$4 is just a token price. The government is expected to pay for the bill. It is less than the BOM of a Nokia 105 ($13.50), a dumb phone that retails for $20.
I suspect the diamonds they are going for will be extremely expensive for their size. Most likely natural diamonds with exceptional qualities. The biggest difficulty in making metallic hydrogen is achieving the enormous pressures required. And for this, you need the best diamonds you can find, or else, they will shatter. Cheap synthetic diamonds, the kind you find in abrasives, are not pure at all. High quality synthetic diamonds are not that cheap compared to their natural counterparts, and it is not even sure that they can be made with the required characteristics.
No one claimed the world was perfect. The claim is that it is improving. When we make statistics about malnutrition, it includes the potential 20M you mentioned, and the average trend is down. Political unrest is not new either, it comes and goes, some countries get better and some get worse, but the big picture is that things are improving. The first argument is typical of NGOs looking for funding. It is marketing strategy : look at all the bad things that happen, you can do something by giving us money. If they tell you that everything is fine, how will they motivate people to give them the money they need to do what they do?
It will make coders super productive and put lesser ability coders out of work. The good coders will suddenly start cranking out x10 more code as they can figure out how to get the AI system to do parts of their jobs.
Anyways, the current method of development is that the hundred page spec. is currently broken down into thousands of unit tests. So, if you can automate the creation and maintaining of half of these tests, then you've eliminated half of your devs.
It is what I think, I just have a more optimistic point of view. Instead of eliminating half of the devs, I expect twice better code. In fact, the thing about unit tests is how it should be done. Unfortunately testing is commonly barely given a second thought and it is possible that AIs will simply add testing where there wasn't before. At one placed I worked, we had various static analysis tools setup. It didn't put code reviewers out of a job, there weren't any reviewers in the first place. Quality improved, no one got fired, everyone happy. As for low skilled coders losing their job, yes, it might happen. Thankfully, young coders can probably be retrained as AI assisted coders rather quickly. And older coders should have known better. Rapidly evolving fields like programming require you to do more than your assigned tasks in order to stay relevant. If you didn't, sooner or later, things will turn bad for you, AI or not.
What many people don't understand is that describing things to a computer, no matter how, is what coding is. The programming language is just a facade. Managing highly complex tasks accurately enough for computers to understand is where the real skills lie.
Just look at one example from the paper:
A new shop near you is selling n paintings. You have k < n friends and you would like to buy each of your friends a painting from the shop. Return the minimal amount of money you will need to spend.
And the output (modified to fit slashdot):
k=int; b=[int]; c=SORT b; d=TAKE k c; e=SUM d
What it proves is that the AI is great at answering test questions. However, in a production environment, no one is going to write and maintain a description like this. And it is just a tiny function. To match the complexity of a real-life program, you have to imagine the same kind of description but spanning hundreds of pages...
Compilers didn't put coders out of a job, these AIs may be the next step but they still won't displace coders. Although it may require some skill adjustments, it won't fundamentally change the job.
There may be psychological effects here. It is definitely unsatisfying when there is something in the bottle you cannot access.
In fact there is no doubt people want to be able to squeeze every last drop of bottles. The real question is : how much are they ready to pay for it? The answer to this question will tell if manufacturers are interested or not.
Geohot, a renowned hacker decided to try making a self driving car. It kinda worked, but it is, well, a hack. However, when regulators came over and asked him to prove that it was actually safe enough for public roads, he backed down and that's how we got Comma.ai free.
I've nothing against Geohot and Comma.ai, quite the opposite in fact, they are great hackers, in the positive sense. However, when lives are on the line, being clever is not enough, we also need the boring and expensive work to make sure it is safe.
On Steam, you can ask for refunds on games you played for less than 2 hours.
In fact I sincerely think that Steam did more against piracy than any DRM scheme. They actually responded to many arguments made by pirates : - You can get refunds (no need to pirate to try) - You can get games really cheap if you wait (you can still play if you are poor) - It is convenient : you can play all games you purchased on any PC with Steam installed, and provided you have a good internet connection, once you decide to buy a game, you can typically play it within minutes (downloading from a pirate site / torrent is not faster)
There are of course things that steam don't offer that piracy do, such as being free, less risk of losing the game (account ban, shutdown,...) and no internet requirement. However, the advantages of piracy are not worth it anymore for many players, even for single player games.
