Other than Intel being faster and consuming less power. Especially on high end servers. My cousin had to purchase 4 $60k servers, two Intel builds and two AMD builds. Ran them all through a slew of tests for both Linux and Solaris, everything as optimized as possible. Not only did Intel win in nearly every benchmark, but it consumed nearly 1/2 the power. This was important because the mains was only able to handle 10 megawatts and he was able to get their electrician to jimmy rig another 2 megawatts, but they still had several $500,000 racks turned off. You get to do silly things when you have your own 150 megawatt power plant that doesn't charge you any money. State funded University research center.
Small Intel CPUs are on par with ARM for efficiency, but the platforms as a whole are not competitive yet. For the servers, Intel is blowing ARM out of the water for ops per watt.
Many look at a technology and say "it's good enough, it does 80% of what I need". Then they cobble together 9 other technologies the same way and you're left with 0.8^10 "enough", leaving you fighting fires from the lack of custom configuration that you need. Technical debt is multiplicative with other technical debt.
For every 1 person that reinvents the wheel, 9 others use an existing wheel for the wrong job or misconfigure the wheel because they don't understand their problem well enough. If you truly understand your current issue, you're smart enough to create a solution. Every time someone treats a tool like a black box of magic, looking at you programmers blindly using libraries without understanding how they work, it's because they don't understand the problem they're trying to solve.
P.S. Understanding what something is doing does not mean you know the exact details of the implementation.
150 isn't that great. I get 1Gb bursts from most websites which would cause ping spikes and jitter if it wasn't for my ISP using an AQM. It's not how slow the Internet is, it's how much faster it could be for the exact same price while they could still make a huge margin. They are purposefully holding us back, it could be better, much better.
Your argument is we should be happy because it could be worse? I say we should be angry because it could be better.
Mine didn't. Not only do they not use the term "up to", but they explicitly point that out and claim you will always get 100% of your bandwidth *within their network and to their peers and trunk. $45/m for 100/100 and currently 14ms from Chicago. Used to be 6ms until Level 3 changed routes. uhggg. fml
Correct. SSDs fail for different reasons than spinning rust. Most mechanical HDs fail for physical reasons and physical reasons tend to be highly correlated for all drives in an array, even if they're different models or even brands. There is a very high risk that if one drive fails, another is right behind it. RAID5, I'm looking at you.
RAID0 is any drive failing is a loss, so multi-drive failures don't matter so much, but they're also much less likely until it's a firmware bug or other pathological issue. But SSDs are pretty much RAID0 already and have a fraction the failure rate of mechanical drives.
M.2 supports up to 2^16 queues with a queue depth of 2^16 each. I wonder when SSD controllers will start to take advantage of this new protocol. These first gen M.2 drives seem more like retro-fitted SATA drives that just so happen to have beefy controllers, but were not specifically designed to make full use of the new features.
Many Youtube videos have already been taken down because they have mentioned the words "react" or "reaction" over this. They're also quickly tracking down Youtube videos that use the base word "react" in any way and asking for a cut of ad revenue or be taken down. It's not only an overreaching trademark, but it's being quickly abused.
POSIX may have changed, but at one point, running the idea of not allowing "rm -rf/" to work by default was heresy to an official POSIX expert until someone realized that part of the standard said if/dev (or something, I forget what path), would be a target of the pattern, then the entire call is undefined as per the standard. Solaris eventually added a protection to refuse to run, but different *nix systems handle it differently.
In my local experience, in the city that I grew up Charter is selling 60Mb/4Mb for $80/month with spotty internet issues, but my mom lives 20 miles past the city limits in a farming town of 600 and has 50Mb/50Mb fiber for $70/month. I myself live in a small dying city of 30k and have 100/100 fiber for $45/month. There are people up North with fiber to their vacation cabins deep in the woods with no neighbors, and they only pay double digits of money for triple digits of speed.
But all of the big cities around here have Charter, and all of them have capitalistically expensive and spotty internet. As long as Charter doesn't care about where you live, there is fast cheap fiber Internet.
