No pun intended, but it'd make a great thin client alternative to a laptop.
Consider you had a "case" that you could dock the iPad to that had a battery, keyboard, mouse, charger, and possibly speakers. Combine some VPN software and RDP/VNC and it'd be pretty sweet for the occasional traveler.
I enjoy reading about Google's data center operations and architecture. But I know that, for the most part, it's useless for a typical enterprise's data center. Why? Because that vast majority of Google's computing capability don't actually have a "correct" answer to give. It doesn't actually matter if your search results are delivered from an index that has a missing 2% of indexes pages.
On the other hand, I bet their payroll system runs on bog standard enterprise class equipment purchased from one of the big vendors (IBM, Oracle, HP, or Dell.) And they are running JD Edwards or something similar.
They grandfathered -- or more accurately they honored -- the existing contracts because if they didn't the customer would have the option of walking away from AT&T without having to pay an early termination fee. Given that a lot of these people are iPhone users with heavily subsidized phones, that could be really painful for AT&T.
A) I'm clever pretty much everywhere. B) I feel brave regardless of whether I'm behind a keyboard, and whether I'm wearing underwear or not. C) Nice to see you've gotten over your straw man arguments and have moved on to ad hominem.
So we're agreed then that you're wrong. Let me give you a suggestion for the future. If you are going to dispute someone's statements then you need to actually dispute their statements, not something you've made up, something easily rebutted, and claimed is their statements. What you and the gentleman who wrote the blog post you linked to have done is what is called lying.
Amdahl's Law says nothing about the relative proportions of parallelizable:sequential. It says nothing about alternative formulations. It says nothing about embarrassing parallelism. It is merely a true observation as to the limits of parallelism in any particular algorithm. Even when the algorithm is 100% parallel it is still true.
So get over yourself and stop trying to be more important than you really are with your juvenile attempts at being scandalous.
If I wipe away all the flim-flam and falsely claimed presumptions, what you -- and the linked blog post -- are saying is that Amdahl's law is 100% correct?
Rather than continuing to debate and having to point out the logical flaws in your reasoning and the wackiness of your approach of telepathy, channeling and otherwise trying to read Dr. Amdahl's mind in order to state what he regards and is embarrassed by, I will simply present you with a bet:
I will give you 100:1 odds that you cannot present me with an algorithm that violates Amdahl's law. Your minimum bet must be $10,000 USD. Since you are sure that he is wrong I'm going to assume you have such an algorithm in hand and set the time frame for the bet at 1 week just to get it wrapped up. An algorithm is a specific solution, not a specific problem. Therefore for you to be considered the winner you must present a single algorithm that does not obey the law, not two contrasting algorithms in which one is more parallelizable than the other. What say you? It should be an easy $1,000,000, right?
If you don't take my bet than I will conclude that you concede the argument and you acknowledge that you are utterly and completely wrong.
That's why I said "substantial features and functionality". The vast majority of what a PS3 is is not the Other OS feature. On the other hand if I buy a racing game and it has three tracks and they later remove two of those tracks they have removed 2/3rds of the product. Just like if I buy a word processor and after clicking on the EULA and it's "no particular fitness" clause it pops up a dialog that says "HA-HA Fooled You!" and the only button is labeled exit, I will certainly get my money back regardless of the disclaimers in the EULA.
You're buying a license to a particular feature set and level of functionality. I have no doubt that the people who actually paid money have a legal case if the update took away substantial features and functionality.
I suppose if you're a tiny company with a tiny amount of data to backup it'd make sense. If you had even a few tens of gigabytes of data why do you want your offsite storage behind a network connection that can deliver perhaps 1 MB/s? Sure if I want to do an occasional file restore, but when the shit hit the fan I want to be able to bring a crate full of tapes into my data center and streaming off of 8 tape drives at 400 MB/s.
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
I'm not going to get into a debate about parsing that one sentence.
Before Julian they came for Massey Energy and the Big Branch Mine. I don't explode and kill my workers so I didn't speak up. And they came for BP, but I don't spill oil into the Gulf of Mexico so I didn't speak up. And they came for Union Carbide. I don't leak toxic gas so I didn't speak up. Then they came for the meat packing plant, but I don't spill blood into rivers so I didn't speak up. Then they came for the crack house, but I don't create a public nuisance so I didn't speak up. Then they came for Pacific Gas and Electric, but I put dump hexavalent chromium into the water table so I didn't speak up.
Look, somethings that create value can also create problems. Sometimes those things are shutdown or fined.
