I do that sort of thing with my Linux boxes all the time. I even do that sort of thing with Windows boxes already.
Except that the X11-style of thin clients only works if the traffic generated between server and client is less than the bandwidth the LAN makes available.
For example, your X terminal is unlikely to work very well for full-screen video playback.
A thunderbolt-based "thin terminal", OTOH, would at all times have performance indistinguishable from a local/traditional setup.
I'm looking to increase my backup times to an external USB3 drive.
I recommend buying a pair of USB<->RS-232 adapters and inserting them back-to-back between your PC and your external USB drive. That ought to do the trick.:^)
Yes, humans would certainly be a lot better at searching for and finding life in person than any remote robot.
I'm not sure even that is true. Yes, Earth-bound humans are better than software at reasoning things out -- but that can largely be done remotely, as we have seen with the Mars rovers.
Earth-bound Humans are currently better at many impomptu, lightweight manual tasks than Earth-bound robots -- but are they still better when encumbered in a 200-pound spacesuit, with gloves like oven mitts? I'd argue that a robot (either locally or remotely controlled) might be more agile than a human in that situation, if only because the robot doesn't need to be hermetically sealed into a life-support system that inhibits its movements.
Which leads to the biggest problem with humans-in-space: humans aren't expendable. If a robot breaks down in space, you can just let it hobble along as best it can, and/or abandon it and send out an identical replacement. If a human being gets sick or dies in space, that is a potential mission-ender, from both a technical and political perspective. Look how long it took NASA to recover from the Challenger disaster -- years of reviews and finger-pointing. With robot missions, OTOH, even a catastrophic failure just means money down the drain, not flag-draped empty coffins and tearful "My Fellow Americans" speeches on the TV. (yes, I know, death is noble and part of the Grand Adventure and all, but it wouldn't take too many iterations of "watch a beloved astronaut die a slow, horrible death on live TV, with bugger all that anyone can do about it" to convince the American public that their dime is better spent elsewhere)
Or in other words........ the only thing keeping Wile E Coyote (Super Genius) from getting to Bugs Bunny though the locked door is his complete lack of awareness that there is nothing around the door but the desert itself.
The greatest trick the Road Runner ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist. And like that... poof, he is gone.
So yeah, that did turn out better, thanks to Bush laying the groundwork and Obama being rather ineffective and waffling.
Hmm. So Obama taking in new information, acting on it appropriately, and thereby preventing further acts of domestic terror was "rather ineffective and waffling"?
For that price, just by comparison, you can buy two F16s, which will run ya about $15M each. (It's a cheap fighter but still.)
Don't forget that each of those two F16s require a trained fighter pilot to operate them (at a cost of ~$2.6 million per pilot). And of course if an F16 gets shot down and the pilot killed or captured, you now may have PR/political problems ranging from sorrowful relatives to ransom demands to beheading videos appearing on YouTube, whereas if a drone gets shot down, no worries, just order a replacement.
That was just 150 years ago. What will happen in 2000 years?
I think it is obvious... Abe Lincoln will be long forgotten, and bands of turtle-necked friars will roam the streets, persecuting all who do not genuflect to the One True Steve.
This project has generated better illustrative proof than ever before that randomness will eventually produce everything. This is often a difficult concept for non-mathematical people to accept, so a nice example is always welcome among those who seek to educate.
Here's a simpler example:
while(1) {
int x = rand() % 10;
if (x==666) printf("Yes, everything!\n"); }
Mirroring an SSD to another SSD which is likely to fail at almost the same time doesn't seem a great plan to me:).
Assuming SSDs are likely to fail after a certain number of writes (as opposed to after a certain number of hours of uptime), a Time-Machine style backup system would work fine (since the number of writes to the backup drive would be much less than the number of writes to the primary). RAID-0 probably would be a bad idea, for the reason you mentioned.
Of course, given that the GPS is mounted on a reflective jacket, it would mean that if a child removes the reflective jacket for whatever reason (e.g. because of feeling hot after running around), the GPS will be removed as well./quote.
True that. A more robust implementation would permanently embed the GPS tracker device into sole of the child's shoe, and recharge its battery by capturing energy from acceleration/deceleration.
The unspoken "cost," of course, is that our children are growing up in a climate of fear: They spend more time sitting indoors or being hovered over by helicopter parents... but they are "safe"... and putting on weight... and failing to develop healthy social, physical, and problem-solving skills.
Perhaps the benefit of GPS trackers would be that we could then relax the other, more stifling measures a bit. For example, if you know you can instantly locate your kids at any time, you might be less reluctant to let them play outside.
It's also clear that a brain with perfect memory is physically impossible
Why is that obvious? My DVR has a perfect memory of its sensory inputs, why couldn't a brain (in theory) do the same?
Granted it would probably need to be much larger (and/or more space-efficient), or have lower-resolution sensory inputs, or both, but I don't see any fundamental reason why it would be physically impossible.
The obvious reason why it hasn't occurred (or at least hasn't occurred yet) is that our existing memory system is "good enough" from a survival/reproduction perspective.
