Depends on how it's packaged. The 32GB microSD card I have at hand weighs ~half a gram. I think an eMMC package has a bunch more pins, and thus a bit more wrapped around the die or dice, so maybe several multiples of that. A whole bunch of discrete packages (either because you really need the speed or you are using low density stuff) might be more.
I know that they have been in locations that wouldn't be so easily subpoenaed into submission (peering points that focus on cost/bit, not storing data, infrastructure in areas they don't technically have jurisdiction in, etc.); but (as best I can figure out from the poor-to-nebulous description in TFA) this sounds like Google attempting to secure their own LANs/private WANs, and possibly the SSL/TLS connections that users use to access their already-trivially-subpoenaed material on Google's servers). I have not heard reports of the NSA bothering to tap company networks that they can already own by legal means, though I'd be interested to hear any if there are some.
For an entity like Google (large, technically sophisticated; but most of their worthwhile data probably count as 'business records' for the purposes of nigh-limitless subpoena-under-cover-of-darkness powers, do the feds really bother sucking on the fiber when they could just flash a badge and get what they want?
If so, actually-working-encryption should create an interesting little jump in the number of information demands (whether they are the kind that Google is allowed to talk about, and whether it will be 'Google received 123,345 demands last year, and only one this year! (The one demand was "We want all of it.") are different questions).
If they already aren't sucking on the fiber because doing it through Legal is easier, this probably isn't bad security practice; but won't really slow the feds down much. They certainly don't have an aversion to genuinely covert behavior; but they also have crazy expansive 'legal' abilities to obtain information (and, especially when paid, often plenty of help from the companies who have the data...)
It depends on what you mean by 'OS': Should the POS and the server be running nethack? Obviously not. Is there any particularly good reason why either device should be running an OS that wouldn't support nethack if it were installed? No, not really (and, in fact, both of them probably do).
As for the Wii U, I assume that if Nintendo felt like releasing a sequel to 'Dr. Mario', where you play as Actuary Wario and attempt to manage the risk pool of Dr. Mario's patients, it wouldn't be the OS that stops them.
~sigh~ have you read the article. KDE/Linux doesn't have the image formats built into the OS. It's one of the things OS X does right.
Given that (especially for 'creative' type use cases, who get the oddball formats) you may have a change of format before you have an OS version bump, why would you want to couple image formats directly to the OS?
A mechanism for the OS to do some useful things with formats it understands, and a plugin mechanism for vendors to tell the OS about theirs(with a few common ones preloaded so jpeg and whatnot work out of the box for normal users), certainly; but don't basically all modern graphical shells do some degree of that already?
This can lead to issues, like the blasphemous nightmare that is fucking around with a directshow filter graph after half a dozen shovelware media-viewer programs have had a fight over it; but it's really the only alternative to either treating images purely as files, nothing more, or assuming that your OS vendor will be always accurate and always timely for every little subcommunity's oddball file format of choice.
The US (I assume that this is because they got into the game fairly late) is actually sort of odd among imperial powers:
We had massive territorial expansion (pretty much the process that made 'the continental united states' mean what it does today); the whole of which was assimilated and crunched into statehood in the space of a century, with almost nothing left but some French influences in Louisiana, assorted totally-fucked-over native tribal groups, and some Spanish speaking populations that are now linguistically near-indiscernable against the much larger number of post-statehood Latin American immigrants.
Outside of the continental US + Alaska, we almost entirely failed to leave an English-speaking zone corresponding to our imperial possessions. Phillipines and Cuba? Lost, and the Spanish made a much bigger impression during their time there. Even Puerto Rico, retained, speaks a great deal of Spanish. Guam and Hawaii are the only two (aside from a scattering of incredibly small pacific islands, some of which still retained a local language, like the Marshall Islands, despite having a native population barely larger than the assorted military assets we had scattered around during the pacific phase of WWII) that come to mind.
Britain, France, Spain, all have massive chunks of the globe speaking their respective languages as an outcome of colonialism, even as they've mostly lost those colonies. Most of the areas that speak US English and aren't in the US do so for reasons that came after we realized that there are cheaper methods than imperial occupation to get what you want.
" I understand the heritage and cultural proudness of having your own characters"
I suspect that that's part of the problem; but in a way that the Chinese government is (fairly sensibly) spinning as an 'Oh, gosh, look at the need for educational improvements!' problem: How many of the 400 million non-Mandarin speakers are just really-badly-educated speakers, and how many are speaking-something-other-than-Mandarin-just-fine-thanks?
