I go to the meetings in my area, but only when I actually have the time and transportation. Being a senior in college with effectively two majors, and not owning a car, makes this difficult.
I've been to a few, though, and I'll agree that there was a definate lack of females there.
You do realize that the failover in question is not a part of the chip itself, but is a software solution, correct? It's Mission Critical Linux's Convolo Cluster, I believe.
I think that they did it to show off cool stuff running on their chip, not necessarily because they didn't trust the reliability of their chips.
And, BTW, if you weren't speaking seriously, please disregard this entire post.
Napster is not reselling the songs; these people *are* trying to sell someone else's work. I suspect that that is the main difference that causes people to get upset about this, but not about Napster.
"You see, the "Serial Heartbeat" line in the middle of the first image is the kicker".
Note 1: The intent is to allow for more than 2 members in the future.
Note 2: That hb cable you're talking about? Not required. The heartbeat can run over the network you use to talk to the machines (put them both into the same switch, which goes to the network, and you're set).
Note 3: a lack of heartbeat will reduce the ability to deal with I/O issues killing the cluster, but will *not* prevent the cluster from functioning.
"if I have a program that has a few MB of source code I would not want to have to make any changes to that code"
What makes you think that you need to change the code of the program itself? The cluster allows you to run programs *on* it; it's the cluster that does the work, so no changes to your source are required. At least, this is true of the HA clusters that I know something about. (check out MCLX's Kimberlite on http://oss.mclx.com)
Besides which - the majority of applications which would benefit from clustering are not small. The types of things that you want to cluster are those things for which you either need high availability or load balancing.
To me, these imply things like databases (not small!), web servers, and NFS servers (size depends on what you're exporting), to name a few.
The point of clustering is more for business use than for personal use, because how many people are going to require that their programs run constantly? Businesses are more likely to use large, often load-heavy applications.
Oh, BTW. Someone just let me know what PVM is - that's parallel computing, not High Availability or Load Balancing clustering. If you're interested in PVM on Linux, check out the Beowolf clusters at http://www.beowulf.org.
I see one glaring problem with the article: Having a computer in the classroom is not equivalant to having access to the internet. You do not *have* to be able to get online if you have a computer.
The main points against computers in the classroom seemed to be the belief that a computer will stifle thinking, and that there is too much information online.
So don't let your students get online until later grades if that is what the problem is. However, there is still value in allowing them to type their papers, and in allowing them to learn how to use the machines.
Additionally - there needs to be some basic security on the machines, so you don't have the more computer literate students putting games on them.:)
Sorry about submitting twice - appears that using Lynx to post comments can be dangerous - not hitting the down arrow enough times is a killer!:) -------------
This is going to be a brief post, since I'm at work... Geek girls *do* exist; I happen to be one. I use Linux on my home computer, so I get to fill that group, too. I do feel the need to mention that I didn't really get all that into computers until college, but that math and science have always been my better subjects. I think that at least part of the 'computers? Eww!' comments that women give are due to the fact that that is what they think they are *supposed* to be saying. The most common responce to smart people in general, but smart women in particular, at least in most pre-college forms of schooling, is to be ostrasized (sp?). I've noticed that this seems to affect the guys less, possibly because guys are less expected to be social creatures than women. *Not*, BTW, that I believe that guys don't need social contact; more that society in general tends to think that guys should be able to deal with being solitary. While I'm not about to say that this is a good thing, it would give guys a higher probability of being able to ignore peer pressure and just do the things that they are interested in. So, women are more likely to do the things that they think will make them accepted - if this means affecting stupidity and/or uninterest in computers, math, and science, they do. And often, this affected uninterest turns into true uninterest - mainly because by the time that they realize that they really *are* interested, they are so far behind those people who followed their interest in their pre-college years, that it's not (usually) worth it for them to start so late. Me? I grew up in a fairly geeky household (dad is an Electrical Engineer), and was always encouraged to be curious and learn things - this is often not the case for many women. Additionally, such an environment may not be able to overcome the socialtal/peer pressures. OK, I'm basing this mostly on experience, not on research, so keep that in mind.:) ---------------
This is going to be a brief post, since I'm at work... Geek girls *do* exist; I happen to be one. I use Linux on my home computer, so I get to fill that group, too. I do feel the need to mention that I didn't really get all that into computers until college, but that math and science have always been my better subjects. I think that at least part of the 'computers? Eww!' comments that women give are due to the fact that that is what they think they are *supposed* to be saying. The most common responce to smart people in general, but smart women in particular, at least in most pre-college forms of schooling, is to be ostrasized (sp?). I've noticed that this seems to affect the guys less, possibly because guys are less expected to be social creatures than women. *Not*, BTW, that I believe that guys don't need social contact; more that society in general tends to think that guys should be able to deal with being solitary. While I'm not about to say that this is a good thing, it would give guys a higher probability of being able to ignore peer pressure and just do the things that they are interested in. So, women are more likely to do the things that they think will make them accepted - if this means affecting stupidity and/or uninterest in computers, math, and science, they do. And often, this affected uninterest turns into true uninterest - mainly because by the time that they realize that they really *are* interested, they are so far behind those people who followed their interest in their pre-college years, that it's not (usually) worth it for them to start so late. Me? I grew up in a fairly geeky household (dad is an Electrical Engineer), and was always encouraged to be curious and learn things - this is often not the case for many women. Additionally, such an environment may not be able to overcome the socialtal/peer pressures. OK, I'm basing this mostly on experience, not on research, so keep that in mind.:)
Slashdot Mirror
I go to the meetings in my area, but only when I actually have the time and transportation. Being a senior in college with effectively two majors, and not owning a car, makes this difficult.
