Consumer 10GbE is a long, long way off. There's no way in hell you're going to wire your home for 10GBASE-CX cabling, and 10GBASE-T is only just begining to appear. The cost of the switch ASICs is so high that creating an 8 or 16 port switch isn't much cheaper than making a 48 port, and adaptors are still complex, expensive devices: a lot of them have SFP connectors so you can plug in a suitable transponder, which makes things expensive. Other are basically HPC interconnect cards running in Ethernet mode I.e. cards produced by Myricom.
Most small & medium sized server rooms won't start to use 10GbE for at least the nex five years, yet alone consumers.
As others have pointed out shielding is unnecessary in everyday use.
Yes, assuming the cable in question was UTP and not STP or FTP. If it was UTP, you still need to keep the pairs together and twisted correctly, or you'll create a giant antenna and create crosstalk.
As it turns out, a boatload of older NICs were mishandled by the new switch which downgraded speeds, communicated in half-duplex, and even then continually reset the connection.
Over 6000 people died in coal mining accidents in China in 2004 alone. That's just deaths, too. Industrial disease such as Black Lung is killing tens of thousands more.
Nearly 20,000 people killed or injured in one country during one year alone v's approximately 4000 people over a 20 year period. I know which one is the disaster here.
it's not like the reactor decided to blow at random
The reactor at Chernobyl was a Soviet designed RBMK-1000. It is a graphite moderated, water cooled design which...had a few flaws. The worst was that it had a positive void coefficient. Without getting too deeply in to it, as the coolant boiled off the reaction increased. Essentially the reactor was unstable by design. It was an accident waiting to happen.
Nothing like Chernobyl could ever happen in a Western reactor, or a modern Russian reactor for that matter, because Western safety regulations mean that a reactor like the RBMK-1000 could never have been built.
While we're at it, Chernobyl was not the fault of the operators who were on duty. No one had ever had to deal with such a situation before, because no one had even realised it was even possible.
Yup. There were also a few other design faults in the RBMK, such as gravity fed control rods (they couldn't be fully inserted when the core had begun to heat because the channels had deformed), no containment building (the RBMK is vertically fueled and 7 metres high, which meant building a complete containment building was deemed prohibitive) and other smaller issues (inserting the control rods actually increased the reaction at the tip of the rod, which in turn caused voids, which coupled with the positive void coefficient was very, very, bad).
Basically the RBMK was an accident waiting to happen, like most Soviet technology. The spin-down experiment was pretty much guaranteed to turn the reactor into a bomb, even in the best-case scenario with a fully trained crew in a fully manned control room!
No. When you're talking about "human error" it almost entirely means stuff like "He pressed the wrong button" or "The warning light was flashing but he ignored it". What happened at Chernobyl was stupidity driven by pure bloody mindedness.
both the Chernobyl accident and three mile island were caused by human error
First of all, Chernobyl was largely not caused by human error. It was due to pure bloody mindedness inherent in the USSR and a dangerous reactor design that made even more dangerous by disabling critical safety systems.
Everyone likes to paint TMI as a huge disaster that should be ranked with Chernobyl, yet TMI was no more serious than a small, controlled release of radioactive gas which quickly dispersed into the atmosphere. Which funnily enough is the exact sort of thing that coal plants do all the time yet nobody appears to live in mortal terror of them. TMI is only considered major because the danger was inflated and the government instilled panic by evacuating large numbers of people. Combine that with a little lobbying from coal and oil companies and you get the current disaster that is US policy on nuclear energy.
Who cares about Chernobyl? No one is building new RBMK-1000/1500 reactors these days. Since the USSR is no more, no one is stupid enough to perform a breathtakingly stupid experiment on a hot reactor that wasn't particularly stable by design in the first place.
Anyone who invokes Chernobyl as an argument against modern nuclear power had better have a good grasp of what actually happened at Chernobyl and why it isn't applicable outside of Chernobyl.
If the CPU clock is under software control then I could see that would be possible create a scheduler that would dynamically alter the clock speed as each process was scheduled.
