Slashdot Mirror


What Data Center Designers Can Learn From Legos

1sockchuck writes "It takes most companies at least a year to build a new data center. Digital Realty Trust says it can build a new data center in just 20 weeks using standard designs and modular components that can be assembled on site. The company equates its 'building blocks' approach to data centers to building with Legos — albeit with customized parts (i.e. the Millennium Falcon Lego kit). Microsoft is taking a similar approach, packaging generators, switchgear and UPS units into pre-assembled components for rapid assembly. Is this the future of data center design?"

157 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. More Present Than Future ... by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is this the future of data center design?

    I'm going to assume you're talking very very large data centers here as it wouldn't make sense to streamline this for a few "blocks." But I think this is an already pretty pervasive idea. Why, we have already talked about Google's ideas on server 'blocks' and data 'pod' technology for their sharded databases. While I'm not sure if this high level design inherently affects relational databases negatively, it sure seems to be the future of data centers.

    Google's strategy sounds even more like homogeneous Lego blocks than either of the two article's solutions.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:More Present Than Future ... by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      I was looking at how to do something similar, using a combination of VMWare (http://www.vmware.com/), Symmetrix V-MAX (http://www.emc.com/products/detail/hardware/symmetrix-v-max.htm) and then just some template 'blade centre' style enclosures, such as HP's Proliant series.
      Now, the V-MAX at least is a bit new to have seen it in the field much, but it would seem there's definitely some scope for the 'linearly scalable' building block data centre - by decoupling the VMs from the physical hardware, you get some impressive scalability.

    2. Re:More Present Than Future ... by cerberusss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While I'm not sure if this high level design inherently affects relational databases negatively, it sure seems to be the future of data centers.

      If you build apps using Google App Engine, the APIs offer you an API to BigTable, a non-relational data store. There is no relational database support.

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
  2. Legos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The plural of "lego" is "lego".

    1. Re:Legos by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 1

      Also, it's LEGO bricks or LEGO pieces, or LEGO .

    2. Re:Legos by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      Actually, what's really sad, I've seen the use of "fishes" a LOT in technical writing in the environmental/ecological sciences.

      It makes me cry.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    3. Re:Legos by emm-tee · · Score: 1

      The plural of "lego" is "lego".

      Not exactly. LEGO is the name of a product group, like Meccano or Erector.

      There's no such thing "a Meccano" or "an Erector", or "a LEGO". Therefore there are no "Meccanos", "Erectors" or "LEGOs".

      There are Meccano and Erector sets, pieces, models. There are LEGO sets, bricks, models etc.

    4. Re:Legos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      fishes is correct for multiple species of fish.
      fish is correct for multiple fish of a single species. ... but cry away, if you must.

    5. Re:Legos by andrikos · · Score: 1

      The plural of l-ego is l-nos!

    6. Re:Legos by Grax · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I played with Legos when I was a kid and my kids play with Legos now. They don't play with "Lego" as they think that refers to a single modular building brick.

      I know a lot of other kids that play with Legos that don't have the time or inclination to say they play with "Lego", "Lego bricks", "Lego playsets", or "Lego compatible modular building playsets". They just play with Legos.

    7. Re:Legos by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Can someone explain the different rules used by American English?

      The "legos" plural form is a good example, but how about the use of mixed tense in a single sentence like "Did you brush your teeth yet?"

      The different pronunciation rules are interesting as well. For example, in most English speaking countries Iraq is "ee-rack" but in the US it's "Eye-rack". Another good example is 'solder', in standard English "sol-der" but in American "sod-er" (silent "l").

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:Legos by ThrowAwaySociety · · Score: 1

      You know what's worse? I've seen it in actual dictionaries.

      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fish

    9. Re:Legos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No.

    10. Re:Legos by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Also the metaphor of generic bricks to build anything wouldn't work today. The kits are all custom; a lego bat plane, lego race car, lego helicopter, etc. They include custom parts as well as the generic bricks.

      It's a shame really, instead of being an imaginative open process it has become following the instructions to make the model in the right way. Having said that my kids will do this once and then combine bits from the various kits and use them in the good old way to make something entirely different.

    11. Re:Legos by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      I think "Sod-er" is how I have never heard that word pronounced. I live in the US. Maybe in this one case it's your ears that are the problem.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    12. Re:Legos by ndnspongebob · · Score: 1

      no, its legi

    13. Re:Legos by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Funny

      Can someone explain the different rules used by American English?

      Absolutely not.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    14. Re:Legos by geobeck · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't know about any of that, but I do know that the plural of "moose" is "meese".

      I think you're confusing that with the plural of 'mouse', which everyone of a certain age knows is 'meeses'.

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    15. Re:Legos by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      ain't is in there as well. Up until fairly recent time, it was not considered a word.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    16. Re:Legos by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      The plural of lego is legos. The common usage of the term defines what the plural tense is, not the marketing department of the Lego company.

    17. Re:Legos by Inda · · Score: 1

      Standard english? That's a new one to me.

      Over here, one speaks the Queen's english. If you wish to speak correctly, copy the Queen.

      If you want to talk like a Yank, raise your voice, raise it again, add some twang and use a lot of TLAs.

      And it's Lego by the way. Anyone saying different is just being difficult. As for the single block argument: one'er, two'er, eight'er, flat-eight...

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
    18. Re:Legos by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      English speaking countries Iraq is "ee-rack" but in the US it's "Eye-rack"

      This reminds me of a sign in an antique store: "You break it you bought it"

      I guess that means we get to name it, too.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    19. Re:Legos by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The plural of "lego" is "lego".

      The distinction only matters to trademark lawyers, because to "protect" their trademark they would argue that there's no such thing as a "Lego" noun, only an adjective.

      The rest of us non-pedants don't give a shit and call them Legos, because in everyday English each individual brick is an individual Lego. Saying "I built this house out of Lego!" sounds prissy and affected. If you disagree, you ought to look deep inside your personality and consider whether *you* are prissy and affected.

    20. Re:Legos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      We believe the Queen is wrong on principle (as all Kings and Queens are; that's why we have Presidents). Thus, if you wish to speak correctly, don't copy the Queen. In fact, behave in a manner as contrary to the Queen's as is practical.

