Oh, and before you get on my case, I know that FB uses MySQL. The point is you are not all in need of huge quick data caches, and if you are serving static pages from a dynamic source, you are doing something else wrong altogether.
First you need to learn something useful, like understand a normal database, like PostgreSQL, SQLLite, DB2 or whatever your heart desires (not MySQL, that's just not right.) Once you really understand the normal databases and you understand your requirements only then you can make a statement by going 'nosql' something, otherwise it's most likely for most scenarios is counterproductive, you are not all FBs out there.
That's not why I wrote the comment, I saw that the access is over http, I wrote it because this story is an ad for this company, but also it's talking about building a system like that for your own use, and if you do it for your own use, why would you do http only?
When you choose which file system to use, you should consider what the purpose of the storage is. If it's to run a database, you may want to rethink the decision to go with a journaling file system, because databases often their own journaling (like PostreSQL WAL), which actually means the performance will get reduced if you put a journaling file system underneath that. Just my 0.0003 grams of gold.
No, but you don't understand. Governments do everything in their power to reduce the power of monopolies, they do what they do for the benefit of consumers, all the regulations and taxes are there to protect you. Don't you know anything?
--
The above is what I normally get as comments, replying to mine on/. Then of-course come the 'moderators'.
Here is why this is good for the general public (though not good for Apple) - it provides people with more manufactured goods at lower prices and it definitely mimics something successful, so you know that it will succeed.
Imitation is the best flattery and also they say that good artists copy and great ones steal.
Now, does this hurt the consumers? From the point of view that it hurts Apple's ability to generate more revenue/income, and possibly somewhat suppresses their ability to throw more money into R&D, yes. On the other hand, the copies that are created by these companies, who mimic Apple this way (and other businesses as well) are cheap (at least they should be), and they do create more variety, as even those, who mimic the look and feel of the companies they also innovate, they do create different products that the original company did not, they provide more competition, which is really what creates wealth.
If government is going to be used to stop this, this is just another way for government to steal from the general public, to raise prices and to prevent competition, and it's not good for market.
What does it mean, 'truce' between MS and Linux kernel (or is it GNU + Linux distros)?
SCO, anybody? Is the memory supposed to be this short? Was GNU/Linux out to destroy MS the way MS is out to destroy any business possibility for GNU/Linux?
Once again: SCO.
If you turn your back to them, the way that penguin did in that animation, there will be a large ice pick that very moment, right in the middle of your spine.
The author of this 'xploit' would have gotten more attention from Google if he tried removing 'google.com' and some other domains that belong to the company.
I think this is the closest one could get to breaking the Internet by 'typing google into google'.
That's not a laptop anymore, when it's that big and heavy.
But I am scared that at some point my SyncMaster 2493HM may go out, because where the hell can one get a good screen on this planet again with 1920x1200 resolution, good contrast, tiny pitch, every port one ever thought of for a screen?
If it's not a troll, then it's really terrible ideology.
You see, the 'hard choices' that Washington has to make are not that hard at all. They never have to do actual hard choices, which in case of Washington would have been real austerity for the government.
Hard choices imply sacrifice, and in case of Washington that's not what they are talking about. Real sacrifice on their part would have been doing the right thing and cutting Washington. You don't call something a 'hard choice', unless it's actually hard for you.
When you talk about scientific research, others talk about infrastructure - if those were the only things that government actually was involved in, there wouldn't have been any hard choices to make today, because there wouldn't have been any crisis, the economy would have been booming in the 20th century, just like it was booming in the 19th, if the government didn't become the maker and breaker of participants in the economy.
So to me at least, anything that talks about the rich being somehow the problem, because they are not for having their taxes raised is a troll.
AFAIC there must be no income taxes, no payroll taxes, no corporate taxes, no taxes on work. The government makes you believe that it's unfair not to tax work but only to tax consumption, because those with fewer means would be hit 'disproportionately'. But it's the same lie by the government, as the one that says that deflation is bad.
How can they reconcile these 2 lies and the liberal public buys it is beyond me. You see, deflation means that prices eventually go down, while taxing work means that there will be inflation, and prices will go up, and so who is really hurt by that? It's not the rich, they'll make sure they are not hit with inflation (well, the smarter ones). It's easy not to be hit with inflation.
