How are you so sure it isn't the NeoCommunists in the DNC doing this? the GOP wasn't hacked, Hillary's campaign was Hacked (and likely her home brew server as well) but.. yeah it has to be the NEOCONS and the VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY!
Because, they pretty much own the Copper Cable Plant in the ground. Additionally, they really can't just "quit" copper, because all the old people with Landlines would freak out. They stay in business because the consequences of pulling out of COPPER landlines would be political suicide.
Last mile is the problem. Last mile brought back to an aggregation point (COLO Facility), where MANY vendors vie for customers would SOLVE just about every problem we have with regulation and franchise agreements (government granted monopolies).
Imagine for a second, that the municipality owned that last mile, and leased it based on the customer/subscriber and the Vendor having a contract for service. Customer could order Comcast, Verizon, Charter, Netflix/Hulu, HBOnly or whatever . It might bring in the a la carte CATV we've all been wanting. I ONLY want ESPN and News, I don't want the 85 Shopping channels that you currently offer, unless you PAY me to take them.
if you'd linked to the article where Bernie fought against a tax increase on his properties
Bernie, the rich powerful "Socialist" fought to keep his taxes low, contrary to his own view on the rich (he's one of them). And what you said, if true is proof that Taxes are Regressive, the rich (like Bernie) can avoid them, and pay to have them removed for themselves. Taxes, are regressive, and you offered up evidence (which if true) makes my case perfectly.
Capitalism would function fine, without government intervention.
Liberty is the greatest liberator of HUMAN capital, and economic Freedom is true liberty. Anything anyone else is telling you about the "evils" of people free to choose the commerce they see fit, is selling government controls.
1) The poor see no choice when Governments conspire against them. Liberty is the cure. In your case #1, they are using one form of government (tryanny) to replace another (tyranny). The only thing that is different is the tyrants in charge, and who and how they promise government power to extract wealth from the populace. (and why Socialism eventually fails)
2) In Capitalism the wars tend to be over governmental control of natural resources (oil, water, ore..) or trade policies. Busybodies are the ones that use the following logic... "We ought to do something, this is something, we ought to do it" and enough people say "yeah yeah yeah" regardless of how effectual it will be.
3) I am a "religious" nut. But I am also a Libertarian. People often see that as a conflict, but I assure them, I am not out to force my morals on anyone. But on the same token, I don't want them forcing their morals (or lack thereof) on me.
4) This is also why I am a libertarian. I don't give a shit if man children exist. Moral Darwinism will take care of them through their children. Of course, they won't see the link between moral decay and broken society. Just allow me to form my own co-op so I can avoid them. Freedom, it is both a blessing and a curse.
Taxes are regressive. If what you said is true, Bernie would be proof that they are, indeed regressive. The rich can avoid them (or pay people to lower theirs), the middle class has no such luxury.
As for socialism, it is based on Irrational Actors (humans) making "socialist" choices, and not looking out for their own best interest, which is, by definition, irrational.
You cannot make people act rationally, as much as you want to force them to. The ONLY thing you can do, is make people responsible for their own choices. Liberty is messy.
To Be honest, the main difference between socialism and Capitalism is the fact that capitalism actually accounts for greed and deception, while Socialism really cannot.
Why? Because captialism (free economics) is about people being able to make decsions for themselves (libertarian) while socialism says that government should decide for everyone, regardless of how good it is to the individual. Socialism doesn't care about the individual, and therefore the individual is at odds with socialism (and why Socialism punishes individual success).
You can see this in Bernie type people who always seem to spew about the "rich" paying "their fair share"... and then run off and buy a $600K beach house, his 3rd home. It is all well and good as long as it is the OTHER guy that pays.
It isn't a waste of taxpayer money, the taxpayers keep electing these idiots, and get what they deserve. And this is, no doubt, designed to protect the precious snowflakes from having chalk marks on the sidewalks, while they ignore the actual radical statements made by people hell bent on killing everyone not like them because they are "Insert politically correct subgroup here".
This is the full on assault of the First Amendment, dressed up to look acceptable to idiots who can't handle free speech.
There are nearly always adjustments made to account for known errors in the data.