I understand. But the point is how do companies raise cash? Either loans, asset sales or issue stock. No one is going to loan Google $200 billion, it'd take decades to pay off and would impair their growth too much. They're not even worth $200 billion so asset sales are out of the question. As far as issuing stock... well they're already expensive (see high P/E ratio), no one is going to pay a premium. Any plan to issue so much stock would see a shareholder revolt. At a minimum people would be selling off their holdings and driving down the price and impacting their ability to even raise enough money at all. More realistically they'd be hit with so many lawsuits the chairman, BOD, president & CEO would be too damned busy trying to figure out how they're going to get out of the situation without personally being bankrupted.
(Incidentally, you should be pricing just the subdivisions which make movies when talking about the MPAA, not the parent company.)
The casual, off-hand tone of "buy out the whole" and "corporate raid" indicated (to me anyway) a hostile takeover. You can't buy subsidiaries in that fashion, they're not on the market, you are stuck buying the parent.
Disney has a market cap of $71.86 billion. News Corp (owns Fox Entertainment Group which owns 20th Century Fox) has a market cap of $50 billion. Sony (owns Sony Pictures) has a market cap if $19 billion. Comcast market cap $74 billion (owns Universal Pictures.) Time Warner (owns Warner Bros. Pictures) market cap $38 billion. I've no idea what Viacom is worth as they're private. The five publicly traded companies have a combined market cap of $252 billion.
Google has $44 billion in cash. Facebook's IPO hopes to raise $5 billion. Not only could they not "buy out the whole MAFIAA with little leverage", they couldn't do it even if they sold their souls. And it's unlikely anyone would want to buy those two souls. FB will have P/E of 166, GOOG's P/E is 20. Two of the most profitable companies in the world don't have such high P/E ratios. (AAPL P/E is 13 & XOM P/E is 10.)
I certainly never said they didn't include applying security patches and closing holes. I said that it's more than that. As soon as someone is wandering around your network you don't know what systems have been compromised. He emailed an executable to an employee. The employee ran the executable. The program installs itself on the employee's machine and provides a mechanism for the intruder to stage additional attacks on your network. Maybe he installed a key logger which gives him the employee's credentials which are then used to access a system the employee is authorized to use. From there the intruder uses a not publicly known local privilege escalation to install kernel modules which roll out into a root kit on a database server. This allows him to collect credentials from anyone logging into the database or the system hosting the database. Any ssh-agents running? Well since he's root he can use any of those to log into other systems. And so on and so on. Along the way the intruder also modifies some documents, updates a few databases and installs lots of back doors to ensure future access. Everything has to be verified and cleaned up. And none of it is necessarily a failing of the IT organization.
Don't think of it as a car, think of it as a jogger who is mugged in the park and shoved onto a broken stick ending up impaled through the stomach. You don't just pull the stick out and put a band-aid on it. You have to go in there and see if any part of the stick broke off inside the jogger. You have to see if there are any internal injuries that need fixing up.
Once the notice comes to IT that they've had a break-in you've got an awful lot of work to do. Much more than just applying a security patch. You've got to figure out what happened and which systems were affected. Which means that even if you have a situation like this where the attacker tells you how they got in, you don't know if they are lying. So you have to do a security survey of every single system on your network to make sure there are no back doors, root kits, or altered data. Just reviewing could readily cost you hundreds to thousands of dollars per system. You may be facing multiple nuke-n-pave situations on your servers (may cost you $5,000 - $10,000/system.) Which means you will be losing data or will have to recreate data. If you have a centralized reservation system they may have to take that down in which case you are idling thousands of workers worldwide as well as losing business during the downtime. That's probably measured in thousands of dollars per minute in costs and losses. You've got to bring in your legal team and executive management so they can determine if non-IT related actions that need to be taken (offer your customers identity theft protection?) Who knows how much that is, but it could easily be north of $100,000. Probably you'll be bringing in security experts to review your policies, practices and implementation. A team of four at $250/hr/consultant and you are burning $40,000/week just in consultant fees. Those consultants will be working with your IT staff who will not be doing their normal work, so that's another $5,000 - $10,000/week.
$400,000 - $1,000,000 is an easy number for an IT organization to reach in a large company. A business the size of Marriott may well have a central IT staff numbering between 750 - 1000 people. If they have a particularly efficient team and are on the low end of staffing (750) and have good control of salary ($60,000/yr), they have annual staff costs over $56,000,000. Diverting 10% of those means $108,000/week.
Unless you are retiring in 2008-2016 then it doesn't really matter that your investments are down today. And if you are retiring in 2008-2016 then you failed to follow the smart advice to be transferring your money out of investments and into "cash" (cash equivalent investments that is.)
