For home use, though... I don't need instant access to my personal backups. Sounds like a nice, cheap option for me.
Hmm... Carbonite is $60 per year per computer. That's $5 per month, so if your HDD is over 500 GB, Carbonite is cheaper. Additionally, it automatically encrypts before sending to their servers, restore is immediate (or nearly so). The only drawback is you have to manually add video files to the backup.
specs say 1.6TB max compressed but i've seen my tapes hold 3TB and 4TB. LTO-5 is even better but too expensive.
What are you paying for -5 and -4? We pay $50 for -5. Not sure about -4 but it's probably around $20-$30. They are about the same per GB.
At $50 for an LTO-5, that's about 3.3 cents per GB native. If the tape has a life of 3 years, that's.09 cents (9 hundreths of a penny) per month per GB for material. But as another person said, the bulk of your costs are going to be infrastructure: the robots to move those tapes around, the actors and drives, the supporting networking infrastructure, bandwidth to move it from the DC to your operational area, environmentals, etc. Not to mention redundancy.
This price is very market competitive, and is cheaper than what we do in house with our tape robot (though to be fair ours is much smaller and has faster SLAs).
What's the SLA on data retrieval? Can you get at your data in 5 hours or less, or are those tape sitting in a box on a shelf, and have to be manually pulled and loaded into the robot? Regardless, who is your vendor? I might be interested in using them. Those rates seem too good to be true unless they are completely offline (i.e. not mounting the tape when you request it, but rather returning it to you physically).
It might affect you at first, but it's not real life.
So all those snuff videos of decapitations, stonings, etc., and all that hardcore CP (where the kid is getting raped, not just nudie shots), all those gore videos of traffic accidents, none of that is real? What a relief.
It is about some asshole middle manager that is running one department and only caring about the bottom line.
If the corporation creates an environment where that manager is judge solely (or mostly) on the bottom line of his P&L, then they are engendering evil. Even a large corporation can put into place metrics and evaluation criteria which reward managers for making decisions that are profit neutral or profit negative in the short term, but that have other benefits, tangible and intangible, to the company outside of that manager's division.
I stumbled across a site that showed people being hung, Russian soldiers decapitated with butchers knives, and cats set afire. How much worse could the internet possibly get?
That assumes other botnets send the same number of spam emails per bot as Grum. Given it is the largest, and probably has the largest address list, it probably sends more spam per bot than other botnets. TFA says it had the capability of sending 18b spam message per day, which is about 90k messages per bot. Other botnets might be only sending 50k or 10k per bot per day.
The debate is actually over whether it's a harmful medical procedure performed on the fetus. Basically one group sees the woman as a caregiver who has by her actions taken over care of another individual currently incapacitated from caring for themselves, and doesn't believe a woman should be allowed to casually withdraw care given that it is 100% likely to lead to the death of said individual. The other group says if an individual hasn't been seen yet, it doesn't exist, and thus executing said individual is fine and not murder.
Obviously way oversimplified, but at least you own up to such in the next paragraph. However, I would point out that this:
the woman as a caregiver who has by her actions taken over care of another individual
is quite obviously wrong. Perhaps you are talking about the abortion debate in general, but TFA and recent social discussion specifically relates to cases of rape.
just a magic but arbitrary switch that has nothing to do with physical development;
It's not really magic, and it does have something to do with physical development, though I agree it is arbitrary to a certain extent. Different people have different opinions about how late in a pregnancy an abortion is permissible. One is: "if the fetus can survive outside the womb then it shouldn't be aborted." There are numerous other, more objective measures, you could use. For example: detectable heartbeat; brainwaves that match a certain level of activity; X grams of mass. Each of these is somewhat arbitrary, but they are not "magic". They attempt to determine a point in time when the physical development is such that we should confer individual rights upon the fetus. Somewhere between the state of "separate egg and sperm" and "live-born baby" is a point at which that organism should be granted certain rights. To me, that line's definition should be all about "development," though the question of what level of development is a thorny one.
the other group believes the same thing, but the thing suddenly becomes an individual earlier.
For the majority of Pro-Life people, this earlier time is conception. To me, this position is just as (maybe slightly) more arbitrary than the other position. I'm not sure there is any "magic" to it, other than the magic of cellular mitosis. It too has something to do with physical development - the organism is growing, it has crossed a critical threshold to multi-celled.
I don't believe newborn babies are any different than a fetus: they're blank and have no individuality, and a one-day-old is pretty worthless and not really a human being but just a collection of cells.
There is very little difference, physically speaking, between a fetus minutes or hours before birth and a baby minutes or hours after birth. One difference is that the baby is breathing air in it's lungs, rather than receiving oxygen and other resources through the umbilical cord. That's a pretty dramatic change in life process. I think being unconnected from the mother is a pretty significant step. Without any conscious support, a baby will die. Without any conscious support, a fetus will (most likely) live. A baby can communicate it's needs in a rudimentary way, but one that is sophisticated compared to a fetus.
Now, do the police have a right to investigate? Absolutely. Do they have any right to detain the man? Absolutely not.