Indeed. Any cost concessions they extract will ultimately come out of some Chinese solar panel plant workers paycheck.
Whereas a less hard-bargaining customer would leave the Chinese company's management free to do what it really wanted to do.... give the extra cash to its line workers, rather than pocket the difference themselves.
The Parents who sold the child to the renter, only get paid once, whereas the pimp gets paid until the end of time. So you should not only feel bad for the poor developers.
The lesson I take from this is that the Parents should cut out the middle-man and pimp out their own kids directly.
lo! the REAL reality, the real gore is immediately banned from youtube and such. Oh, the hypocrisy.
Is it hypocrisy, or is it respect for the families of the victims, who might not want to have mangled pieces of their loved ones served up as entertainment for the masses just yet?
Most people that age have difficulty driving cars.
I guess it needs to be pointed out that the pilot was an individual, not "most people". Different people age at different rates. If the pilot's health and faculties were good, then they were good, regardless of what other 80 year olds are like.
That said, I hope that all pilots in events like these (and in fact, all pilots period) are required to undergo regular physical exams.
However when land started to become a scarce resource then we started to build vertically
This isn't quite right -- land is still plentiful in most countries. (take a flight across the country and look out the window to see all the empty space available!)
What's not plentiful is land that's conveniently close to the existing infrastructure goodies. There's are big business advantages to having an office in Manhattan, as opposed to Alaska, for example. I imagine it's the same on-chip.
I say, if it makes the code look ugly, it's wrong.
The problem with that standard is that for any line of code you think is ugly, there will be an equal and opposite programmer somewhere who thinks that same line of code is pretty.
So you'll never settle any arguments solely on aesthetic grounds. Particularly since for many programmers (myself included), "ugly" is mostly just shorthand for "not in the style that I'm used to seeing".
I believe the intended logic was "more internet bandwidth == more internet traffic == more spam".
It's a special case of the standard Slashdot curmudgeon technique, where you demonstrate how experienced and knowledgable you are by interpreting any piece of potentially good news as definite bad news. If you do it enough times, you win a patch of lawn to keep children off of.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like an Xterminal from 1988.
I do that sort of thing with my Linux boxes all the time. I even do that sort of thing with Windows boxes already.
Except that the X11-style of thin clients only works if the traffic generated between server and client is less than the bandwidth the LAN makes available.
For example, your X terminal is unlikely to work very well for full-screen video playback.
A thunderbolt-based "thin terminal", OTOH, would at all times have performance indistinguishable from a local/traditional setup.
I'm looking to increase my backup times to an external USB3 drive.
I recommend buying a pair of USB<->RS-232 adapters and inserting them back-to-back between your PC and your external USB drive. That ought to do the trick. :^)
Yes, humans would certainly be a lot better at searching for and finding life in person than any remote robot.
I'm not sure even that is true. Yes, Earth-bound humans are better than software at reasoning things out -- but that can largely be done remotely, as we have seen with the Mars rovers.
Earth-bound Humans are currently better at many impomptu, lightweight manual tasks than Earth-bound robots -- but are they still better when encumbered in a 200-pound spacesuit, with gloves like oven mitts? I'd argue that a robot (either locally or remotely controlled) might be more agile than a human in that situation, if only because the robot doesn't need to be hermetically sealed into a life-support system that inhibits its movements.
Which leads to the biggest problem with humans-in-space: humans aren't expendable. If a robot breaks down in space, you can just let it hobble along as best it can, and/or abandon it and send out an identical replacement. If a human being gets sick or dies in space, that is a potential mission-ender, from both a technical and political perspective. Look how long it took NASA to recover from the Challenger disaster -- years of reviews and finger-pointing. With robot missions, OTOH, even a catastrophic failure just means money down the drain, not flag-draped empty coffins and tearful "My Fellow Americans" speeches on the TV. (yes, I know, death is noble and part of the Grand Adventure and all, but it wouldn't take too many iterations of "watch a beloved astronaut die a slow, horrible death on live TV, with bugger all that anyone can do about it" to convince the American public that their dime is better spent elsewhere)
Or in other words........ the only thing keeping Wile E Coyote (Super Genius) from getting to Bugs Bunny though the locked door is his complete lack of awareness that there is nothing around the door but the desert itself.
The greatest trick the Road Runner ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist. And like that... poof, he is gone.
So yeah, that did turn out better, thanks to Bush laying the groundwork and Obama being rather ineffective and waffling.
Hmm. So Obama taking in new information, acting on it appropriately, and thereby preventing further acts of domestic terror was "rather ineffective and waffling"?
For that price, just by comparison, you can buy two F16s, which will run ya about $15M each. (It's a cheap fighter but still.)
Don't forget that each of those two F16s require a trained fighter pilot to operate them (at a cost of ~$2.6 million per pilot). And of course if an F16 gets shot down and the pilot killed or captured, you now may have PR/political problems ranging from sorrowful relatives to ransom demands to beheading videos appearing on YouTube, whereas if a drone gets shot down, no worries, just order a replacement.