Additionally, if you were employed through the recession and crash then if you didn't up your retirement contributions enormously then you failed to take advantage of a great opportunity to be buying blue chip stocks and mutual funds at rock bottom prices with 40% upsides in two to three years.
You almost get it. If a community decides not to fund a library then there is no library and no amount of litigation can force that community to pay for the creation (or continued existence) of a library. If a library doesn't serve the needs of the majority then the library can be closed, the library staff fired, the collection recycled into toilet paper and paper towels and the building sold to property developers. At the other less extreme end, even a public library has no obligation to provide space and care for any particular book. Shelf space is limited.
This is obviously absurd. The schools are public spaces, and the courts have ruled in favor of children having all of the constitutional rights of adults.
Yeah? Go hold a rally there why don't you? I'm talking about the government being able to say "yes this is publicly owned, but you still cannot camp|hold a rally|eat your lunch|read your pornography|sleep here."
And no the courts have not held that children have all the constitutional rights of adults. In fact it's very much otherwise. Hell there are numerous clauses of the constitution that explicitly deny rights to children.
Which is comically out of sync with the letter or spirit of 1A.
Says you. The US Supreme Court Justices (and the vast majority of Americans) say otherwise which means that your opinion on this subject is irrelevant.
You don't have a right to make a public library G-rated only...
Me personally? No, I don't, But the residents of Seattle? They most certainly do. There is no right to a public library at all. If the people of a community decide to create a library they have absolute freedom to fill that library with the types of materials that they feel will best serve the community. If videos of anal sex and other pornography are making people uncomfortable enough to not use the library then don't be surprised if the budget for the library shrinks to zero. Whatever your personal feelings and concerns, it's not about you any more than it's about me.
I'm fond enough of porn that I actually pay for it. But this is not a free speech issue, it's a use of public funds issue. I have no more obligation to provide porn to the poor than I am required to buy them beer and cigarettes.
Slashdot Mirror
Done by the inexperienced perhaps. Location, sure. A number, sure. But type and purpose and OS? No thanks. DNS is not a configuration management tool.
Assign your servers names and addresses for purposes of managing the servers. Assign your applications their own names, and (potentially) addresses.
No pun intended, but it'd make a great thin client alternative to a laptop.
Consider you had a "case" that you could dock the iPad to that had a battery, keyboard, mouse, charger, and possibly speakers. Combine some VPN software and RDP/VNC and it'd be pretty sweet for the occasional traveler.
I enjoy reading about Google's data center operations and architecture. But I know that, for the most part, it's useless for a typical enterprise's data center. Why? Because that vast majority of Google's computing capability don't actually have a "correct" answer to give. It doesn't actually matter if your search results are delivered from an index that has a missing 2% of indexes pages.
On the other hand, I bet their payroll system runs on bog standard enterprise class equipment purchased from one of the big vendors (IBM, Oracle, HP, or Dell.) And they are running JD Edwards or something similar.
You're forgetting the most exciting part! He gets to collect everyone's usernames and passwords. How sweet!
a) it's "retcon."
b) it's "nocter" backwards.
They grandfathered -- or more accurately they honored -- the existing contracts because if they didn't the customer would have the option of walking away from AT&T without having to pay an early termination fee. Given that a lot of these people are iPhone users with heavily subsidized phones, that could be really painful for AT&T.
A) I'm clever pretty much everywhere.
B) I feel brave regardless of whether I'm behind a keyboard, and whether I'm wearing underwear or not.
C) Nice to see you've gotten over your straw man arguments and have moved on to ad hominem.
So we're agreed then that you're wrong. Let me give you a suggestion for the future. If you are going to dispute someone's statements then you need to actually dispute their statements, not something you've made up, something easily rebutted, and claimed is their statements. What you and the gentleman who wrote the blog post you linked to have done is what is called lying.
Amdahl's Law says nothing about the relative proportions of parallelizable:sequential. It says nothing about alternative formulations. It says nothing about embarrassing parallelism. It is merely a true observation as to the limits of parallelism in any particular algorithm. Even when the algorithm is 100% parallel it is still true.
So get over yourself and stop trying to be more important than you really are with your juvenile attempts at being scandalous.
If I wipe away all the flim-flam and falsely claimed presumptions, what you -- and the linked blog post -- are saying is that Amdahl's law is 100% correct?