Actually, detention of suspects at the onset, during and after an investigation is common and not unconstitutional within limits. From TFS, this sounds like a pretty routine psych detention. I've had a friend detained on at least 2 occasions for psych evaluations, though in fairness he was committing trespassing crimes both times.
Easy solution. Make it so that spammers can see posts by everyone, including other spammers. That way spammers will think they are being successful, especially if you do an IP block on them.
Until the 2nd, 3rd, 4th account is identified and marked as a spam account, it won't be able to see the posts of the 1st account.
(It's actually illegal for State Dept (and probably other Dept's) employees to read the leaked cables, though I'm not implying that I work for the State Dept.)
Murder is, by definition, the bad kind of killing. Other types of killing may exist-- it depends on the state.
And thus there is not a lot of agreement on "murder." Saying that different people define murder differently, but all agree that murder is bad, belies the GGP's point that there is universal agreement on a particular behavior.
You could add a dot/period before the last character of your user name and filter that way too, though it makes it more difficult to keep track of a wide variety of sites that way.
You don't have to create extra email address with Gmail. You can use periods or '+' to create custom email address that still get delivered to your inbox. Then you can set up filters or rules to treat them accordingly. For example, you could sign up with a site with "yourname+sitename@gmail.com" and the email will go to "yourname@gmail.com". So you can track address leaks/sales, or auto-delete/auto-star/auto-file emails from certain sites.
Well, at the mid-management level, I know that I had accounts on vendor/customer websites (e.g. newegg, Dell, Costco) because I had to do business with them for my job. In some cases, like Newegg, I had my on personal account as well.
I can easily see the need for an account on Dropbox or Twitter or FB or some other service that was tied expressly to your job, and not for you personally. I don't see as much of a case for C level positions, but I guess if you want to easily share files across computers it makes sense.
And re security, if you can't trust your CEO not to steal files, then you have bigger problems.
Slashdot Mirror
For home use, though ... I don't need instant access to my personal backups. Sounds like a nice, cheap option for me.
Hmm... Carbonite is $60 per year per computer. That's $5 per month, so if your HDD is over 500 GB, Carbonite is cheaper. Additionally, it automatically encrypts before sending to their servers, restore is immediate (or nearly so). The only drawback is you have to manually add video files to the backup.
specs say 1.6TB max compressed but i've seen my tapes hold 3TB and 4TB. LTO-5 is even better but too expensive.
What are you paying for -5 and -4? We pay $50 for -5. Not sure about -4 but it's probably around $20-$30. They are about the same per GB.
At $50 for an LTO-5, that's about 3.3 cents per GB native. If the tape has a life of 3 years, that's .09 cents (9 hundreths of a penny) per month per GB for material. But as another person said, the bulk of your costs are going to be infrastructure: the robots to move those tapes around, the actors and drives, the supporting networking infrastructure, bandwidth to move it from the DC to your operational area, environmentals, etc. Not to mention redundancy.
This price is very market competitive, and is cheaper than what we do in house with our tape robot (though to be fair ours is much smaller and has faster SLAs).
$2000 a month to store over 1000 tapes for us.
What's the SLA on data retrieval? Can you get at your data in 5 hours or less, or are those tape sitting in a box on a shelf, and have to be manually pulled and loaded into the robot? Regardless, who is your vendor? I might be interested in using them. Those rates seem too good to be true unless they are completely offline (i.e. not mounting the tape when you request it, but rather returning it to you physically).
Oh sure... think of the programmer. What about the AI? What about it's emotional well being? You humanist.
It might affect you at first, but it's not real life.
So all those snuff videos of decapitations, stonings, etc., and all that hardcore CP (where the kid is getting raped, not just nudie shots), all those gore videos of traffic accidents, none of that is real? What a relief.
It is about some asshole middle manager that is running one department and only caring about the bottom line.
If the corporation creates an environment where that manager is judge solely (or mostly) on the bottom line of his P&L, then they are engendering evil. Even a large corporation can put into place metrics and evaluation criteria which reward managers for making decisions that are profit neutral or profit negative in the short term, but that have other benefits, tangible and intangible, to the company outside of that manager's division.
Robots are preferred but not required.
I wonder who at Google is spending their 20% time trying to program the AI that can do this job.
I stumbled across a site that showed people being hung, Russian soldiers decapitated with butchers knives, and cats set afire. How much worse could the internet possibly get?
/b/ is just the tip of the iceberg.
That assumes other botnets send the same number of spam emails per bot as Grum. Given it is the largest, and probably has the largest address list, it probably sends more spam per bot than other botnets. TFA says it had the capability of sending 18b spam message per day, which is about 90k messages per bot. Other botnets might be only sending 50k or 10k per bot per day.
The debate is actually over whether it's a harmful medical procedure performed on the fetus. Basically one group sees the woman as a caregiver who has by her actions taken over care of another individual currently incapacitated from caring for themselves, and doesn't believe a woman should be allowed to casually withdraw care given that it is 100% likely to lead to the death of said individual. The other group says if an individual hasn't been seen yet, it doesn't exist, and thus executing said individual is fine and not murder.