It isn't exactly news that China is less homogeneous than Beijing would prefer, and includes a number of both ethnic and linguistic groups that aren't entirely fuzzy toward the capital.
Apple, under Jobs, definitely didn't suffer from a risk-averse willingness to uncreative iteration (How many more incremental generations of the bestselling-product-ever iPod Mini could they have squeezed out when Jobs basically said 'Hard drives make me sick, fuck the Mini and go build me a Nano, I don't care if it actually reduces storage capacity until you get to the higher-end model a generation later."? However, Apple also (mostly, the 'why not make the shuffle a featureless rectangle for no reason, even though we had a version that was only slightly larger and incorporated the iconic control-wheel design?' was not a clever move) had the virtue of having a good idea waiting in the wings when they exercised their willingness to take an already-successful product out and shoot it.
That's possibly the even trickier part: there are very strong incentives to be a conservative, risk-averse, iterator when you are on top, so people tend to do so; but there's also a well-developed literature on 'just sitting around and milking your cash cow is how you get eaten by hungry upstarts'. Trouble is, unless you actually have lots of good ideas, like those hungry upstarts just outside the gates, staring at you, doing some cargo-cult management and killing random cash cows won't actually save you, just reduce the amount of delicious cash-milk you get to collect before you die.
You don't want conservatism to crib-death the upstart ideas that could genuinely save you from succumbing to old age and laziness; but you also want to be careful to recognize that, if you are in fact ossified and uncreative, that milking the situation for all it's worth and then cashing out gracefully beats the hell out of increasingly desperate flailing as you bleed out.
There may or may not be some upset investors(if they managed to get in during some peak value period they may have managed to lose some money even at Microsoft's fairly sweetheart valuation); but I suspect that the real difference is that there are people who judge 'success' and 'failure' by "how much can I offload it on the next chump for?" and those who judge success and failure by "What were we doing and creating?".
Microsoft's willingness to buy them out of what appeared to be a pretty hairy situation saved the day for team bean-counter; but I suspect that team engineer is wondering 'How did we go from being fucking Nokia to being eaten by a software company?'
The more bank accounts that get screwed with, the more people will seek out alternatives for wealth storage, like bitcoin.
I'm not sure that electronic attacks will have people flocking to a notably-dogged-by-electronic-theft cryptographic currency... Yeah, after every attack, it is carefully explained that the person attacked was a noob who had it coming because they skipped some implementation detail; but that's rarely very helpful.
I'm not saying that doing that is a good idea; rather mocking the (honestly rather repulsive) worldview of somebody who casually suggests that attacking Syrian infrastructure would be a demonstration of how 'humane' "cyber" war can be; but warns against the terribly dangerous path of going after financial assets.
You have to be kind of a ragingly bad person to suggest that zapping every SCADA system that looks vulnerable in an entire country is a good opportunity to prove that cyberwarfare is a fine, upstanding, sort of activity, while simultaneously warning that zeroing a few bank accounts is just to terrifying to contemplate. Though, this guy does seem to be a ragingly bad person, so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised.
I'm not really in the market; but I'm just surprised that they managed to get the thing into a phone chassis at all without either building the phone like a tank or gimping the hell out of the SoC. It isn't an enormous one; but the finned heatsink, fan, and intake and exhaust ports on the Shield were only slightly smaller than those on Atom or ULV-version-of-some-chip-Intel-doesn't-hate laptops. Totally possible that Nvidia just didn't give a damn, and a discrete heatsink was cheaper than a better chassis design that sinks heat into the shell; but it didn't seem like a good sign for the thermals of their platform...
Not being able to see the pixels, without really working at it, is easy on the eyes(assuming all the art assets/widget sets are in a row and there isn't any ghastly malscaling going on). It's a luxury feature, in the sense that (precisely by virtue of throwing enough pixels at you that they blend together) more resolution doesn't mean more area to work, unlike increases in resolution at lower DPI where you can meaningfully fit more stuff into the same space if only things were packed a bit tighter.
Probably doesn't hurt that it makes 1 to 1 mirroring on common HDTVs trivial, though that isn't a wildly common use case.
Didn't the NVIDIA Shield have a cooling fan and a couple of giant vents to keep the Tegra 4 happy? How much lower are the clocks going to be on a phone?
Apparently we should use 'cyber' weapons; but not against the finances of the guy we accuse of killing ~100k people; because the poor, poor, banks might get weepy or something. What kind of bullshit is this? Sure, target the Syrian electrical grid (it's "dual use"!) but don't touch the financial markets, they have feelings too(and apparently financial markets aren't "dual use" much to the confusion of money launderers, mercenaries, and plundering kleptocrats worldwide?)