Oh yes, they believe it. But they will never admit it publicly. Why should they? No matter how much piracy benefits them (if it does), they still want you to pay.
And I'd love to see all these people you mentioned work together. I am not sure that putting so many strong personalities together will go anywhere but it will be quite fun to watch.
Physically there is no way to tell that you are free-falling vs actual zero-G. So much that Einstein decided that it was the same thing, did the maths based on this premise and came out with general relativity. Considering how successful his theory is, it is certainly not a bad assumption.
Well, because the ISS exists in the real world, there are still a few effects that make it not completely zero-G, like tidal forces, but I suppose they are small enough to be negligible.
And what if it is just what is just as it says. A way to save energy. Optimizing the workspace is not a bad thing. Done right, it is win/win : more comfort for the employee, more productivity for the company.
You are probably thinking about the boss monitoring every movement of his employees in order to punish them later if they take too many breaks. Truth is : the boss doesn't give a shit. In fact, the ideal employee is one you assign a task and forget about him until he gets back to you with the work done. As an example, I know sysadmins who know exactly what people do on the internet. They know some people spend hours on the internet not working. Their boss know it too, they don't care as long as the work is done and that this activity doesn't endanger the network in some way. In my own work, I happily go on non-work related sites all the time, with my own session. And yes, they are watching, and I never had any problem. Only once I visited a site that was considered a security threat and they got back at me asking me if I did it willingly, I said yes, explained why, and it stayed there. It wasn't a very good reason but at least, they knew it wasn't malware or an intrusion and it is all they needed to know.
Just as an aside, I thought the turn right on red idea was crazy and dangerous when I first heard about it. It really isn't though, and it works quite well.
Coming from Europe, I had the same experience.However, it may be in part because streets tend to be much wider in the US. So in busy intersections, the rightmost lane is almost like a right turn only lane. Fast moving cars can usually just pass you on the left. In Europe, many signaled intersections only have one lane each way, with blind angles and traffic arriving quite fast. When traffic is slower and when there is more space, roundabouts are preferred. There is also significantly more variety, not all crossings are the typical right angle cross.
256m3, quadtree, it is weird. maybe it is 256m2 squares with 1m height resolution. With such confusing specifications, bugs are to be expected. Furthermore, this problem sounds a lot like premature optimization. And look at our world, we can't do anything without being overwhelmed by side effects. The creator certainly has good intuition but he is a lousy coder. I'd hate to work with him.
If you argument that coding is meaningless because it will be automated, you probably don't understand what lies behind coding. What a programmer do is convert vague ideas into something well defined so that the computer can understand. For example the customer will ask for a calculator with number buttons and operators. The programmer will break the problem in small pieces and deal with the details like how the numbers should be stored, what happens when a number overflows, etc... This kind of thinking is independent of the language or code generator. And programming languages just happen be very effective for this kind of work. User friendly code generators exist and will certainly improve but they are typically limited to a narrow scope. To use the more versatile tool, you start running into the same problems coders have, and soon enough, you will actually want to write code. Learning coding at a young age, can, I think, teach problem solving skill that may become useful in many fields.
It's like saying that foreign languages will become useless with automatic translators. That's forgetting the part about the culture and mind opening that goes with it. Of course, I also think that replacing foreign language with coding is retarded. The only thing the have in common is the word "language".
The main reason not to take LSD is that it can drive you insane. It is unlikely but the risk is non-zero, especially if you have predispositions to schizophrenia. It is a substance that can change your life for the better or for the worse, or just give you an enjoyable trip. From what I've seen, the outcome is more likely to be positive, especially if you do what you can to minimize the risks. However the risks are real, and LSD is mostly unpredictable. And while LSD is not toxic and not addictive, you really need to make sure that what you are taking really is LSD. Due to its potency, adulterants shouldn't be a problem. However, common substitutes like 25I-MBOMe have been linked to several deaths. That being said, if you minimize the risks and take a moderate dose the most likely scenario by far is a mostly inconsequential good trip.
I know that antipsychotics can be used to stop a bad trip. Some of them can act as serotonin antagonists. Though I don't know how effective they really are compared to a placebo, and if they are, by what mechanism.
I think we can model this as an exponential decay. As in : the molecule has a 50% of coming out loose and being eliminated every 6 hours.