Obviously way oversimplified, but at least you own up to such in the next paragraph. However, I would point out that this:
the woman as a caregiver who has by her actions taken over care of another individual
is quite obviously wrong. Perhaps you are talking about the abortion debate in general, but TFA and recent social discussion specifically relates to cases of rape.
just a magic but arbitrary switch that has nothing to do with physical development;
It's not really magic, and it does have something to do with physical development, though I agree it is arbitrary to a certain extent. Different people have different opinions about how late in a pregnancy an abortion is permissible. One is: "if the fetus can survive outside the womb then it shouldn't be aborted." There are numerous other, more objective measures, you could use. For example: detectable heartbeat; brainwaves that match a certain level of activity; X grams of mass. Each of these is somewhat arbitrary, but they are not "magic". They attempt to determine a point in time when the physical development is such that we should confer individual rights upon the fetus. Somewhere between the state of "separate egg and sperm" and "live-born baby" is a point at which that organism should be granted certain rights. To me, that line's definition should be all about "development," though the question of what level of development is a thorny one.
the other group believes the same thing, but the thing suddenly becomes an individual earlier.
For the majority of Pro-Life people, this earlier time is conception. To me, this position is just as (maybe slightly) more arbitrary than the other position. I'm not sure there is any "magic" to it, other than the magic of cellular mitosis. It too has something to do with physical development - the organism is growing, it has crossed a critical threshold to multi-celled.
I don't believe newborn babies are any different than a fetus: they're blank and have no individuality, and a one-day-old is pretty worthless and not really a human being but just a collection of cells.
There is very little difference, physically speaking, between a fetus minutes or hours before birth and a baby minutes or hours after birth. One difference is that the baby is breathing air in it's lungs, rather than receiving oxygen and other resources through the umbilical cord. That's a pretty dramatic change in life process. I think being unconnected from the mother is a pretty significant step. Without any conscious support, a baby will die. Without any conscious support, a fetus will (most likely) live. A baby can communicate it's needs in a rudimentary way, but one that is sophisticated compared to a fetus.
Are you arguing for a regressive tax system?
Can't tell if young, naive pseudo-libertarian or just trolling.
somewhat worse than a "brief period of instability".
In much the same way, The Dark Ages was a short respite from learning, technology and engineering.
p>
Now, do the police have a right to investigate? Absolutely. Do they have any right to detain the man? Absolutely not.
Actually, detention of suspects at the onset, during and after an investigation is common and not unconstitutional within limits. From TFS, this sounds like a pretty routine psych detention. I've had a friend detained on at least 2 occasions for psych evaluations, though in fairness he was committing trespassing crimes both times.
no money is produced by the government whatsoever. Never has been, never will be.
What are you talking about? Haven't you heard of quantitative easing or monetizing the debt?
Maybe what you meant that no value is produced by the government.
Easy solution. Make it so that spammers can see posts by everyone, including other spammers. That way spammers will think they are being successful, especially if you do an IP block on them.
Until the 2nd, 3rd, 4th account is identified and marked as a spam account, it won't be able to see the posts of the 1st account.
It was. I was just making the small joke that you were using wikipedia to "prove" someone was wrong.
Haha.... you won't catch so easily FBI man. ;)
(It's actually illegal for State Dept (and probably other Dept's) employees to read the leaked cables, though I'm not implying that I work for the State Dept.)
Warning: Parent link is NSFA (Not Safe For America).
Someone is citing wikipedia on the internet.
So if the user has accounts on 15 different sites, you would have them set up 15 different email address?
Murder is, by definition, the bad kind of killing. Other types of killing may exist-- it depends on the state.
And thus there is not a lot of agreement on "murder." Saying that different people define murder differently, but all agree that murder is bad, belies the GGP's point that there is universal agreement on a particular behavior.
There are a few things that the world DOES agree on - such as kiddie porn and murder being bad -
I don't see a lot of agreement on "murder being bad." Lots of countries and cultures regularly commit it with premeditation.
You could add a dot/period before the last character of your user name and filter that way too, though it makes it more difficult to keep track of a wide variety of sites that way.
You don't have to create extra email address with Gmail. You can use periods or '+' to create custom email address that still get delivered to your inbox. Then you can set up filters or rules to treat them accordingly. For example, you could sign up with a site with "yourname+sitename@gmail.com" and the email will go to "yourname@gmail.com". So you can track address leaks/sales, or auto-delete/auto-star/auto-file emails from certain sites.
Well, at the mid-management level, I know that I had accounts on vendor/customer websites (e.g. newegg, Dell, Costco) because I had to do business with them for my job. In some cases, like Newegg, I had my on personal account as well.
I can easily see the need for an account on Dropbox or Twitter or FB or some other service that was tied expressly to your job, and not for you personally. I don't see as much of a case for C level positions, but I guess if you want to easily share files across computers it makes sense.
And re security, if you can't trust your CEO not to steal files, then you have bigger problems.