third party Kexts would increase the security of the OS for in use systems. That's a nice way of saying not all third-party Kexts are created equal.

I could see an argument where moving existing hardware Kexts to user space is easier because IOKit uses the libkern C++ Runtime. The OO design of IOKit may lend itself very nicely to the driver approach BarrelFish takes (http://www.barrelfish.org). The real hard one to move to user space would be third-party filesystems. That's mainly because of dated VFS architecture used in *NIX systems. I could see Apple completely moving away from that at a future point too.

It's not sneaky just because you're not looking. I have found the CoreOS group to be guarded in their responses to future directions but never sneaky. There have been multiple times where an API/design/etc change in a WWDC session didn't make sense. I would follow up in the labs and be told the reason is because X is happening in the future. Granted I'm not always told. In that case a diff of kernel sources between releases along with some years working in the XNU kernel is enough to figure it out. Sometimes you're just lucky and hint it in the actual session. For example the 2013 WWDC Session titled "What's New in Kext Development" (https://asciiwwdc.com/2013/sessions/707) leaked SIP well before it was officially announced. They key line was:

So in the future, we are going to tighten down access to the system hierarchy, the whole hierarchy down from /System and everything in there.

Another example of them sharing future plans was user space networking. I forgot what year it was but in the session they noted something about network kernel extensions (NKE) going away and to use Network Extensions instead. NKEs weren't the best but for Apple to send all the effort to recreate the 'same' thing in a new framework was odd. A visit to the labs and you were instantly told of the move to user space networking.

One last example. Apple ships in the default OS a number of third party mass storage kernel drivers. Take a look at /Library/Extensions on a new install. This ensure when you try to install that new OS or boot that new OS, you can see you're drives. Apple likely needs to work with those third-parties to make that happen.

I understand why it might appear sneaky but I don't think that's the case.

It depends. Sophisticated malware, say a rootkit, can hide calls and even presence on the system. It can do things like modify the syscall table, register a MAC policy to alter what's returned to the rest of the system and use Mach ports to do things without tripping security systems. I say hide because you can still find the malware, it just takes a lot more work. Also the malware had to do something to get to latter point which is easier to detect. A lot of products just deal with that.

Just a few other notes to help make kernel development with VMware Fusion easier:

1. Add -zc and -zp to your boot args. It's not documented but it greatly helps catch zone allocation problems (OSMalloc/OSFree/buffer overrun) issues.

2. Use snapshots instead of rebooting. It's much faster to revert back to a snapshot than to reboot your virtual machine instance after a crash.

3. If you use a shared directory between your instance and host machine for moving your KEXTs/other code, make sure to MD5 the files before loading. It's very common for the instance to be using stale cached blocks.

4. While not necessary, I create a separate network interface that's host only to debug on. I give it a static ip and add an entry to my host's host file. It makes debugging instances easier to do since I can connect by name, i.e. kdb-remote vm0.

OP if you're looking to raise $ from OVP, I'd suggest you keep looking.

Okay but what did you think of the post?

A big congrats to the Zencoder team. Well, well done.

I'm skeptical. There are too many unsupported claims in this article. Off the top of my head:

- Assumes the Chinese put the backdoor in. There are plenty of others interested in backdoors. - Assumes the designing company doesn't do any detailed production product checks. Not likely since this is a many, many billion dollar business. - Claims a systemic problem but only notes one chip. That one FPGA could just have a design flaw. Need more details on the others. - At the end it claims an investigation over ten years but the fab world has greatly changed over ten years. Many micro controller companies actually own their Chinese fabs now.

As a side note, if you discover something like this, don't assume you found something you weren't meant to find. You're discovery may just have made you found.

I worked for Steve Barnet while at SSEC (http://www.ssec.wisc.edu). Working for him is about as awesome as working at the South Pole.

