It's kinda hard to find technical specifications on these mainframes beyond marketing fluff. After some looking I found this brochure, which has some interesting information on the firmware and a few details of the I/O, but not much about the processing units, and why one of these would be able to replace 133 blade servers. It does mention up to 30 superscalar processors per box, but I'm not really sure what that means. (Maybe they go next to the inverting flux capacitor).
It was #4. I've already answered someone with regards to this. Mind you, #2 was answering a post just to point something like this out. ^_^ you're also the 3rd person to make this comment.
No, I made my comment at 10:47 and you replied to the first person at 12:23, and I was the second person to make that comment, after the first person at 10:03.
At least, thats what my browser is telling me, YMMV.
Indeed. Bleeding hearts like to call Taser recipients 'victims', but I tell you, if they were innocent they wouldn't be tasered now, would they?
So what you are saying is that the robot will observe the crime, convene a jury of twelve robot peers, find the person guilty of the offense comitted, record the convinction via Bluetooth to central crimes processing, then taser them?
Or were you using the word innocent in the "I'm too dumb to understand the legal definition of innocent" kind of way?
The easiest way to go to preserving headcount is to go with Windows.
The best way to preserve headcount is to go with Linux.
Which would you rather have? 10 people maintaining broken Windows systems or 10 people working on Linux-based infrastructure improvements?
The answer to your question is (c) 20 people maintaining and improving broken Windows system.
The GP's point was that most clueless managers have even more clueless executives above them. And the clueless understand one corporate principle very well; change is risky and growth is good. If your department is growing in size, then it is a good thing. If your department is 3 times as productive with the same number of staff, not only are you a threat to the other managers, but effeciency and effectiveness are not rewarded in large corporate environments, so it's all risk and no reward.
They actually had a powerful search capability since NT4. It was not well exposed in GUI and was not running by default. It was called Indexing Service. Current Vista Search is modified Indexing Service + GUI. It was even done by the same team.
Please tell me you are joking. Please. The first thing I would do on ANY clean install was to turn off the useless Indexing Service that (a) Sucked up CPU (b) Re-indexed every frikkin file every frikkin time it started up and (c) did not make searching for stuff any better, faster or more useful. And yes, it was running by default, as evidenced by the fact that I had to turn it off, disable it and delete the binary after every install, in order to stop it from interupting my work.
Violet Blue's (nsfw) site is probably a good starting point,
Thanks for that. Will check it out when I get home.
I still think you're wrong about hardcore porn being violent - that is, while it's a common thing, it's certainly not a requirement.
I guess I was generalising from experience. I will have a look at the above site and see if I can't change my mind about that.
The problem is that specific statements about "what women want" generalize about women so much as to be useless.
I agree, however the GP made a sweeping generalisation about women hating porn, describing it as a 'misery' for them. My contention was that women *are* interested in porn, it's just that *generally* it is a very different kind of porn than men are exposed to. So much so that men *generally* are completely blind to it.
'Sex and the City' has very little sex in it. I say that having borrowed fast-forwarded through my roommates' Season 1 and 2 DVD sets looking for the juicy bits. When the characters have sex, the act itself is represented by a few seconds of film that segues into narration that talks about the sex and quickly moves past it to the aftereffects. I think the appeal of 'Sex and the City' is based on its treatment of sex through characters, relationships (in the general sense), plot, and occasionally witty writing. Although the portrayal of sex is graphic by American TV standards, the sex is basically summed up by a few little snippets, in contrast to the pre- and post-coital bedroom scenes, which are given lengthy treatment and are often key to plot and character development.
I re-read the above three times, and I can't determine if you agree or disagree that 'Sex in the City' is soft-core porn. Isn't 'having very little sex' and 'the act itself is represented by a few seconds of film' part of what makes something soft-core porn? Or are you saying that because the definition of soft-core porn is that it is crap and uninteresting, it follows that if Sex in the City is mildly interesting and reasonably well produced that it is not soft-core porn?
Seems circular to me... but maybe I'm missing something. I don't have access to Skinemax so I don't really know the genre that you are referring to (thank you for giving a summary above) but it seems to me like you are proposing a logical fallacy, ergo; Soft-core porn is crap, so if it is not crap then it is not soft-core porn.
As for the rest of your post, I agree with your sentiment, I just disagree with your definition of soft-core porn.
Try looking for hardcore that is marketed to women... it tends to be better, all around.
Not being facetious, but I have no idea how to do that. Do I type in 'porn for women' into Google?
Please don't take this the wrong way, I am genuinely curious about such a genre, given that the HC porn I have seen is so bad in almost every way.