Also the income taxes were originally introduced to only be paid by the top richest people, and their rate was around 1.5%. That was the way it was sold to the public, and what do you have today?
No surprise that the only economic growth in US and most other Western nations is now only found in government, because government lives much beyond the means of the public to support it, government prints money (and in case of US it's illegal, they are only allowed to mint coins from your gold/silver for your own use, so you bring your metal, they mint it and you get it back from them, but they can't create money, yet they do. Sure it's the Fed, not Congress, but the Fed, just like SCOTUS is now the arm of federal government.)
The reasons behind the economic crisis are that the public is bought by government officials with promises of various programs, which cannot be actually supported in the long run by the economy. The spending on SS, Medicare, Wars is what is killing the economy, but to listen to the politicians, it's the richest people not paying their so called 'fair share' is responsible for it.
What is 'fair share'? How is it ever fair to tax income even at 1%, never mind 35% federal, 7% State (average), 3% medicare, SS (the rich?) etc.etc.? None of it was ever fair, none of it is fair now none of it will be fair in the future.
You don't tax people's work. They do work and the work improves the economy and creates the wealth. You tax the work, regulate the work, subsidize some of the businesses while creating barriers to entry for others - you distort and destroy the economy, you create situation where the employer has no rights and employee has all of them, all of this so that the majority of voters keep voting you in. This is mobocracy, this is the death of republic, which was on purpose created not to be a democracy - mobocracy, because the mob doesn't look beyond the now and destroys its own economy by making the wrong choices for the economy in the long run 100% of the time.
Of-course this is now a dissident opinion, the majority have spoken and there is no going back, there will be economic destruction because the majority is what is leading to it,
Yes, actually having an opinion and having debunked the same thing over for about 145 times makes one stop caring about somebody stating the obvious wrong argument the 146 time around.
Will people voluntarily do the 'right thing'? Who is going to tell 'people' what the 'right thing' is? You?
Government shouldn't be printing its own currency either.
Mint can only mint coins for you, you bring it the gold/silver and it mints coins out of that for you. It's your material and coins that come out are also yours. They can charge a nominal fee for the work, that's all.
Government printing money is unconstitutional, but I'll be moded troll here for this again, but hey, what else is new?
Yes, all those things, none of them should exist or be done by government. I read about 2 lines, then the last line, the mid-section is obviously more of the same.
More people simply create more demand for more products and more new services, so if a pandemic hits, this is just another reason for many new businesses to start working on looking for a solution to that problem, as providing the solution can be profitable.
Of-course once they find the solution and present it to the market, they'll become rich, and thus automatically will become the "enemy" in today's society, because clearly, they are dirty capitalist pig-dogs, just stealing from the state and keeping the common man down.
Having a larger and growing market is good for the market place, because it allows the market place to find solutions to the new problems, creating more wealth in the process. This type of thinking, that humans are a liability, is closely tied to the stupid idea that more demand from growing markets increases prices for products and resources, while in reality it creates incentive for more production and increases production, thus allowing new economies of scale to bring the prices down.
That's why oil as at all time low in price, gas is cheapest that it has ever been on in US, as a gallon now only costs a dime. Of-course that's a silver dime - real money, as they used to mint before 1965.
- Oh, yes. Al Gore invented it, while DARPA misused an old packet switching protocol from POTS and mixed it up at tax payers expense with existing communication systems. Or did you think that before DARPA there were no networks? Or that DARPA came up with packet switching out of nothing?
How much innovation is stifled by government intervention into the economy, by mis-allocation of resources, and what would we have today if there was no government intervention and mis-allocation?
No, I don't consider my original comment ironic at all, I consider yours misguided.
For those business sites like Asus or HP, I've begun filing ADA (american disabilities act) complaints that the websites are no accessible to disabled users
- yeah, because for some reason companies must spend time and money building things for corner cases rather than for their main target customer. Government. Is there anything it can do that does not hurt the economy? If it can, I haven't found one example yet so far.
Yes, promise people a retirement program, take money from them for all their working lives, and then refuse to give anything back to them when they need it
- the past generations of people voted for the past generations of politicians to get them to be on top of the pyramid scam that SS and Medicare are, and they voted to get the unborn to pay for that in the future.
Swell grandma you got there. AFAIC she deserves the nice clock cleaning, not anybody who doesn't want to pay her from a system, from which she already gotten out of more, than anybody who is paying her today ever will.