    21. Re:Legos by snspdaarf · · Score: 1

      When I was a kid, we had to dig up the pavers if we wanted to play with bricks. Now, get off my lawn!

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    22. Re:Legos by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I thought of another good one: "I could care less". Seems to be the American version of "I couldn't care less", with the same meaning but appearing to say exactly the opposite.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    23. Re:Legos by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      That's sarcasm. Welcome to America, enjoy your stay.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    24. Re:Legos by Grax · · Score: 1

      We just have buckets of bricks they can use to make something up. I agree, having a "right" way to assemble a Lego model is silly and defeats the purpose.

    25. Re:Legos by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      That was pretty funny, and also missing a comma :)

      Actually, misusing the comma must be the most common English mistake. "Eats, shoots and leaves" is the classic example.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    26. Re:Legos by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The Queen's English is not standard. Standard English is what the BBC news presenters (used to) use. Approximately 3 words per second, largely accent free delivery.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    27. Re:Legos by TurboNed · · Score: 1

      But you build a brick wall with bricks. One could also say that he built the wall with brick, but the distinction there is the concept of the material used to build (brick, wood, stone, Lego), or the individual pieces which come together to form the wall (bricks, planks, stones, Legos.)

    28. Re:Legos by Bender0x7D1 · · Score: 1

      I hate that word to pieces!

      --
      Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
    29. Re:Legos by Chruisan · · Score: 1

      It used to be written on the side of box on the big kits.

    30. Re:Legos by mrslacker · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you can cry that there are different collective nouns (other than "school" of course) for different species of fish.

    31. Re:Legos by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      S-O-L-D-E-R, not soldier.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    32. Re:Legos by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      "Did you brush your teeth yet?" is incorrect.

      It should be:

      "Have you brushed your teeth yet?"

      or

      "Did you brush your teeth already?"

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    33. Re:Legos by maxume · · Score: 1

      I doubt that it is only American, I think it is just a variant.

      Of course, there are probably more English speaking people living outside of the United States, Canada, Australia and UK than there are people living inside of those countries (and then there are countries like India and Nigeria). At some point, the rules in a particular country aren't going to matter anymore.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    34. Re:Legos by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Legos is simply short for "LEGO(tm) bricks". Same as googling is short for "Searching with Google".
      If everybody understands it, it is more efficient. And humans are lazy for a reason. Because it saves important resources when you add it all up.
      So why not?

      Hell, you could also ask us to call cars "auto-mobile horse carriages". ^^ (In Germany, we call them "Autos", stemming from this.)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    35. Re:Legos by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Let me guess: You threw them at each other. And this is how it came that you have to stay in the basement now. Right? *ducks* ^^

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    36. Re:Legos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Apparently the plural of "pedantic asshole" is "slashdotters".

    37. Re:Legos by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      And Jinxy hates those meeses to pieces.

    38. Re:Legos by franki.macha · · Score: 1

      Speaking as a non-yank "Did you brush your teeth already?" sounds terribly American to me, the closest I'd go is "Have you already brushed your teeth?".

    39. Re:Legos by franki.macha · · Score: 1

      As far as the differing rules for pronunciation, in my experience Americans have a tendency to 'over-pronounce', particularly vowels, which to a British ear can make the speaker sound, erm, not so mentally agile :)

      Not that I propagate such stereotypes, I've always just put it down to the large percentage of Americans over the last ~300 years for whom English wasn't a native language.

    40. Re:Legos by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      I think that should be "Did you already brush your teeth?"

      I could be wrong, but my spidey-sense is tingling. I'm usually right about these things.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    41. Re:Legos by franki.macha · · Score: 1

      There's no such thing as accent-free, I presume you're referring to received pronunciation

    42. Re:Legos by _ivy_ivy_ · · Score: 1

      Technically, if you have children, this is more correct:

      For the last time, BRUSH YOUR GOD DAMN TEETH AND GO TO BED!

    43. Re:Legos by nyctopterus · · Score: 1

      'Fish' is the plural of 'fish'. 'Fishes' refers to a taxonomic group (now largely out of favour), which is why you see it in technical writing.

    44. Re:Legos by hattig · · Score: 1

      Damn right. It's "fishies". I saw it on Red Dwarf: "Come here little fishies".

    45. Re:Legos by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      "Did you brush your teeth already?"

      That is wrong too. You should say "Have you brushed your teeth already?"

      You can't have "already" and "did", the tense does not match. If you want to use "did", you need to say "did you brush your teeth earlier?".

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    46. Re:Legos by HeyLaughingBoy · · Score: 1

      As soon as I saw the topic, I giggled, wondering how many posts it would take before the pedantic undercurrent brought this up :-)

    47. Re:Legos by ceswiedler · · Score: 1

      Yes, but after building them according to the instructions, who actually played with them for more than a minute before disassembling them and rebuilding them using parts from various kits? I had quite a few of the "space patrol" lego kits, so I ended up with a lot of wings, cockpits, engines, etc., and used them to make cool spaceships, rovers, and stations of my own design.

      I found that building things with rectangular pieces was very boring unless you wanted to build nothing other than houses, or were building things at a massive scale so that the bricks became something more like voxels than pieces.

    48. Re:Legos by RabidMonkey · · Score: 1

      While I wouldn't say "I built this house out of Lego", I would say "Hey! Look at this Lego house I built!"

      In fact, now that I think about it, I probably would say "I built this house out of lego (lowercase l)" because thats what it is. I have a box of lego, not a box of legos. I give the gift of lego to my nephew, not legos. When I need to clean up, I don't clean up my legos, but my lego.

      Meh .. I guess I'm prissy and affected, have been since I was a wee boy, calling it lego. Poor me.

      --
      We emerge from our mother's womb an unformatted diskette; our culture formats us. - Douglas Coupland
    49. Re:Legos by xenocide2 · · Score: 1

      That's stupid American sarcasm. What do you mean by a sarcastic "I could care less"? That you care a lot? Or not at all? It's stupid on the face of it and indefensible.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    50. Re:Legos by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Sarcasm:

      When I say the opposite of what I mean. If you're too dumb to figure out that I meant the opposite, I laugh at you.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    51. Re:Legos by jshazen · · Score: 1

      I think he meant "sodder" (or "sah-der"). The point is that the L is silent in American pronunciation, unlike (apparently) those in countries that speak English.