Those who live in glass houses, should not throw stones...
Especially not at people who live in much less glassy houses and still have plenty of stones... Seriously, unless the world of SCADA systems, consumer operating systems, and assorted web infrastructure, and such is far less of a clusterfuck than is routinely reported at security conferences, do we really want to encourage any more hackery than already goes on?
(Attempting to use the 'humanitarian' bullshit is doubly foolish: 'humanitarian' is always an object of politicized cynisism, and wouldn't it arguably be 'humanitarian' to discourage US military activities by turning out the lights in DC for a few days every time somebody gets cruise-missiled?)
What they really don't want(though people screwing up on cookies and IPs and such reduces the risk a bit) is effective segregation of different parts of your life at the same time.
If somebody merely tries to 'start clean' every year/2years/5years/whatever, either he also gives up all his friends/family/contacts, or he might as well not bother, his new account will slot neatly back into his old networks and habits, and it just won't do much.
If somebody has a strictly segregated set of accounts for different purposes, it makes each individual account less valuable(because the 'being a social dickhead' account now has no attached consumer preferences or professional income data) and it isn't necessarily the case that the accounts tie back together, barring mistakes on the user's part.
Of course, with many of them enforcing 'real name' policies, and using facial recognition such that anybody posting a picture of you can rat you out, it isn't clear that you can win.
It's not as if it's a trick -- they're very explicit that the purpose of the site is for you to tell them all about yourself so they can sell that info. https://aboutthedata.com/portal begins "Who are you? If you want to get the best advertising delivered to you, based on your actual interests, start here. Tell us who you are so we can show you the information used to fuel many of the marketing offers you receive from advertisers using Acxiom's digital marketing data."
As for who enjoys ads so much that they want to take time out of their day to do unpaid work for advertising companies... well I can't imagine.
The question that occurs to me is "Are those assholes at Acxiom good enough to discern 'corrections' that make the data even less accurate than it was, or 'corrections' made to other peoples' profiles?"
It'll be a cold day in hell before I volunteer better data to scum like them; but I think that polluting the database would be my good deed for the day, probably my good deed for the month if I could automate it.
It will only be a matter of time until they find clustering algorithms that can separate your "interests".
Basically it is like you have three clouds of points. One cloud is your interests. One cloud is for your wife, and one cloud is for your child. For a human, it is easy to tell these clouds apart. For a computer, it will soon be easy too.
I was told by a retired jeweler in my neighborhood that being able to separate customers' "interests" has been a particularly acute problem in that sector for some time: Obviously, as with any business(especially one built on unnecessary luxury goods) they want to cultivate and flatter their good customers; but they ran into the persistent problem that some of their good customers had wives who did open marketing mail addressed to a household; but had not been the recipients of some or all of the jewelry purchased... That is, of course, awkward for all involved.
Call me racist, but this type of stuff coming from minorities does not surprise me.
Is there any population group where dickheaded infighting over who gets to inherit the family cash is a surprise? Even people too poor to have assets worth fighting over can use 'dividing the estate' as a proxy for all the childhood emnities over who mommy and daddy loved best, magnified by all the anxiety, rivalry, bitterness, and jealousy about who did, and didn't, achieve the life that they wanted for themselves, with nothing but a few trinkets of sentimental value. Once you put some cash on the table... break out the lawyers.
Though, if you don't want to be judged by the color of your skin, being filthy stinking rich is a better tactic than most... (also a pretty good way to avoid being judged by the content of your character; but hey!)
My problem with RaspberryPi for file server is the 10/100 ethernet. Gigabit is cheap and prevalent. I understand the keeping costs down aspect though.
The rPi has enough ethernet issues that Gigabit wouldn't make much difference (there are people who will sell you a 'gigabit' USB 2.0 NIC; but that's because there are bad people, not because it works all that well). The ethernet, and both accessible USB ports, are provided by a combo NIC/USB hub switch dangling from a single USB2 root port on the SoC. Since SD cards top out at fairly low capacities, that typically implies that the USB bus will be dealing with mass-storage chatter between the rPi and your external HDD enclosure and ethernet traffic for whatever file serving protocol you are using. Not Fast.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on how it's packaged. The 32GB microSD card I have at hand weighs ~half a gram. I think an eMMC package has a bunch more pins, and thus a bit more wrapped around the die or dice, so maybe several multiples of that. A whole bunch of discrete packages (either because you really need the speed or you are using low density stuff) might be more.