According to Youtube's statistics, they have about 1bil unique visitors with the majority of them in the age range of 18-49. World wide, there are only about 3bil people in that age range, and the majority of them are in 3rd world countries incapable of streaming Youtube. That means 1st world countries need to have a very high percentage to compensate the average.
There are two types of people. Those who think they need more bandwidth, and those who complain when they don't have enough from time to time but take the stance they have enough. If I have to wait for anything, it's too slow. Of course some people think other need more patience. Patience is just another way of saying you don't value your own time.
In your case you get at least what you've been sold. Even better is getting nearly exactly what you've been sold. If you can maintain your bandwidth +- less than 1% of your sold speed, you can safely traffic shape your bandwidth to maintain virtually 0 latency under nearly all work loads. I can safely maintain less than 3ms of bufferbloat under full saturation during peak hours for long sustained times.
Many ISPs that do care to maintain performance, will over-provision bandwidth because sometimes their bandwidth dips, allowing you to generally average your sold speed. I would rather not have the dips than for them to give me extra to compensate.
The vast majority is people who grew up before the Internet and their children have moved out. If you exclude people nearing or in retirement, suddenly the vast majority do not find 10Mb fast enough. If you're below the age of 40, you probably want at least 30Mb unless you're single and hit the clubs every night.
The same way you can force a company to not sell you spoiled food. We can set minimum levels of quality. If you don't want to meet those levels, then don't even get into the business.
You can't efficiently be an ISP without the government if only because of land ownership issues. You get one of two issues. The government controls land rights and allows ISPs to install last mile infrastructure or there are no rules and anyone can destroy someone else's property. In the USA, the biggest issue with last mile right of ways is the local populace votes to limit the number of ISPs so their land doesn't get tore up every time a new ISP wants to run cables. You can't have your cake and eat it to. Either way you need the government to step in.
Buying food is voluntary? I already broke your assumption. Something is only voluntary if you don't need it. Want a job? You need internet. Want to file taxes for "Free"? You need the Internet. Want to communicate with friends or family? You need the Internet. What a cheap form of entertainment so you don't kill yourself from a boring life? You need the Internet(almost all other forms of entertainment is more expensive and entertainment is required for to be psychologically healthy).
IR and fiber are just forms of directional wifi. There are good implementations of wifi backhauls in cities with congested frequencies. There are limitations, but you can have a pretty reliable good design.
It's horribly wrong with a few correct facts. The human brain does continuous integration of past and current information and the eyes do a lot of pre-processing. The eyes don't return all information, only the important information and the brain fills in the holes. 3Mb/s of "bandwidth" of raw data from the eyes is only enough for 4fps of binary monocrome color, yet we see in a vibrant array of colors and can perceive as quickly as 300fps. The analogy is horribly broken to absurdity with only basic common sense.
I can only do about 1 mathematical operation per second if I'm lucky. Would you say the brain is only capable of 1 instruction per second?
You obviously don't understand how digital-analog hybrid neutral networks feed into our perception. Next you'll tell us bullets aren't dangerous because their average velocity over the age of the Universe approaches 0.
You can support two 8Mb/s Netflix 1080p streams and a 10Mb/s+ 1080p 60fps Youtube stream all on your 10Mb connection? There are some basics of information theory you may want to learn about.
Either you don't spend much time on the Internet or your time is not worth that much. I value my time and waiting for crap to download is not desirable. 10Mb is not enough for me. Statisitically, a network connection is pretty much saturated at 80% load because of the hocky stick graph for latency and jitter as your approach saturation. My wife watching a single stream is 8Mb average. That average is already 80% load. Let me tell you, the data does not come down in a smooth fashion. Netflix, Youtube, Hulu, they all send data in 1Gb bursts that saturate my connection. Of course it comes out to an 8Mb/s average over the course of a minute.
You're making a large assumption. Around here, the rural markets have the fastest Internet because the incumbents are not there. In the city? Maybe 60Mb/4Mb Internet. Live on a farm in the middle of no where? 100/100 or 1Gb/1Gb fiber Internet for 1/2 the price.