Right... because a "drone control center" - and you KNOW they will centralize it - wouldn't be just as juicy a target as an airfield?
Err... why do I know that? What is stopping them from decentralizing it?
That was just 150 years ago. What will happen in 2000 years?
I think it is obvious... Abe Lincoln will be long forgotten, and bands of turtle-necked friars will roam the streets, persecuting all who do not genuflect to the One True Steve.
Couldn't be worse at it than the last couple ;)
Clearly you haven't been watching the Republican debates... ;^)
This project has generated better illustrative proof than ever before that randomness will eventually produce everything. This is often a difficult concept for non-mathematical people to accept, so a nice example is always welcome among those who seek to educate.
Here's a simpler example:
while(1)
{
int x = rand() % 10;
if (x==666) printf("Yes, everything!\n");
}
I believe in the tunnel. I just believe it's only a few neutrinos wide.
Or perhaps to put it another way: for a neutrino, everywhere is a tunnel.
Mirroring an SSD to another SSD which is likely to fail at almost the same time doesn't seem a great plan to me :).
Assuming SSDs are likely to fail after a certain number of writes (as opposed to after a certain number of hours of uptime), a Time-Machine style backup system would work fine (since the number of writes to the backup drive would be much less than the number of writes to the primary). RAID-0 probably would be a bad idea, for the reason you mentioned.
And who would "change tape" in your brain when it's full?
Who changes the tape in your DVR when it's full?
(answer: no one... it just deletes some old/unwanted contents to free up space as necessary)
Of course, given that the GPS is mounted on a reflective jacket, it would mean that if a child removes the reflective jacket for whatever reason (e.g. because of feeling hot after running around), the GPS will be removed as well./quote.
True that. A more robust implementation would permanently embed the GPS tracker device into sole of the child's shoe, and recharge its battery by capturing energy from acceleration/deceleration.
The unspoken "cost," of course, is that our children are growing up in a climate of fear: They spend more time sitting indoors or being hovered over by helicopter parents ... but they are "safe" ... and putting on weight ... and failing to develop healthy social, physical, and problem-solving skills.
Perhaps the benefit of GPS trackers would be that we could then relax the other, more stifling measures a bit. For example, if you know you can instantly locate your kids at any time, you might be less reluctant to let them play outside.
It's also clear that a brain with perfect memory is physically impossible
Why is that obvious? My DVR has a perfect memory of its sensory inputs, why couldn't a brain (in theory) do the same?
Granted it would probably need to be much larger (and/or more space-efficient), or have lower-resolution sensory inputs, or both, but I don't see any fundamental reason why it would be physically impossible.
The obvious reason why it hasn't occurred (or at least hasn't occurred yet) is that our existing memory system is "good enough" from a survival/reproduction perspective.
Indeed. Any cost concessions they extract will ultimately come out of some Chinese solar panel plant workers paycheck.
Whereas a less hard-bargaining customer would leave the Chinese company's management free to do what it really wanted to do.... give the extra cash to its line workers, rather than pocket the difference themselves.
Right.
The Parents who sold the child to the renter, only get paid once, whereas the pimp gets paid until the end of time. So you should not only feel bad for the poor developers.
The lesson I take from this is that the Parents should cut out the middle-man and pimp out their own kids directly.
I'm sure EA would do it.
lo! the REAL reality, the real gore is immediately banned from youtube and such. Oh, the hypocrisy.
Is it hypocrisy, or is it respect for the families of the victims, who might not want to have mangled pieces of their loved ones served up as entertainment for the masses just yet?
Most people that age have difficulty driving cars.
I guess it needs to be pointed out that the pilot was an individual, not "most people". Different people age at different rates. If the pilot's health and faculties were good, then they were good, regardless of what other 80 year olds are like.
That said, I hope that all pilots in events like these (and in fact, all pilots period) are required to undergo regular physical exams.
However when land started to become a scarce resource then we started to build vertically
This isn't quite right -- land is still plentiful in most countries. (take a flight across the country and look out the window to see all the empty space available!)
What's not plentiful is land that's conveniently close to the existing infrastructure goodies. There's are big business advantages to having an office in Manhattan, as opposed to Alaska, for example. I imagine it's the same on-chip.
I say, if it makes the code look ugly, it's wrong.
The problem with that standard is that for any line of code you think is ugly, there will be an equal and opposite programmer somewhere who thinks that same line of code is pretty.
So you'll never settle any arguments solely on aesthetic grounds. Particularly since for many programmers (myself included), "ugly" is mostly just shorthand for "not in the style that I'm used to seeing".
Storm, meet Teacup.
Worst X-Men episode ever.
Problem?
No, Solution! ;)
And how does it enable more spam and trolling?
I believe the intended logic was "more internet bandwidth == more internet traffic == more spam".
It's a special case of the standard Slashdot curmudgeon technique, where you demonstrate how experienced and knowledgable you are by interpreting any piece of potentially good news as definite bad news. If you do it enough times, you win a patch of lawn to keep children off of.