I know that they have been in locations that wouldn't be so easily subpoenaed into submission (peering points that focus on cost/bit, not storing data, infrastructure in areas they don't technically have jurisdiction in, etc.); but (as best I can figure out from the poor-to-nebulous description in TFA) this sounds like Google attempting to secure their own LANs/private WANs, and possibly the SSL/TLS connections that users use to access their already-trivially-subpoenaed material on Google's servers). I have not heard reports of the NSA bothering to tap company networks that they can already own by legal means, though I'd be interested to hear any if there are some.
For an entity like Google (large, technically sophisticated; but most of their worthwhile data probably count as 'business records' for the purposes of nigh-limitless subpoena-under-cover-of-darkness powers, do the feds really bother sucking on the fiber when they could just flash a badge and get what they want?
If so, actually-working-encryption should create an interesting little jump in the number of information demands (whether they are the kind that Google is allowed to talk about, and whether it will be 'Google received 123,345 demands last year, and only one this year! (The one demand was "We want all of it.") are different questions).
If they already aren't sucking on the fiber because doing it through Legal is easier, this probably isn't bad security practice; but won't really slow the feds down much. They certainly don't have an aversion to genuinely covert behavior; but they also have crazy expansive 'legal' abilities to obtain information (and, especially when paid, often plenty of help from the companies who have the data...)
It depends on what you mean by 'OS': Should the POS and the server be running nethack? Obviously not. Is there any particularly good reason why either device should be running an OS that wouldn't support nethack if it were installed? No, not really (and, in fact, both of them probably do).
As for the Wii U, I assume that if Nintendo felt like releasing a sequel to 'Dr. Mario', where you play as Actuary Wario and attempt to manage the risk pool of Dr. Mario's patients, it wouldn't be the OS that stops them.
~sigh~ have you read the article. KDE/Linux doesn't have the image formats built into the OS. It's one of the things OS X does right.
Given that (especially for 'creative' type use cases, who get the oddball formats) you may have a change of format before you have an OS version bump, why would you want to couple image formats directly to the OS?
A mechanism for the OS to do some useful things with formats it understands, and a plugin mechanism for vendors to tell the OS about theirs(with a few common ones preloaded so jpeg and whatnot work out of the box for normal users), certainly; but don't basically all modern graphical shells do some degree of that already?
This can lead to issues, like the blasphemous nightmare that is fucking around with a directshow filter graph after half a dozen shovelware media-viewer programs have had a fight over it; but it's really the only alternative to either treating images purely as files, nothing more, or assuming that your OS vendor will be always accurate and always timely for every little subcommunity's oddball file format of choice.
The US (I assume that this is because they got into the game fairly late) is actually sort of odd among imperial powers:
We had massive territorial expansion (pretty much the process that made 'the continental united states' mean what it does today); the whole of which was assimilated and crunched into statehood in the space of a century, with almost nothing left but some French influences in Louisiana, assorted totally-fucked-over native tribal groups, and some Spanish speaking populations that are now linguistically near-indiscernable against the much larger number of post-statehood Latin American immigrants.
Outside of the continental US + Alaska, we almost entirely failed to leave an English-speaking zone corresponding to our imperial possessions. Phillipines and Cuba? Lost, and the Spanish made a much bigger impression during their time there. Even Puerto Rico, retained, speaks a great deal of Spanish. Guam and Hawaii are the only two (aside from a scattering of incredibly small pacific islands, some of which still retained a local language, like the Marshall Islands, despite having a native population barely larger than the assorted military assets we had scattered around during the pacific phase of WWII) that come to mind.
Britain, France, Spain, all have massive chunks of the globe speaking their respective languages as an outcome of colonialism, even as they've mostly lost those colonies. Most of the areas that speak US English and aren't in the US do so for reasons that came after we realized that there are cheaper methods than imperial occupation to get what you want.
" I understand the heritage and cultural proudness of having your own characters"
I suspect that that's part of the problem; but in a way that the Chinese government is (fairly sensibly) spinning as an 'Oh, gosh, look at the need for educational improvements!' problem: How many of the 400 million non-Mandarin speakers are just really-badly-educated speakers, and how many are speaking-something-other-than-Mandarin-just-fine-thanks?
It isn't exactly news that China is less homogeneous than Beijing would prefer, and includes a number of both ethnic and linguistic groups that aren't entirely fuzzy toward the capital.
