I count that as wise. If you put a real IP address, it would likely get a lot of traffic.
Which is why I've always been confused by the fact that they use fictituous IP's, rather than a production company website with trailers for upcoming projects...
It is a lot of work to raise your arm and point at an exact location on the screen (and slow too). After a short time you will be feeling the fatigue building up in your arm, which starts feeling very heavy. Then you will hate your touch screen and go back to using a mouse, touchpad, or keyboard, none of which require you to make large arm movements, or hold up the weight of your arm in front of you.
Why is touch on the desktop always assumed to be something that would have to replace using other inputs? I mean, if touch added $5 to my monitor, and I used it once every few weeks, I'd consider that a win. And, if it were widely deployed, economies of scale would mean that it really would be very cheap to add. (Like audio on the motherboard.) Having things like pinch to zoom could be handy on the desktop.
instead, they ran rampant and now we have a bullshit system which even on my system, sometimes fails...chrome doesnt play audio, firefox does...no idea why...although getting my HDMI tv to play sound on fedora was interesting, the eventual solution was I had to edit a file in/usr/share and add a:0 to the end of one of the parameters...I have no idea why....in linux mint it was fixed and I never had to do it...but weird shit like this seems to happen all the time...
Despite my best efforts, with Chrome on Ubuntu, Some YouTube videos will play out of one sound card, and some videos will play out of another. I think it's Flash vs. HTML5 being used for different videos. Seriously, it's the most bewildering user experience to have to randomly switch between my USB headphones and my analog headphones. Getting bluetooth audio working reliably is just a lost cause. Skype used to work. I apparently broke it in the course of trying to fix other things. 10 years professional experience as a UNIX admin, and I can't figure out how to make Youtube work without wearing two different headphones. It's sort of fucked.
Slashdot's terrible at interviews. Hopefully somebody much more qualified would interview them, and then amonth later slashdot would post a link to it several times.
Well, if he has identified it as taking up a large amount of the available bandwidth, then it certainly makes sense to consider it a target for reductions. Perhaps more importantly, users tend not to care about updates like that. A user actively downloading a file from some source is probably more important than some automated process the user doesn't care about, and can be deferred until the user gets home without them noticing anything.
That said, I've been saying for a while that there needs to be some sort of bandwidth discovery protocol. My original thought process was driven by apps on mobile phones, but this seems like it would benefit for the same reasons. Wireless oeprators are always concerned about using scarce bandwidth resources so we get plans with low data caps and such. Imagine if there was a completely standardised way for an application (say an email app on a phone) to "ping" bandwidthdiscovery://mail.foo.com with some sort of priority metric. If nothing responded back, it would act normally, so the system would be completely backwards compatible. If something did respond back along the route (for example, the wireless ISP you are connected to, but it could theoretically be something local or distant. The school's DDWRT router in the OP example.) it could reject the session, or encourage a delay. That way an email app set to check every 5 minutes could occasionally get a polite rejection from the ISP asking the app to hold off since circuits are overloaded. The phone would then wait a few minutes before trying again. Eventually the phone would download new email, but at high traffic times, it might wind up going 15 minutes instead of 5, saving the network some trouble. Software updates might defer a download for days or weeks if there is a continual rejection.
My Android phone lets me set software updates and podcast downloads to only happen over wifi, under the assumption that cellular data is expensive, but wifi data is unlimited. But, if I connect to a Mifi access point connected to a cellular connection, my phone currently has no way to discover that it is actually using (limited) cellular data. With a bandwidth discovery protocol, it would get the same rejections from the ISP that it would get if it had directly connected to the cellular data itself. And, local admins could easily set up rejection rules like the OP would be interested in, while still allowing the possibility of user overrides in cases where the school IT guy really wants to manually update the school's computer systems and whatnot. Think of it as a sort of queryable QoS.
And because any intermediate system on the route can let apps know to reduce bandwidth usage, a server being slashdotted can have some queries be rejected, rather than everything being on the link local side near the user. Obviously, none of this helps the admin in the immeadiate term. But, it would seem like that's how it ought to work.
Implicit semicolons. '5' + 3 gives '53' whereas '5' - 3 gives 2. I tried to include the famous Javascript truth table. Look it up. Including it in the post just triggered the junk filter, but it's hilarious. Javascript manages to be chock full of wtf even without the DOM at all. I always wished that Python would show up in the browser at some point. Once apon a time, the idea of genuinely novel scripting languages for web pages actually seemed plausible. (Remember vbscript web pages?) I guess there is so much legacy JS now that it's just the way things work and we'll never be completely rid of it.
