So you're assuming that communications will be limited to the eight cars nearest to you? Not the car four cars ahead of you or four cars behind you or the car on an overpass or the dude with the parabolic high gain antenna half a mile away in some high-rise? And no one will spoof a digital identifier?
None. There are lots that get about 80% of the way there. But as anyone who has developed a complex product can tell you, the first 20% of the cost and effort gets you 90% of the functionality, the remaining 10% functionality takes the remaining 80% of the investment. The odds are against F/OSS products ever being a total replacement for the products in Adobe's portfolio.
"worthless" seniors created the company and keep it in business and likely solve the vast majority of the issues that come up. might want to keep that in mind.
if you don't believe this take a look at open source projects. the ones with longevity (linux, xorg, mysql, mozilla) are run and carried by "worthless" seniors.
Depends on what you believe the purpose of the law is. If it's to provide restitution to the victims then a low value fine for a low amount harm is appropriate. If it's to discourage people from breaking the law, then it's perfectly reasonable to have the fine adapt to the wealth of the perpetrator. (See this for a real life example.)
There's a difference between fixing something that was broken to begin with and providing new functionality. I get that my first generation iPad only has 256 MB RAM and the features in iOS 6 require at least 512 MB. That shouldn't absolve Apple from fixing bugs in iOS 5 for some reasonable period of time.
Perhaps it shouldn't be surprising that so many people don't recognize this, but there is a difference between support and new development. It's not legit to only fix bugs in the newest releases of a product. I understand why companies take that approach -- it's cheaper to not support your products -- but the reality should be that if someone sells a product that advertises a particular feature, say a web browser, then it is not unreasonable to insist that that web browser be bug free to the extent possible and repaired when new bugs are found. Especially when the bugs make the product "unsafe" to use. For a product that's been off the market for ten years I can see an argument to be made that it can't be supported. But less than two years? Within the contract terms that were agreed to on purchasing the device? Hell, no.
No it's a matter of equality and fairness. And I don't mean the liberal definition of fair, but the actual commonly understood definition of fair.
Let us say that an employer pays an employee $1,000/mo. The employer deducts that from their revenue to calculate net profit and then pays taxes on the profit. The employee pays taxes income taxes on that $1,000 dollars and then sustains themselves with whatever is left over. Such as buying meals. So all the money involved was taxed.
Consider instead that an employer pays an employee $700/mo and also feeds the employee at a cost of $10/day or $300/mo. The employer deducts both of those from their revenue and pays taxes on the net. The employee pays income taxes on the $700. The other $300/mo is not being taxed. Because that is not being taxed the net benefit to the employee is greater than if they had received the full $1,000 ($700 salary + $300 food) compensation as pay.
You shouldn't even want to get into this because what's the next expense that could be paid by the employer and deducted as an expense? Mortgage payments? Car payments?
Doesn't matter what Google gets out of the deal. What matters is if the meals are being considered a business expense, in which case neither Google nor the employee are paying a tax on it.
How would you feel if the benefit being received was the exclusive use of a $4.5 million dollar apartment in the city and the employee receiving the benefit were the CEO? Would you think that that is part of their compensation? The IRS does. How is a business regularly, routinely and as a matter of standard practice providing a meal to an employee different?
Really? He just used a password for too long? So his sneaking his equipment into one of their wiring closets and physically connecting to their network never happened? They didn't try to block him by MAC address? He didn't flee from the police?
Are you going to be all "well, they didn't make it physically impossible to keep him from doing what he did?" In which case I'll go ahead and sink to your level and ask whether you're bullet proof and if you're not you're ok with being shot, right?
They offered him six months in a minimum security prison camp. He didn't have the moral convictions to back up his actions and took the coward's way out instead.
General mental brokenness isn't a reason not to overlook criminal actions.
What I was trying to do was phrase things in a way to avoid triggering the reactionary responses of people who are emotionally invested in Linux and are completely incapable of hearing any suggestion that there might be some system somewhere that runs better on something other than Linux. Apparently I failed.