Apple, under Jobs, definitely didn't suffer from a risk-averse willingness to uncreative iteration (How many more incremental generations of the bestselling-product-ever iPod Mini could they have squeezed out when Jobs basically said 'Hard drives make me sick, fuck the Mini and go build me a Nano, I don't care if it actually reduces storage capacity until you get to the higher-end model a generation later."? However, Apple also (mostly, the 'why not make the shuffle a featureless rectangle for no reason, even though we had a version that was only slightly larger and incorporated the iconic control-wheel design?' was not a clever move) had the virtue of having a good idea waiting in the wings when they exercised their willingness to take an already-successful product out and shoot it.
That's possibly the even trickier part: there are very strong incentives to be a conservative, risk-averse, iterator when you are on top, so people tend to do so; but there's also a well-developed literature on 'just sitting around and milking your cash cow is how you get eaten by hungry upstarts'. Trouble is, unless you actually have lots of good ideas, like those hungry upstarts just outside the gates, staring at you, doing some cargo-cult management and killing random cash cows won't actually save you, just reduce the amount of delicious cash-milk you get to collect before you die.
You don't want conservatism to crib-death the upstart ideas that could genuinely save you from succumbing to old age and laziness; but you also want to be careful to recognize that, if you are in fact ossified and uncreative, that milking the situation for all it's worth and then cashing out gracefully beats the hell out of increasingly desperate flailing as you bleed out.
There may or may not be some upset investors(if they managed to get in during some peak value period they may have managed to lose some money even at Microsoft's fairly sweetheart valuation); but I suspect that the real difference is that there are people who judge 'success' and 'failure' by "how much can I offload it on the next chump for?" and those who judge success and failure by "What were we doing and creating?".
Microsoft's willingness to buy them out of what appeared to be a pretty hairy situation saved the day for team bean-counter; but I suspect that team engineer is wondering 'How did we go from being fucking Nokia to being eaten by a software company?'
The more bank accounts that get screwed with, the more people will seek out alternatives for wealth storage, like bitcoin.
I'm not sure that electronic attacks will have people flocking to a notably-dogged-by-electronic-theft cryptographic currency... Yeah, after every attack, it is carefully explained that the person attacked was a noob who had it coming because they skipped some implementation detail; but that's rarely very helpful.
I'm not saying that doing that is a good idea; rather mocking the (honestly rather repulsive) worldview of somebody who casually suggests that attacking Syrian infrastructure would be a demonstration of how 'humane' "cyber" war can be; but warns against the terribly dangerous path of going after financial assets. You have to be kind of a ragingly bad person to suggest that zapping every SCADA system that looks vulnerable in an entire country is a good opportunity to prove that cyberwarfare is a fine, upstanding, sort of activity, while simultaneously warning that zeroing a few bank accounts is just to terrifying to contemplate. Though, this guy does seem to be a ragingly bad person, so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised.
I'm not really in the market; but I'm just surprised that they managed to get the thing into a phone chassis at all without either building the phone like a tank or gimping the hell out of the SoC. It isn't an enormous one; but the finned heatsink, fan, and intake and exhaust ports on the Shield were only slightly smaller than those on Atom or ULV-version-of-some-chip-Intel-doesn't-hate laptops. Totally possible that Nvidia just didn't give a damn, and a discrete heatsink was cheaper than a better chassis design that sinks heat into the shell; but it didn't seem like a good sign for the thermals of their platform...
Not being able to see the pixels, without really working at it, is easy on the eyes(assuming all the art assets/widget sets are in a row and there isn't any ghastly malscaling going on). It's a luxury feature, in the sense that (precisely by virtue of throwing enough pixels at you that they blend together) more resolution doesn't mean more area to work, unlike increases in resolution at lower DPI where you can meaningfully fit more stuff into the same space if only things were packed a bit tighter.
Probably doesn't hurt that it makes 1 to 1 mirroring on common HDTVs trivial, though that isn't a wildly common use case.
It doesn't much help that people are proposing violence as a solution to a war where there aren't even any factions we actually want winning...
Didn't the NVIDIA Shield have a cooling fan and a couple of giant vents to keep the Tegra 4 happy? How much lower are the clocks going to be on a phone?
Apparently we should use 'cyber' weapons; but not against the finances of the guy we accuse of killing ~100k people; because the poor, poor, banks might get weepy or something. What kind of bullshit is this? Sure, target the Syrian electrical grid (it's "dual use"!) but don't touch the financial markets, they have feelings too(and apparently financial markets aren't "dual use" much to the confusion of money launderers, mercenaries, and plundering kleptocrats worldwide?)