    52. Re:Legos by teh+kurisu · · Score: 1

      Do they refer to an individual brick as "a lego"? That just sounds wrong to me.

      Sort of like referring to a single water molecule as "a water", and then referring to a collection of water molecules, say a glassful, as "waters".

    53. Re:Legos by teh+kurisu · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, as it's teaching your kids how to follow instructions. I'll admit to despairing when the kid from next door to my parents brought his Lego X-Wing over, which clearly hadn't been built properly and was almost falling apart.

      What your kids are doing is exactly what I used to do, and I think it works in a way because with model kits, you get a larger variety of pieces, which allows you to be more imaginative in what you build. I always found the variety of pieces available in brick boxes to be far too limiting.

    54. Re:Legos by mjwx · · Score: 1

      The plural of "lego" is "lego".

      Maybe they were referring to the pasta sauce. Although I fail to see what more garlic can do for a data centre.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    55. Re:Legos by noundi · · Score: 1

      I was making fun of the post before me as he was simply dropping synonyms. Nobody caught this? Seems I overestimated you once again Slashdot. You win this round.

      --
      I am the lawn!
    56. Re:Legos by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I played with Legos when I was a kid and my kids play with Legos now. They don't play with "Lego" as they think that refers to a single modular building brick.

      Then they're stupid, ignorant and plain wrong - just like you.

      don't have the time or inclination to say they play with "Lego", "Lego bricks", "Lego playsets", or "Lego compatible modular building playsets". They just play with Legos.

      How does it take more effort and time to say "Lego" rather than "Legos"?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    57. Re:Legos by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Well actually it is a misunderstanding. This is an exception, so the default case is completely irrelevant. All well educated mans, womans and childs know that.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    58. Re:Legos by Grax · · Score: 1

      It is more efficient to learn one set of rules and as few exceptions as possible to those rules. 1 doll, 2 dolls. 1 car, 2 cars. 1 Lego, 2 Legos.

      I will take the time to teach them that 2 gooses are 2 geese but I'm not wasting my time on explaining the Lego thing. I realize some people don't know diddly squat about raising children so I'll help you out here.

      Children learn by observing patterns. As they develop they realize that if "x" is true then "y" is probably true too. If you constantly go around "correcting" them every time they say something that fits the pattern but technically fits into an exception, you are not necessarily helping their development.

      Sure, they will need to learn these things eventually but by letting some of the little things go, you reinforce the pattern that they learned, rather than destroying the pattern in favor of your pedantic requirement that every single thing be "correct".

    59. Re:Legos by xenocide2 · · Score: 1

      Good sarcasm is about exaggeration. The difference between not caring at all and claiming to only care some is nowhere near large enough. If you wanted to say you don't care sarcastically, then you'd say "That's the most interesting thing ever!" The key of good sarcasm is in the tone of the speaker, and there's just no room in "I could care less."

      Feel free to continue defending this; I'm sure you've got a plausible rebuttal!

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    60. Re:Legos by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      My definition was funnier. And no, this time I'm not being sarcastic.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  3. No, the future is heavy customization. Psych! by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Someone's going to retort that this is only because America hasn't built a new nuke power plant in ages, but the fact of the matter is that nuke power in Canada and France is reliable, efficient, and cheap because they have settled on a standard plant design. Contrast this with the fully customized design for each American nuke plant and you can see why we still consider nuclear power to be expensive and dangerous.

    Extend this to software design. Sure, using standard libraries may mean that you are possibly using a sub-optimal algorithm or pulling in too many unwanted/unused features. But the alternative is to spend a lot of time reinventing the wheel. When it comes down to brass tacks, the cost spent to optimize software pales in comparison to the cost of delaying the product.

    Use your time wisely.

  4. Why not for computers as well? by pieterh · · Score: 1

    I had this idea ages ago: computer blocks, which could plug together. Storage, processors, media, PSUs, batteries, interfaces... just bricks that you stack together using some universal power-and-data bus connector on each plug (imagine Lego blocks about eight inches long).

    1. Re:Why not for computers as well? by MBCook · · Score: 1

      Congratulations, you've invented a variation on the S-100 bus.

      Now with the ability to do external PCI express, this could be reasonably possible again, maybe. I'd think you'd have big signal integrity problems.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    2. Re:Why not for computers as well? by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      "computer blocks, which could plug together. Storage, processors, media, PSUs, batteries, interfaces... just bricks that you stack together"

      Thermaltake has a new modular case that is similar to that.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    3. Re:Why not for computers as well? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      After seeing 2001 and 2010 I envisioned the same thing, but I imagined them being powered by induction and optical data connections. That way they're waterproof. Today I would probably also imagine in some water connections for cooling — all the liabilities thereof vanish when you're not using electrical connections. Some twenty years later, we're still using copper-fingered plastic sockets :(

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  5. Re:The 'data centre' is obsolete for most users by russotto · · Score: 1

    Why on earth would you want to build a data centre? Moore's Law means that most functions that previously required arrays of expensive hardware can be done with a single server.

    Needs expand with available capacity.

    If your needs are greater than that, surely it makes sense to buy capacity from a cloud computing vendor such as Amazon EC2.

    If the data processing is central to your business, it doesn't make sense to outsource it.

  6. Re:The 'data centre' is obsolete for most users by Swizec · · Score: 1

    Of course data centers have _a_ future, but probably if an IT tech of today saw a data center of 50 years from now, they wouldn't recognise it as such.

    I think a single human brain, connected properly and whatnot, could be used as a server farm. There's multi-threading support aplenty, lots and lots of storage and once you take away the sub-processses like emotion and such, there's even an abundance of computing power. Therefore, the future of data centers is in jars of glass filled with nutritional liquid.

  7. If this is innovative... by ndnspongebob · · Score: 1

    If this is innovative, datacenters will be failing to impress for a long time

    1. Re:If this is innovative... by click2005 · · Score: 1

      In other news another company is designing data centres based on Velcro.