I'd have to disagree that hardcore sex is inherently violent
Well, I didn't say that hardcore sex is inherently violent, I said that hardcore porn is violent, at least the stuff that I have seen. The two are not equivilent.
Maybe you're watching the wrong ones? =)
I must be. I just wasn't prepared to wade through hours of violent shit to find something decent. Perhaps you could suggest an avenue of exploration instead of vaguely alluding to this different type of hardcore porn.
I suppose the point I really want to make is that women are very much like men in that they're individuals.
That statement is so abstract as to be worthless. Let's replace 'women' in that sentence with 'snowflakes'.
I suppose the point I really want to make is that snowflakes are very much like men in that they're individuals. If you think you're going to "understand" snowflakes like they are some sort of weird single organism, it's just not going to happen. Interest yourself in the individual snowflake and you're more than half there.
When I hear that women like softcore porn, I think, yeah, right, some guy pressures his overly compliant wife/girlfriend into watching porn with him, and she chooses softcore as a way of limiting the misery.
Here's a clue. Walk into a bookshop one day and head to the 'romance' section. I know you've never been there before, but look for the women with guilty looks on their faces standing close to shelves reading small paperbacks with intense concentration. Pick up a few of those books and flick through the pages to find the juicy bits, and then come back here and tell me that women are not interested in soft-core porn.
But there's no reason you have to put up with any vileness when you choose porn.
You see, for women, sex is a package deal, and hard-core porn leaves out 90% of what needs to be in the package. Added to which hard-core porn is basically violence, not sex, and generally women aren't turned on by violence (although they do respond to aggression, which is different).
If you add back in the rest of the ingredients that women need, and remove the violent aspect of most hard-core porn, then you have soft-core porn.
What is 'Sex in the City' if it is not soft-core porn? And women watch that show voluntarily in their millions.
Long and short, you would really benefit if you took some time to understand what women want.
I couldn't locate concrete numbers, but I'm willing to bet we spend a LOT more money funding Global Warming fear mongerin-- I mean research than we do Fusion power generation research.
Interesting. Current estimates on US research into nuclear power for civilian purposes (generating electricity) is $25 Beeellion dollars, from which we have the following outcomes.
1) Nuclear power still does not produce as much energy as.... wood.
2) Both the inputs to and outputs from Nuclear reactors cause cancer.
3) The outputs from Nuclear reactors needs to be either (a) Stored at great expense for thousands of years or (b) shipped to the third world at some expense or (c) turned into projectiles and fired at the third world at great expense.
4) Did I mention that the waste from Nuclear reactors causes cancer?
So given how wonderful the fruits of $25B in nuclear power research have been, I can see why you are concerned about the $25B that has been spent on Global Warming Research. Oh, and by the way, the climate change scientists called and asked if you know where the other $24,890,000,000 of their research money has gone. Thanks.
And exactly where do you live where all races, creeds, and colors live homogeneously in an equal distribution everywhere??
You probably didn't go to college because your reading comprehension sucks. The parent asked about colleges, not where white and black people live.
In the country I live in, most Universities have a student population that ethnically approximates the general population very closely (with a few exceptions, notably Lebanese, Aboriginal, and in the past Vietnamese). This is because where you go to University in this country is not generally a function of where you went to High School, and the same is true in the US.
Do you have Hispanic colleges? Eastern European colleges? Asian colleges?
Therefore, one comes to the conclusion that it is the selection process (economic, academic, preference), both on the part of the student and the colleges that results in White and Black colleges, and it is not a function of where you live.
They are not segregated moron, but some schools attract more of one race than the other.
Now, of course, I'm going to call that assumption into question. What is a web site?
I'll see your question, and raise you another. What is a web site, to who?
To a user: A web site is a presentation of content (words, pictures, other media) and navigation (links, menus, other) that appears in their Web Browser when they are connected to the Internet, that is a function of the address that appears in their browser's address entry field.
To a developer: A web site is one or more request/response technologies that parse remote requests and return responses that contain content and navigation.
To a judge: A web site in which information is exchanged between the viewer of the site and the creator(s) of the site, that is accessed with a specialised piece of computer software known as a browser when the computer is connected to the internet.
Yes, you can expand on the terms navigation, connected and so on, but to do so would be pointless without adding yet another sub-question "In what context?". The question would then become;
"What is a web site, to a [user/developer/judge/police officer/porn star], in the context of [a means to obtain information/deliver information/discussion/indoctrination/etc]?"
So before we even get into the answer, lets beat up on how crappy the question is.
The list I gave you had 10 countries with WMD and one without. The US government invaded the one without. So, you see it doesn't really matter what list you give the US government about countries with WMD, because they are not invading countries with WMD. In other words, they have another agenda.