And then you need to duplicate the whole thing in another datacenter for geographical redundancy.
Useful for some workloads, sure. But if it is an internal service, rather than something like a website (gasp, not all servers are public facing websites) then if my office gets taken out by a meteorite, none of the corpses in the building actually care about whether or not some instance of the service exists in some other safer geographic region.
The flip side is that at a small scale, you get a certain amount 'for free.' If you need to have some infrastructure locally, then you already have some sort of a room with space to put a new server in, you already have sufficient electricity. You already have a guy to replace a blown hard drive. The extra time he spends replacing it is technically nonzero, but it's a fairly rare event, so a single extra server tends to be "in the noise." The big cost is as soon as you exhaust your existing capacity. I.E. The guy is already replacing drives full time, so adding one more server will mean needing to add another full time guy. Or, all the racks are full and you will need to add additional space. You can see a point where the TCO of the last server was genuinely much less than outsourced infrastructure, but the TCO of the next server will effectively be $500000 if you only add one more machine.
Emulating a piece of hardware with another piece of hardware in software is always slow. I remember when you needed a fairly beefy PC to play emulated NES games effectively. If you think that emulating a current console on a PC will never be practical, given that they are essentially just PC's themselves now, then you attention span is too short to have bothered reading this far into my comment, so I'm not entirely sure why I bothered.
Except now the car can just take itself to a maintenance appointment while you are at work or overnight, so you never need to actively actually do anything. In any case, I think the cars will make the best estimate of the world that they can, based on a combination of sensors. It seems to be the case that you can drive a car optically (humans do it) so if the radar sensors go out, it's probably still perfectly safe to let it drive on lidar and cameras for a little while. It doesn't get scary until cheap econobox cars go autonomous without any real redundancies. But, they'll still be safer than human drivers.
The thing is that every "video news" website gets it wrong. Nobody cares about the talking heads giving bookends for the content, and nobody wants auto play. So, whenever you go to such a web page, it instantly starts playing some random person giving a banal intro. OTOH, an article saying "X happened" with a video that you can choose to play to see X happening would actually be valuable. If person X gave a speech to the UN or something, then having video of the speech is reasonable. But, yeah, I'll play it if I want it.
Why is that "reasonable"? Shouldn't they be focusing their resources of groups/nations that present some threat to us?
Why wouldn't military allies pose a threat? Seriously, this is an incredibly naive view of the utility of intelligence. You think that a relatively small number of terrorists trying ineffectually to lob a few bombs is really the only major concern? Or even "partner/competitor" nations like China that have a single second hand aircraft carrier? No state military power is realistically going to start a full on war with the United States by attacking the U.S. mainland, and no non-state actor has the resources to realistically do all *that* much physical damage.
But, military allies who oppose US preferences in trade deals can potentially cost the US economy billions of dollars. Massive unemployment and economic collapse is absolutely considered an existential threat to any state. And, yes, much of the day to day accomplishments of an intelligence agency revolve around knowing in advance what tariff rate an ambassador to a trade conference in going to support on potatoes from various parts of the world. Knowing who you can move a few percent, and who is a hardliner, is enough to change a deal. A few small changes in a trade deal can effect msaaive numbers of people, and the US is very aggressive about maintaining power through things like trade deals which seem incredibly boring, and often go unreported in the news here. In business, everybody is both a friend and an enemy. A potential supplier of customer, but also a potential competitor. The concept of "Ally" becomes very grey as soon as you take a broader view of international relations that "If we shoot at somebody, are we supposed to shoot at them?"
Ask again in 200 years. Then we'll know if understanding asteroids proved useful. It takes a long time for basic research and pushing the boundaries of human understanding to pay off, but some of it eventually does. You know, like the electron, or semiconducting, or liquid crystals, or imaginary numbers. All of that stuff was ivory tower academic fluff at one point. The whole value of "out there" research is that it is in areas that we don't fully understand yet, and therefore have no idea how useful they might eventually become.
You are assuming a more rational person than most of them probably are. Try "I'm obviously a better driver than any computer or most other people, but if they reduce my premiums, I'm willing to take on the extra risk in exchange for the extra money in my pocket and convenience."