I would add that Bluetooth Low Energy isn't totally free. Somewhere in your cost you have FCC/IC/CE testing, Bluetooth licensing/testing/certification, possible software stack cost and more expensive components (radio, antenna, etc). You also have a larger power requirement as low energy isn't as low as UART. I won't give specific numbers here as I cant't legally, but the cost difference is probably a wash. That's assuming your doing the radio layout and not using a module. Apple's move to wireless is definitely for their sake. I could also see an argument made that because of the possible extra costs for doing Blouetooth Low Energy (chips, testing, power, RF design, etc) you may see less accessories for a while.

In any case I think you're right that the tell tale signs are there.

Any chance of getting an SRTM terrain layer?

I'm not worked up. I'm seeking clarity for those applying to Project Skyway. They're new, naive and easily taken advantage of. I'm asking the questions I would hope they would ask.

If you haven't made enough on your exits to angel invest, then you built lifestyle companies which I understand Project Skyway doesn't want. Additionally, you're providing advice to entrepreneurs on how to create something which you haven't done yourself. That would give me pause if I was applying. Maybe your just providing your network to entrepreneurs for a fee (the equity stake Project Skyway takes). In that case, your price is much too large compared to Angel List and your value is significantly less.

Why are you arguing points I didn't contest?

I have started, built and successfully exited from a couple of different companies, so I know it can be done.

Given this, how many angel investments in MN web/mobile/social/etc startups have you made?

Just checked out your web site Matt. Great product. Great accomplishment. Would love to have you in our network.

My company is specifically listed as an example of a company you're not interested in on your website FAQ and you just checked out our website? Additionally I say something challenging about Project Skyway and you ask me to join your network? Thanks but you're better served by guys like Rob Weber and Justin Kaufenberg. They made it. I'm just in the process of.

we chose not to entertain any device companies like yours because we do not have the expertise, network or resources to benefit these types of companies at this point.

This is the part I just don't get. MN has more expertise in MedDev (Medtronic, Guidant, Mayo, United Health Care, etc) and hardware (Compellent, Xiotech, Cray, IBM, etc) than anything else. I guess I would add advertising to that list (Fallon, Olsen, Brew).

If you don't fell for the spell of the coasts, that is, and continue to enjoy what MN has to offer to our entrepreneurial community.

I'm staying. See above for the reason.

In the end Cem you've made a bet with your own money. We'll see how it plays out.

Hey Matt, nice to see you chiming in. Appreciate the thoughts.

Ah more MN Nice.

You say "You are left funding founders not dedicated enough to their startups to move and give their startups the best chance." Interpreted another way: everyone not smart enough or driven enough to move to the Valley we'll be stuck with. Second raters.

No interpretation needed. I said dedicated enough. You stated they weren't smart enough or driven enough.

But you're missing the point: Is this pool still good enough? In the pool of 5,000 rejected YC and TS applicants per year are there any winners? We think so. We think there are a lot. Chicago is a far cry from SV or NYC yet a full half of Accelerate Labs' last class went on to raise an impressive angel round. 50% follow on funding is nothing to sneeze at no matter how you measure it. Most accelerator programs cross their fingers for that.*

Geography does not dictate success. If so, Phoenix would have more successful incubators than Boulder.

You say "Thanks to Angel List you don't have to pay an accelerator for access". You just made raising a round leveraging AL sound really easy. You've found success with it -- is it really that easy? But even so, how do you think companies that are a tad too early for that going to maximize their chances of getting to that point? A Pedal Brain c. 2009?

It is that easy. If you can't get to the point of a prototype, you shouldn't be funded. If you can't convince someone to work for equity/options to get you to a prototype, you shouldn't be funded.

You bring up good points, and I think that they lead to the fact we appear to be "just another YC". Stay tuned. This is just our first class (what we call a cycle). In 2012 and beyond we'll be focusing much more on niche cycles. Ones that are absolutely perfect for this ecosystem. See this year merely as our test drive, but we know we're not perfect. Factor that in before you short us into the ground. =)

Do the startups applying this year and giving you 6% of their founder shares understand it's just a test drive this year?