They sure, some molecules will stay in for much longer than the duration of the trip but after a few days, nothing significant will be left, and after maybe 2 weeks, there won't be a single molecule left in your brain. There are mentions about some kind of "afterglow" lasting a couple of days after a good trip and sometimes subsequent "flashbacks". However, I think they are more likely to be an effect or memorization rather than some of the substance staying in your body.
It depends on the dosage. With very small doses the effects are not that strong. It is more about slightly altered perception than full-blown hallucinations. Colors may become more vivid, you notice small things that you haven't noticed before, etc... You can get the same effects with a placebo. Even experienced trippers can be fooled, at least to some extent. And the summary explicitly mentioned small doses.
Of course, at high doses, there is no way you are going to say you had a placebo if you were given the real deal, though the opposite may be possible if you are naive.
There are different kinds of hallucinogens. They usually fall into 3 broad categories : dissociatives, delirants and psychedelics. - Dissociatives disconnect your mind from your body, causing things like out of body experiences, makes you feel light, etc... Ketamine and PCP are dissociatives. - Delirants cause hallucinations that are indistinguishable from reality, no matter how strange they are. Making you talk to imaginary people, see monsters, etc... Datura as well as many plants associated with whichcraft are delirants. These effects are rarely enjoyable so these substances are not considered drugs of abuse. - Psychedelics cause you to "see things differently". While the hallucinations are convincing, you are usually fully aware that things aren't as they normally are. Technically, they are pseudohallucinations. Common effects include light tracers, distorting shapes, divine revelations, etc... LSD, DMT and psylocibin mushrooms are psychedelics.
tl;dr : people under LSD know they are hallucinating.
Another *wow*. Do you realize how vanishingly small the percentage of people is that are willing to pay more for a slower ride, just to avoid security?
Total time, the train is often faster (depends on the distance of course). Security is just one of the contributing factors. The Shinkansen goes downtown to downtown. There is no need to arrive early, just enough time to walk to the platform before the train leaves, which is exactly the time written on your ticket. You can buy the ticket anytime, even a few minutes before departure if there are seats left, which is often the case. And even if for some reason, the Shinkansen is a bit slower, it is time spent comfortably in a train, not waiting in line and running from place to place.
I think that if you go to Japan and travel there, you too will be willing to "pay more for a slower ride".
Stand the audience to a safe enough distance, and only on the sides of the tube. If the pod fails to stop debris will go mostly forward, thanks to momentum. In case of a depressurization, air will post likely rush in, follow the pipe and ram of the end, projecting debris in line with the pipe but not so much on the sides.
So must likely scenario if the pod hits the end of the tube at full speed and nothing is done to absorb the shock : the pods breaks the end of the tube, flying out like a bullet. Through the hole, air rushes in, carrying most of the smaller debris with it, travels at the speed of sound through the tube the opposite way, break the other end, and everything flies like out of a shotgun. So you have a cannon on one end, a really big shotgun on the other end and nothing much on the sides, which are relatively safe. That's assuming there is no system in place to prevent this kind of catastrophic failure.
Microsoft is still getting more and more subscribers. Office365 is growing, not declining. It is just not growing as fast.
In mathematical terms, we are talking about the _third_ derivative being negative (the function being the money in the bank). For some reason, in the financial world, things aren't good unless you have an exponential growth. And to make sure the growth is unsustainable, it also has to be faster than any kind of inflation.
I won't tell you who I'm working for but it is not an IT company, which is a good thing since the IT department is abysmal... However, I think you overestimate companies in general. You know, you, as an individual, forget about things sometimes. Have you ever found something in house house you thought was lost? Have you ever forgotten to pay a bill? Have you ever missed a deadline just because you forgot about it? If you are a normal human, you probably ended up is such situations. Companies are made of people, they make the same kinds of mistakes. It is even worse because people tend to join and leave the company, information is lost between as it travels the management chain, etc... Proper methods help alleviate the problem but it is far from easy. I've seen many, many facepalm moments, from companies that should know better, both first hand and in the news. And these are companies that are still alive and profitable.
So I think it is very possible for petabytes to go unnoticed, though I think a few terabytes are all what it takes for the bug to appear. And years won't save you, the older things are, the more likely you are to forget.
Slashdot Mirror
$4 is just a token price. The government is expected to pay for the bill.
It is less than the BOM of a Nokia 105 ($13.50), a dumb phone that retails for $20.