Same democracy that granted the colonies taxation without representation?
Yes, in the same way you would no doubt consider the United States of America a democracy even though it denied suffrage to women until the 1920's and practices racial segregation well into the 1960's.
Who paid off Virginia state to label Anonymous as a terrorist organization
Scientology. Or Habbo.com. Either could be the culprit.
how much of Anonymous will be loyal enough to stick around
That's such an illogical conjecture I'm not sure where to start. "Anonymous" isn't some sort of highly organised group. It's just a bunch of people on various websites. Going to those websites doesn't make you a terrorist, or a furry, or a protester, or whatever it is someone else is doing. "Stick around"? Makes no sense.
I've got everything switched off. All the new menus, collapsing comments, Web 2.37a stuff. I read at -1, Nested, Oldest First with no modifiers. In fact I'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between how I see Slashdot now and how I saw it when I first started reading. Which is just the way I like it!
Really though, nuclear technology isnt that hard. Take 2 pieces of near-critical U235 and smack them together.. Hell, we could have Soulskill clap them together.
It's a touch harder than that. First you need that highly enriched uranium, which means you'll need a reactor, reprocessing facilities and some way to refine your U238-rich Uranium into weapons grade U235. You'll also need a few other metals while you're there, such as Beryllium. Then once you have all of that, and assuming someone hasn't bombed your facilities in the mean time, you have to "smash them together" in just the right way: too fast and they'll fly apart before they reach criticality, too slow and the mass will not be compressed enough: either will lead to a fizzle.
Which is exactly what happened to North Korea by the way. Apparently even after decades of research and development, smacking to bits of metal together is pretty hard to do right.
No it isn't. It's written in C++. Look, you even contradict yourself with this quote:
The Java Runtime Environment (JRE) is required for the Base (database) component of OpenOffice.org as well as several other features.
Note that it doesn't say "The JRE is required for OpenOffice.org". You can install and run OO.o without installing Java, provided you don't want to use OO.o Base
No. Linux only needs to understand initrd because it uses initrd. If Linux supported it, GRUB (or any other Multiboot compliant loader) can load all of the required kernel modules on behalf of the kernel, including the root filesystem module.
This is exactly how Syllable does things. All of it's filesystems, bus drivers and disc subsystems are loadable modules and we rely on GRUB to load them all at boot time, then the kernel initialises them all before it mounts it's root filesystem.
Finally, my chance to wear shorts and a hawaiian shirt to work.
Oh, and remember: next Friday... is Hawaiian shirt day. So, you know, if you want to, go ahead and wear a Hawaiian shirt and jeans.
I wonder if they will let me put some beach sounds on the server room stereo.:)
I was told that I could listen to the radio at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven, I told Bill that if Sandra is going to listen to her headphones while she's filing then I should be able to listen to the radio while I'm collating so I don't see why I should have to turn down the radio because I enjoy listening at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven.
In the UK we install the cheaper, thiner wiring but still get 4800W because we're strange and wire the outlets as a ring circuit, which effectively doubles the available cross sectional surface area of the conductor.
Oh and btw, there is a simple solution to this non-problem:
You are remote system 'X'. I am client 'Y'. I send you a string. The first eight bytes of the stream are:
0x82 0x31 0x32 0x6A 0x7B 0x72 0x34 0x37
Did I just send you a 16bit string, or a 32bit string? Or perhaps it's a 64bit string?
So do we force everyone to standardise on one known protocol? Now you have the overhead of converting from your native size to the "neutral" size. What if you're a 32bit machine and the neutral size is 64bit? Well, perhaps we could use a more complex encoding scheme? Ever seen the ASN.1 spec?
Now your 16bit strings & 32bit strings are not portable across implementations, and you have to somehow know that which type of string you're using before you can use it.
Actual string objects don't have to be portable between a 16-bit and 32-bit implementation
Are you sure about that? I can think of plenty of situations where passing a simple bit of data between two platforms causes all sorts of problems without the added headache of having to deal with different "types" of strings, with different headers etc.