Your argument fails to take into account the purpose of patents: to promote the progress of science and useful arts. Almost anything patentable in the physical space is doing something in a new way. Seeing the device is not enough to understand how it works, and the patent is designed to force the "how" to become public.
Exactly!
There was once a clan in Japan that made a certain type of Indigo dye. It was a clan secret, and because the colour was popular, the clan enjoyed a monopoly on the sale of that colour dye for centuries. Of course, attempts to obtain this secret often had violent and bloody ends. Similar trade monopolies existed in Europe in the arts and crafts.
So at one point someone in the Powers That Be thought to themselves "How can we design a system such that secret techniques and knowledge are put into the domain of public knowledge so that others can learn from them and improve the arts and sciences as a whole?"
The answer was to grant the inventor a *limited* monopoly on their invention, so that they could profit from it, and once the monopoly expired, others could use the knowledge to improve the technology arts of their society.
And in the early days of patents, it was a roaring success. Unfortunately, it hasn't worked out all that well in the later part of the 20th Century, and in the 21st century a private inventor patenting his work in the hope of actually profiting from his invention is either a fool or a con-artist.
IMHO, the problem is that the useful arts and sciences have progressed beyond all expectations. The patent system suceeded wildly, and now that it has achieved it's objective for our society, it is no longer any use to us in it's present form. What we need now is a system that promotes the human arts, because we've got all the science and technology we need to kill each other 100 times over.
Slashdot Mirror
...all the support people with the requisite funny accents
.... always wondered about that.
Oooh, those mid-west accents are required
8 million square feet for 4000 servers??!!! WTF? That's 2000 sq.ft per server.
Why would a server need a 3 bedroom apartment to run?
It's kinda hard to find technical specifications on these mainframes beyond marketing fluff. After some looking I found this brochure, which has some interesting information on the firmware and a few details of the I/O, but not much about the processing units, and why one of these would be able to replace 133 blade servers. It does mention up to 30 superscalar processors per box, but I'm not really sure what that means. (Maybe they go next to the inverting flux capacitor).
It was #4. I've already answered someone with regards to this. Mind you, #2 was answering a post just to point something like this out. ^_^ you're also the 3rd person to make this comment.
No, I made my comment at 10:47 and you replied to the first person at 12:23, and I was the second person to make that comment, after the first person at 10:03.
At least, thats what my browser is telling me, YMMV.
Taking PR statements and criticizing them for being PR speak is #3 on the "10 dumbest ways to spend your time" list that I made a minute ago.
Where did "making a 10-dumbest-ways-to-spend-your-time list" appear on that list?
Neither Apple nor Sun have a billion users - which is of course the inconvenient little detail you conveniently "forget" all the time.
Neither does Microsoft. In fact, only TRON has a billion users, and TRON doesn't seem to have the problems you describe.
Ah yes, the killer rabbit of Caerbannog. He's got great nasty teeth. Look at the bones!
Oohh a sarcasm detector, that's a usefull invention
The idiots that allowed a robot in the police force.
...
And what about the robots that allowed idiots into the police force? Oh wait
Indeed. Bleeding hearts like to call Taser recipients 'victims', but I tell you, if they were innocent they wouldn't be tasered now, would they?
So what you are saying is that the robot will observe the crime, convene a jury of twelve robot peers, find the person guilty of the offense comitted, record the convinction via Bluetooth to central crimes processing, then taser them?
Or were you using the word innocent in the "I'm too dumb to understand the legal definition of innocent" kind of way?
The easiest way to go to preserving headcount is to go with Windows.
The best way to preserve headcount is to go with Linux.
Which would you rather have? 10 people maintaining broken Windows systems or 10 people working on Linux-based infrastructure improvements?
The answer to your question is (c) 20 people maintaining and improving broken Windows system.
The GP's point was that most clueless managers have even more clueless executives above them. And the clueless understand one corporate principle very well; change is risky and growth is good. If your department is growing in size, then it is a good thing. If your department is 3 times as productive with the same number of staff, not only are you a threat to the other managers, but effeciency and effectiveness are not rewarded in large corporate environments, so it's all risk and no reward.
Touche.
We support your a War Of Terror.
And we thinka that George Premier Bush should kill all Iraq children terrorists!
May George Bush drink the blood of every man, woman and child in Iraq.
And bomb every part of Iraq until not even a lizard can live.
They actually had a powerful search capability since NT4. It was not well exposed in GUI and was not running by default. It was called Indexing Service. Current Vista Search is modified Indexing Service + GUI. It was even done by the same team.
