I don't think we need to be able to better treat diseases to counteract aging. Aging happens to us from the day we're born for 90-100 years max. Slowing down that process so that it takes 300 years to do the same thing, seems achievable without messing with heart disease or cancer. It's no guarantee anyone will live that long, and in fact, the further out we extend it the more likely accidents, or heart disease, or cancer will pay a role, and less likely anyone will be able to achieve max lifespan - but at least it's a possibility.
And people wonder why Apple is raking in money hand over fist.
Yeah, it's because of their simple computer line-up that was on the brink of bankruptcy just a few years ago - nothing to do with practically inventing 3 product categories: mp3 players, smartphones, smarttablets - and riding that wave back to the shore of their computer lineup.
Flamebait?? That's a funny well placed reference. What kind of draconian moderating is that? Someone with mods fix it.
(I'm not the poster, just a good samaritan)
I'm not pro-war, but I sure as hell will be happy that war allowed us to developed the nuclear bomb when aliens invade. So I say release it - knowledge is impossible to contain - we are better off adapting to it early.
Thank god these forces weren't around when Curt Cobain was weighing the cost/benefit of pursuing his MBA or being a heroine-addicted iconic rock star...
I'm an openly rabid pirater and I still go to the movies for the social experience, the quality and mainly the popcorn:) Studios are realizing this, and innovating accordingly with more movies in 3D, more movies in imax, and theaters that actually serve dinner during the movie (great experience by the way). Movies routinely make hundreds of millions of dollars more than their cost in boxoffice dollars alone. The incentive to make big budget movies will be there for a long time to come.
Usually, the cost of more computer resource is vastly lower than the cost of a programmer doing optimisation. Jeff Atwood has written frequently on the subject.
That's not necessarily true in the cloud. Consider a site that processes 100 requests per second, and on every request the site needs the same 100 row recordset. If you had a traditional, fixed-cost, non-cloud environment, and the site was performing nicely, it wouldn't matter whether that recordset was being pulled from the db on every request or from cache or wherever.
In a cloud environment like Amazon's, however, you are charged for all transfer and requests in and out of the db. So even if your site is fast, there may be a very compelling monetary argument to optimize that process by having it come from ram rather than hit the database.
At 100 requests/second and if the data were only updated monthly, you could be paying many orders of magnitude more money by not spending that tiny bit of developer time.
--
The cloud is nothing more than a datacenter, only as much as twitter is nothing more than updating your finger file
I would also like to add apps:/apps/home/linux
That way you can nuke/linux whenever you want and keep your apps. Also, often you have to mess around with config for apps, maybe copy in a plugin etc. No need for it to be mixed up with core linux.
To take it a step further, it would be nice to completely get rid of/opt,/var, and other non-human oriented fragmentation that was only there to be able to partition them separately and enforce different computer-related rules.
This is not your grandpa's thin client. Imagine you had your desktop exactly as it was, with the slight modification that it would back itself up silently to a server of your choosing. Then if you bought a new computer, or used someone else's computer, you could login into your account, have it rebuild/resume your saved state, allowing you to continue running your apps locally. Wouldn't that just be better in every way?
That's where Google's going, and why they are pursuing something as costly are gargantuan as building an OS. Otherwise, they would just continue to build for the browser.
if Google has deep pockets, Microsoft's are even deeper.
Practically speaking, I don't think MSFT's pockets are deeper. Sure they make/have more money, but are they going to shutdown XBOX, Zune, Office, SQL Server, CRM and Exchange just to compete with Google? Mano e mano I'd say they have about the same amount of cash to burn.
The "escort service" fliers are all over the place.
Finding out whether an escort service is an "escort service" or not, is a costly and time consuming business. They get busted all the time, but the cops can't do 'em all. And by the time they finish busting one, two more pop up ready to take its place. Sound familiar?
The law, like life, is very nuanced. If you have one bad phone number in a big phonebook, its ok. But if your entire phonebook is full of drug dealers and prostitutes, AND you're making money advertising, the law provides mechanisms to differentiate the two.
(disclaimer: I am a drug dealer and prostitute.)
The way to think about it is to estimate the maximum amount the world is willing to pay NOT to LOSE their Linux. RedHat would pay at least half their worth (2.6B / 2 = 1.3B) to stop you from pressing the NukeAllKernels button. Cisco would pay at least a sixth of their market cap (109B / 6 = 18B). That's already almost 20B!
How much would you pay to not have your Linux nuked?
I am pro OSS but your argument doesn't make sense... how would having access to the source have changed your experience?
Do you read through all the source of apps you are thinking of installing then mentally re-create the experience and all possible permutations before actually running them?
If so, you have a pretty awesome brain that I would like to try running Crysis on (I know, I know, but I can't help it!)
Slashdot Mirror
I contribute to different charities.
I don't think we need to be able to better treat diseases to counteract aging. Aging happens to us from the day we're born for 90-100 years max. Slowing down that process so that it takes 300 years to do the same thing, seems achievable without messing with heart disease or cancer. It's no guarantee anyone will live that long, and in fact, the further out we extend it the more likely accidents, or heart disease, or cancer will pay a role, and less likely anyone will be able to achieve max lifespan - but at least it's a possibility.