- you do realize, you are like a twentieth commenter here with the same BS? You should have read what is written already.
Gov't workers do not pay income taxes because the money that they get from gov't was money that gov't already collected, it's money gov't already had. It pays you the money so that it can collect it back from you, that's not income taxes, that's an illusion created to make it look like gov't workers pay income taxes.
To pay income taxes you have to genuinely earn the money, not from gov't, but from private trade, so that gov't can come in and raid whatever you made via income taxes. Income taxes is money, raided from real workers in real economy (though by the looks of it, now the only economy left in US is gov't, which is my point.)
Any money that you get from gov't as an employee, which then ends up shuffled back to the gov't is not real income taxes, because it doesn't come from any real income. It's gov't shuffling the money it already has to create an illusion.
Any industry that had as much demand for increased services as the government has would be growing at the same rate.
- government does not produce anything, and whatever it distributes, it collects from others, who are compelled to contribute by force. So when you say 'demand', I say - sure. There is always demand for free stuff.
Free stuff is always in demand. Too bad there is no such thing as free stuff, somebody ACTUALLY produces it.
Who said that? We just aren't taking YOU seriously when you make assinine statements like "government workers don't pay income taxes" and "the workers are famous, they are swamped by armies of lobbyists". Tell that to the DMV person at the counter the next time you renew your driver's license.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and before you get on my case, I know that FB uses MySQL. The point is you are not all in need of huge quick data caches, and if you are serving static pages from a dynamic source, you are doing something else wrong altogether.
First you need to learn something useful, like understand a normal database, like PostgreSQL, SQLLite, DB2 or whatever your heart desires (not MySQL, that's just not right.) Once you really understand the normal databases and you understand your requirements only then you can make a statement by going 'nosql' something, otherwise it's most likely for most scenarios is counterproductive, you are not all FBs out there.
That's not why I wrote the comment, I saw that the access is over http, I wrote it because this story is an ad for this company, but also it's talking about building a system like that for your own use, and if you do it for your own use, why would you do http only?
When you choose which file system to use, you should consider what the purpose of the storage is. If it's to run a database, you may want to rethink the decision to go with a journaling file system, because databases often their own journaling (like PostreSQL WAL), which actually means the performance will get reduced if you put a journaling file system underneath that. Just my 0.0003 grams of gold.
No, but you don't understand. Governments do everything in their power to reduce the power of monopolies, they do what they do for the benefit of consumers, all the regulations and taxes are there to protect you. Don't you know anything?
--
The above is what I normally get as comments, replying to mine on /. Then of-course come the 'moderators'.
on monopolies
more on monopolies
some more
Standard Oil, Alcoa Aluminum, AT&T, etc.
the fix to the problem
what's money?
what's a real solution?
is government evil?
why? don't we have this awesome tech today? It will only get better in the future.
Ha, I worked for many Canadian and US telcos on contracts. I also had a contract with electrical utility, which used to be an arm of government.
I also contracted for Symcor, ADP, IFDS, Christie Digital, Boomboat, Avema. Subcontracted for World Insure, Davis + Henderson, Danli Promotions.
For the last 2 years I've been building my own suite of software for retail chains in Asia.
Thanks for asking.
No, that's impossible. I find that using 5 flag methodology works though.
Here is why this is good for the general public (though not good for Apple) - it provides people with more manufactured goods at lower prices and it definitely mimics something successful, so you know that it will succeed.
Imitation is the best flattery and also they say that good artists copy and great ones steal.
Now, does this hurt the consumers? From the point of view that it hurts Apple's ability to generate more revenue/income, and possibly somewhat suppresses their ability to throw more money into R&D, yes. On the other hand, the copies that are created by these companies, who mimic Apple this way (and other businesses as well) are cheap (at least they should be), and they do create more variety, as even those, who mimic the look and feel of the companies they also innovate, they do create different products that the original company did not, they provide more competition, which is really what creates wealth.
If government is going to be used to stop this, this is just another way for government to steal from the general public, to raise prices and to prevent competition, and it's not good for market.
What does it mean, 'truce' between MS and Linux kernel (or is it GNU + Linux distros)?
SCO, anybody? Is the memory supposed to be this short? Was GNU/Linux out to destroy MS the way MS is out to destroy any business possibility for GNU/Linux?
