Slashdot Mirror

Demon Seed FTW.

But, anyways, that's 51.2 LOC, or about 3 Proteus, IIRC.

from http://www.lesk.com/mlesk/ksg97/ksg.html The 20-terabyte size of the Library of Congress is widely quoted and as far as I know is derived by assuming that LC has 20 million books and each requires 1 MB. Of course, LC has much other stuff besides printed text, and this other stuff would take much more space.

1. Thirteen million photographs, even if compressed to a 1 MB JPG each, would be 13 terabytes. 2. The 4 million maps in the Geography Division might scan to 200 TB. 3. LC has over five hundred thousand movies; at 1 GB each they would be 500 terabytes (most are not full-length color features). 4. Bulkiest might be the 3.5 million sound recordings, which at one audio CD each, would be almost 2,000 TB.

This makes the total size of the Library perhaps about 3 petabytes (3,000 terabytes).

so 230 libraries by the old standard or 1.5 by the new standard

Compress each audio file to a 5 MB MP3. That's 17.5 TB. Total size would be 750 terabytes.

So the data would be 6 LOC.

from http://www.lesk.com/mlesk/ksg97/ksg.html The 20-terabyte size of the Library of Congress is widely quoted and as far as I know is derived by assuming that LC has 20 million books and each requires 1 MB. Of course, LC has much other stuff besides printed text, and this other stuff would take much more space.

1. Thirteen million photographs, even if compressed to a 1 MB JPG each, would be 13 terabytes.
2. The 4 million maps in the Geography Division might scan to 200 TB.
3. LC has over five hundred thousand movies; at 1 GB each they would be 500 terabytes (most are not full-length color features).
4. Bulkiest might be the 3.5 million sound recordings, which at one audio CD each, would be almost 2,000 TB.

This makes the total size of the Library perhaps about 3 petabytes (3,000 terabytes).

so 230 libraries by the old standard or 1.5 by the new standard

Actually it 1024 gigabytes using binary units (base 2), we use binary units because formatted capacity is measured in binary units. For exampe: 1 Exabyte = 1(1024) Petabytes = 1(1024)(1024) Terabytes = 1(1024)(1024)(1024) Gigabytes and so on... The formula to convert si units into binary units is si_unit * (125/128) which comes out to 0.9765625. For example: a 750GB hard drive is 750(125/128) = 732.421875 Gigabytes. Also don't forget reserved space... On FreeBSD it's 8% of the format capacity, so 732.421875 * 92% = 673.828125 Gigabytes of usable space.

The Library of Congress is estimated at 3 petabytes, or 3(1024) terabytes:

http://www.lesk.com/mlesk/ksg97/ksg.html

To get a feel for the size and scale of 50 exabytes using today's technology,

* Two copy's of the entire Library of Congress, 6000 TB[1], can be stored in the collective cache buffers of the RAID controllers.
* It would need a 1,712 MW (peak) power source, a typical PWR nuclear power station produces 2,000 MW. Tack on another $5 billion for the construction of a nuclear power station.
* You would likely need to employ an entire team (in 3 shifts) to replace defective drives every day.
* You would need 1,684,804 sq. feet to house all the racks, a building the size of the John Hancock Center would be needed. Add another $385 million to the bill.

[1] http://www.lesk.com/mlesk/ksg97/ksg.html

Most musicians always earned their money by giving concerts and selling merchandise. The money from records usually directly went into the pockets of the music label managers to cover the production of records, the marketing, the investments, the ... you name it. Most musicians got nothing from sales of their record. (See Lesk's article for some figures.)

But the record labels usually did not get a share of the revenue from concerts.

Or, as the RIAA writes:

"When artists are successful, record companies typically renegotiate their contracts to provide significantly higher compensation. These renegotiations are allowed under Section 2855. Record companies want to retain their most popular artists. As a result, successful artists frequently renegotiate terms mid-contract for larger advances and better royalties. Their recordings also serve as springboards for other revenue sources that they do not share with the record companies, such as concert revenues and publishing and merchandising royalties."

The sky isn't falling.

But it has started...

What's new is that record labels offer contracts to newcomer musicians with clauses that guarantee them a large of revenues from concerts and merchandising. See, e.g., "EMI Takes a Stake in Band" (http://davidkusek.typepad.com/future_of_music/KOR NEMI.pdf).

"Sources close to the band said that under the terms of the deal, EMI would pay the four- member band an estimated $15 million upfront -- more than twice what the band might expect from a traditional recording contract. In return, EMI would get more than 25% of the band's publishing, merchandising and touring revenue as well as profit from the group's albums."

Expect rising prices for merchandising articles as well.

No mystery about Mike Lesk: Bellcore, then the NSF, now Rutgers.

Maybe deep in the mess legal bumpf SCO does have an axe in the heart of Linux. Maybe something like the backing store debacle.

Step 1. SCO Creates Legal FUD against Linux, creating _huge_ bad PR for itself.
Step 2. M$ insures itself against the "axe" by licensing it.
Step 3. SCO crumbles (everybody hates them), but surprised surprise, the legal axe somehow ends up held (maybe via a proxy) in M$'s greasy paws.
Step 4. M$, who orchestrated the whole sick mess, comes out smelling roses, its main enterprise level competitor dead, its Market share blooming, its PR all fresh and glowing.

Sorry, forgot the link