Slashdot Mirror
Other than Intel being faster and consuming less power. Especially on high end servers. My cousin had to purchase 4 $60k servers, two Intel builds and two AMD builds. Ran them all through a slew of tests for both Linux and Solaris, everything as optimized as possible. Not only did Intel win in nearly every benchmark, but it consumed nearly 1/2 the power. This was important because the mains was only able to handle 10 megawatts and he was able to get their electrician to jimmy rig another 2 megawatts, but they still had several $500,000 racks turned off. You get to do silly things when you have your own 150 megawatt power plant that doesn't charge you any money. State funded University research center.
Small Intel CPUs are on par with ARM for efficiency, but the platforms as a whole are not competitive yet. For the servers, Intel is blowing ARM out of the water for ops per watt.
Thanks, I found this strangely funny thing morning.
Many look at a technology and say "it's good enough, it does 80% of what I need". Then they cobble together 9 other technologies the same way and you're left with 0.8^10 "enough", leaving you fighting fires from the lack of custom configuration that you need. Technical debt is multiplicative with other technical debt.
For every 1 person that reinvents the wheel, 9 others use an existing wheel for the wrong job or misconfigure the wheel because they don't understand their problem well enough. If you truly understand your current issue, you're smart enough to create a solution. Every time someone treats a tool like a black box of magic, looking at you programmers blindly using libraries without understanding how they work, it's because they don't understand the problem they're trying to solve.
P.S. Understanding what something is doing does not mean you know the exact details of the implementation.
150 isn't that great. I get 1Gb bursts from most websites which would cause ping spikes and jitter if it wasn't for my ISP using an AQM. It's not how slow the Internet is, it's how much faster it could be for the exact same price while they could still make a huge margin. They are purposefully holding us back, it could be better, much better.
Your argument is we should be happy because it could be worse? I say we should be angry because it could be better.
Mine didn't. Not only do they not use the term "up to", but they explicitly point that out and claim you will always get 100% of your bandwidth *within their network and to their peers and trunk. $45/m for 100/100 and currently 14ms from Chicago. Used to be 6ms until Level 3 changed routes. uhggg. fml
Correct. SSDs fail for different reasons than spinning rust. Most mechanical HDs fail for physical reasons and physical reasons tend to be highly correlated for all drives in an array, even if they're different models or even brands. There is a very high risk that if one drive fails, another is right behind it. RAID5, I'm looking at you.
RAID0 is any drive failing is a loss, so multi-drive failures don't matter so much, but they're also much less likely until it's a firmware bug or other pathological issue. But SSDs are pretty much RAID0 already and have a fraction the failure rate of mechanical drives.
M.2 supports up to 2^16 queues with a queue depth of 2^16 each. I wonder when SSD controllers will start to take advantage of this new protocol. These first gen M.2 drives seem more like retro-fitted SATA drives that just so happen to have beefy controllers, but were not specifically designed to make full use of the new features.
Many Youtube videos have already been taken down because they have mentioned the words "react" or "reaction" over this. They're also quickly tracking down Youtube videos that use the base word "react" in any way and asking for a cut of ad revenue or be taken down. It's not only an overreaching trademark, but it's being quickly abused.
POSIX may have changed, but at one point, running the idea of not allowing "rm -rf /" to work by default was heresy to an official POSIX expert until someone realized that part of the standard said if /dev (or something, I forget what path), would be a target of the pattern, then the entire call is undefined as per the standard. Solaris eventually added a protection to refuse to run, but different *nix systems handle it differently.
"rm -rf /" is undefined by the rm standard. Why it even works is beyond me.
Programming is not as hard as some people suspect
Programming 101: Balancing your allowance
Programming in the real world: Managing the economy of a nation
Managing money isn't that hard, just make sure you don't spend more than you earn.
In my local experience, in the city that I grew up Charter is selling 60Mb/4Mb for $80/month with spotty internet issues, but my mom lives 20 miles past the city limits in a farming town of 600 and has 50Mb/50Mb fiber for $70/month. I myself live in a small dying city of 30k and have 100/100 fiber for $45/month. There are people up North with fiber to their vacation cabins deep in the woods with no neighbors, and they only pay double digits of money for triple digits of speed.
But all of the big cities around here have Charter, and all of them have capitalistically expensive and spotty internet. As long as Charter doesn't care about where you live, there is fast cheap fiber Internet.