Here's the biggest reason to run Solaris rather than Linux on SPARC: The builder of the hardware also writes the OS. This means a whole bunch of things, for example you'll never encounter a situation where the OS vendor is blaming that hardware vendor for a problem and vice-verse. Or when there is a hardware fault, not only do the mechanisms in the hardware compensate for the failure and keep the system running independently of the OS, there are services in Solaris that are notified of the fault and are able to specifically call out the exact component that failed and how it failed and what the impact on the system is.
Solaris runs very well on x86. So your restatement of my position doesn't even make any sense. Look, I use Linux. I use it at home and I use it in the data center. There are lots of things that speak for it. But there are areas where Solaris is just better.
I read about how cool ZFS is, but then I see the ridiculous number of obtuse commands you need to stitch all that shit together into a useable filesystem and I want to cry.
One is a ridiculous number? Wow. You have very high expectations for ease of use.
I'm guessing that in your IT world the only value proposition is how much horsepower can Intel deliver because everything else is going to be the generic setting. And to be honest it's a pretty worthwhile stance to take, but there is still value in having someone who understands the systems architecture and can tell you what knobs you need to turn to get the maximum value from your systems.
Spamhaus doesn't block anyone. They only make a list. Are you saying that third party ISPs that have no business with a spammer are obligated to accept and store an infinite amount of spam mail from that spammer? You must be insane.
At the $53k price point the SPARC box also includes a pair of boot drives and 4 integrated 10 Gbps NICs and an extra 64 GB of RAM. More PCIe 3.0 slots. Not to mention the 16x SMT that was already pointed out in another reply. I will note that I did erroneously double the number of cores in the SPARC system. There are only 16 cores.
It doesn't seem to be that the pricing is all that bad comparatively.
Assuming a few years ago means 2010 or there about (also "SSD raid" suggests that kind of time frame), so you are comparing a server last sold in 2005 against a five year newer system. Moore's law alone suggests a 6x performance increase. Add in lower latency storage and I'm surprised the processes were only took 1/6th the time.
I admin for an enterprise with a large Sun/Oracle hardware base, and I have serious complaints with Oracle's support procedures, but beyond a few notable missteps, their hardware is quite good. And Solaris is very nice if you know how to use it.
You seem somewhat ignorant of the platform you are criticizing. Yes, we know it's not x86 so the fact that it doesn't run Windows isn't a surprise. You can run Linux on SPARC, don't know why you would want to though, Solaris is very good. No, it's not Linux, but it's still very good.
As far as virtualization goes, they've had hardware support for longer than the x86 line. The Niagara line of processes have had hypervisors as an integral part of the system since the first generation T-1 processors in the T-1000 servers.
Don't even know wtf you are talking about as far as "architectural design does not simplify operations and make IT more agile." Solaris supports all modern technologies commonly found in a data center.
The problem with the magnets isn't that they are being swallowed. It's that they're being swallowed twice at two different times. First magnet goes down, no problem. Just like swallowing a coin. Six hours later the second magnet goes down and once it gets to the intestine it is close enough "as the crow flies" to the first magnet to stick together and when doing so they capture some of the child's intestine between them. And the constant pressure from the magnets on the tissue result in impairment of blood to that tissue leading to tissue death and then serious medical complications for the toddler.
Because he was using a device that has the direct capability to cause permanent physical harm to victim? Plus an indirect capability to cause significant or fatal injury? Having your cones & rods destroyed by a laser beam is just as much an injury as having them destroyed by an ice-pick.
Slashdot Mirror
So you're assuming that communications will be limited to the eight cars nearest to you? Not the car four cars ahead of you or four cars behind you or the car on an overpass or the dude with the parabolic high gain antenna half a mile away in some high-rise? And no one will spoof a digital identifier?
None. There are lots that get about 80% of the way there. But as anyone who has developed a complex product can tell you, the first 20% of the cost and effort gets you 90% of the functionality, the remaining 10% functionality takes the remaining 80% of the investment. The odds are against F/OSS products ever being a total replacement for the products in Adobe's portfolio.