      --
      I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
  8. lego in the plural by Speare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I saw the "legonotlegos" tag on this story. Anyone who has read the paper materials that come with Lego sets knows the language about calling them "Lego(tm) bricks" not "Legos." Yes, the Lego company feels they have to write that in their products, because they have to protect the trademark in order to keep trademark protection in many world markets. However, that does not mean that regular people must actually follow that usage. You wanna call 'em Legos? Go ahead. You want to be the ten millionth middle-manager who tries to explain a business model or operational strategy using toy blocks of a certain name? Go ahead. The metaphor is already cliched, but go ahead. Just like Oreos (not Oreo(tm) cookies), or Kleenexes (not Kleenex(tm) brand facial tissues), people should not feel constrained in how they phrase popular culture references.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:lego in the plural by Xeth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But if we can't be pedantic about our specializations, how can we feel superior to the laity?

      --
      If your theory is different from practice, then your theory is wrong.
    2. Re:lego in the plural by D66 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I often find that people who argue detailed semantics are people who have nothing worthwhile to contribute

    3. Re:lego in the plural by Threni · · Score: 1

      > However, that does not mean that regular people must actually follow that usage.

      Slashdot (tm) is not `regular people`. Private Eye magazine (a UK mag) frequently refers to Biros, and always gets a letter from some legal firm complaining it's a trademark and that they have to stop. Typically they just run the whiny legal letter under the heading "what a way to earn a living".

    4. Re:lego in the plural by residieu · · Score: 1

      Yes yes we know. And it's not a band-aid. It's a "Band-aid brand adhesive bandage."

    5. Re:lego in the plural by sfraggle · · Score: 1

      Just like Oreos (not Oreo(tm) cookies), or Kleenexes (not Kleenex(tm) brand facial tissues),

      I think you mean Kleenices.

      --
      were you expecting to see a sig here? perhaps you'd rather see the inside of an ambulance!
    6. Re:lego in the plural by whydna · · Score: 1

      It's due to trademark laws... the IP lawyers where I work remind us that trademarked brand terms should be used as adjectives and not nouns (despite the fact that they're generally referred to as nouns amongst "lay people"). For instance, Apple refers to the iPod(R) as the "iPod(R) mobile digital device" if you dig deeply into their docs.

      It's the same thing for Lego... they're Lego(R) bricks, despite the common vernacular of Legos. :D

    7. Re:lego in the plural by joelmax · · Score: 1

      agreed

    8. Re:lego in the plural by Stuart+Gibson · · Score: 1

      The Kleenex thing has always fascinated me as it hasn't made the leap across the Atlantic. In the UK you ask for a tissue or a hankie, but never a Kleenex. Here, Kleenex is still very much a specific brand. To my knowledge this is also the case with Xerox. We photocopy things, we don't Xerox them.

      --
      It's all fun and games until a 200' robot dinosaur shows up and trashes Neo-Tokyo... Again
    9. Re:lego in the plural by OrugTor · · Score: 2

      The plural of Kleenex is Kleeneces.

    10. Re:lego in the plural by maxume · · Score: 1

      Usage varies in the U.S.; I only ever ask about copying something on a copier, I don't normally use Xerox or photocopier.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    11. Re:lego in the plural by residieu · · Score: 2

      Even in the US, I think Kleenex must be a regional thing. In my experience "tissue" is much more common. Maybe it's just that my family never bought Kleenex brand anyway.

    12. Re:lego in the plural by Gallomimia · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the fact that there is now a hundred posts entirely off topic. If you guys have that much time laying around you need to get in touch with me and/or find something useful to do.

      --
      Sadly, a Libertarian cannot force his views on another, and freedom cannot spread as does the cancer known as religion.
    13. Re:lego in the plural by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually if you read the post you replied to they were saying that things like "band-aids" is fine since you can have a band-aid but there's actually no such thing as a Lego. There's such a thing as a Lego set or a Lego brick but not a Lego. Therefore using "Legos" is really quite incorrect.

  9. Re:The 'data centre' is obsolete for most users by InsertWittyNameHere · · Score: 1

    There's also tons of viruses, worms, parasites... Windows Brain Edition?

  10. 1 Lego brick, 2 Lego bricks by tepples · · Score: 1

    1 moose, 2 moose. 1 sheep, 2 sheep. 1 aircraft, 2 aircraft. 1 head of cattle, 2 head of cattle.[1] 1 bison, 2 bison, M.Bison. Or pretty much every word in Japanese or Chinese. But trademarks are adjectives, and in English, adjectives generally precede nouns. So the plural of "Lego brick" is "Lego bricks".

    [1] "Head of cattle" is a precise epicene (gender-neutral) word for what is commonly called a "bull" or "cow".

    1. Re:1 Lego brick, 2 Lego bricks by Da+Fokka · · Score: 4, Funny

      So IPod is an adjective? I am no native speaker but that doesn't sound right (but then again, neither do the IPod earphones)

    2. Re:1 Lego brick, 2 Lego bricks by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      But trademarks are adjectives

      Except zipper and kleenex and uggs and coke and big mac and...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:1 Lego brick, 2 Lego bricks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I do have to admit that it is hard to get a joke sometimes.

    4. Re:1 Lego brick, 2 Lego bricks by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Proper adjective:

      A trademark is a distinctive sign used by a business to identify its products to consumers. When a trademark is a word used adjectivally, it is capitalized and hence is a proper adjective. Intellectual property lawyers sometimes advise corporations to use their trademarks only as proper adjectives, not as proper nouns. By this theory, a trademark is not the name of a product, but rather a signifier of the source of the product.

