But incorporating liquid cooling into high-density racks can address cooling challenges, and Hamilton argues that removing support personnel from the data centers will improve reliability, noting that "human administrative error causes 20% to 50% of system outages."
What, humans with remote access won't screw up? Maybe they don't trust MCSE's with screwdrivers...
This initiative doesn't address the real problems in large-scale installations, energy density and power conditioning.
"Network neutrality" in the case of the Internet is about customers' traffic getting the usual "common carrier" treatment. In the case of the Skype proposal, it's nothing less than an attempt to get something (access to cell towers and related equipment) for nothing (without having to pay for it). The writeup is both disturbing and misleading.
Just as some slaveholders were beginning to come out against slavery before the (U.S.) Civil War, mainly on economic grounds. There were not enough of them, however, and they were not in sufficient numbers to prevent said war.
There's a reason they're called "Cowards".
Those of us who've been around a while know that there are all kinds of languages out there, and plenty of them can be used to write good code.
The real problem with Perl is that Larry Wall is slowly losing his mind, adding features that nobody asked for; a good example is the new, backwards-incompatible regexps. (Don't go off that there'll be a compatibility mode; that's beside the point. The hubris needed to upend this core part of the language is pretty astonishing.) Also, he seems to be spending a lot of time with the Parrot rehosting, something else that is (perhaps) of dubious value. The changes are so orthogonal to what I do with Perl (hello, how about faster OO calls?) I have to wonder if there'll ever be a reason to switch to Perl 6. (Perhaps someone out there who knows more can comment.)
... utterly useless for anything of real size. XML::Simple is a huge memory sink, because, as mentioned elsewhere, it insists on generating full hash and array representations of the source XML text. This seems to be the side effect of taking too seriously a lot of Perl advice enthusiastically handed out in the older documentation. (Put file text into a huge array! Don't close your file descriptors!) The rest of us know better.
When Gates says that people are coming up with exploits for the Mac every single day, it's possible he really believes it. The truth, of course, is far different (and much less dangerous than with Windows exploits), as anyone who actually uses the platform can attest; but Gates here is talking to his core audience, which wants to be reassured that the security headaches they're constantly having aren't peculiar to the Windows platform. As with Bush talking to the GOP faithful, it's important to stay on-message.
Liberalism (as practiced in the United States) does no such thing. It generally calls for the creation of some very large government agency to Do Something, and much of its existence is predicated to finding a Something with which to terrorize the populace. The Great Depression worked well toward that end, but there have been others. (Bush II is really a liberal, but nobody wants to tell him yet.)
In this case, the stick is global warming (whether you believe it's anthropogenic or not, it is happening), and the Something would range from making automobiles illegal to ultimately banning industrial civilization, or making it practically impossible. The Europeans, whom Americans are supposed to emulate, are grinding their teeth over their noncompliance with Kyoto even now, and the Chinese... well, good luck telling them they'll just have to stay poor, thank you.
The lip service paid to economics is the real human cost of the Green miscalculation.
from the state legislature. If he really wanted to do something to save energy, they'd pass a bill mandating water-cooled air-conditioning units, especially in desert locales.
Actually buying their products was an out-and-out nightmare, as the rules changed every six months. You never got a consistent sales rep dedicated to your account, and they were always bringing in someone new who couldn't explain what was going on especially well. You had to keep buying new releases, because support for old versions died out, quicker and quicker over time.
As for Oracle support, it was the main thing we looked forward to at first (this was the mid-90's); but it, too, got worse over time. I would not trust Oracle to properly support MySQL, especially since they have no motivation to push it, and they are not the developers (and in fact are in competition with them).
Sure, he brought it up and didn't bother to explore it at all (all emphasis mine):
But life is all about repeating the same mistakes in many different contexts. So, are we reluctant regulators wrong again? Is there something we think is impossible today that will be obvious tomorrow? Can last-mile broadband be developed in a way that doesn't rely on the incentives that drive current providers toward innovation-stifling business models?
Yes. There isn't yet a Linus Torvalds of broadband,
Quite right. Linus Torvalds would have needed gigadollars to compete with the telcos.
nor is a single competitive platform being built by volunteers to displace AT&T.
See above. That is to say, he never really addresses the principle problems with his flawed analogy, but handwaves it away. Volunteers cannot make capital appear by magic.
Further, his idea that governments are going to fill the void and provide competition doesn't hold water, either. How do we ensure local governments don't get snookered by tech bamboozlers with visions of creating monopoly markets of their own? This is how we ended up with the disaster that is cable television now, by hundreds of municipalities handing out local monopolies with millions of captive customers.
Linux was able to succeed as a collaborative effort because of cheap, commodity PCs (whose performance increased constantly), the Internet, a common desire for a freely available operating system, and remarkably good project management. None of this required capital beyond what was readily available to any one player.
With broadband, the network neutrality issue comes back to the idea of common carrier status. This is important, because the companies delivering this traffic have been granted a monopoly on service explicitly. What the large ISPs are trying to do is to eliminate common carrier status while retaining the monopoly. Allowing that would be a disastrous mistake for the public.
1) The Telegraph leans to the right. This report may be nothing more than a shill to shut down Google Earth.
2) That said, it does seem reasonable that insurgents might be able to make use of Google Earth for some targeting information. Since the data is generally fairly stale, though, one wonders just how useful it would actually be.