Adobe Photoshop CS6 retails for $599 all by itself.
Creative Cloud @ $50/mo includes:
I begin to suspect that Nerval's Lobster and the slashdot editor Soulskill lack appropriate knowledge to be commenting on this subject.
You have a very rude surprise ahead of you.
"worthless" seniors created the company and keep it in business and likely solve the vast majority of the issues that come up. might want to keep that in mind.
if you don't believe this take a look at open source projects. the ones with longevity (linux, xorg, mysql, mozilla) are run and carried by "worthless" seniors.
Depends on what you believe the purpose of the law is. If it's to provide restitution to the victims then a low value fine for a low amount harm is appropriate. If it's to discourage people from breaking the law, then it's perfectly reasonable to have the fine adapt to the wealth of the perpetrator. (See this for a real life example.)
There's a difference between fixing something that was broken to begin with and providing new functionality. I get that my first generation iPad only has 256 MB RAM and the features in iOS 6 require at least 512 MB. That shouldn't absolve Apple from fixing bugs in iOS 5 for some reasonable period of time.
Perhaps it shouldn't be surprising that so many people don't recognize this, but there is a difference between support and new development. It's not legit to only fix bugs in the newest releases of a product. I understand why companies take that approach -- it's cheaper to not support your products -- but the reality should be that if someone sells a product that advertises a particular feature, say a web browser, then it is not unreasonable to insist that that web browser be bug free to the extent possible and repaired when new bugs are found. Especially when the bugs make the product "unsafe" to use. For a product that's been off the market for ten years I can see an argument to be made that it can't be supported. But less than two years? Within the contract terms that were agreed to on purchasing the device? Hell, no.
Only to the extent that it's for the benefit of the employer. I don't this applies here.
No it's a matter of equality and fairness. And I don't mean the liberal definition of fair, but the actual commonly understood definition of fair.
Let us say that an employer pays an employee $1,000/mo. The employer deducts that from their revenue to calculate net profit and then pays taxes on the profit. The employee pays taxes income taxes on that $1,000 dollars and then sustains themselves with whatever is left over. Such as buying meals. So all the money involved was taxed.
Consider instead that an employer pays an employee $700/mo and also feeds the employee at a cost of $10/day or $300/mo. The employer deducts both of those from their revenue and pays taxes on the net. The employee pays income taxes on the $700. The other $300/mo is not being taxed. Because that is not being taxed the net benefit to the employee is greater than if they had received the full $1,000 ($700 salary + $300 food) compensation as pay.
You shouldn't even want to get into this because what's the next expense that could be paid by the employer and deducted as an expense? Mortgage payments? Car payments?
Doesn't matter what Google gets out of the deal. What matters is if the meals are being considered a business expense, in which case neither Google nor the employee are paying a tax on it.
How would you feel if the benefit being received was the exclusive use of a $4.5 million dollar apartment in the city and the employee receiving the benefit were the CEO? Would you think that that is part of their compensation? The IRS does. How is a business regularly, routinely and as a matter of standard practice providing a meal to an employee different?
http://louisville.edu/finance/payroll/ubm-info/taxable-income-and-employee-compensation-1.html
Really? He just used a password for too long? So his sneaking his equipment into one of their wiring closets and physically connecting to their network never happened? They didn't try to block him by MAC address? He didn't flee from the police?
Are you going to be all "well, they didn't make it physically impossible to keep him from doing what he did?" In which case I'll go ahead and sink to your level and ask whether you're bullet proof and if you're not you're ok with being shot, right?
I mean, of course, "isn't a reason to overlook criminal actions."
They offered him six months in a minimum security prison camp. He didn't have the moral convictions to back up his actions and took the coward's way out instead.
General mental brokenness isn't a reason not to overlook criminal actions.