Please tell me you are joking. Please. The first thing I would do on ANY clean install was to turn off the useless Indexing Service that (a) Sucked up CPU (b) Re-indexed every frikkin file every frikkin time it started up and (c) did not make searching for stuff any better, faster or more useful. And yes, it was running by default, as evidenced by the fact that I had to turn it off, disable it and delete the binary after every install, in order to stop it from interupting my work.
Violet Blue's (nsfw) site is probably a good starting point,
Thanks for that. Will check it out when I get home.
I still think you're wrong about hardcore porn being violent - that is, while it's a common thing, it's certainly not a requirement.
I guess I was generalising from experience. I will have a look at the above site and see if I can't change my mind about that.
The problem is that specific statements about "what women want" generalize about women so much as to be useless.
I agree, however the GP made a sweeping generalisation about women hating porn, describing it as a 'misery' for them. My contention was that women *are* interested in porn, it's just that *generally* it is a very different kind of porn than men are exposed to. So much so that men *generally* are completely blind to it.
Women love straight-up, no-strings fucking as much as the rest of us. And yeah, that includes the 'nice' ones.
Let me correct the above so it doesn't sound like complete tosh.
Some women love straight-up, no-strings fucking as much as the rest of us in some contexts.
'Sex and the City' has very little sex in it. I say that having borrowed fast-forwarded through my roommates' Season 1 and 2 DVD sets looking for the juicy bits. When the characters have sex, the act itself is represented by a few seconds of film that segues into narration that talks about the sex and quickly moves past it to the aftereffects. I think the appeal of 'Sex and the City' is based on its treatment of sex through characters, relationships (in the general sense), plot, and occasionally witty writing. Although the portrayal of sex is graphic by American TV standards, the sex is basically summed up by a few little snippets, in contrast to the pre- and post-coital bedroom scenes, which are given lengthy treatment and are often key to plot and character development.
... but maybe I'm missing something. I don't have access to Skinemax so I don't really know the genre that you are referring to (thank you for giving a summary above) but it seems to me like you are proposing a logical fallacy, ergo; Soft-core porn is crap, so if it is not crap then it is not soft-core porn.
I re-read the above three times, and I can't determine if you agree or disagree that 'Sex in the City' is soft-core porn. Isn't 'having very little sex' and 'the act itself is represented by a few seconds of film' part of what makes something soft-core porn? Or are you saying that because the definition of soft-core porn is that it is crap and uninteresting, it follows that if Sex in the City is mildly interesting and reasonably well produced that it is not soft-core porn?
Seems circular to me
As for the rest of your post, I agree with your sentiment, I just disagree with your definition of soft-core porn.
Try looking for hardcore that is marketed to women... it tends to be better, all around.
Not being facetious, but I have no idea how to do that. Do I type in 'porn for women' into Google?
Please don't take this the wrong way, I am genuinely curious about such a genre, given that the HC porn I have seen is so bad in almost every way.
I'd have to disagree that hardcore sex is inherently violent
Well, I didn't say that hardcore sex is inherently violent, I said that hardcore porn is violent, at least the stuff that I have seen. The two are not equivilent.
Maybe you're watching the wrong ones? =)
I must be. I just wasn't prepared to wade through hours of violent shit to find something decent. Perhaps you could suggest an avenue of exploration instead of vaguely alluding to this different type of hardcore porn.
I suppose the point I really want to make is that women are very much like men in that they're individuals.
That statement is so abstract as to be worthless. Let's replace 'women' in that sentence with 'snowflakes'.
I suppose the point I really want to make is that snowflakes are very much like men in that they're individuals. If you think you're going to "understand" snowflakes like they are some sort of weird single organism, it's just not going to happen. Interest yourself in the individual snowflake and you're more than half there.
When I hear that women like softcore porn, I think, yeah, right, some guy pressures his overly compliant wife/girlfriend into watching porn with him, and she chooses softcore as a way of limiting the misery.
Here's a clue. Walk into a bookshop one day and head to the 'romance' section. I know you've never been there before, but look for the women with guilty looks on their faces standing close to shelves reading small paperbacks with intense concentration. Pick up a few of those books and flick through the pages to find the juicy bits, and then come back here and tell me that women are not interested in soft-core porn.
But there's no reason you have to put up with any vileness when you choose porn.
You see, for women, sex is a package deal, and hard-core porn leaves out 90% of what needs to be in the package. Added to which hard-core porn is basically violence, not sex, and generally women aren't turned on by violence (although they do respond to aggression, which is different).
If you add back in the rest of the ingredients that women need, and remove the violent aspect of most hard-core porn, then you have soft-core porn.