The problem with Pascal strings is that it's easy for a short-sighted implementer to paint themselves into a corner. It's all very well and good to say "The first two bytes in a string are used to indicate the length of the string" but then what do you do a decade from now when a 16bit string is laughably small? The benefit of NUL terminated strings is that there length is only limited by the memory available to you and yet are forward and backward compatible by decades.
Slashdot Mirror
Consumer 10GbE is a long, long way off. There's no way in hell you're going to wire your home for 10GBASE-CX cabling, and 10GBASE-T is only just begining to appear. The cost of the switch ASICs is so high that creating an 8 or 16 port switch isn't much cheaper than making a 48 port, and adaptors are still complex, expensive devices: a lot of them have SFP connectors so you can plug in a suitable transponder, which makes things expensive. Other are basically HPC interconnect cards running in Ethernet mode I.e. cards produced by Myricom.
Most small & medium sized server rooms won't start to use 10GbE for at least the nex five years, yet alone consumers.
Yes, assuming the cable in question was UTP and not STP or FTP. If it was UTP, you still need to keep the pairs together and twisted correctly, or you'll create a giant antenna and create crosstalk.
Can I take a guess? Were they 3Com NICs?
Over 6000 people died in coal mining accidents in China in 2004 alone. That's just deaths, too. Industrial disease such as Black Lung is killing tens of thousands more.
Nearly 20,000 people killed or injured in one country during one year alone v's approximately 4000 people over a 20 year period. I know which one is the disaster here.
The reactor at Chernobyl was a Soviet designed RBMK-1000. It is a graphite moderated, water cooled design which...had a few flaws. The worst was that it had a positive void coefficient. Without getting too deeply in to it, as the coolant boiled off the reaction increased. Essentially the reactor was unstable by design. It was an accident waiting to happen.
Nothing like Chernobyl could ever happen in a Western reactor, or a modern Russian reactor for that matter, because Western safety regulations mean that a reactor like the RBMK-1000 could never have been built.
While we're at it, Chernobyl was not the fault of the operators who were on duty. No one had ever had to deal with such a situation before, because no one had even realised it was even possible.
Yup. There were also a few other design faults in the RBMK, such as gravity fed control rods (they couldn't be fully inserted when the core had begun to heat because the channels had deformed), no containment building (the RBMK is vertically fueled and 7 metres high, which meant building a complete containment building was deemed prohibitive) and other smaller issues (inserting the control rods actually increased the reaction at the tip of the rod, which in turn caused voids, which coupled with the positive void coefficient was very, very, bad).
Basically the RBMK was an accident waiting to happen, like most Soviet technology. The spin-down experiment was pretty much guaranteed to turn the reactor into a bomb, even in the best-case scenario with a fully trained crew in a fully manned control room!
No. When you're talking about "human error" it almost entirely means stuff like "He pressed the wrong button" or "The warning light was flashing but he ignored it". What happened at Chernobyl was stupidity driven by pure bloody mindedness.
First of all, Chernobyl was largely not caused by human error. It was due to pure bloody mindedness inherent in the USSR and a dangerous reactor design that made even more dangerous by disabling critical safety systems.
Everyone likes to paint TMI as a huge disaster that should be ranked with Chernobyl, yet TMI was no more serious than a small, controlled release of radioactive gas which quickly dispersed into the atmosphere. Which funnily enough is the exact sort of thing that coal plants do all the time yet nobody appears to live in mortal terror of them. TMI is only considered major because the danger was inflated and the government instilled panic by evacuating large numbers of people. Combine that with a little lobbying from coal and oil companies and you get the current disaster that is US policy on nuclear energy.
Who cares about Chernobyl? No one is building new RBMK-1000/1500 reactors these days. Since the USSR is no more, no one is stupid enough to perform a breathtakingly stupid experiment on a hot reactor that wasn't particularly stable by design in the first place.
Anyone who invokes Chernobyl as an argument against modern nuclear power had better have a good grasp of what actually happened at Chernobyl and why it isn't applicable outside of Chernobyl.
I never said it was. I was just providing an explanation of the mysterious feature mentioned in the article.