And people wonder why Apple is raking in money hand over fist.
Yeah, it's because of their simple computer line-up that was on the brink of bankruptcy just a few years ago - nothing to do with practically inventing 3 product categories: mp3 players, smartphones, smarttablets - and riding that wave back to the shore of their computer lineup.
Flamebait?? That's a funny well placed reference. What kind of draconian moderating is that? Someone with mods fix it. (I'm not the poster, just a good samaritan)
Why is the pistol broken! It was a great utility weapon and a sad day when I found out how much they crippled it in the sequels...
I'm pretty sure you haven't actually - oh yeah I forgot, it's cool to randomly trash Microsoft.
apt-cache search cgi
I'm not pro-war, but I sure as hell will be happy that war allowed us to developed the nuclear bomb when aliens invade. So I say release it - knowledge is impossible to contain - we are better off adapting to it early.
Thank god these forces weren't around when Curt Cobain was weighing the cost/benefit of pursuing his MBA or being a heroine-addicted iconic rock star...
Listen to child
I'm an openly rabid pirater and I still go to the movies for the social experience, the quality and mainly the popcorn :) Studios are realizing this, and innovating accordingly with more movies in 3D, more movies in imax, and theaters that actually serve dinner during the movie (great experience by the way). Movies routinely make hundreds of millions of dollars more than their cost in boxoffice dollars alone. The incentive to make big budget movies will be there for a long time to come.
Countries with legal prostitution and drugs have lower use rates of both.
Interesting, citation pls.
using them singles you out as someone with something to hide.
You're 100% right - luckily it's anonymous...
Usually, the cost of more computer resource is vastly lower than the cost of a programmer doing optimisation. Jeff Atwood has written frequently on the subject.
That's not necessarily true in the cloud. Consider a site that processes 100 requests per second, and on every request the site needs the same 100 row recordset. If you had a traditional, fixed-cost, non-cloud environment, and the site was performing nicely, it wouldn't matter whether that recordset was being pulled from the db on every request or from cache or wherever.
In a cloud environment like Amazon's, however, you are charged for all transfer and requests in and out of the db. So even if your site is fast, there may be a very compelling monetary argument to optimize that process by having it come from ram rather than hit the database.
At 100 requests/second and if the data were only updated monthly, you could be paying many orders of magnitude more money by not spending that tiny bit of developer time.
--
The cloud is nothing more than a datacenter, only as much as twitter is nothing more than updating your finger file
What' the reference, couldn't find it?
I would also like to add apps: /apps /home /linux
That way you can nuke /linux whenever you want and keep your apps. Also, often you have to mess around with config for apps, maybe copy in a plugin etc. No need for it to be mixed up with core linux.
To take it a step further, it would be nice to completely get rid of /opt, /var, and other non-human oriented fragmentation that was only there to be able to partition them separately and enforce different computer-related rules.
This is not your grandpa's thin client. Imagine you had your desktop exactly as it was, with the slight modification that it would back itself up silently to a server of your choosing. Then if you bought a new computer, or used someone else's computer, you could login into your account, have it rebuild/resume your saved state, allowing you to continue running your apps locally. Wouldn't that just be better in every way? That's where Google's going, and why they are pursuing something as costly are gargantuan as building an OS. Otherwise, they would just continue to build for the browser.
if Google has deep pockets, Microsoft's are even deeper.
Practically speaking, I don't think MSFT's pockets are deeper. Sure they make/have more money, but are they going to shutdown XBOX, Zune, Office, SQL Server, CRM and Exchange just to compete with Google? Mano e mano I'd say they have about the same amount of cash to burn.
Amen! Nothing makes me madder than letting markets decide the value of of someone's work!
Yeah! How dare people get paid in multiple small transactions rather than in one equivalent sum!
Uhhh... so turn off the graphics? You can make it exactly like windows 2000 with the click of a button - what kind of programmer are you :p
The "escort service" fliers are all over the place.
Finding out whether an escort service is an "escort service" or not, is a costly and time consuming business. They get busted all the time, but the cops can't do 'em all. And by the time they finish busting one, two more pop up ready to take its place. Sound familiar?
The law, like life, is very nuanced. If you have one bad phone number in a big phonebook, its ok. But if your entire phonebook is full of drug dealers and prostitutes, AND you're making money advertising, the law provides mechanisms to differentiate the two. (disclaimer: I am a drug dealer and prostitute.)
The way to think about it is to estimate the maximum amount the world is willing to pay NOT to LOSE their Linux. RedHat would pay at least half their worth (2.6B / 2 = 1.3B) to stop you from pressing the NukeAllKernels button. Cisco would pay at least a sixth of their market cap (109B / 6 = 18B). That's already almost 20B! How much would you pay to not have your Linux nuked?
I am pro OSS but your argument doesn't make sense... how would having access to the source have changed your experience? Do you read through all the source of apps you are thinking of installing then mentally re-create the experience and all possible permutations before actually running them? If so, you have a pretty awesome brain that I would like to try running Crysis on (I know, I know, but I can't help it!)