So, the measurments are flawed, and so instead of fixing the measurements, you fix the data. And that NEVER includes the bias of those making the adjustments, right?
Thus, you clearly don't care about introducing political biases into science, in order to get funding, promote a cause, exploit the masses...
You can't tell me there are no biases in manufactured data. I mean, you can, but I don't have to believe you. Science demands skepticism.
Excuse me, but REAL science is based on Skepticism. Anyone not skeptical and only accepts "expert opinions" ends up believing in things like Piltdown Man.
If you're not skeptical, you're not a scientist. PERIOD. Science demands facts, and facts need to be examined under skeptical eyes. Anything less is religion.
I disagree, but only to a point. If the person knows they don't know shit, and admits it (humility), can be successful. It is the people who know nothing, but think they are god because their MBA from Prestigious University tells them so, that are dangerous. IMHO a piece of paper is only as good as the first job out of school, though there are those that think it is worth more than this.
I've had good Managers, bad managers, expert Managers,and non-expert managers. There is a VENN diagram of intersections out there somewhere. The problem is, that like most things in life, there aren't absolutes.
Good Managers:... They actually are good at direction, and making decisions. These are the people who point the way; give direction and then get out of the way. They make key decisions based on the available information and their best effort. They aren't always right, and they take ownership (and learn) when they aren't. You don't need to be an "expert" in a field to do these things, but it helps.
Bad Managers: Are driven by the direction of the wind. Whatever way the wind is blowing, that is where they go. Their staff is left rudderless. They make decisions based on "least resistance" or "what the boss wants' regardless of what the results might be. Their staff is directionless, often to the point of paralysis (since the winds change every other moment). An "Expert" bad manager, doesn't use his/her expertise to give guidance because it is irrelevant to their decision making tree. "The boss wants everyone to have the same password, so that is what we are going to do". They don't believe they deserve to be in that position, and thus are in fear for their jobs constantly.
Someone could manage outside their expertise, but it'll be harder.
Of course it is harder, because it often comes with a learning curve. And while they may not be an "Expert", they at least become proficient enough to understand the experts in the expert's own nomenclature.
He did, in fact, get away with it. No witnesses, can't prove anything.
There wasn't supposed to be any witnesses, but there was, which is why we know about it. NORMAL people don't try to hide their activities. However, this is Clinton, and we all know that he isn't the most trustworthy of people. That being said, there are those who are running to his defense, saying ""Can't Prove Anything" as if we were to just stop looking at something suspicious.
Had this been Trump's kids / family, it would have been all over the MSM Headlines until the election, and those same people who are defending Clinton now, would be frothing at the mouth. Such is politics, and why most NORMAL people are sick to their stomach with American Political Cronyism.
Facebook = People I care about Google+ =Things I care about
Facebook is filled with crap from people I care about. Most of it is crap / clickbait / memes and other "crap". It is really hard to filter all the crap from all the people I car about, but I still want to keep up with the People (the limited amount of non-crap items)
Google+ has much better control over my feed. It is much better at filtering crap out. I want to see just "Photography" stuff, I open that Circle. Too Much spam from person A, they get removed from that circle.
IF all you are concerned about is storage capacity, you're probably right. But there are other things to consider, such as IOPs, Energy Costs (spinning, heat/cooling etc) and MTBF rates. Actual VALUE is in SSDs, all things being equal. But if all you look at is Cost / TB, you're right... for now. My suggestion is that is going to change, very rapidly in the next few years.
You are already seeing Drive Denisities exceeding Spindle drives. You're gonna need eight 8TB spindle drives to match one 60TB SSD. More than eight times the power, cooling, not to mention much much lower IOPs. What good is having all that data if it takes forever (computer time) to get it all off the drive.
Slashdot Mirror
How are you so sure it isn't the NeoCommunists in the DNC doing this? the GOP wasn't hacked, Hillary's campaign was Hacked (and likely her home brew server as well) but .. yeah it has to be the NEOCONS and the VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY!
How does AT&T stay in business?
Because, they pretty much own the Copper Cable Plant in the ground. Additionally, they really can't just "quit" copper, because all the old people with Landlines would freak out. They stay in business because the consequences of pulling out of COPPER landlines would be political suicide.