According to Youtube's statistics, they have about 1bil unique visitors with the majority of them in the age range of 18-49. World wide, there are only about 3bil people in that age range, and the majority of them are in 3rd world countries incapable of streaming Youtube. That means 1st world countries need to have a very high percentage to compensate the average.
There are two types of people. Those who think they need more bandwidth, and those who complain when they don't have enough from time to time but take the stance they have enough. If I have to wait for anything, it's too slow. Of course some people think other need more patience. Patience is just another way of saying you don't value your own time.
In your case you get at least what you've been sold. Even better is getting nearly exactly what you've been sold. If you can maintain your bandwidth +- less than 1% of your sold speed, you can safely traffic shape your bandwidth to maintain virtually 0 latency under nearly all work loads. I can safely maintain less than 3ms of bufferbloat under full saturation during peak hours for long sustained times.
Many ISPs that do care to maintain performance, will over-provision bandwidth because sometimes their bandwidth dips, allowing you to generally average your sold speed. I would rather not have the dips than for them to give me extra to compensate.
The vast majority is people who grew up before the Internet and their children have moved out. If you exclude people nearing or in retirement, suddenly the vast majority do not find 10Mb fast enough. If you're below the age of 40, you probably want at least 30Mb unless you're single and hit the clubs every night.
The same way you can force a company to not sell you spoiled food. We can set minimum levels of quality. If you don't want to meet those levels, then don't even get into the business.
You can't efficiently be an ISP without the government if only because of land ownership issues. You get one of two issues. The government controls land rights and allows ISPs to install last mile infrastructure or there are no rules and anyone can destroy someone else's property. In the USA, the biggest issue with last mile right of ways is the local populace votes to limit the number of ISPs so their land doesn't get tore up every time a new ISP wants to run cables. You can't have your cake and eat it to. Either way you need the government to step in.
Buying food is voluntary? I already broke your assumption. Something is only voluntary if you don't need it. Want a job? You need internet. Want to file taxes for "Free"? You need the Internet. Want to communicate with friends or family? You need the Internet. What a cheap form of entertainment so you don't kill yourself from a boring life? You need the Internet(almost all other forms of entertainment is more expensive and entertainment is required for to be psychologically healthy).
IR and fiber are just forms of directional wifi. There are good implementations of wifi backhauls in cities with congested frequencies. There are limitations, but you can have a pretty reliable good design.
It's horribly wrong with a few correct facts. The human brain does continuous integration of past and current information and the eyes do a lot of pre-processing. The eyes don't return all information, only the important information and the brain fills in the holes. 3Mb/s of "bandwidth" of raw data from the eyes is only enough for 4fps of binary monocrome color, yet we see in a vibrant array of colors and can perceive as quickly as 300fps. The analogy is horribly broken to absurdity with only basic common sense.
I can only do about 1 mathematical operation per second if I'm lucky. Would you say the brain is only capable of 1 instruction per second?
You obviously don't understand how digital-analog hybrid neutral networks feed into our perception. Next you'll tell us bullets aren't dangerous because their average velocity over the age of the Universe approaches 0.
You can support two 8Mb/s Netflix 1080p streams and a 10Mb/s+ 1080p 60fps Youtube stream all on your 10Mb connection? There are some basics of information theory you may want to learn about.
Either you don't spend much time on the Internet or your time is not worth that much. I value my time and waiting for crap to download is not desirable. 10Mb is not enough for me. Statisitically, a network connection is pretty much saturated at 80% load because of the hocky stick graph for latency and jitter as your approach saturation. My wife watching a single stream is 8Mb average. That average is already 80% load. Let me tell you, the data does not come down in a smooth fashion. Netflix, Youtube, Hulu, they all send data in 1Gb bursts that saturate my connection. Of course it comes out to an 8Mb/s average over the course of a minute.
You're making a large assumption. Around here, the rural markets have the fastest Internet because the incumbents are not there. In the city? Maybe 60Mb/4Mb Internet. Live on a farm in the middle of no where? 100/100 or 1Gb/1Gb fiber Internet for 1/2 the price.