      For example, in the sentence "I need to blow my nose; do you have any Kleenex?", the word Kleenex is a proper noun, used to name the product being discussed. This is perfectly acceptable English usage, from a grammatical perspective. It would also be acceptable to say, "I need to blow my nose; do you have any Kleenex facial tissue?", where the word Kleenex is a proper adjective. The Kimberly-Clark Corporation (which owns the trademark Kleenex) takes care to use the word only as a proper adjective. The legal risk is that a trademark used as a noun can become genericized, in which case other businesses could legally use the word to refer to their products. This happened to the word "elevator", for example, which used to be a trademark but is now a common noun.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    5. Re:1 Lego brick, 2 Lego bricks by lupinstel · · Score: 2, Funny

      It is onomonopoea for what you say when you see someone wearing Uggs shoes.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Cthulhu.
    6. Re:1 Lego brick, 2 Lego bricks by tepples · · Score: 1

      So IPod is an adjective? I am no native speaker but that doesn't sound right

      The law often doesn't sound right. The word "iPod" legally means "made or endorsed by Apple Inc."; hence iPod player, iPod headphones, iPod dock.

    7. Re:1 Lego brick, 2 Lego bricks by boinger · · Score: 1

      it's "iPod", you insensitive clod!

      --
      Send your friends messages of love at fuck-you.org
  11. Re:The 'data centre' is obsolete for most users by iamhassi · · Score: 1

    "the number of computers needed to run a business never seems to fall in practice. But although data centres are certainly needed now, do they really have a 'future'?"

    You have a good point. The millions it costs to build a datacenter could probably be better spent sending Amazon EC2 hundreds of thousands a month. Instead of having to spend millions more to upgrade in 5 yrs Amazon has already done that.

    Course if something were to go wrong and your data is lost or stolen it'd be hard to even get a "sorry" out of Amazon much less compensation, at least if it's local you can fire some people and starve their kids.

    --
    my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  12. Enterprise Mindstorms by tepples · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't surprise me if the Lego Group has its lawyers in attack mode as we speak.

    Then how about actually partnering with Lego Group and calling it "Enterprise Mindstorms"?

  13. Re:fishes by Grax · · Score: 1

    As long as they aren't sleeping with them.

  14. How convenient... by cmdr_klarg · · Score: 1

    Wish I could convince the bosses that I needed the $500 Millennium Falcon Lego kit for work...

    --
    THE SOFTWARE, IT NO WORKY!!!
    1. Re:How convenient... by click2005 · · Score: 1

      The Millennium Falcon was unique. Not only could it travel faster than light, it could travel faster than length!!!

      It travelled 18 parsecs in less than 12 parsecs. Thats compression of physical space of over 33%. Just imagine a data center
      where you could fit 19 inch rack mount cabinets in a 13 inch space or 56U in a 42U cabinet.

      Nah.. my boss didnt believe me either.

      --
      I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
    2. Re:How convenient... by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      Clearly it's a custom server housing for optimized airflow which'll lead to a net decrease in cooling requirements across the datacentre. And you need one as a functional prototype, rather than forking out that scale of investment per rack initially, so you can validate whether it will actually save your company money long term.

    3. Re:How convenient... by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      According to the story, that was because of space-time compression due to the close proximity of numerous black holes.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    4. Re:How convenient... by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      I love the gymnastics they went through to cover up the fact that when shooting the original, no one knew what a parsec was, and it just sounded cool.

    5. Re:How convenient... by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It sounded even cooler after the explanation.

      I mean, c'mon... skimming the event horizon of a black hole? That's not cool?

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  15. Re:It's *lego* by Sobrique · · Score: 1

    Stupid parents correlates to stupid children. Who'da thought it?

  16. officially its an adjective by eean · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you look at the website:
    http://www.lego.com/eng/info/default.asp?page=fairplay

    Of course if its an adjective then "legos" is nonsense.

    In common usage it is in fact a noun: the OED defines "Lego" as a noun. The plural of a noun has an 's', with the handful of well-established exceptions.

    Who decided that LEGO was an exception? Not the LEGO Group who say its only an adjective. So I think its the fact that the LEGO Group never says "LEGOs" (since they always uses it as an adjective) caused misguided pedantic people (or otherwise any lover of arbitrary rules) to decide that its a plural noun.

    So put me in the legos camp. :)

    1. Re:officially its an adjective by emm-tee · · Score: 1

      ...it is in fact a noun: the OED defines "Lego" as a noun. The plural of a noun has an 's', with the handful of well-established exceptions.

      It is a noun, but it's a noun because it's the name of a company's product group. This product group that includes building bricks.

      "Cutlery" is a noun, but you don't say "I need a cutlery". It doesn't make sense to have "cutleries". It's exactly the same for LEGO.

      There is no such thing as "a LEGO", so there is no plural either.

    2. Re:officially its an adjective by jackhererUK · · Score: 1

      Lego is not an exception, it has no s because it refers to stuff not things. You would say "that's a lot of Lego" in the same way you would say "that's a lot of sugar". An individual Lego brick is not "a Lego" therefore lots of them are not "Legos". Even Firefox knows this, it is happy with Lego, but it tells me Legos is not spelled correctly and suggests Lego instead.

    3. Re:officially its an adjective by eean · · Score: 1

      Its the LEGO Group... they're still using it as an adjective.

      But yes of course its a noun. It does make sense to use legos since thats a pretty common way of saying it. I say "pass me that lego" and "we keep the legos downstairs." If you pointed at a pile of lego blocks and said "pass me the lego" I would say "which one?"

      This follows rules for plurals just fine. :)

      Yes collective nouns do exist in English and cutlery is an example. Dog is an example of a non-collective noun if somehow this proves something? But the closest we have to an establishment for legos is the LEGO Group and they deny its even a noun. So people claiming they know better about how to speak... are just making crap up. There's no English Academy, our language is dictated by usage.

    4. Re:officially its an adjective by eean · · Score: 1

      Says who? Your authority is aspell? Give me a break.

      I would say "that's a lot of legos". :)

  17. Re:No, the future is heavy customization. Psych! by maxume · · Score: 1

    For a while, I had feared that you had devolved into mindless trolling, but this post ends all of that, it is a shining example of you living up to your name.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  18. customized parts? by tuffy · · Score: 1

    The Millennium Falcon Lego kit is made up almost entirely of generic pieces - triangles, rectangles, Technic-style crossbars, and so on. The only nonstandard bits in it are the bendable engine grills and the minifigs.

    --

    Ita erat quando hic adveni.

  19. Re:The 'data centre' is obsolete for most users by __aasqbs9791 · · Score: 1

    Oh, geez, as if either of those things needed more infection vectors!