Once again: SCO.
If you turn your back to them, the way that penguin did in that animation, there will be a large ice pick that very moment, right in the middle of your spine.
The author of this 'xploit' would have gotten more attention from Google if he tried removing 'google.com' and some other domains that belong to the company.
I think this is the closest one could get to breaking the Internet by 'typing google into google'.
That's not a laptop anymore, when it's that big and heavy.
But I am scared that at some point my SyncMaster 2493HM may go out, because where the hell can one get a good screen on this planet again with 1920x1200 resolution, good contrast, tiny pitch, every port one ever thought of for a screen?
If it's not a troll, then it's really terrible ideology.
You see, the 'hard choices' that Washington has to make are not that hard at all. They never have to do actual hard choices, which in case of Washington would have been real austerity for the government.
Hard choices imply sacrifice, and in case of Washington that's not what they are talking about. Real sacrifice on their part would have been doing the right thing and cutting Washington. You don't call something a 'hard choice', unless it's actually hard for you.
When you talk about scientific research, others talk about infrastructure - if those were the only things that government actually was involved in, there wouldn't have been any hard choices to make today, because there wouldn't have been any crisis, the economy would have been booming in the 20th century, just like it was booming in the 19th, if the government didn't become the maker and breaker of participants in the economy.
So to me at least, anything that talks about the rich being somehow the problem, because they are not for having their taxes raised is a troll.
AFAIC there must be no income taxes, no payroll taxes, no corporate taxes, no taxes on work. The government makes you believe that it's unfair not to tax work but only to tax consumption, because those with fewer means would be hit 'disproportionately'. But it's the same lie by the government, as the one that says that deflation is bad.
How can they reconcile these 2 lies and the liberal public buys it is beyond me. You see, deflation means that prices eventually go down, while taxing work means that there will be inflation, and prices will go up, and so who is really hurt by that? It's not the rich, they'll make sure they are not hit with inflation (well, the smarter ones). It's easy not to be hit with inflation.
Also the income taxes were originally introduced to only be paid by the top richest people, and their rate was around 1.5%. That was the way it was sold to the public, and what do you have today?
No surprise that the only economic growth in US and most other Western nations is now only found in government, because government lives much beyond the means of the public to support it, government prints money (and in case of US it's illegal, they are only allowed to mint coins from your gold/silver for your own use, so you bring your metal, they mint it and you get it back from them, but they can't create money, yet they do. Sure it's the Fed, not Congress, but the Fed, just like SCOTUS is now the arm of federal government.)
The reasons behind the economic crisis are that the public is bought by government officials with promises of various programs, which cannot be actually supported in the long run by the economy. The spending on SS, Medicare, Wars is what is killing the economy, but to listen to the politicians, it's the richest people not paying their so called 'fair share' is responsible for it.
What is 'fair share'? How is it ever fair to tax income even at 1%, never mind 35% federal, 7% State (average), 3% medicare, SS (the rich?) etc.etc.? None of it was ever fair, none of it is fair now none of it will be fair in the future.
You don't tax people's work. They do work and the work improves the economy and creates the wealth. You tax the work, regulate the work, subsidize some of the businesses while creating barriers to entry for others - you distort and destroy the economy, you create situation where the employer has no rights and employee has all of them, all of this so that the majority of voters keep voting you in. This is mobocracy, this is the death of republic, which was on purpose created not to be a democracy - mobocracy, because the mob doesn't look beyond the now and destroys its own economy by making the wrong choices for the economy in the long run 100% of the time.
Of-course this is now a dissident opinion, the majority have spoken and there is no going back, there will be economic destruction because the majority is what is leading to it,
Yes, actually having an opinion and having debunked the same thing over for about 145 times makes one stop caring about somebody stating the obvious wrong argument the 146 time around.
Will people voluntarily do the 'right thing'? Who is going to tell 'people' what the 'right thing' is? You?
Government shouldn't be printing its own currency either.
Mint can only mint coins for you, you bring it the gold/silver and it mints coins out of that for you. It's your material and coins that come out are also yours. They can charge a nominal fee for the work, that's all.
Government printing money is unconstitutional, but I'll be moded troll here for this again, but hey, what else is new?
has a hard time holding the line against health care or tax cuts for the richest Americans.
- and my comments are routinely moderated as 'troll', while obviously trolling is done on regular basis in the 'story' summaries?