Well, it probably does real time encodes of 24 FPS content, but perhaps would struggle a bit more with 60 FPS+ Desktop content. Likewise, if the content is photographic, the compression artifacts tend to be less noticeable. Have some simple shapes and bright colors with crisp edges like a GUI in the mix, and you tend to need much higher quality than with photographic content. Even doing the encode in real time at adequate quality, you are probably encoding to a long GOP codec which has quite a lot of inherent latency. If the GOP size adds 1 second of latency, it doesn't matter how much CPU and bandwidth you throw at the problem, it would still be very bad for real time interactive uses.
* (Used to be an Engineer responsible for dealing with remote sites and technology for real time remote color grading sessions transmitted over the internet and over private WAN links using H.264 and JP2K based codecs mostly for TV commercials.)
Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming
on
The Silk Road Is Back
·
· Score: 1
Very few currencies are, except to other currencies. I mean, I suppose you could say the value of the US Dollar is attached in some vague way to the military power of the US, and thus their ability to force people to accept the currency, but that's hardly a useful conversion for daily use.
And even if the driving robots don't work better than the sugary robots, just look for a robotic two-for-one deal and you are almost guaranteed to make it to your destination in one piece.
Question 1- a title is supposed to inform you on what the story is about. That makes option (a) a bad choice. The sun is in the story, but is not a central actor. Option (d) is also a bad choice, it would make a relatively unimportant part the theme.
I'm sorry, but that's fucking ridiculous The suggestion that a title is "supposed" to inform you in any particular way is absurd. Some titles are chosen because they fit in with a particular pattern of other works in the series. (Final Fantasy : Advent Children. Tell me anything about the story based on that title!) Some titles are picked purely for marketing reasons. (The Day The Earth Stopped. Named to ride the coat tails of The Day The Earth Stood Still.) Some titles are picked purely because they sound cool, or because of a pun of a character's name that is funny. Some titles are awkward translations (Try deciphering some Anime titles and tell me how informative they are.)
What the title of a story should be is absolutely subjective. "Which of these possible titles best explains what the story is about?" might be a reasonable question. But, absent a specified metric, there is absolutely no way to qualify a sample's success with regard to that metric.
Well then why not subdivide all time zones in 1/4 so people at the end of a current timezone can get an extra 45 minutes? Why is 1 hr granularity "correct" but two hour granularity "incorrect" despite all the simplification in offers? The hour listed on the clock is arbitrary. Don't want to get up in dark? Fine, schedule your work day however you want. I've worked real jobs where I went into the office at 1:00 pm or 10:00 pm.
Why would it matter in any sense if sunset happens at 3:11? Would it make you happier if we called it something else? You understand that the correlation between when we do things and what number is on a clock is completely arbitrary, right? We could go from 3:10 to HERBERT O'Clock and then to 3:12 every day and skip over the whole issue of sunset at 3:11. It would happen at HERBERT instead.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is why I've always been confused by the fact that they use fictituous IP's, rather than a production company website with trailers for upcoming projects...
Why is touch on the desktop always assumed to be something that would have to replace using other inputs? I mean, if touch added $5 to my monitor, and I used it once every few weeks, I'd consider that a win. And, if it were widely deployed, economies of scale would mean that it really would be very cheap to add. (Like audio on the motherboard.) Having things like pinch to zoom could be handy on the desktop.
Way easier to toss a condom than to clean a sex bot. Just sayin'.
Despite my best efforts, with Chrome on Ubuntu, Some YouTube videos will play out of one sound card, and some videos will play out of another. I think it's Flash vs. HTML5 being used for different videos. Seriously, it's the most bewildering user experience to have to randomly switch between my USB headphones and my analog headphones. Getting bluetooth audio working reliably is just a lost cause. Skype used to work. I apparently broke it in the course of trying to fix other things. 10 years professional experience as a UNIX admin, and I can't figure out how to make Youtube work without wearing two different headphones. It's sort of fucked.
Slashdot's terrible at interviews. Hopefully somebody much more qualified would interview them, and then amonth later slashdot would post a link to it several times.
Well, if he has identified it as taking up a large amount of the available bandwidth, then it certainly makes sense to consider it a target for reductions. Perhaps more importantly, users tend not to care about updates like that. A user actively downloading a file from some source is probably more important than some automated process the user doesn't care about, and can be deferred until the user gets home without them noticing anything.