    Blood-brain firewall is the new blood-brain barrier?

  20. Re:The 'data centre' is obsolete for most users by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 1

    Moore's Law means that most functions that previously required arrays of expensive hardware can be done with a single server. If your needs are greater than that, surely it makes sense to buy capacity from a cloud computing vendor such as Amazon EC2.

    This only makes sense if there are significant economies of scale in building larger data centers.

    But although data centres are certainly needed now, do they really have a 'future'?

    I work for an insurance TPA. We have multiple servers, for different security levels (production, FTP, dev, etc), different OSes (Windows, AIX, Linux), etc. We can't use a "cloud computing" provider because of the legal protection requirements for some of the data we handle, and if that wasn't the case we'd still not be able to because of paranoid clients (like the one that doesn't even like our primary production server, and pays extra for a special dedicated server with lots of extra security rules).

  21. Latency and control by TheLink · · Score: 1

    Control: putting your sensitive and important information (and applications) in some "cloud" under the control of some other company is a bad idea.

    Latency: The speed of light is still only about 300000 kilometres a second, and the actual latencies of remote servers in practice add up to even more (especially when encryption is involved).

    --
  22. Obligatory Pedant by sukotto · · Score: 1

    You should say "Lego Bricks", not "Legos".
    "Lego" is the name of the company.

    --
    Come play free flash games on Kongregate!
  23. Legolas? by AioKits · · Score: 1

    Maybe this is what they were meaning instead? For a low fee one of the elves of Lord of the Rings will personally assist you in the construction and improvement of your data center!

    --
    "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
  24. or you can have a DC in a few weeks by jakedog · · Score: 1
  25. Re:The 'data centre' is obsolete for most users by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Why on earth would you want to build a data centre? Moore's Law means that most functions that previously required arrays of expensive hardware can be done with a single server.

    So, I take it your plan is to go into the future, and bring back servers to do today's work with tomorrow's resources? We've always managed to find new ways to use up computing power in the past, what makes you think the future will differ?

    OTOH I figure the future of the data center is more distributed. There's no reason they should be quite as big as they are; their current size only create special infrastructural problems. A number of companies are now dealing in "instant" data centers which could be easily shipped to "remote" locations. How remote? Anywhere along the southern pacific railroad line ought to be a good place to get some bandwidth from Qwest :) Now, correlate that with locations with ready access to power and you're in there.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  26. Wow, 50 posts about legos by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And two about data centers.

    News for nerds, or news for obsessive man children?

    --


    He tried to kill me with a forklift!
    1. Re:Wow, 50 posts about legos by Tokerat · · Score: 1

      A good portion of us spend all day building/operating data centers, and the rest of us likely spend our day writing software that will go in those data centers in some fashion or other - forgive us if we hear LEGO and take a short break to go "WHEEEEEEEEEEEEE I LOVES THOSE"

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    2. Re:Wow, 50 posts about legos by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      What's the difference?

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    3. Re:Wow, 50 posts about legos by KDingo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, wish you could mod entire threads down.

    4. Re:Wow, 50 posts about legos by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      You can. It's that "-" icon next to the headline on the front page.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  27. Re:you can just sod off with your by Sobrique · · Score: 1

    Independance was declared in 1776. The first English dictionary was published in 1755.

  28. Re:you can just sod off with your by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    By "standard" I mean the standard rules of spelling and pronunciation, either British or American.

    To be fair, English is a horribly inconsistent language. Most common verbs are irregular. Rules they teach you at school like "i before e except after c" have lots of exceptions etc.

    You are of course right about the very strong accents we have here, but at least I can explain them in terms of rules.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  29. Re:dragon_magistrate by clone53421 · · Score: 1

    Good call.

    --
    Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  30. Demand matters by DerekLyons · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "The company equates its "building blocks" approach to data centers to building with Legos -- albeit with customized parts (i.e. the Millennium Falcon Lego kit). Microsoft is taking a similar approach, packaging generators, switchgear and UPS units into pre-assembled components for rapid assembly. Is this the future of data center design?"

    It only makes sense to maintain the infrastructure to build the building blocks so long as data centers are being rolled out at a furious pace - something that cannot continue forever.

    I suspect the 'Lego' builders are betting on vendor lock-in to feed the bottom line over the long term. Once you buy their bricks, you're pretty much stuck with their interface and thus will be coming back to them for upgrades and renovation.

    1. Re:Demand matters by HeyLaughingBoy · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily. The high-build rate just funds the building of the Lego-like datacenter infrastructure. Then once that infrastructure (design, manufacturing, distribution, etc.) is paid for, it becomes cost effective to build all datacenters that way because it's now cheaper and faster. And the guy building them makes money hand-over-foot.

  31. Stop, dammit! by snspdaarf · · Score: 1

    Will someone please talk about data centers?

    --
    Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    1. Re:Stop, dammit! by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Sure. They're like LEGO, right?

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    2. Re:Stop, dammit! by Gallomimia · · Score: 1

      Will someone please delete the offtopic posts in this thread?

      --
      Sadly, a Libertarian cannot force his views on another, and freedom cannot spread as does the cancer known as religion.
    3. Re:Stop, dammit! by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      The thread isn't about data centres, it's about LEGO bricks. Look at the headline:

      What Data Center Designers Can Learn From Legos

      Thus, it's obviously about LEGO bricks and what data centre designers can learn from them — which isn't necessarily limited to things relevant to data centre design.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  32. Re:The 'data centre' is obsolete for most users by ITShaman · · Score: 1

    Um, have you ever worked for a major corporation? I've worked on and seen the (multiple) data centers for Fortune 500 sized companies from banks, airlines, retail, government, and others. The sheer amount of legacy systems, multiple use systems, heterogeneous realities, political and financial realities... All of these necessitate a 'data center'.

    Yes, what was called a 'data center' 20 years ago is certainly not what it is today, nor what it will be in 20 more years, but there will always be a need to centralize a certain percentage of computing resources.

    Cloud computing is over-hyped, and for various security, political and financial reasons doesn't fit every business model.