Those who live in glass houses, should not throw stones...
Especially not at people who live in much less glassy houses and still have plenty of stones... Seriously, unless the world of SCADA systems, consumer operating systems, and assorted web infrastructure, and such is far less of a clusterfuck than is routinely reported at security conferences, do we really want to encourage any more hackery than already goes on?
(Attempting to use the 'humanitarian' bullshit is doubly foolish: 'humanitarian' is always an object of politicized cynisism, and wouldn't it arguably be 'humanitarian' to discourage US military activities by turning out the lights in DC for a few days every time somebody gets cruise-missiled?)
What they really don't want(though people screwing up on cookies and IPs and such reduces the risk a bit) is effective segregation of different parts of your life at the same time.
If somebody merely tries to 'start clean' every year/2years/5years/whatever, either he also gives up all his friends/family/contacts, or he might as well not bother, his new account will slot neatly back into his old networks and habits, and it just won't do much.
If somebody has a strictly segregated set of accounts for different purposes, it makes each individual account less valuable(because the 'being a social dickhead' account now has no attached consumer preferences or professional income data) and it isn't necessarily the case that the accounts tie back together, barring mistakes on the user's part.
Of course, with many of them enforcing 'real name' policies, and using facial recognition such that anybody posting a picture of you can rat you out, it isn't clear that you can win.
It's not as if it's a trick -- they're very explicit that the purpose of the site is for you to tell them all about yourself so they can sell that info. https://aboutthedata.com/portal begins "Who are you? If you want to get the best advertising delivered to you, based on your actual interests, start here. Tell us who you are so we can show you the information used to fuel many of the marketing offers you receive from advertisers using Acxiom's digital marketing data."
As for who enjoys ads so much that they want to take time out of their day to do unpaid work for advertising companies... well I can't imagine.
The question that occurs to me is "Are those assholes at Acxiom good enough to discern 'corrections' that make the data even less accurate than it was, or 'corrections' made to other peoples' profiles?"
It'll be a cold day in hell before I volunteer better data to scum like them; but I think that polluting the database would be my good deed for the day, probably my good deed for the month if I could automate it.
It will only be a matter of time until they find clustering algorithms that can separate your "interests".
Basically it is like you have three clouds of points. One cloud is your interests. One cloud is for your wife, and one cloud is for your child. For a human, it is easy to tell these clouds apart. For a computer, it will soon be easy too.
I was told by a retired jeweler in my neighborhood that being able to separate customers' "interests" has been a particularly acute problem in that sector for some time: Obviously, as with any business(especially one built on unnecessary luxury goods) they want to cultivate and flatter their good customers; but they ran into the persistent problem that some of their good customers had wives who did open marketing mail addressed to a household; but had not been the recipients of some or all of the jewelry purchased... That is, of course, awkward for all involved.
Have they added 'Patriotic; but not , y'know, that patriotic' since they got Snowdened?
...of many more years of royalites!
Call me racist, but this type of stuff coming from minorities does not surprise me.
Is there any population group where dickheaded infighting over who gets to inherit the family cash is a surprise? Even people too poor to have assets worth fighting over can use 'dividing the estate' as a proxy for all the childhood emnities over who mommy and daddy loved best, magnified by all the anxiety, rivalry, bitterness, and jealousy about who did, and didn't, achieve the life that they wanted for themselves, with nothing but a few trinkets of sentimental value. Once you put some cash on the table... break out the lawyers.
I don't think this was part of King's dream.
Though, if you don't want to be judged by the color of your skin, being filthy stinking rich is a better tactic than most... (also a pretty good way to avoid being judged by the content of your character; but hey!)
My problem with RaspberryPi for file server is the 10/100 ethernet. Gigabit is cheap and prevalent. I understand the keeping costs down aspect though.
The rPi has enough ethernet issues that Gigabit wouldn't make much difference (there are people who will sell you a 'gigabit' USB 2.0 NIC; but that's because there are bad people, not because it works all that well). The ethernet, and both accessible USB ports, are provided by a combo NIC/USB hub switch dangling from a single USB2 root port on the SoC. Since SD cards top out at fairly low capacities, that typically implies that the USB bus will be dealing with mass-storage chatter between the rPi and your external HDD enclosure and ethernet traffic for whatever file serving protocol you are using. Not Fast.
Ah; but if only one of them turns to crime, we can hire the other one to protect the robot against the criminal!