What I was trying to do was phrase things in a way to avoid triggering the reactionary responses of people who are emotionally invested in Linux and are completely incapable of hearing any suggestion that there might be some system somewhere that runs better on something other than Linux. Apparently I failed.
Here's the biggest reason to run Solaris rather than Linux on SPARC: The builder of the hardware also writes the OS. This means a whole bunch of things, for example you'll never encounter a situation where the OS vendor is blaming that hardware vendor for a problem and vice-verse. Or when there is a hardware fault, not only do the mechanisms in the hardware compensate for the failure and keep the system running independently of the OS, there are services in Solaris that are notified of the fault and are able to specifically call out the exact component that failed and how it failed and what the impact on the system is.
Solaris runs very well on x86. So your restatement of my position doesn't even make any sense. Look, I use Linux. I use it at home and I use it in the data center. There are lots of things that speak for it. But there are areas where Solaris is just better.
One is a ridiculous number? Wow. You have very high expectations for ease of use.
I'm guessing that in your IT world the only value proposition is how much horsepower can Intel deliver because everything else is going to be the generic setting. And to be honest it's a pretty worthwhile stance to take, but there is still value in having someone who understands the systems architecture and can tell you what knobs you need to turn to get the maximum value from your systems.
Spamhaus doesn't block anyone. They only make a list. Are you saying that third party ISPs that have no business with a spammer are obligated to accept and store an infinite amount of spam mail from that spammer? You must be insane.
According to IBM's website, $45k will get you:
4x E5-4650 @ 2.7GHz (32 total cores)
192GB RAM
0 HDD
2 1 Gbps NICs
At the $53k price point the SPARC box also includes a pair of boot drives and 4 integrated 10 Gbps NICs and an extra 64 GB of RAM. More PCIe 3.0 slots. Not to mention the 16x SMT that was already pointed out in another reply. I will note that I did erroneously double the number of cores in the SPARC system. There are only 16 cores.
It doesn't seem to be that the pricing is all that bad comparatively.
Their "small" T5-2 has 32 cores running at 3.6 GHz with 256 threads and 256 GB of RAM. A similar and cheaper x86 system doesn't even exist.
Assuming a few years ago means 2010 or there about (also "SSD raid" suggests that kind of time frame), so you are comparing a server last sold in 2005 against a five year newer system. Moore's law alone suggests a 6x performance increase. Add in lower latency storage and I'm surprised the processes were only took 1/6th the time.
I admin for an enterprise with a large Sun/Oracle hardware base, and I have serious complaints with Oracle's support procedures, but beyond a few notable missteps, their hardware is quite good. And Solaris is very nice if you know how to use it.
You seem somewhat ignorant of the platform you are criticizing. Yes, we know it's not x86 so the fact that it doesn't run Windows isn't a surprise. You can run Linux on SPARC, don't know why you would want to though, Solaris is very good. No, it's not Linux, but it's still very good.
As far as virtualization goes, they've had hardware support for longer than the x86 line. The Niagara line of processes have had hypervisors as an integral part of the system since the first generation T-1 processors in the T-1000 servers.
Don't even know wtf you are talking about as far as "architectural design does not simplify operations and make IT more agile." Solaris supports all modern technologies commonly found in a data center.
Um, yes it does.
The problem with the magnets isn't that they are being swallowed. It's that they're being swallowed twice at two different times. First magnet goes down, no problem. Just like swallowing a coin. Six hours later the second magnet goes down and once it gets to the intestine it is close enough "as the crow flies" to the first magnet to stick together and when doing so they capture some of the child's intestine between them. And the constant pressure from the magnets on the tissue result in impairment of blood to that tissue leading to tissue death and then serious medical complications for the toddler.
Because he was using a device that has the direct capability to cause permanent physical harm to victim? Plus an indirect capability to cause significant or fatal injury? Having your cones & rods destroyed by a laser beam is just as much an injury as having them destroyed by an ice-pick.
How is this guy a non-violent offender?
People already shine lasers into cars. From sidewalks, overpasses and even from other cars.