I suspect the diamonds they are going for will be extremely expensive for their size. Most likely natural diamonds with exceptional qualities.
The biggest difficulty in making metallic hydrogen is achieving the enormous pressures required. And for this, you need the best diamonds you can find, or else, they will shatter.
Cheap synthetic diamonds, the kind you find in abrasives, are not pure at all. High quality synthetic diamonds are not that cheap compared to their natural counterparts, and it is not even sure that they can be made with the required characteristics.
No one claimed the world was perfect. The claim is that it is improving.
When we make statistics about malnutrition, it includes the potential 20M you mentioned, and the average trend is down. Political unrest is not new either, it comes and goes, some countries get better and some get worse, but the big picture is that things are improving.
The first argument is typical of NGOs looking for funding. It is marketing strategy : look at all the bad things that happen, you can do something by giving us money. If they tell you that everything is fine, how will they motivate people to give them the money they need to do what they do?
That's from the same guys who call oxygen a metal I suppose
It will make coders super productive and put lesser ability coders out of work. The good coders will suddenly start cranking out x10 more code as they can figure out how to get the AI system to do parts of their jobs.
Anyways, the current method of development is that the hundred page spec. is currently broken down into thousands of unit tests. So, if you can automate the creation and maintaining of half of these tests, then you've eliminated half of your devs.
It is what I think, I just have a more optimistic point of view.
Instead of eliminating half of the devs, I expect twice better code. In fact, the thing about unit tests is how it should be done. Unfortunately testing is commonly barely given a second thought and it is possible that AIs will simply add testing where there wasn't before.
At one placed I worked, we had various static analysis tools setup. It didn't put code reviewers out of a job, there weren't any reviewers in the first place. Quality improved, no one got fired, everyone happy.
As for low skilled coders losing their job, yes, it might happen. Thankfully, young coders can probably be retrained as AI assisted coders rather quickly. And older coders should have known better. Rapidly evolving fields like programming require you to do more than your assigned tasks in order to stay relevant. If you didn't, sooner or later, things will turn bad for you, AI or not.
What many people don't understand is that describing things to a computer, no matter how, is what coding is. The programming language is just a facade. Managing highly complex tasks accurately enough for computers to understand is where the real skills lie.
Just look at one example from the paper :
A new shop near you is selling n paintings. You have k < n friends and you would like to buy each of your friends a painting from the shop. Return the minimal amount of money you will need to spend.
And the output (modified to fit slashdot):
k=int; b=[int]; c=SORT b; d=TAKE k c; e=SUM d
What it proves is that the AI is great at answering test questions. However, in a production environment, no one is going to write and maintain a description like this.
And it is just a tiny function. To match the complexity of a real-life program, you have to imagine the same kind of description but spanning hundreds of pages...
Compilers didn't put coders out of a job, these AIs may be the next step but they still won't displace coders. Although it may require some skill adjustments, it won't fundamentally change the job.
There may be psychological effects here.
It is definitely unsatisfying when there is something in the bottle you cannot access.
In fact there is no doubt people want to be able to squeeze every last drop of bottles. The real question is : how much are they ready to pay for it? The answer to this question will tell if manufacturers are interested or not.
Geohot, a renowned hacker decided to try making a self driving car. It kinda worked, but it is, well, a hack.
However, when regulators came over and asked him to prove that it was actually safe enough for public roads, he backed down and that's how we got Comma.ai free.
I've nothing against Geohot and Comma.ai, quite the opposite in fact, they are great hackers, in the positive sense. However, when lives are on the line, being clever is not enough, we also need the boring and expensive work to make sure it is safe.
On Steam, you can ask for refunds on games you played for less than 2 hours.
In fact I sincerely think that Steam did more against piracy than any DRM scheme. They actually responded to many arguments made by pirates :
- You can get refunds (no need to pirate to try)
- You can get games really cheap if you wait (you can still play if you are poor)
- It is convenient : you can play all games you purchased on any PC with Steam installed, and provided you have a good internet connection, once you decide to buy a game, you can typically play it within minutes (downloading from a pirate site / torrent is not faster)
There are of course things that steam don't offer that piracy do, such as being free, less risk of losing the game (account ban, shutdown, ...) and no internet requirement. However, the advantages of piracy are not worth it anymore for many players, even for single player games.