That said, I've been saying for a while that there needs to be some sort of bandwidth discovery protocol. My original thought process was driven by apps on mobile phones, but this seems like it would benefit for the same reasons. Wireless oeprators are always concerned about using scarce bandwidth resources so we get plans with low data caps and such. Imagine if there was a completely standardised way for an application (say an email app on a phone) to "ping" bandwidthdiscovery://mail.foo.com with some sort of priority metric. If nothing responded back, it would act normally, so the system would be completely backwards compatible. If something did respond back along the route (for example, the wireless ISP you are connected to, but it could theoretically be something local or distant. The school's DDWRT router in the OP example.) it could reject the session, or encourage a delay. That way an email app set to check every 5 minutes could occasionally get a polite rejection from the ISP asking the app to hold off since circuits are overloaded. The phone would then wait a few minutes before trying again. Eventually the phone would download new email, but at high traffic times, it might wind up going 15 minutes instead of 5, saving the network some trouble. Software updates might defer a download for days or weeks if there is a continual rejection.
My Android phone lets me set software updates and podcast downloads to only happen over wifi, under the assumption that cellular data is expensive, but wifi data is unlimited. But, if I connect to a Mifi access point connected to a cellular connection, my phone currently has no way to discover that it is actually using (limited) cellular data. With a bandwidth discovery protocol, it would get the same rejections from the ISP that it would get if it had directly connected to the cellular data itself. And, local admins could easily set up rejection rules like the OP would be interested in, while still allowing the possibility of user overrides in cases where the school IT guy really wants to manually update the school's computer systems and whatnot. Think of it as a sort of queryable QoS.
And because any intermediate system on the route can let apps know to reduce bandwidth usage, a server being slashdotted can have some queries be rejected, rather than everything being on the link local side near the user. Obviously, none of this helps the admin in the immeadiate term. But, it would seem like that's how it ought to work.
Implicit semicolons. '5' + 3 gives '53' whereas '5' - 3 gives 2. I tried to include the famous Javascript truth table. Look it up. Including it in the post just triggered the junk filter, but it's hilarious. Javascript manages to be chock full of wtf even without the DOM at all. I always wished that Python would show up in the browser at some point. Once apon a time, the idea of genuinely novel scripting languages for web pages actually seemed plausible. (Remember vbscript web pages?) I guess there is so much legacy JS now that it's just the way things work and we'll never be completely rid of it.
Useful for some workloads, sure. But if it is an internal service, rather than something like a website (gasp, not all servers are public facing websites) then if my office gets taken out by a meteorite, none of the corpses in the building actually care about whether or not some instance of the service exists in some other safer geographic region.
The flip side is that at a small scale, you get a certain amount 'for free.' If you need to have some infrastructure locally, then you already have some sort of a room with space to put a new server in, you already have sufficient electricity. You already have a guy to replace a blown hard drive. The extra time he spends replacing it is technically nonzero, but it's a fairly rare event, so a single extra server tends to be "in the noise." The big cost is as soon as you exhaust your existing capacity. I.E. The guy is already replacing drives full time, so adding one more server will mean needing to add another full time guy. Or, all the racks are full and you will need to add additional space. You can see a point where the TCO of the last server was genuinely much less than outsourced infrastructure, but the TCO of the next server will effectively be $500000 if you only add one more machine.
It's hardly sudden. Developers have spoken about an algorithm being compute/bandwidth/io/memory bound for at least decades.
Emulating a piece of hardware with another piece of hardware in software is always slow. I remember when you needed a fairly beefy PC to play emulated NES games effectively. If you think that emulating a current console on a PC will never be practical, given that they are essentially just PC's themselves now, then you attention span is too short to have bothered reading this far into my comment, so I'm not entirely sure why I bothered.
A Mexican desert shark that robs trucks? That seems like a syfy movie of the week even before it gets ahold of the radioactive cobalt!
Except now the car can just take itself to a maintenance appointment while you are at work or overnight, so you never need to actively actually do anything. In any case, I think the cars will make the best estimate of the world that they can, based on a combination of sensors. It seems to be the case that you can drive a car optically (humans do it) so if the radar sensors go out, it's probably still perfectly safe to let it drive on lidar and cameras for a little while. It doesn't get scary until cheap econobox cars go autonomous without any real redundancies. But, they'll still be safer than human drivers.
The thing is that every "video news" website gets it wrong. Nobody cares about the talking heads giving bookends for the content, and nobody wants auto play. So, whenever you go to such a web page, it instantly starts playing some random person giving a banal intro. OTOH, an article saying "X happened" with a video that you can choose to play to see X happening would actually be valuable. If person X gave a speech to the UN or something, then having video of the speech is reasonable. But, yeah, I'll play it if I want it.