I've been to a few, though, and I'll agree that there was a definate lack of females there.
I think that they did it to show off cool stuff running on their chip, not necessarily because they didn't trust the reliability of their chips.
And, BTW, if you weren't speaking seriously, please disregard this entire post.
---------
Napster is not reselling the songs; these people *are* trying to sell someone else's work. I suspect that that is the main difference that causes people to get upset about this, but not about Napster.
Note 1: The intent is to allow for more than 2 members in the future.
Note 2: That hb cable you're talking about? Not required. The heartbeat can run over the network you use to talk to the machines (put them both into the same switch, which goes to the network, and you're set).
Note 3: a lack of heartbeat will reduce the ability to deal with I/O issues killing the cluster, but will *not* prevent the cluster from functioning.
---
What makes you think that you need to change the code of the program itself? The cluster allows you to run programs *on* it; it's the cluster that does the work, so no changes to your source are required. At least, this is true of the HA clusters that I know something about. (check out MCLX's Kimberlite on http://oss.mclx.com)
Besides which - the majority of applications which would benefit from clustering are not small. The types of things that you want to cluster are those things for which you either need high availability or load balancing.
To me, these imply things like databases (not small!), web servers, and NFS servers (size depends on what you're exporting), to name a few.
The point of clustering is more for business use than for personal use, because how many people are going to require that their programs run constantly? Businesses are more likely to use large, often load-heavy applications.
Oh, BTW. Someone just let me know what PVM is - that's parallel computing, not High Availability or Load Balancing clustering. If you're interested in PVM on Linux, check out the Beowolf clusters at http://www.beowulf.org.
I see one glaring problem with the article: Having a computer in the classroom is not equivalant to having access to the internet. You do not *have* to be able to get online if you have a computer.
:)
The main points against computers in the classroom seemed to be the belief that a computer will stifle thinking, and that there is too much information online.
So don't let your students get online until later grades if that is what the problem is. However, there is still value in allowing them to type their papers, and in allowing them to learn how to use the machines.
Additionally - there needs to be some basic security on the machines, so you don't have the more computer literate students putting games on them.
Sorry about submitting twice - appears that using Lynx to post comments can be dangerous - not hitting the down arrow enough times is a killer! :)
-------------
This is going to be a brief post, since I'm at work... :)
Geek girls *do* exist; I happen to be one. I use Linux on my home computer, so I get to fill that group, too.
I do feel the need to mention that I didn't really get all that into computers until college, but that math and science have always been my better subjects.
I think that at least part of the 'computers? Eww!' comments that women give are due to the fact that that is what they think they are *supposed* to be saying. The most common responce to smart people in general, but smart women in particular, at least in most pre-college forms of schooling, is to be ostrasized (sp?). I've noticed that this seems to affect the guys less, possibly because guys are less expected to be social creatures than women.
*Not*, BTW, that I believe that guys don't need social contact; more that society in general tends to think that guys should be able to deal with being solitary. While I'm not about to say that this is a good thing, it would give guys a higher probability of being able to ignore peer pressure and just do the things that they are interested in.
So, women are more likely to do the things that they think will make them accepted - if this means affecting stupidity and/or uninterest in computers, math, and science, they do. And often, this affected uninterest turns into true uninterest - mainly because by the time that they realize that they really *are* interested, they are so far behind those people who followed their interest in their pre-college years, that it's not (usually) worth it for them to start so late.
Me? I grew up in a fairly geeky household (dad is an Electrical Engineer), and was always encouraged to be curious and learn things - this is often not the case for many women. Additionally, such an environment may not be able to overcome the socialtal/peer pressures.
OK, I'm basing this mostly on experience, not on research, so keep that in mind.
---------------
This is going to be a brief post, since I'm at work... :)
Geek girls *do* exist; I happen to be one. I use Linux on my home computer, so I get to fill that group, too.
I do feel the need to mention that I didn't really get all that into computers until college, but that math and science have always been my better subjects.
I think that at least part of the 'computers? Eww!' comments that women give are due to the fact that that is what they think they are *supposed* to be saying. The most common responce to smart people in general, but smart women in particular, at least in most pre-college forms of schooling, is to be ostrasized (sp?). I've noticed that this seems to affect the guys less, possibly because guys are less expected to be social creatures than women.
*Not*, BTW, that I believe that guys don't need social contact; more that society in general tends to think that guys should be able to deal with being solitary. While I'm not about to say that this is a good thing, it would give guys a higher probability of being able to ignore peer pressure and just do the things that they are interested in.
So, women are more likely to do the things that they think will make them accepted - if this means affecting stupidity and/or uninterest in computers, math, and science, they do. And often, this affected uninterest turns into true uninterest - mainly because by the time that they realize that they really *are* interested, they are so far behind those people who followed their interest in their pre-college years, that it's not (usually) worth it for them to start so late.
Me? I grew up in a fairly geeky household (dad is an Electrical Engineer), and was always encouraged to be curious and learn things - this is often not the case for many women. Additionally, such an environment may not be able to overcome the socialtal/peer pressures.
OK, I'm basing this mostly on experience, not on research, so keep that in mind.