Last mile is the problem. Last mile brought back to an aggregation point (COLO Facility), where MANY vendors vie for customers would SOLVE just about every problem we have with regulation and franchise agreements (government granted monopolies).
Imagine for a second, that the municipality owned that last mile, and leased it based on the customer/subscriber and the Vendor having a contract for service. Customer could order Comcast, Verizon, Charter, Netflix/Hulu, HBOnly or whatever . It might bring in the a la carte CATV we've all been wanting. I ONLY want ESPN and News, I don't want the 85 Shopping channels that you currently offer, unless you PAY me to take them.
if you'd linked to the article where Bernie fought against a tax increase on his properties
Bernie, the rich powerful "Socialist" fought to keep his taxes low, contrary to his own view on the rich (he's one of them). And what you said, if true is proof that Taxes are Regressive, the rich (like Bernie) can avoid them, and pay to have them removed for themselves. Taxes, are regressive, and you offered up evidence (which if true) makes my case perfectly.
Capitalism would function fine, without government intervention.
Liberty is the greatest liberator of HUMAN capital, and economic Freedom is true liberty. Anything anyone else is telling you about the "evils" of people free to choose the commerce they see fit, is selling government controls.
1) The poor see no choice when Governments conspire against them. Liberty is the cure. In your case #1, they are using one form of government (tryanny) to replace another (tyranny). The only thing that is different is the tyrants in charge, and who and how they promise government power to extract wealth from the populace. (and why Socialism eventually fails)
2) In Capitalism the wars tend to be over governmental control of natural resources (oil, water, ore ..) or trade policies. Busybodies are the ones that use the following logic ... "We ought to do something, this is something, we ought to do it" and enough people say "yeah yeah yeah" regardless of how effectual it will be.
3) I am a "religious" nut. But I am also a Libertarian. People often see that as a conflict, but I assure them, I am not out to force my morals on anyone. But on the same token, I don't want them forcing their morals (or lack thereof) on me.
4) This is also why I am a libertarian. I don't give a shit if man children exist. Moral Darwinism will take care of them through their children. Of course, they won't see the link between moral decay and broken society. Just allow me to form my own co-op so I can avoid them. Freedom, it is both a blessing and a curse.
Taxes are regressive. If what you said is true, Bernie would be proof that they are, indeed regressive. The rich can avoid them (or pay people to lower theirs), the middle class has no such luxury.
As for socialism, it is based on Irrational Actors (humans) making "socialist" choices, and not looking out for their own best interest, which is, by definition, irrational.
You cannot make people act rationally, as much as you want to force them to. The ONLY thing you can do, is make people responsible for their own choices. Liberty is messy.
To Be honest, the main difference between socialism and Capitalism is the fact that capitalism actually accounts for greed and deception, while Socialism really cannot.
Why? Because captialism (free economics) is about people being able to make decsions for themselves (libertarian) while socialism says that government should decide for everyone, regardless of how good it is to the individual. Socialism doesn't care about the individual, and therefore the individual is at odds with socialism (and why Socialism punishes individual success).
You can see this in Bernie type people who always seem to spew about the "rich" paying "their fair share" ... and then run off and buy a $600K beach house, his 3rd home. It is all well and good as long as it is the OTHER guy that pays.
Soicialism fails, yet socialists continue to believe that with enough "tweaks" and "adjustments" it will work ... this time!
Gary Johnson.
Thus, I prove your point ;) But consider Trump and Clinton as viable and "only" choice we have is kinda stupid, don't you think?
IT wasn't supposed to be a template for our society.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
It isn't a waste of taxpayer money, the taxpayers keep electing these idiots, and get what they deserve. And this is, no doubt, designed to protect the precious snowflakes from having chalk marks on the sidewalks, while they ignore the actual radical statements made by people hell bent on killing everyone not like them because they are "Insert politically correct subgroup here".
This is the full on assault of the First Amendment, dressed up to look acceptable to idiots who can't handle free speech.
https://xkcd.com/927/
There are nearly always adjustments made to account for known errors in the data.
So, the measurments are flawed, and so instead of fixing the measurements, you fix the data. And that NEVER includes the bias of those making the adjustments, right?