    --
    I can no longer read Dilbert. It's too depressing, because it is too real. -- Hyperhaplo
  33. I learned a lot from lego bricks by ebuck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I learned that given a large enough supply of Lego bricks, their flaws become readily apparent. We owned a day care centre, so I had literally twenty pounds or more Lego bricks at my disposal (after hours and then after we sold the centre).

    Legos are heavily dependent on gravity, the gripping power of a brick is impressive (especially if they are new), but torque is more impressive. There is a limit to how far you can build a Lego ledge, and that includes shoring it up with Lego bracing (diagonal Lego bracing is more susceptible to torque). The torque doesn't apply well to a brick that's designed for straight down pressure.

    Legos are heavily bound by gravity. The compressive forces of the walls provide grip. In my attempts to rebuild cathedral wall structures, the compression could not be balanced between the flying buttresses and the inner walls, so the buttresses mainly provided a stabilizing effect. The problem was that at about five or so feet, the bottom bricks would not hold because the weight of the bricks above expanded the plastic enough to negate the brick's grip.

    Legos provide little resistance to upward pressure (by design this is how you release them, to a degree). This means that as structures sway, you effectively reduce the gripping power of some connection within the structure. This is the equivalent to stress related failure. A larger Lego structure must be glued or it will fail due to these internal forces.

    Finally if you attempt to fix some of these issues by sandwiching critical joints, you add mass, which compounds the problem in other joints. Shoring up those eventually just increases the number of locations where failure could occur and statistics steps in and assures at least one failure, somewhere.

    I won't even go into the issues with worn bricks, because those are obvious.

    Few data centres expand to the size of our largest data centres, but by "designing like Lego" we will simplify things. The danger is that we might standardize on an architecture that has built-in limits. The architecture we currently have isn't as clean in vision as a Lego brick, but it already scales better than the Lego brick, even if it needs to do so by the default structure being slightly less elegant.

    These Lego data centre visionaries have the right goal, making it simple, but they might be going about it in the wrong way. I've never heard a rational argument detailing how Lego bricks and data centre components are the same, so this might turn out to be a bad analogy implemented in hardware. Time will tell, but the centres we currently have did not come as the result of people deliberately trying to make data centres more complex.

    1. Re:I learned a lot from lego bricks by cowscows · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think the solution is pretty much similar to the solution that Lego uses when they come up against the limitations of their pieces. They introduce additional pieces. You could even think of the glue that is used on larger structures in this way. It wasn't one of the original elements, but all of those original elements were designed with enough flexibility that they can be glued together.

      The point of standardization isn't necessarily to come up with a complete system that will cover any and every possible need throughout the past, present, and future. It's to provide some useful building blocks to make the easy 90% of a project even easier. And if done well, the standardization will allow for enough flexibility to make that last 10% possible. And since you saved so much time and money on that first 90% because you had all those nice standard and mass produced parts to choose from, you'll have extra resources to really get the final details right.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    2. Re:I learned a lot from lego bricks by ebuck · · Score: 1

      While I agree with you in sentiment, I still arrive back at my questions, "How do the current standards in place not facilitate the current server farms in place?", and "How does a Lego analogy hold up at the scale we are talking about?"

      Most Lego bricks have only eight nubs on the top. Yes, there are custom bricks, but the bulk of the Lego trade is the 2x4. How does that scale when you need to attach 8 2x4s to the top of a 2x4? Eight nubs could provide eight points of connection, but geometry gets in the way. It can't be done without stacking another layer or some other intermediary brick.

      Standards don't just enable, they limit too. The power of a good standard is that they limit poor choices. If we want to build a standard on the analogy of Lego bricks, are we picking the right model? If the model is known not to scale in common building technology, why hinder the standard by analogy to an problematic model?

      I imagine that given a sufficient amount of glue, a Lego three story town home would still collapse provided that it is more brick than glue. Once there is more glue than brick, you have to question if you really have a Lego structure.

    3. Re:I learned a lot from lego bricks by Tokerat · · Score: 1

      Oh my God, will everyone stop talking about LEGO and... Oh, you DID talk about data centers.

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    4. Re:I learned a lot from lego bricks by cowscows · · Score: 1

      Well yeah, if your standard sucks, it's going to cause problems down the road. If it sucks so bad that you have to ignore it 80% of the time in order to get anything done, then it's not really a standard anymore.

      I wasn't defending a particular standard for this application as much as I was trying to express that very often the benefits of having a standard easily outweigh the downsides.

      I'm not sure how closely one would want to pattern a data center standard after the system that lego uses. I think that using lego as an example is less about the specifics, and more about just providing an abstract example that everyone has at least some basic familiarity with.

      As an interesting aside, I have degrees in Architecture, and in school if someone ever suggested using lego to build a model, they were very strongly advised against it, usually with the argument that the limited selection of pieces limits the design opportunities. Although in that particular case I thought a more useful argument was that at the model scales that we generally used, lego pieces rarely served as an appropriately sized representation of any real world materials.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  34. Re: What drives American English by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    If you compare
    a) British/Canadian/Indian/Australian/NZ English
    b) U.S. English
    spelling and pronunciation,
    it is invariably the case that the American version (b) is the one that reflects either -

    ignorance of special rules of the language and therefore a resort to simplified general rules,

    or a lazier and more utilitarian use of a subset of the language vocabulary and its grammar rules.

    e.g. (First form not used by most Americans)

    -Lego plural of Lego is a special case (possibly related to Latin or Greek derived English words)

    -through instead of thru is special-case pronunciation and spelling

    -colour vs color is an extra letter (not lazy) and is a special pronunciation rule

    -cheque vs check reflects knowledge and acceptance of the origins of English words in words of other languages

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  35. Re:you can just sod off with your by timbck2 · · Score: 1

    To be fair, English is a horribly inconsistent language.

    My favorite example of this is the diphthong "ough". It can be pronounced at least five different ways.

    • although
    • through
    • thought
    • bough
    • cough
    --
    Absurdity: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion. -- Ambrose Bierce
  36. Re:you can just sod off with your by _ivy_ivy_ · · Score: 1

    By "standard" I mean the standard rules of spelling and pronunciation, either British or American.