Proven returns isn't being cocky. If your plan to compete directly with the coasts startup for startup, idea for idea I wish you the best of luck. I'm going to have to short your stock though. The Midwest at this time and possibly forever can't compete against the coasts for the types of startups project skyway is looking for. They have more quality talent for web/mobile/social/etc. They have more advanced networks and streamlined capitalization. They also have founders going on startup three, four, five and not all successful. If I had a web/mobile/social/etc startup or saw myself being a founder of one, the first thing I would do is move. The statistics of success dictate such.

Things brings up a problem see with project skyway. You are left funding founders not dedicated enough to their startups to move and give their startups the best chance. I would have serious reservations about investing in such a founder.

Incumbators were great even two years ago but now they really aren't as necessary. Thanks to Angel List you don't have to pay an accelerator for access to the network. In the world of Angel List an accelerator is actually a decelerator. If you have an idea for a startup, get a prototype done and submit it to Angel List. If it's got merit, you'll get interest. If not, move onto something else. I view project skyway more as a founder school that you pay with equity rather than an accelerator. I wish it would market itself as such.

The Midwest can kick the coasts' ass any day of the week but not with the type of companies project skyway wants. It's with the type of companies it specifically doesn't want.

I wish project skyway the best (that's Minnesota nice for I don't think it will work).

There should be an asterisk at the of the title Steve Blank's SXSW talk saying:

While new rules are in place for the new bubble they only apply to startups operating in the bubble. All other startups should continue following the rules for their respective sphere. Entrepreneurs should continue to start startups in any sphere.

He talks about four paths to startup liquidity. I hope he noted the latter doesn't replace the former. It should seem obvious but in the world of the new iPad making the original iPad a paperweight, I don't think it is. I'd argue for the continued validity of the former business models.

I wrote in more detail about this on my blog:

http://mattbauer.github.com/2011/03/13/new-rules-for-the-new...

Octopart if you want to start making money, build in some BOM management features. It's not a sexy area but BOM management is a pretty good problem to solve with designers, suppliers, CMs, etc. Don't forget the EOCs and MCOs too.

Really nice. Great way for me to share designs with remote designers and stakeholders with having them install a viewer. Could be the start of a Scribd for the physical world.

I wouldn't say it's useless but they aren't primetime. You just can't get the tolerances you need out of them yet. The real world is all about tolerances and non mechanical engineers always forget this. We actually adjust our files for the 3D printer to get the tolerances closer. In the end, the speed, material cost, tolerances and finish won't make these printers ready for the real world in 2011. Sorry guys. And yes I do own a very nice Stratasys 3D printer and have access to an Exojet too.

This is a good point. I bet the level of radiation is an OSHA violation. Nothing like one government agency fighting another.

Colin worked for us on Pedal Brain. The things he talks about were all used in our antenna work. It's based on the work of a rather serious antenna designer who I can't mention by name. I'll only say you use his antenna's multiple times a day.

I own a uPrint and run it all the time. In the same day we can print a new version, test it out on the bike, make some changes with a Dremel, measure the changes, redesign in Solidworks and repeat. Once you add time into the cost savings equation it's really a no brainer. We are looking at a much larger one that has almost a cubic meter envelope. BTW the reliability of the Stratasys printers is unbelievable.

I own a Stratasys 3D printer, the uPrint to be exact. They are amazing machines and have saved me ten of thousands of dollars in just a few months. We run our printer nearly non stop during the day without a problem. The highend Stratasys models are even more impressive in terms of speed and finish. I just hope Stratasys doesn't do anything to lessen their quality for HP.

I've been working on this since the first day Apple released the accessory information for an iPhone. It works quite well and even have some professional cyclists and triathletes test it. I'll be releasing the rest of the site and applications over the next few months. The plan is to have everything ready in March including availability at your local bike shop.