Rather than continuing to debate and having to point out the logical flaws in your reasoning and the wackiness of your approach of telepathy, channeling and otherwise trying to read Dr. Amdahl's mind in order to state what he regards and is embarrassed by, I will simply present you with a bet:
I will give you 100:1 odds that you cannot present me with an algorithm that violates Amdahl's law. Your minimum bet must be $10,000 USD. Since you are sure that he is wrong I'm going to assume you have such an algorithm in hand and set the time frame for the bet at 1 week just to get it wrapped up. An algorithm is a specific solution, not a specific problem. Therefore for you to be considered the winner you must present a single algorithm that does not obey the law, not two contrasting algorithms in which one is more parallelizable than the other. What say you? It should be an easy $1,000,000, right?
If you don't take my bet than I will conclude that you concede the argument and you acknowledge that you are utterly and completely wrong.
Perhaps you are merely trying to be outré but what exactly is wrong about:
"The speedup of a program using multiple processors in parallel computing is limited by the time needed for the sequential fraction of the program."
That's why I said "substantial features and functionality". The vast majority of what a PS3 is is not the Other OS feature. On the other hand if I buy a racing game and it has three tracks and they later remove two of those tracks they have removed 2/3rds of the product. Just like if I buy a word processor and after clicking on the EULA and it's "no particular fitness" clause it pops up a dialog that says "HA-HA Fooled You!" and the only button is labeled exit, I will certainly get my money back regardless of the disclaimers in the EULA.
You're buying a license to a particular feature set and level of functionality. I have no doubt that the people who actually paid money have a legal case if the update took away substantial features and functionality.
I suppose if you're a tiny company with a tiny amount of data to backup it'd make sense. If you had even a few tens of gigabytes of data why do you want your offsite storage behind a network connection that can deliver perhaps 1 MB/s? Sure if I want to do an occasional file restore, but when the shit hit the fan I want to be able to bring a crate full of tapes into my data center and streaming off of 8 tape drives at 400 MB/s.
1) Everybody lies.
2) It's not lupus.
Here is what it actually says:
I'm not going to get into a debate about parsing that one sentence.
Any reason that you think this shutdown has anything to do with:
Otherwise 18 USC 242 has no application here.
Before Julian they came for Massey Energy and the Big Branch Mine. I don't explode and kill my workers so I didn't speak up.
And they came for BP, but I don't spill oil into the Gulf of Mexico so I didn't speak up.
And they came for Union Carbide. I don't leak toxic gas so I didn't speak up.
Then they came for the meat packing plant, but I don't spill blood into rivers so I didn't speak up.
Then they came for the crack house, but I don't create a public nuisance so I didn't speak up.
Then they came for Pacific Gas and Electric, but I put dump hexavalent chromium into the water table so I didn't speak up.
Look, somethings that create value can also create problems. Sometimes those things are shutdown or fined.
I understand. But the point is how do companies raise cash? Either loans, asset sales or issue stock. No one is going to loan Google $200 billion, it'd take decades to pay off and would impair their growth too much. They're not even worth $200 billion so asset sales are out of the question. As far as issuing stock... well they're already expensive (see high P/E ratio), no one is going to pay a premium. Any plan to issue so much stock would see a shareholder revolt. At a minimum people would be selling off their holdings and driving down the price and impacting their ability to even raise enough money at all. More realistically they'd be hit with so many lawsuits the chairman, BOD, president & CEO would be too damned busy trying to figure out how they're going to get out of the situation without personally being bankrupted.
The casual, off-hand tone of "buy out the whole" and "corporate raid" indicated (to me anyway) a hostile takeover. You can't buy subsidiaries in that fashion, they're not on the market, you are stuck buying the parent.
Disney has a market cap of $71.86 billion. News Corp (owns Fox Entertainment Group which owns 20th Century Fox) has a market cap of $50 billion. Sony (owns Sony Pictures) has a market cap if $19 billion. Comcast market cap $74 billion (owns Universal Pictures.) Time Warner (owns Warner Bros. Pictures) market cap $38 billion. I've no idea what Viacom is worth as they're private. The five publicly traded companies have a combined market cap of $252 billion.
Google has $44 billion in cash. Facebook's IPO hopes to raise $5 billion. Not only could they not "buy out the whole MAFIAA with little leverage", they couldn't do it even if they sold their souls. And it's unlikely anyone would want to buy those two souls. FB will have P/E of 166, GOOG's P/E is 20. Two of the most profitable companies in the world don't have such high P/E ratios. (AAPL P/E is 13 & XOM P/E is 10.)