Why wouldn't military allies pose a threat? Seriously, this is an incredibly naive view of the utility of intelligence. You think that a relatively small number of terrorists trying ineffectually to lob a few bombs is really the only major concern? Or even "partner/competitor" nations like China that have a single second hand aircraft carrier? No state military power is realistically going to start a full on war with the United States by attacking the U.S. mainland, and no non-state actor has the resources to realistically do all *that* much physical damage.
But, military allies who oppose US preferences in trade deals can potentially cost the US economy billions of dollars. Massive unemployment and economic collapse is absolutely considered an existential threat to any state. And, yes, much of the day to day accomplishments of an intelligence agency revolve around knowing in advance what tariff rate an ambassador to a trade conference in going to support on potatoes from various parts of the world. Knowing who you can move a few percent, and who is a hardliner, is enough to change a deal. A few small changes in a trade deal can effect msaaive numbers of people, and the US is very aggressive about maintaining power through things like trade deals which seem incredibly boring, and often go unreported in the news here. In business, everybody is both a friend and an enemy. A potential supplier of customer, but also a potential competitor. The concept of "Ally" becomes very grey as soon as you take a broader view of international relations that "If we shoot at somebody, are we supposed to shoot at them?"
Ask again in 200 years. Then we'll know if understanding asteroids proved useful. It takes a long time for basic research and pushing the boundaries of human understanding to pay off, but some of it eventually does. You know, like the electron, or semiconducting, or liquid crystals, or imaginary numbers. All of that stuff was ivory tower academic fluff at one point. The whole value of "out there" research is that it is in areas that we don't fully understand yet, and therefore have no idea how useful they might eventually become.
You are assuming a more rational person than most of them probably are. Try "I'm obviously a better driver than any computer or most other people, but if they reduce my premiums, I'm willing to take on the extra risk in exchange for the extra money in my pocket and convenience."
Don't forget, you can buffer a YouTube video. Can't really get a 30 second buffer of an RDP session. The requirements are very different.
Well, it probably does real time encodes of 24 FPS content, but perhaps would struggle a bit more with 60 FPS+ Desktop content. Likewise, if the content is photographic, the compression artifacts tend to be less noticeable. Have some simple shapes and bright colors with crisp edges like a GUI in the mix, and you tend to need much higher quality than with photographic content. Even doing the encode in real time at adequate quality, you are probably encoding to a long GOP codec which has quite a lot of inherent latency. If the GOP size adds 1 second of latency, it doesn't matter how much CPU and bandwidth you throw at the problem, it would still be very bad for real time interactive uses.
* (Used to be an Engineer responsible for dealing with remote sites and technology for real time remote color grading sessions transmitted over the internet and over private WAN links using H.264 and JP2K based codecs mostly for TV commercials.)
Very few currencies are, except to other currencies. I mean, I suppose you could say the value of the US Dollar is attached in some vague way to the military power of the US, and thus their ability to force people to accept the currency, but that's hardly a useful conversion for daily use.
To the contrary, you can never be referred to as a professional. Having to work a job is for the little non Lord people.
And even if the driving robots don't work better than the sugary robots, just look for a robotic two-for-one deal and you are almost guaranteed to make it to your destination in one piece.
I'm sorry, but that's fucking ridiculous The suggestion that a title is "supposed" to inform you in any particular way is absurd. Some titles are chosen because they fit in with a particular pattern of other works in the series. (Final Fantasy : Advent Children. Tell me anything about the story based on that title!) Some titles are picked purely for marketing reasons. (The Day The Earth Stopped. Named to ride the coat tails of The Day The Earth Stood Still.) Some titles are picked purely because they sound cool, or because of a pun of a character's name that is funny. Some titles are awkward translations (Try deciphering some Anime titles and tell me how informative they are.)
What the title of a story should be is absolutely subjective. "Which of these possible titles best explains what the story is about?" might be a reasonable question. But, absent a specified metric, there is absolutely no way to qualify a sample's success with regard to that metric.
Well then why not subdivide all time zones in 1/4 so people at the end of a current timezone can get an extra 45 minutes? Why is 1 hr granularity "correct" but two hour granularity "incorrect" despite all the simplification in offers? The hour listed on the clock is arbitrary. Don't want to get up in dark? Fine, schedule your work day however you want. I've worked real jobs where I went into the office at 1:00 pm or 10:00 pm.
Why would it matter in any sense if sunset happens at 3:11? Would it make you happier if we called it something else? You understand that the correlation between when we do things and what number is on a clock is completely arbitrary, right? We could go from 3:10 to HERBERT O'Clock and then to 3:12 every day and skip over the whole issue of sunset at 3:11. It would happen at HERBERT instead.