What is 'Sex in the City' if it is not soft-core porn? And women watch that show voluntarily in their millions.
Long and short, you would really benefit if you took some time to understand what women want.
I'm just curious, what is the difference between a fucking retard and a retard ?
In some countries they sterilise retards to stop them from breeding.
I couldn't locate concrete numbers, but I'm willing to bet we spend a LOT more money funding Global Warming fear mongerin-- I mean research than we do Fusion power generation research.
.... wood.
Interesting. Current estimates on US research into nuclear power for civilian purposes (generating electricity) is $25 Beeellion dollars, from which we have the following outcomes.
1) Nuclear power still does not produce as much energy as
2) Both the inputs to and outputs from Nuclear reactors cause cancer.
3) The outputs from Nuclear reactors needs to be either (a) Stored at great expense for thousands of years or (b) shipped to the third world at some expense or (c) turned into projectiles and fired at the third world at great expense.
4) Did I mention that the waste from Nuclear reactors causes cancer?
So given how wonderful the fruits of $25B in nuclear power research have been, I can see why you are concerned about the $25B that has been spent on Global Warming Research. Oh, and by the way, the climate change scientists called and asked if you know where the other $24,890,000,000 of their research money has gone. Thanks.
And exactly where do you live where all races, creeds, and colors live homogeneously in an equal distribution everywhere??
You probably didn't go to college because your reading comprehension sucks. The parent asked about colleges, not where white and black people live.
In the country I live in, most Universities have a student population that ethnically approximates the general population very closely (with a few exceptions, notably Lebanese, Aboriginal, and in the past Vietnamese). This is because where you go to University in this country is not generally a function of where you went to High School, and the same is true in the US.
Do you have Hispanic colleges? Eastern European colleges? Asian colleges?
Therefore, one comes to the conclusion that it is the selection process (economic, academic, preference), both on the part of the student and the colleges that results in White and Black colleges, and it is not a function of where you live.
They are not segregated moron, but some schools attract more of one race than the other.
I'm afraid it is you that sounds the moron.
Now, of course, I'm going to call that assumption into question. What is a web site?
I'll see your question, and raise you another. What is a web site, to who?
To a user: A web site is a presentation of content (words, pictures, other media) and navigation (links, menus, other) that appears in their Web Browser when they are connected to the Internet, that is a function of the address that appears in their browser's address entry field.
To a developer: A web site is one or more request/response technologies that parse remote requests and return responses that contain content and navigation.
To a judge: A web site in which information is exchanged between the viewer of the site and the creator(s) of the site, that is accessed with a specialised piece of computer software known as a browser when the computer is connected to the internet.
Yes, you can expand on the terms navigation, connected and so on, but to do so would be pointless without adding yet another sub-question "In what context?". The question would then become;
"What is a web site, to a [user/developer/judge/police officer/porn star], in the context of [a means to obtain information/deliver information/discussion/indoctrination/etc]?"
So before we even get into the answer, lets beat up on how crappy the question is.
And isn't that list more valuable than:
No, it isn't.
The list I gave you had 10 countries with WMD and one without. The US government invaded the one without. So, you see it doesn't really matter what list you give the US government about countries with WMD, because they are not invading countries with WMD. In other words, they have another agenda.
Your argument fails to take into account the purpose of patents: to promote the progress of science and useful arts. Almost anything patentable in the physical space is doing something in a new way. Seeing the device is not enough to understand how it works, and the patent is designed to force the "how" to become public.
Exactly!
There was once a clan in Japan that made a certain type of Indigo dye. It was a clan secret, and because the colour was popular, the clan enjoyed a monopoly on the sale of that colour dye for centuries. Of course, attempts to obtain this secret often had violent and bloody ends. Similar trade monopolies existed in Europe in the arts and crafts.
So at one point someone in the Powers That Be thought to themselves "How can we design a system such that secret techniques and knowledge are put into the domain of public knowledge so that others can learn from them and improve the arts and sciences as a whole?"
The answer was to grant the inventor a *limited* monopoly on their invention, so that they could profit from it, and once the monopoly expired, others could use the knowledge to improve the technology arts of their society.
And in the early days of patents, it was a roaring success. Unfortunately, it hasn't worked out all that well in the later part of the 20th Century, and in the 21st century a private inventor patenting his work in the hope of actually profiting from his invention is either a fool or a con-artist.
IMHO, the problem is that the useful arts and sciences have progressed beyond all expectations. The patent system suceeded wildly, and now that it has achieved it's objective for our society, it is no longer any use to us in it's present form. What we need now is a system that promotes the human arts, because we've got all the science and technology we need to kill each other 100 times over.