I certainly never said they didn't include applying security patches and closing holes. I said that it's more than that. As soon as someone is wandering around your network you don't know what systems have been compromised. He emailed an executable to an employee. The employee ran the executable. The program installs itself on the employee's machine and provides a mechanism for the intruder to stage additional attacks on your network. Maybe he installed a key logger which gives him the employee's credentials which are then used to access a system the employee is authorized to use. From there the intruder uses a not publicly known local privilege escalation to install kernel modules which roll out into a root kit on a database server. This allows him to collect credentials from anyone logging into the database or the system hosting the database. Any ssh-agents running? Well since he's root he can use any of those to log into other systems. And so on and so on. Along the way the intruder also modifies some documents, updates a few databases and installs lots of back doors to ensure future access. Everything has to be verified and cleaned up. And none of it is necessarily a failing of the IT organization.
Don't think of it as a car, think of it as a jogger who is mugged in the park and shoved onto a broken stick ending up impaled through the stomach. You don't just pull the stick out and put a band-aid on it. You have to go in there and see if any part of the stick broke off inside the jogger. You have to see if there are any internal injuries that need fixing up.
Why do you think the damages are made up?
Once the notice comes to IT that they've had a break-in you've got an awful lot of work to do. Much more than just applying a security patch. You've got to figure out what happened and which systems were affected. Which means that even if you have a situation like this where the attacker tells you how they got in, you don't know if they are lying. So you have to do a security survey of every single system on your network to make sure there are no back doors, root kits, or altered data. Just reviewing could readily cost you hundreds to thousands of dollars per system. You may be facing multiple nuke-n-pave situations on your servers (may cost you $5,000 - $10,000/system.) Which means you will be losing data or will have to recreate data. If you have a centralized reservation system they may have to take that down in which case you are idling thousands of workers worldwide as well as losing business during the downtime. That's probably measured in thousands of dollars per minute in costs and losses. You've got to bring in your legal team and executive management so they can determine if non-IT related actions that need to be taken (offer your customers identity theft protection?) Who knows how much that is, but it could easily be north of $100,000. Probably you'll be bringing in security experts to review your policies, practices and implementation. A team of four at $250/hr/consultant and you are burning $40,000/week just in consultant fees. Those consultants will be working with your IT staff who will not be doing their normal work, so that's another $5,000 - $10,000/week.
$400,000 - $1,000,000 is an easy number for an IT organization to reach in a large company. A business the size of Marriott may well have a central IT staff numbering between 750 - 1000 people. If they have a particularly efficient team and are on the low end of staffing (750) and have good control of salary ($60,000/yr), they have annual staff costs over $56,000,000. Diverting 10% of those means $108,000/week.
Unless you are retiring in 2008-2016 then it doesn't really matter that your investments are down today. And if you are retiring in 2008-2016 then you failed to follow the smart advice to be transferring your money out of investments and into "cash" (cash equivalent investments that is.)
Additionally, if you were employed through the recession and crash then if you didn't up your retirement contributions enormously then you failed to take advantage of a great opportunity to be buying blue chip stocks and mutual funds at rock bottom prices with 40% upsides in two to three years.
You almost get it. If a community decides not to fund a library then there is no library and no amount of litigation can force that community to pay for the creation (or continued existence) of a library. If a library doesn't serve the needs of the majority then the library can be closed, the library staff fired, the collection recycled into toilet paper and paper towels and the building sold to property developers. At the other less extreme end, even a public library has no obligation to provide space and care for any particular book. Shelf space is limited.
Really? http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/03/judge-restores-access-to-wisconsin-capitol----but-no-staying-overnight.php
Or were you referring to parks?
Yeah? Go hold a rally there why don't you? I'm talking about the government being able to say "yes this is publicly owned, but you still cannot camp|hold a rally|eat your lunch|read your pornography|sleep here."
And no the courts have not held that children have all the constitutional rights of adults. In fact it's very much otherwise. Hell there are numerous clauses of the constitution that explicitly deny rights to children.
Says you. The US Supreme Court Justices (and the vast majority of Americans) say otherwise which means that your opinion on this subject is irrelevant.
Me personally? No, I don't, But the residents of Seattle? They most certainly do. There is no right to a public library at all. If the people of a community decide to create a library they have absolute freedom to fill that library with the types of materials that they feel will best serve the community. If videos of anal sex and other pornography are making people uncomfortable enough to not use the library then don't be surprised if the budget for the library shrinks to zero. Whatever your personal feelings and concerns, it's not about you any more than it's about me.
I'm fond enough of porn that I actually pay for it. But this is not a free speech issue, it's a use of public funds issue. I have no more obligation to provide porn to the poor than I am required to buy them beer and cigarettes.