Thus, you clearly don't care about introducing political biases into science, in order to get funding, promote a cause, exploit the masses ...
You can't tell me there are no biases in manufactured data. I mean, you can, but I don't have to believe you. Science demands skepticism.
Excuse me, but REAL science is based on Skepticism. Anyone not skeptical and only accepts "expert opinions" ends up believing in things like Piltdown Man.
If you're not skeptical, you're not a scientist. PERIOD. Science demands facts, and facts need to be examined under skeptical eyes. Anything less is religion.
He cannot manage something he doesn't understand.
I disagree, but only to a point. If the person knows they don't know shit, and admits it (humility), can be successful. It is the people who know nothing, but think they are god because their MBA from Prestigious University tells them so, that are dangerous. IMHO a piece of paper is only as good as the first job out of school, though there are those that think it is worth more than this.
I've had good Managers, bad managers, expert Managers ,and non-expert managers. There is a VENN diagram of intersections out there somewhere. The problem is, that like most things in life, there aren't absolutes.
Good Managers: ... They actually are good at direction, and making decisions. These are the people who point the way; give direction and then get out of the way. They make key decisions based on the available information and their best effort. They aren't always right, and they take ownership (and learn) when they aren't. You don't need to be an "expert" in a field to do these things, but it helps.
Bad Managers: Are driven by the direction of the wind. Whatever way the wind is blowing, that is where they go. Their staff is left rudderless. They make decisions based on "least resistance" or "what the boss wants' regardless of what the results might be. Their staff is directionless, often to the point of paralysis (since the winds change every other moment). An "Expert" bad manager, doesn't use his/her expertise to give guidance because it is irrelevant to their decision making tree. "The boss wants everyone to have the same password, so that is what we are going to do". They don't believe they deserve to be in that position, and thus are in fear for their jobs constantly.
Someone could manage outside their expertise, but it'll be harder.
Of course it is harder, because it often comes with a learning curve. And while they may not be an "Expert", they at least become proficient enough to understand the experts in the expert's own nomenclature.
seems to me hard to understand how a manager can manage something he doesn't know anything about
It isn't hard to understand. In fact, there is a whole cartoon series dedicated to exactly this.
http://www.dilbert.com/
He did, in fact, get away with it. No witnesses, can't prove anything.
There wasn't supposed to be any witnesses, but there was, which is why we know about it. NORMAL people don't try to hide their activities. However, this is Clinton, and we all know that he isn't the most trustworthy of people. That being said, there are those who are running to his defense, saying ""Can't Prove Anything" as if we were to just stop looking at something suspicious.
Had this been Trump's kids / family, it would have been all over the MSM Headlines until the election, and those same people who are defending Clinton now, would be frothing at the mouth. Such is politics, and why most NORMAL people are sick to their stomach with American Political Cronyism.
Android
Facebook = People I care about
Google+ =Things I care about
Facebook is filled with crap from people I care about. Most of it is crap / clickbait / memes and other "crap". It is really hard to filter all the crap from all the people I car about, but I still want to keep up with the People (the limited amount of non-crap items)
Google+ has much better control over my feed. It is much better at filtering crap out. I want to see just "Photography" stuff, I open that Circle. Too Much spam from person A, they get removed from that circle.
AN IP address is not an identifiable to a person. It may not even be legitimate (think TOR or Proxy Service).
It is a fishing expedition. The ocean is big, they know its a fish, they are hoping to catch the right fish.
IF all you are concerned about is storage capacity, you're probably right. But there are other things to consider, such as IOPs, Energy Costs (spinning, heat/cooling etc) and MTBF rates. Actual VALUE is in SSDs, all things being equal. But if all you look at is Cost / TB, you're right ... for now. My suggestion is that is going to change, very rapidly in the next few years.
You are already seeing Drive Denisities exceeding Spindle drives. You're gonna need eight 8TB spindle drives to match one 60TB SSD. More than eight times the power, cooling, not to mention much much lower IOPs. What good is having all that data if it takes forever (computer time) to get it all off the drive.
It is a low power SDD, suited for low access / Archiving.
Or the Elizabeth Warren's approach ... and make Trump just "disappear" (veiled threat???? )
Of course, the press didn't cover that the same way .. or at all.