But architecture is essentially the building of plans, not the development of actual physical buildings. My point is that there's no such thing, and never will be, as an open source oil company.
They cite a mistaken analogy to Linux as one of the reasons they feel their project could succeed, but in fact the problem is that such a system will require capital to run. This in fact makes it the opposite of the situation obtaining with Linux, when one of the key ingredients, low-cost commodity PCs, helped drive and unify development.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, can Windows — any version — be made secure?
Per Wikipedia (either as Dubai or as the United Arab Emirates).
The Federation might have wanted to anthromophosize data, but they never enslaved Data.
"Network neutrality" in the case of the Internet is about customers' traffic getting the usual "common carrier" treatment. In the case of the Skype proposal, it's nothing less than an attempt to get something (access to cell towers and related equipment) for nothing (without having to pay for it). The writeup is both disturbing and misleading.
Just as some slaveholders were beginning to come out against slavery before the (U.S.) Civil War, mainly on economic grounds. There were not enough of them, however, and they were not in sufficient numbers to prevent said war.
his brother, Professor Patent.
and not a one mentions saltpeter.
The Chicago Transit Authority needs all the help it can get.
There's a reason they're called "Cowards". Those of us who've been around a while know that there are all kinds of languages out there, and plenty of them can be used to write good code. The real problem with Perl is that Larry Wall is slowly losing his mind, adding features that nobody asked for; a good example is the new, backwards-incompatible regexps. (Don't go off that there'll be a compatibility mode; that's beside the point. The hubris needed to upend this core part of the language is pretty astonishing.) Also, he seems to be spending a lot of time with the Parrot rehosting, something else that is (perhaps) of dubious value. The changes are so orthogonal to what I do with Perl (hello, how about faster OO calls?) I have to wonder if there'll ever be a reason to switch to Perl 6. (Perhaps someone out there who knows more can comment.)
... utterly useless for anything of real size. XML::Simple is a huge memory sink, because, as mentioned elsewhere, it insists on generating full hash and array representations of the source XML text. This seems to be the side effect of taking too seriously a lot of Perl advice enthusiastically handed out in the older documentation. (Put file text into a huge array! Don't close your file descriptors!) The rest of us know better.
When Gates says that people are coming up with exploits for the Mac every single day, it's possible he really believes it. The truth, of course, is far different (and much less dangerous than with Windows exploits), as anyone who actually uses the platform can attest; but Gates here is talking to his core audience, which wants to be reassured that the security headaches they're constantly having aren't peculiar to the Windows platform. As with Bush talking to the GOP faithful, it's important to stay on-message.
Liberalism (as practiced in the United States) does no such thing. It generally calls for the creation of some very large government agency to Do Something, and much of its existence is predicated to finding a Something with which to terrorize the populace. The Great Depression worked well toward that end, but there have been others. (Bush II is really a liberal, but nobody wants to tell him yet.)
In this case, the stick is global warming (whether you believe it's anthropogenic or not, it is happening), and the Something would range from making automobiles illegal to ultimately banning industrial civilization, or making it practically impossible. The Europeans, whom Americans are supposed to emulate, are grinding their teeth over their noncompliance with Kyoto even now, and the Chinese... well, good luck telling them they'll just have to stay poor, thank you.
The lip service paid to economics is the real human cost of the Green miscalculation.
from the state legislature. If he really wanted to do something to save energy, they'd pass a bill mandating water-cooled air-conditioning units, especially in desert locales.
Too bad "only" buying $25,000 worth of licenses every six months doesn't get you good service.
As for Oracle support, it was the main thing we looked forward to at first (this was the mid-90's); but it, too, got worse over time. I would not trust Oracle to properly support MySQL, especially since they have no motivation to push it, and they are not the developers (and in fact are in competition with them).
I wouldn't be surprised if the reason was that this is the minimal charge that credit card companies (one or more) will accept.
Quite right. Linus Torvalds would have needed gigadollars to compete with the telcos.
See above. That is to say, he never really addresses the principle problems with his flawed analogy, but handwaves it away. Volunteers cannot make capital appear by magic.Further, his idea that governments are going to fill the void and provide competition doesn't hold water, either. How do we ensure local governments don't get snookered by tech bamboozlers with visions of creating monopoly markets of their own? This is how we ended up with the disaster that is cable television now, by hundreds of municipalities handing out local monopolies with millions of captive customers.
Linux was able to succeed as a collaborative effort because of cheap, commodity PCs (whose performance increased constantly), the Internet, a common desire for a freely available operating system, and remarkably good project management. None of this required capital beyond what was readily available to any one player.
With broadband, the network neutrality issue comes back to the idea of common carrier status. This is important, because the companies delivering this traffic have been granted a monopoly on service explicitly. What the large ISPs are trying to do is to eliminate common carrier status while retaining the monopoly. Allowing that would be a disastrous mistake for the public.
2) That said, it does seem reasonable that insurgents might be able to make use of Google Earth for some targeting information. Since the data is generally fairly stale, though, one wonders just how useful it would actually be.
But architecture is essentially the building of plans, not the development of actual physical buildings. My point is that there's no such thing, and never will be, as an open source oil company.
They cite a mistaken analogy to Linux as one of the reasons they feel their project could succeed, but in fact the problem is that such a system will require capital to run. This in fact makes it the opposite of the situation obtaining with Linux, when one of the key ingredients, low-cost commodity PCs, helped drive and unify development.