Oh yes, they believe it.
But they will never admit it publicly. Why should they? No matter how much piracy benefits them (if it does), they still want you to pay.
And I'd love to see all these people you mentioned work together. I am not sure that putting so many strong personalities together will go anywhere but it will be quite fun to watch.
Physically there is no way to tell that you are free-falling vs actual zero-G.
So much that Einstein decided that it was the same thing, did the maths based on this premise and came out with general relativity. Considering how successful his theory is, it is certainly not a bad assumption.
Well, because the ISS exists in the real world, there are still a few effects that make it not completely zero-G, like tidal forces, but I suppose they are small enough to be negligible.
And what if it is just what is just as it says. A way to save energy.
Optimizing the workspace is not a bad thing. Done right, it is win/win : more comfort for the employee, more productivity for the company.
You are probably thinking about the boss monitoring every movement of his employees in order to punish them later if they take too many breaks. Truth is : the boss doesn't give a shit. In fact, the ideal employee is one you assign a task and forget about him until he gets back to you with the work done.
As an example, I know sysadmins who know exactly what people do on the internet. They know some people spend hours on the internet not working. Their boss know it too, they don't care as long as the work is done and that this activity doesn't endanger the network in some way.
In my own work, I happily go on non-work related sites all the time, with my own session. And yes, they are watching, and I never had any problem. Only once I visited a site that was considered a security threat and they got back at me asking me if I did it willingly, I said yes, explained why, and it stayed there. It wasn't a very good reason but at least, they knew it wasn't malware or an intrusion and it is all they needed to know.
Just as an aside, I thought the turn right on red idea was crazy and dangerous when I first heard about it. It really isn't though, and it works quite well.
Coming from Europe, I had the same experience.However, it may be in part because streets tend to be much wider in the US. So in busy intersections, the rightmost lane is almost like a right turn only lane. Fast moving cars can usually just pass you on the left.
In Europe, many signaled intersections only have one lane each way, with blind angles and traffic arriving quite fast. When traffic is slower and when there is more space, roundabouts are preferred. There is also significantly more variety, not all crossings are the typical right angle cross.
256m3, quadtree, it is weird. maybe it is 256m2 squares with 1m height resolution.
With such confusing specifications, bugs are to be expected. Furthermore, this problem sounds a lot like premature optimization. And look at our world, we can't do anything without being overwhelmed by side effects. The creator certainly has good intuition but he is a lousy coder. I'd hate to work with him.
If you argument that coding is meaningless because it will be automated, you probably don't understand what lies behind coding.
What a programmer do is convert vague ideas into something well defined so that the computer can understand. For example the customer will ask for a calculator with number buttons and operators. The programmer will break the problem in small pieces and deal with the details like how the numbers should be stored, what happens when a number overflows, etc... This kind of thinking is independent of the language or code generator.
And programming languages just happen be very effective for this kind of work. User friendly code generators exist and will certainly improve but they are typically limited to a narrow scope. To use the more versatile tool, you start running into the same problems coders have, and soon enough, you will actually want to write code.
Learning coding at a young age, can, I think, teach problem solving skill that may become useful in many fields.
It's like saying that foreign languages will become useless with automatic translators. That's forgetting the part about the culture and mind opening that goes with it. Of course, I also think that replacing foreign language with coding is retarded. The only thing the have in common is the word "language".
The main reason not to take LSD is that it can drive you insane. It is unlikely but the risk is non-zero, especially if you have predispositions to schizophrenia.
It is a substance that can change your life for the better or for the worse, or just give you an enjoyable trip. From what I've seen, the outcome is more likely to be positive, especially if you do what you can to minimize the risks. However the risks are real, and LSD is mostly unpredictable.
And while LSD is not toxic and not addictive, you really need to make sure that what you are taking really is LSD. Due to its potency, adulterants shouldn't be a problem. However, common substitutes like 25I-MBOMe have been linked to several deaths.
That being said, if you minimize the risks and take a moderate dose the most likely scenario by far is a mostly inconsequential good trip.
Battery storage reaching critical mass? I hope they are not talking about nuclear batteries...
I know that antipsychotics can be used to stop a bad trip. Some of them can act as serotonin antagonists.
Though I don't know how effective they really are compared to a placebo, and if they are, by what mechanism.
I think we can model this as an exponential decay.