Yes, all those things, none of them should exist or be done by government. I read about 2 lines, then the last line, the mid-section is obviously more of the same.
More people simply create more demand for more products and more new services, so if a pandemic hits, this is just another reason for many new businesses to start working on looking for a solution to that problem, as providing the solution can be profitable.
Of-course once they find the solution and present it to the market, they'll become rich, and thus automatically will become the "enemy" in today's society, because clearly, they are dirty capitalist pig-dogs, just stealing from the state and keeping the common man down.
(yeah, that was sarcasm.)
When did humans become a liability exactly?
Having a larger and growing market is good for the market place, because it allows the market place to find solutions to the new problems, creating more wealth in the process. This type of thinking, that humans are a liability, is closely tied to the stupid idea that more demand from growing markets increases prices for products and resources, while in reality it creates incentive for more production and increases production, thus allowing new economies of scale to bring the prices down.
That's why oil as at all time low in price, gas is cheapest that it has ever been on in US, as a gallon now only costs a dime. Of-course that's a silver dime - real money, as they used to mint before 1965.
+5 ironic for writing that on the internet.
- Oh, yes. Al Gore invented it, while DARPA misused an old packet switching protocol from POTS and mixed it up at tax payers expense with existing communication systems. Or did you think that before DARPA there were no networks? Or that DARPA came up with packet switching out of nothing?
How much innovation is stifled by government intervention into the economy, by mis-allocation of resources, and what would we have today if there was no government intervention and mis-allocation?
No, I don't consider my original comment ironic at all, I consider yours misguided.
For those business sites like Asus or HP, I've begun filing ADA (american disabilities act) complaints that the websites are no accessible to disabled users
- yeah, because for some reason companies must spend time and money building things for corner cases rather than for their main target customer. Government. Is there anything it can do that does not hurt the economy? If it can, I haven't found one example yet so far.
The more my comments are down-moderated as 'troll' (this entire thread), the more I know I am absolutely, irrevocably correct.
Yes, promise people a retirement program, take money from them for all their working lives, and then refuse to give anything back to them when they need it
- the past generations of people voted for the past generations of politicians to get them to be on top of the pyramid scam that SS and Medicare are, and they voted to get the unborn to pay for that in the future.
Swell grandma you got there. AFAIC she deserves the nice clock cleaning, not anybody who doesn't want to pay her from a system, from which she already gotten out of more, than anybody who is paying her today ever will.
incredulously false claims.
- you do realize, you are like a twentieth commenter here with the same BS? You should have read what is written already.
Gov't workers do not pay income taxes because the money that they get from gov't was money that gov't already collected, it's money gov't already had. It pays you the money so that it can collect it back from you, that's not income taxes, that's an illusion created to make it look like gov't workers pay income taxes.
To pay income taxes you have to genuinely earn the money, not from gov't, but from private trade, so that gov't can come in and raid whatever you made via income taxes. Income taxes is money, raided from real workers in real economy (though by the looks of it, now the only economy left in US is gov't, which is my point.)
Any money that you get from gov't as an employee, which then ends up shuffled back to the gov't is not real income taxes, because it doesn't come from any real income. It's gov't shuffling the money it already has to create an illusion.
Any industry that had as much demand for increased services as the government has would be growing at the same rate.
- government does not produce anything, and whatever it distributes, it collects from others, who are compelled to contribute by force. So when you say 'demand', I say - sure. There is always demand for free stuff.
Free stuff is always in demand. Too bad there is no such thing as free stuff, somebody ACTUALLY produces it.
Who said that? We just aren't taking YOU seriously when you make assinine statements like "government workers don't pay income taxes" and "the workers are famous, they are swamped by armies of lobbyists". Tell that to the DMV person at the counter the next time you renew your driver's license.
- why would I go to DMV? Besides which, I am against any government taxes and subsidies, I am surely against subsidies to infrastructure.
Or the census worker who stops by your door when you refuse to return your census paperwork.
- oh yes, a world wonder of government productivity - the census worker.
Or the letter carrier. The only thing I don't know, in this case, is which one will punch your lights out first.
- well, they don't say 'going postal' for nothing, do they? AFAIC this government monopoly also shouldn't exist.
Anyway, I have to split, it's late night, sleep is, after all, something we all need.