    To be fair, English is a horribly inconsistent language...

    We like it that way. It keeps the rabble out.

    Upon further inspectshun, Ei am not shure a tranzishun to a mor fonetik speling sistem is a reelee gud ideea.

  37. Re:you can just sod off with your by franki.macha · · Score: 1

    So get your own house in order before you start declaring that you own the standard.

    If by that you mean "destroy regional variety", this was once a favourite pastime of the English government, but I for one am glad to see it in decline. I'm a great fan of regional dialects, within the United Kingdom and without, however I do believe that _standard_ English should be decided by the English, specifically in Oxford, for historical reasons, but maybe I'm just old fashioned.

    Disclaimer: I'm not english

  38. What is this LegOS? by hattig · · Score: 1

    Is it some kind of virtualisation OS that runs over multiple machines, hence making data centre deployments easy?

    Certainly nothing to do with LEGO which are little plastic bricks, that aren't good for halon delivery systems.

    1. Re:What is this LegOS? by Ant+P. · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Certainly nothing to do with LEGO which are little plastic bricks, that aren't good for halon delivery systems.

      No, u.

  39. Disturbing by silver007 · · Score: 1

    The use of oversimplified analogies based on childrens' toys by large companies to express common sense ideas disturbs me.

  40. Software design and buildings in general by Gallomimia · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The concept of bricking out components in such a way that they may be assembled like Legoâ Brand building blocks (or whatever the 50 people who think it's important seem to think it should be called) can be ported to the concept of software design, as it already has in some regards. It's called Encapsulation. It's in very good practice when you're not the only one hacking at the code.

    Why can't conventional buildings use this concept? Granted you wouldn't do it on a single family house, but when you start to build the bigger buildings once you have the structural integrity built, would it be worthwhile to slide in a building block that makes up a condo or a room or an office space?

    It would make firewalls easier, and if the new "room block" had standardized connections for water, sewer, central air, electricity, and telecommunications, such connections could be made nearly instantly, and they could be metered. This would effectively lower the rent for all tenants, save the building owner on hefty utility bills, and pass along such costs to the tenant. Bearing the burden of utility bills has a marvelous effect on conservation.

    Imagine what this could do for the new "green" building craze that's started up recently. Some "room blocks" could involve green technologies. Solar Panels on the exterior walls, or heat absorbent walls to allow the heating of water or whatever else a tenant might custom build into their "room-block" before ordering it from the room-block factory.

    I think a lot would have to happen before economies of scale made this even remotely viable. A city would have to have dozens of very large buildings compatible with this system before anyone will be much interested in building a new building that is compatible with the system or develop a factory to manufacture them, or a transportation system that will swap them in and out on-demand and bring them to the warehouse to be refit.

    --
    Sadly, a Libertarian cannot force his views on another, and freedom cannot spread as does the cancer known as religion.
  41. Re: What drives American English by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

    through instead of thru is special-case pronunciation and spelling

    Even in America, "thru" is thoroughly non-standard spelling. I've never understood what the hell possesses people to spell the word that way, to be honest.

    --
    "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  42. LEGO not Legos by gfxguy · · Score: 1

    Being an Adult Fan of LEGO, I used to share the opinion that it was sad that they had so many custom parts.

    It's true, to an extent, but the new bricks simply open up new possibilities. I build the sets because those LEGO designers show some true genius sometimes in their construction techniques... but even they don't always get it right, and people modify the plans all the time.

    Moreover, the idea is basically that you don't HAVE to follow the directions, and even if you do, you can then take it apart and combine it with other LEGO to make new things...

    One problem is that they now release instructions for building sets online for free. If there were no custom parts, you wouldn't have to buy the sets. I'm not saying this is a good thing, but it's certainly one of the reasons they do it... While I have problems with TLG, I don't mind the occasional new part, but they do abuse it. On the other hand, it's when they started doing things like this that they became profitable after a long slide downward. I'd rather have them making custom parts in order to increase sales than not being around at all.

    --
    Stupid sexy Flanders.
  43. Glow blocks? by catbertscousin · · Score: 1

    But do the data center modules come with glow-in-the-dark blocks?

    --
    No good deed goes unpunished. - Avon, Blake's 7
  44. Re: What drives American English by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    I'm don't think it's just ignorance on the American part. As I understand it, there was a concerted effort to simplify the language, the most obvious result of which is the simplified spelling of words like "night", "light", "analogue", "catalogue", "through" etc.

    What I find interesting is that Americans seem to actively try to use what would be considered in academic circles as incorrect English. In the UK there are widely varying accents and many local words or phrases, but they do tend to follow at least some basic rules and any errors do seem to be born of simple ignorance, where as Americans just seem to do it deliberately.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  45. Re:you can just sod off with your by diablovision · · Score: 1

    Cough and thought are the same, sorry.

    --
    120 characters isn't enough to explain it.
  46. Re:you can just sod off with your by clone53421 · · Score: 1

    Eh? "Cough" is pronounced like "off". "Thought" is pronounced like "aww".

    --
    Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  47. Re: What drives American English by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    Ironically, there's a good argument that, because human memory works on a "remember the exceptions" basis, a simpler set of rules will encourage forgetting the existence or meaning of some words, and thus will lead to reduction in usable vocabulary. Some words were remembered (their existence remembered and their meaning remembered) BECAUSE of their unusual grammar or spelling rule, and/or the word family lineage patterns that marble-texture the full version of English.

    Remove this texture and these landmarks of weirdness in the natural language, and you remove the map that helps the brain comprehend a rich-vocabulary version of the language.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  48. Re: What drives American English by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    Like, you know, I go:
    When we eviscerate and castrate the language,
    we get...
    He goes: ...words with no guts no power.
    Then she goes:
    As if

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  49. Engineers respond by syousef · · Score: 1

    Dear Sir,

    Thank you for your suggestion that we learn from Lego. It has been duely noted and implemented as a course requirement for our engineers. We felt the most appropriate phase of education for this was primary school. We have checked, and fortunately all of our data centre engineers have this qualification.

    Sincerely,

    Eng G. Neer.
    Human Resources
    Megacorp Limited.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer