Assholes need a punch in the nose, not a law that traps everyone. I'm not against the rule of law, I'm against laws that trap people who are innocent.
There are laws that cannot be enforced except very selectively, those are BAD LAWS. Take driving for example.....
I drive 85 on I5 where the speed limit is 75 and traffic is moving at 85. I'm technically breaking the law, but traveling at 75 is a traffic hazard. Now an asshole comes along and drives 105 in his BMW weaving in and out of traffic along the way.
Cop pulls me over for going 85 in a 75 zone, but misses the 105 guy because he has me on the side of the road. I get the ticket, asshole doesn't.
Fifteen minutes later I'm going 75 in the 75 zone and get pulled over by a DIFFERENT cop, for being a traffic hazard because traffic is going 90.
While on the side of the road, getting another ticket, guy #2 drives buy in a Mustang going excess of 110.
I see the mustang guy rolled over one hour and 30 miles later on the side of the road. Traffic is moving at about 15 MPH, thanks to the accident.
I get to the court and hold up two tickets before the judge and say "pick one" the judge takes a look and dismisses both tickets (thankfully) because he could see how silly it really was.
Selective inforcement doesn't stop assholes. Only way assholes learn is by pain, and only sometimes.
"The thing about rules is that if you don't have any at all, the bad guys will simply claim they did nothing wrong."
As if rules stop the bad guys. There are two guys of bad guys, first thinks rules are for everyone but themselves, the other, which is far worse, live within the rules, often walking that tight line but never crossing it. These guys are ASSHOLES. They are the guys that need to be punched in the nose.
But they "aren't doing anything wrong", they just screw the system for everyone else, because people say "there ought to be a law" and so there is, which screws people who aren't assholes and cross some line somewhere accidentally (truly unintentionally).
And good luck making the rules so people can't be assholes.
Burn down the economy get a big fat check is about right.
The problem with slow justice, is that it gives the appearance of no justice. Bernie Madoff will, in all likelyhood, die without spending a day in PMITA Prison.
And his family will keep the benefit of all the Billions that disappeared, because all the assets in trusts and such are untouchable by the law, even if they are ill gained. That is what a trust was created exactly to protect. Trusts are nothing more than legal money laundering.
And there is nothing wrong with making a profit. The problem isn't profit, or even greed. The problem is that people will use the rules in place to screw others and hide the loot. It doesn't matter what the rules are, and the more complex the rules, the easier it is to hide malfeasance. More rules don't stop it. People will do evil regardless of the rules.
Bad people don't follow the rules, and will use the rules as an excuse to do bad. They use the rules to take advantage of others. Once people realize that rules are for the law abiding, not the law breakers, then we can get rid of all the stupid rules which don't prevent anything.
Greed isn't necessarily bad. Thrift isn't necessarily good. Putting absolutes to things that are neither black or white, but some shade of gray is part of the problem.
Greed allocates scarce resources, and it can do a decent job of it. Thrift doesn't produce anything useful.
The problem is when people don't use both in the right proportions. We should be thrifty (save) as part of a long term plan to save resources for the times when they might not be as plentiful, and greed shouldn't be used to hoard resources beyond what is needed.
But exactly who decides how much greed is bad, or how much thrift is good is an equally interesting debate. And as long as humans are involved, there will be flaws in the systems we use to decide.
The problem is that people think humans can be flawless. Whenever we have this view of humans, that is the biggest flaw we have.
When criticizing people for using a Exclamation Point, when it is used in a title of a book being reviewed, it is YOU who look like a Wanker. Especially since the only time the reviewer used "Joomla!" was when quoting the book title, which is entirely appropriate and to NOT do so is bad form.
If you have an issue with the "Joomla!", write the author of the book. Of course I doubt you'd do that being the wanker you are.
Also, when confronted with having to change passwords on a regular basis, most people will configure their passwords to reflect how often the are required to change, and how many passwords are needed before reuse.
I worked at a place that required new passwords every month, and the service calls increased to have passwords reset by people who couldn't remember their password they set two weeks ago.
So the helpdesk was instructed to give them this idea: Use the following as an example only....
mY$up3r$3cr3tPa$$word0902
Where 0902 equals the current year/month. The problem is that this kind of Password Convention doesn't solve the "change password monthly" problem because only two digits need to change each month, and two only need to change each year. This gives you the same basic password with lifetime reuse, and doesn't make anything any more secure.
If you make something difficult, the workarounds end up exposing the silliness of requirements.
MY suggestion for passwords are as follows. Set up Security level passwords.
1) Low level. Use something simple to type, easy to modify (see example above), and is easy to remember. I share this password with wife/kids etc. e.g. mypassword0902. Used for meaningless "online" crap.
2) Moderate level. Use something slightly more difficult to type. My wife might know this one. Used for meaningful online / moderate secure stuff.
3) High Level. Use something that is not prone to dictionary style brute force. I usually use acronyms for sentences, obfuscated with the odd symbol or number. I only have one. Used for Secure things like banking. Nobody know it but me. The only way it will be compromised is if it is saved as plaintext by my bank's db. If thats the case, the bank has more problems than I do.
My daughters don't watch crap like that, they don't want to. They don't want to be like the cheap sluts and tramps who think they are making any point besides "If you seek Amy"
People who think there is nothing wrong with letting girls watch stuff like that, end up with 14 year old girls who are parents. Or Abortions parents never care about. Or......
Saying it doesn't affect girls because one girl may not follow after the sluts is like saying Cigarettes don't cause cancer because one guy didn't get cancer and lived to 105.
Of course this is a complete and utter falsehood in the form of ignorant rant against principles.
Human body is not evil. What people do with it is either good or evil, it is just a tool. Sexualizing of women demeans women and objectifies them.
This is one of those weird things that has backfired on the whole woman's liberation movement, IMHO. The Sexual revolution has turned women from respected members of society to cheap whores and sluts, good for only one thing.... sex.
Danica Patrick isn't an Indy Car Racer, she is a "Hot Chick" who drives Indy Cars. Anna Kornakova isn't a Tennis Player, she is a "Hot Chick" who used to play tennis.
It is really bad when people look at women and only see their boobies.
Turning women into objects of desire isn't woman's liberation, it is woman's slavery.
Why argue for both, when neither also is acceptable.
I don't want my daughters to become sexualized sluts at 13, any more than I want my boys to become homicidal maniacs. And just because you don't care doesn't mean I shouldn't either.
Why is it that it always boils down to "lowest common denominator" and "how low can we go"? I'm sick of the race to the bottom.
The Great Society didn't end the Depression. It in all likelyhood extended it until WWII. I don't want a war to end this, but at this rate, Obama will blame _____ people, round them all up and gas them.
STUPID is letting stupid get away with it. Punish the STUPID Assholes. ALL of them. Congress, Governors, CEOs that raped their companies. ALL of them.
STUPID is thinking more GOVERNMENT is the solution. Government of the people for the people and by the people. Not special interest groups. I'd toss all the Lobbyists in Jail. ALL of them. They are F'ing up the country fast as they can.
I'm not for letting the ASSHOLES get away with it, I'm for raping them back. Take all their assets and lock them up. Putting the same people in CHARGE again isn't the solution either.
STUPID is not realizing the my kids are already going to suffer for the stupidity of others. My goal is to minimize how STUPID people affect them. Your solution is for everyone to be STUPID and thus, equal. STUPID and EQUAL WOOO HOOO.
Excuse me, if YOUR LIFE is affected because of MY "stupid", it is only because YOU are Stupid to let yourself get that way. ALL I'm suggesting is that STUPID PEOPLE pay the most.
You obviously have issue with STUPID having any consequences, because you like being STUPID and think I (who hasn't participated in any of this stupid shit) should pay more so you can remain stupid.
Yeah, because it is easier to blame everyone else for you being STUPID!
That isn't enough pain for STUPID. Take all their assets, take their freedom, take everything away from these "Brilliant" CEOs and upper management.
And then, let the stupid companies fail. Let the Stupid Investors lose everything. Next time, they'll look beyond the last quarter's earnings and next quarters projections and look into the soundness of the business plan.
Quit trying to protect the STUPID from their mess. They made their bed, let them sleep in it for a while. I don't care if they end up being homeless bums.
The worst part of all this, is the same people who got us in this mess, are the ones telling us how to get out of it. AND the only thing I can see, is that they are STILL raping the Treasury
No, the current kind of STUPID is just passing the "HURT" on to our children, in the form of Massive debt.
This is the problem with Liberals, they don't think it is going to hurt those that have to pay the debt eventually.
Yes, it does hurt us now if we don't do anything. IT SHOULD!!! STUPID often hurts those around STUPID who aren't stupid. My question is, why should my kids pay for other people being STUPID.
It only encourages people to BE STUPID. That is the problem with LIBERAL views is that it is okay to be stupid, everyone will pay to clean up the mess. The problem gets passed on until people realize that it doesn't pay to be SMART because SMART ends up paying for STUPID. So, in the end, everyone ends up STUPID and nobody is cleaning up the mess because... well everyone is STUPID and doesn't care.
The only way to stop STUPID is to let stupid get what stupid deserves. YES, it MIGHT hurt those around stupid, but that is the case anyway.
The only way to stop STUPID is to MAKE STUPID HURT. and sometimes, just sometimes it makes people smarter in the end. At least it might stop them from being stupid the next time.
There is nothing like painting with a broad brush. In this case the premise of the article seems to be an ALL or NOTHING proposition. Web or Standalone application.
This is huge problem in understanding that there really is a need for BOTH. If you've ever tried to get a bunch of Term Servers running powerpoint presentations simultaneously, you'll quickly realize that some things are NOT suited for time sliced or otherwise processor sharing.
On the other hand, some things are suited for Web side (some database applications), which cut development and deployment costs.
Developers that understand this will be okay. Those that don't will continue to try to fit everything into one model or the other and eventually fail.
Stupid SHOULD hurt. The government and the liberals don't realize this. And yes, I said Liberals... not Democrats. There were plenty of LIBERAL (see compassionate conservatives) in the Republican Party too.
And by "Stupid" I don't mean lack of intelligence (IQ), I mean DARWIN Award winners types. These are the people who have a brain, should know better, but don't F'in care about what they are doing and expect everyone else to clean up their mess.
Sorry, but STUPID SHOULD HURT! Like when you stick your hand on the stove hurt. Like when you make stupid loans and bundle them into derivatives to leverage the stupidity and then re-bundle those into even more stupid derivatives. IT all works, until it doesn't, then everyone pays for the Ponzi Schemes.
Which is why the stupid Bailouts to the same people that caused this mess is just stupidity on top of stupidity. We are now leveraging STUPID to try to stop the "HURT".
And nobody is willing to tell it like it is. STUPID!
Re:More is More
on
Less Is Moore
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
But you don't stop doing those tasks because it takes 10 Seconds. While you do have a valid point, those chunks of time don't stop you, they only annoy you.
Trust me, you don't know what you DO NOT do because it takes to long to do it. I've seen tasks grow in time, from a minute to 1.5 hours as the logs grow due to increased activity. As the time mounted to process the logs, the less frequently I processed them, often running them over a weekends and evenings because I couldn't afford to process them during the week day.
Getting a new machine and having that 1.5 hour log processing suddenly become four minutes meant I could process the logs just about anytime I had 4 or 5 minutes to spare.
It was much easier to find 5 minutes than 1.5 hours.
More is More
on
Less Is Moore
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
One of the things I learned many years ago, is that computer and computing speed isn't a function of how fast something runs. Rather it is a matter of whether or not you actually run something.
If computer speeds are twice as fast, and it currently takes you ten seconds to accomplish Task A, and a new computer will allow you to accomplish that same task in 5 seconds.... getting a new computer is not that big of a deal.
However, if you run Task B, which takes 1.5 hours to complete, and a new computer will run that same task in say 4 minutes (Real world example from my past, log processing), the difference isn't necessarily the 86 minute difference, but rather if and how often you actually run that task.
It is endlessly amusing to see "real world benchmarks" that run in 3 minutes for most processors, separated by less than 2 x. Or frames per sec. Or...... whatever.
When shit takes too long to get done, you tend NOT to do it. If the difference is a few seconds, that is nice and all, and a few seconds may be of interest to "extreme" hobbyists.
But Real World differences are not marginally decreasing from 300 to 279 seconds. Sorry, but those extra few seconds aren't going to prevent you from running that Task.
The true measure is not how fast something gets done, but whether or not you actually do the task, because the time involve is prohibitive.
Raid is for High Availability not a Backup Strategy.
Offline (Offsite) Storage is for Backup, not for High Availability.
These are two separate problems, that are often confused. Backup is way more expensive than RAID, because it requires more time and effort. It often requires some level of human intervention on a regular basis for media cycling and verification of procedures. Most people's data isn't worth the effort.
Slashdot Mirror
I hear that it might be kind of hard to reach that Moses guy ...
Assholes need a punch in the nose, not a law that traps everyone. I'm not against the rule of law, I'm against laws that trap people who are innocent.
There are laws that cannot be enforced except very selectively, those are BAD LAWS. Take driving for example.....
I drive 85 on I5 where the speed limit is 75 and traffic is moving at 85. I'm technically breaking the law, but traveling at 75 is a traffic hazard. Now an asshole comes along and drives 105 in his BMW weaving in and out of traffic along the way.
Cop pulls me over for going 85 in a 75 zone, but misses the 105 guy because he has me on the side of the road. I get the ticket, asshole doesn't.
Fifteen minutes later I'm going 75 in the 75 zone and get pulled over by a DIFFERENT cop, for being a traffic hazard because traffic is going 90.
While on the side of the road, getting another ticket, guy #2 drives buy in a Mustang going excess of 110.
I see the mustang guy rolled over one hour and 30 miles later on the side of the road. Traffic is moving at about 15 MPH, thanks to the accident.
I get to the court and hold up two tickets before the judge and say "pick one" the judge takes a look and dismisses both tickets (thankfully) because he could see how silly it really was.
Selective inforcement doesn't stop assholes. Only way assholes learn is by pain, and only sometimes.
"The thing about rules is that if you don't have any at all, the bad guys will simply claim they did nothing wrong."
As if rules stop the bad guys. There are two guys of bad guys, first thinks rules are for everyone but themselves, the other, which is far worse, live within the rules, often walking that tight line but never crossing it. These guys are ASSHOLES. They are the guys that need to be punched in the nose.
But they "aren't doing anything wrong", they just screw the system for everyone else, because people say "there ought to be a law" and so there is, which screws people who aren't assholes and cross some line somewhere accidentally (truly unintentionally).
And good luck making the rules so people can't be assholes.
Burn down the economy get a big fat check is about right.
The problem with slow justice, is that it gives the appearance of no justice. Bernie Madoff will, in all likelyhood, die without spending a day in PMITA Prison.
And his family will keep the benefit of all the Billions that disappeared, because all the assets in trusts and such are untouchable by the law, even if they are ill gained. That is what a trust was created exactly to protect. Trusts are nothing more than legal money laundering.
And there is nothing wrong with making a profit. The problem isn't profit, or even greed. The problem is that people will use the rules in place to screw others and hide the loot. It doesn't matter what the rules are, and the more complex the rules, the easier it is to hide malfeasance. More rules don't stop it. People will do evil regardless of the rules.
Bad people don't follow the rules, and will use the rules as an excuse to do bad. They use the rules to take advantage of others. Once people realize that rules are for the law abiding, not the law breakers, then we can get rid of all the stupid rules which don't prevent anything.
Greed isn't necessarily bad. Thrift isn't necessarily good. Putting absolutes to things that are neither black or white, but some shade of gray is part of the problem.
Greed allocates scarce resources, and it can do a decent job of it. Thrift doesn't produce anything useful.
The problem is when people don't use both in the right proportions. We should be thrifty (save) as part of a long term plan to save resources for the times when they might not be as plentiful, and greed shouldn't be used to hoard resources beyond what is needed.
But exactly who decides how much greed is bad, or how much thrift is good is an equally interesting debate. And as long as humans are involved, there will be flaws in the systems we use to decide.
The problem is that people think humans can be flawless. Whenever we have this view of humans, that is the biggest flaw we have.
It is supposed to be ....
3) ????
4) PROFIT!!!
You insensitive Clod.
Now, get off my lawn.
WINE + SAMBA
Well, at least it isn't VISTA
When criticizing people for using a Exclamation Point, when it is used in a title of a book being reviewed, it is YOU who look like a Wanker. Especially since the only time the reviewer used "Joomla!" was when quoting the book title, which is entirely appropriate and to NOT do so is bad form.
If you have an issue with the "Joomla!", write the author of the book. Of course I doubt you'd do that being the wanker you are.
so, your time is only worth $270/wk??
Also, when confronted with having to change passwords on a regular basis, most people will configure their passwords to reflect how often the are required to change, and how many passwords are needed before reuse.
I worked at a place that required new passwords every month, and the service calls increased to have passwords reset by people who couldn't remember their password they set two weeks ago.
So the helpdesk was instructed to give them this idea: Use the following as an example only ....
mY$up3r$3cr3tPa$$word0902
Where 0902 equals the current year/month. The problem is that this kind of Password Convention doesn't solve the "change password monthly" problem because only two digits need to change each month, and two only need to change each year. This gives you the same basic password with lifetime reuse, and doesn't make anything any more secure.
If you make something difficult, the workarounds end up exposing the silliness of requirements.
MY suggestion for passwords are as follows. Set up Security level passwords.
1) Low level. Use something simple to type, easy to modify (see example above), and is easy to remember. I share this password with wife/kids etc. e.g. mypassword0902. Used for meaningless "online" crap.
2) Moderate level. Use something slightly more difficult to type. My wife might know this one. Used for meaningful online / moderate secure stuff.
3) High Level. Use something that is not prone to dictionary style brute force. I usually use acronyms for sentences, obfuscated with the odd symbol or number. I only have one. Used for Secure things like banking. Nobody know it but me. The only way it will be compromised is if it is saved as plaintext by my bank's db. If thats the case, the bank has more problems than I do.
My daughters don't watch crap like that, they don't want to. They don't want to be like the cheap sluts and tramps who think they are making any point besides "If you seek Amy"
People who think there is nothing wrong with letting girls watch stuff like that, end up with 14 year old girls who are parents. Or Abortions parents never care about. Or ......
Saying it doesn't affect girls because one girl may not follow after the sluts is like saying Cigarettes don't cause cancer because one guy didn't get cancer and lived to 105.
IT was both ;-)
www.gentoo.org
Not quite "one size fits all" but it is pretty close.
Of course this is a complete and utter falsehood in the form of ignorant rant against principles.
Human body is not evil. What people do with it is either good or evil, it is just a tool. Sexualizing of women demeans women and objectifies them.
This is one of those weird things that has backfired on the whole woman's liberation movement, IMHO. The Sexual revolution has turned women from respected members of society to cheap whores and sluts, good for only one thing .... sex.
Danica Patrick isn't an Indy Car Racer, she is a "Hot Chick" who drives Indy Cars. Anna Kornakova isn't a Tennis Player, she is a "Hot Chick" who used to play tennis.
It is really bad when people look at women and only see their boobies.
Turning women into objects of desire isn't woman's liberation, it is woman's slavery.
How about Neither?
Why argue for both, when neither also is acceptable.
I don't want my daughters to become sexualized sluts at 13, any more than I want my boys to become homicidal maniacs. And just because you don't care doesn't mean I shouldn't either.
Why is it that it always boils down to "lowest common denominator" and "how low can we go"? I'm sick of the race to the bottom.
Speaking of conference rooms, the cleverest names I've seen were all based on this naming convention: Disposed, Contenant, Sane, Secure ... etc
So when you asked where someone was .... well they were InDisposed or InSane or... you get the point.
The Great Society didn't end the Depression. It in all likelyhood extended it until WWII. I don't want a war to end this, but at this rate, Obama will blame _____ people, round them all up and gas them.
STUPID is letting stupid get away with it. Punish the STUPID Assholes. ALL of them. Congress, Governors, CEOs that raped their companies. ALL of them.
STUPID is thinking more GOVERNMENT is the solution. Government of the people for the people and by the people. Not special interest groups. I'd toss all the Lobbyists in Jail. ALL of them. They are F'ing up the country fast as they can.
I'm not for letting the ASSHOLES get away with it, I'm for raping them back. Take all their assets and lock them up. Putting the same people in CHARGE again isn't the solution either.
STUPID is not realizing the my kids are already going to suffer for the stupidity of others. My goal is to minimize how STUPID people affect them. Your solution is for everyone to be STUPID and thus, equal. STUPID and EQUAL WOOO HOOO.
Excuse me, if YOUR LIFE is affected because of MY "stupid", it is only because YOU are Stupid to let yourself get that way. ALL I'm suggesting is that STUPID PEOPLE pay the most.
You obviously have issue with STUPID having any consequences, because you like being STUPID and think I (who hasn't participated in any of this stupid shit) should pay more so you can remain stupid.
Yeah, because it is easier to blame everyone else for you being STUPID!
"Although a lot of client apps these days are very good at updating themselves over the internet ;-)"
Just what I need, yet another updater icon in the task bar (Windows). I'm going to rue the day that all of my apps have updates on the same day.
Makes me love my Ubuntu side all the more.
That isn't enough pain for STUPID. Take all their assets, take their freedom, take everything away from these "Brilliant" CEOs and upper management.
And then, let the stupid companies fail. Let the Stupid Investors lose everything. Next time, they'll look beyond the last quarter's earnings and next quarters projections and look into the soundness of the business plan.
Quit trying to protect the STUPID from their mess. They made their bed, let them sleep in it for a while. I don't care if they end up being homeless bums.
The worst part of all this, is the same people who got us in this mess, are the ones telling us how to get out of it. AND the only thing I can see, is that they are STILL raping the Treasury
No, the current kind of STUPID is just passing the "HURT" on to our children, in the form of Massive debt.
This is the problem with Liberals, they don't think it is going to hurt those that have to pay the debt eventually.
Yes, it does hurt us now if we don't do anything. IT SHOULD!!! STUPID often hurts those around STUPID who aren't stupid. My question is, why should my kids pay for other people being STUPID.
It only encourages people to BE STUPID. That is the problem with LIBERAL views is that it is okay to be stupid, everyone will pay to clean up the mess. The problem gets passed on until people realize that it doesn't pay to be SMART because SMART ends up paying for STUPID. So, in the end, everyone ends up STUPID and nobody is cleaning up the mess because ... well everyone is STUPID and doesn't care.
The only way to stop STUPID is to let stupid get what stupid deserves. YES, it MIGHT hurt those around stupid, but that is the case anyway.
The only way to stop STUPID is to MAKE STUPID HURT. and sometimes, just sometimes it makes people smarter in the end. At least it might stop them from being stupid the next time.
There is nothing like painting with a broad brush. In this case the premise of the article seems to be an ALL or NOTHING proposition. Web or Standalone application.
This is huge problem in understanding that there really is a need for BOTH. If you've ever tried to get a bunch of Term Servers running powerpoint presentations simultaneously, you'll quickly realize that some things are NOT suited for time sliced or otherwise processor sharing.
On the other hand, some things are suited for Web side (some database applications), which cut development and deployment costs.
Developers that understand this will be okay. Those that don't will continue to try to fit everything into one model or the other and eventually fail.
Stupid SHOULD hurt. The government and the liberals don't realize this. And yes, I said Liberals ... not Democrats. There were plenty of LIBERAL (see compassionate conservatives) in the Republican Party too.
And by "Stupid" I don't mean lack of intelligence (IQ), I mean DARWIN Award winners types. These are the people who have a brain, should know better, but don't F'in care about what they are doing and expect everyone else to clean up their mess.
Sorry, but STUPID SHOULD HURT! Like when you stick your hand on the stove hurt. Like when you make stupid loans and bundle them into derivatives to leverage the stupidity and then re-bundle those into even more stupid derivatives. IT all works, until it doesn't, then everyone pays for the Ponzi Schemes.
Which is why the stupid Bailouts to the same people that caused this mess is just stupidity on top of stupidity. We are now leveraging STUPID to try to stop the "HURT".
And nobody is willing to tell it like it is. STUPID!
But you don't stop doing those tasks because it takes 10 Seconds. While you do have a valid point, those chunks of time don't stop you, they only annoy you.
Trust me, you don't know what you DO NOT do because it takes to long to do it. I've seen tasks grow in time, from a minute to 1.5 hours as the logs grow due to increased activity. As the time mounted to process the logs, the less frequently I processed them, often running them over a weekends and evenings because I couldn't afford to process them during the week day.
Getting a new machine and having that 1.5 hour log processing suddenly become four minutes meant I could process the logs just about anytime I had 4 or 5 minutes to spare.
It was much easier to find 5 minutes than 1.5 hours.
One of the things I learned many years ago, is that computer and computing speed isn't a function of how fast something runs. Rather it is a matter of whether or not you actually run something.
If computer speeds are twice as fast, and it currently takes you ten seconds to accomplish Task A, and a new computer will allow you to accomplish that same task in 5 seconds .... getting a new computer is not that big of a deal.
However, if you run Task B, which takes 1.5 hours to complete, and a new computer will run that same task in say 4 minutes (Real world example from my past, log processing), the difference isn't necessarily the 86 minute difference, but rather if and how often you actually run that task.
It is endlessly amusing to see "real world benchmarks" that run in 3 minutes for most processors, separated by less than 2 x. Or frames per sec. Or ...... whatever.
When shit takes too long to get done, you tend NOT to do it. If the difference is a few seconds, that is nice and all, and a few seconds may be of interest to "extreme" hobbyists.
But Real World differences are not marginally decreasing from 300 to 279 seconds. Sorry, but those extra few seconds aren't going to prevent you from running that Task.
The true measure is not how fast something gets done, but whether or not you actually do the task, because the time involve is prohibitive.
Raid is for High Availability not a Backup Strategy.
Offline (Offsite) Storage is for Backup, not for High Availability.
These are two separate problems, that are often confused. Backup is way more expensive than RAID, because it requires more time and effort. It often requires some level of human intervention on a regular basis for media cycling and verification of procedures. Most people's data isn't worth the effort.