If the CPU clock is under software control then I could see that would be possible create a scheduler that would dynamically alter the clock speed as each process was scheduled.
Yes, in the same way you would no doubt consider the United States of America a democracy even though it denied suffrage to women until the 1920's and practices racial segregation well into the 1960's.
That simply depends on how you define "modern" and "democracy". Great Britain had a functional democracy long before the United States of America.
Scientology. Or Habbo.com. Either could be the culprit.
That's such an illogical conjecture I'm not sure where to start. "Anonymous" isn't some sort of highly organised group. It's just a bunch of people on various websites. Going to those websites doesn't make you a terrorist, or a furry, or a protester, or whatever it is someone else is doing. "Stick around"? Makes no sense.
[Citation needed]
I pay 20% Income Tax, 1% National Insurance (NHS) and 15% VAT (Sales Tax). My Council Tax payments are ~£110 a month.
I've got everything switched off. All the new menus, collapsing comments, Web 2.37a stuff. I read at -1, Nested, Oldest First with no modifiers. In fact I'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between how I see Slashdot now and how I saw it when I first started reading. Which is just the way I like it!
It's a touch harder than that. First you need that highly enriched uranium, which means you'll need a reactor, reprocessing facilities and some way to refine your U238-rich Uranium into weapons grade U235. You'll also need a few other metals while you're there, such as Beryllium. Then once you have all of that, and assuming someone hasn't bombed your facilities in the mean time, you have to "smash them together" in just the right way: too fast and they'll fly apart before they reach criticality, too slow and the mass will not be compressed enough: either will lead to a fizzle.
Which is exactly what happened to North Korea by the way. Apparently even after decades of research and development, smacking to bits of metal together is pretty hard to do right.
No it isn't. It's written in C++. Look, you even contradict yourself with this quote:
Note that it doesn't say "The JRE is required for OpenOffice.org". You can install and run OO.o without installing Java, provided you don't want to use OO.o Base
Where's all this new hardware that has been released in the last three months which does not have Linux drivers?
No. Linux only needs to understand initrd because it uses initrd. If Linux supported it, GRUB (or any other Multiboot compliant loader) can load all of the required kernel modules on behalf of the kernel, including the root filesystem module.
This is exactly how Syllable does things. All of it's filesystems, bus drivers and disc subsystems are loadable modules and we rely on GRUB to load them all at boot time, then the kernel initialises them all before it mounts it's root filesystem.
Oh, and remember: next Friday... is Hawaiian shirt day. So, you know, if you want to, go ahead and wear a Hawaiian shirt and jeans.
I was told that I could listen to the radio at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven, I told Bill that if Sandra is going to listen to her headphones while she's filing then I should be able to listen to the radio while I'm collating so I don't see why I should have to turn down the radio because I enjoy listening at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven.
In the UK we install the cheaper, thiner wiring but still get 4800W because we're strange and wire the outlets as a ring circuit, which effectively doubles the available cross sectional surface area of the conductor.
You are remote system 'X'. I am client 'Y'. I send you a string. The first eight bytes of the stream are:
Did I just send you a 16bit string, or a 32bit string? Or perhaps it's a 64bit string?
So do we force everyone to standardise on one known protocol? Now you have the overhead of converting from your native size to the "neutral" size. What if you're a 32bit machine and the neutral size is 64bit? Well, perhaps we could use a more complex encoding scheme? Ever seen the ASN.1 spec?
Now your 16bit strings & 32bit strings are not portable across implementations, and you have to somehow know that which type of string you're using before you can use it.
Are you sure about that? I can think of plenty of situations where passing a simple bit of data between two platforms causes all sorts of problems without the added headache of having to deal with different "types" of strings, with different headers etc.
The problem with Pascal strings is that it's easy for a short-sighted implementer to paint themselves into a corner. It's all very well and good to say "The first two bytes in a string are used to indicate the length of the string" but then what do you do a decade from now when a 16bit string is laughably small? The benefit of NUL terminated strings is that there length is only limited by the memory available to you and yet are forward and backward compatible by decades.