As in : the molecule has a 50% of coming out loose and being eliminated every 6 hours.
They sure, some molecules will stay in for much longer than the duration of the trip but after a few days, nothing significant will be left, and after maybe 2 weeks, there won't be a single molecule left in your brain.
There are mentions about some kind of "afterglow" lasting a couple of days after a good trip and sometimes subsequent "flashbacks". However, I think they are more likely to be an effect or memorization rather than some of the substance staying in your body.
It depends on the dosage.
With very small doses the effects are not that strong. It is more about slightly altered perception than full-blown hallucinations. Colors may become more vivid, you notice small things that you haven't noticed before, etc... You can get the same effects with a placebo. Even experienced trippers can be fooled, at least to some extent.
And the summary explicitly mentioned small doses.
Of course, at high doses, there is no way you are going to say you had a placebo if you were given the real deal, though the opposite may be possible if you are naive.
There are different kinds of hallucinogens. They usually fall into 3 broad categories : dissociatives, delirants and psychedelics.
- Dissociatives disconnect your mind from your body, causing things like out of body experiences, makes you feel light, etc... Ketamine and PCP are dissociatives.
- Delirants cause hallucinations that are indistinguishable from reality, no matter how strange they are. Making you talk to imaginary people, see monsters, etc... Datura as well as many plants associated with whichcraft are delirants. These effects are rarely enjoyable so these substances are not considered drugs of abuse.
- Psychedelics cause you to "see things differently". While the hallucinations are convincing, you are usually fully aware that things aren't as they normally are. Technically, they are pseudohallucinations. Common effects include light tracers, distorting shapes, divine revelations, etc... LSD, DMT and psylocibin mushrooms are psychedelics.
tl;dr : people under LSD know they are hallucinating.
Another *wow*. Do you realize how vanishingly small the percentage of people is that are willing to pay more for a slower ride, just to avoid security?
Total time, the train is often faster (depends on the distance of course). Security is just one of the contributing factors.
The Shinkansen goes downtown to downtown. There is no need to arrive early, just enough time to walk to the platform before the train leaves, which is exactly the time written on your ticket. You can buy the ticket anytime, even a few minutes before departure if there are seats left, which is often the case.
And even if for some reason, the Shinkansen is a bit slower, it is time spent comfortably in a train, not waiting in line and running from place to place.
I think that if you go to Japan and travel there, you too will be willing to "pay more for a slower ride".
Stand the audience to a safe enough distance, and only on the sides of the tube.
If the pod fails to stop debris will go mostly forward, thanks to momentum.
In case of a depressurization, air will post likely rush in, follow the pipe and ram of the end, projecting debris in line with the pipe but not so much on the sides.
So must likely scenario if the pod hits the end of the tube at full speed and nothing is done to absorb the shock : the pods breaks the end of the tube, flying out like a bullet. Through the hole, air rushes in, carrying most of the smaller debris with it, travels at the speed of sound through the tube the opposite way, break the other end, and everything flies like out of a shotgun.
So you have a cannon on one end, a really big shotgun on the other end and nothing much on the sides, which are relatively safe. That's assuming there is no system in place to prevent this kind of catastrophic failure.
Microsoft is still getting more and more subscribers. Office365 is growing, not declining. It is just not growing as fast.
In mathematical terms, we are talking about the _third_ derivative being negative (the function being the money in the bank). For some reason, in the financial world, things aren't good unless you have an exponential growth. And to make sure the growth is unsustainable, it also has to be faster than any kind of inflation.
I won't tell you who I'm working for but it is not an IT company, which is a good thing since the IT department is abysmal...
However, I think you overestimate companies in general. You know, you, as an individual, forget about things sometimes. Have you ever found something in house house you thought was lost? Have you ever forgotten to pay a bill? Have you ever missed a deadline just because you forgot about it? If you are a normal human, you probably ended up is such situations.
Companies are made of people, they make the same kinds of mistakes. It is even worse because people tend to join and leave the company, information is lost between as it travels the management chain, etc... Proper methods help alleviate the problem but it is far from easy. I've seen many, many facepalm moments, from companies that should know better, both first hand and in the news. And these are companies that are still alive and profitable.
So I think it is very possible for petabytes to go unnoticed, though I think a few terabytes are all what it takes for the bug to appear. And years won't save you, the older things are, the more likely you are to forget.