A range of companies with wireless LANs are discovering that 50% to 90% or more of Ethernet ports now go unused, because Wi-Fi has become so prevalent.
At this moment, the only wireless device on the WAP at my end of the building is my iPod. There are a whole slew of wired devices, though, from servers to desktops to printers.
They look at racks of unused switches, ports, Ethernet wall jacks, the cabling that connects them all, the yearly maintenance charges for unused switches, electrical charges, and cooling costs.
Uh-huh, because WAPs run on fairy dust and ponies' daydreams.
Keeping systems up-to-date, both base system and userspace stuff, is much easier on Debian-based systems, IMO.
I upgraded to 4.5 this morning, and the package upgrade instructions were to run pkg_add -ui -F update -F updatedepends. Now, I'm typing this on Ubuntu, and I use FreeBSD on most of "my" servers, but that just about as convenient as it gets.
Gotta love how a business class line from many telcos give you 8 IPs.
That's mainly because a 4-IP block is hugely wasteful. Remove the router and broadcast addresses and you're left with 2 usable IPs. At least with a/29, you get to use 6 of 8 of those addresses.
We do. We have a/48 from HE.net, and using the GP's example of aaaa:aaaa:bbbb:cccc:dddd:dddd:dddd:dddd, we use cccc to number netblocks on the router. For instance, aaaa:aaaa:1:: is the main LAN, aaaa:aaaa:2:: is the server block, aaaa:aaaa:3:: is Wi-Fi, etc. That way we still have 64 bits left for autoconfig, and the router doesn't have to memorize routes to every single host on our network.
Security. We believe that reducing the amount of code running is the first step to a more secure environment. In the Linux world the trend has been exactly the opposite even with so-called enterprise distributions. From NetBSD 5.0 we look forward to ASLR and security features inspired by PaX, the technology which we believe in with our Linux systems. This is one area where there is a big minus sign for FreeBSD.
Which part of that does FreeBSD lack to earn the big minus sign?
Because I had never heard of the (incredibly vague) term
Example of a push polling question: "would you still vote for Joe Candidate if news of his secret heroin addiction were to become public?" Basically, it's a speech disguised as an opinion poll.
The GOP has shrunk a great deal in the last 4 years. Moderates and Independents left the party. Millions of them. The result is a GOP that is far more conservative than it was as recently as the 2004 election.
You're only looking at one trait. From talking to friends and family, I believe that a huge number of fiscal conservatives have left the party, leaving only social conservatives who are bad at math. I had been a Republican before Bush came along, but now I just try to vote for any Conservatives (if any happen to be running).
Sure, he's done some good things over the years. A stopped clock is correct twice a day, right? That doesn't make him a good guy. Paul and Kucinich at least stood on principles, but I'll be darned if I can see what Specter ever stood on beyond political expedience. He's a fickle little punk, always has been, and always will be. That isn't something that just started last week.
You misunderstood. What Shivetya described is what he thinks is going to happen now, not what he wishes to happen. And when it does, he wants there to be no one else to blame but the people he believes are responsible for it.
In short: he wants good things for the country, but if bad things happen, we should know unequivocally who caused them.
For example, I've got a fair amount of respect for Obama. He seems like a reasonably bright guy with the right set of priorities. But when Obama talks about fixing health care, why isn't the shortage of medical doctors front and center?
Because a big part of the problem is that doctors have insanely high liability for things outside their control. Have a bad reaction to anesthesia? Sue the anesthesiologist and let the courts sort it out! Never mind that his insurance premiums will triple even if he wins. Why would any bright young student want to get themselves into that mess when business school is easier and more profitable?
When Obama shakes the unions off his back and does something about tort reform, you'll know he actually cares about the problem. Anything short of that is just posturing.
So then why aren't her prices down at minimum wage (or even zero)?
Because the overhead in a medical practice is tremendous and largely irreducible.
I'll agree that insurance companies are siphoning off some of the monopoly profits that would otherwise go to medical doctors but they certainly don't set her prices.
They most certainly do. Insurance decides the customary rates for a given procedure, then pays a fixed percentage of that. If the average price of a elbowectomy is $1,000 where you live, then insurance will typically pay $600 to a doctor that performs one. Since most doctors take insurance "on assignment", they agree to accept whatever rate the insurance company offers as their fee. When you get older and get a job with insurance, look at your explanation of benefits. It'll say something like:
Procedure: elbowectomy
Billed: $1,000
Allowed: $600
Deductible: $100
Paid: $500
Patient responsibility: $100
Basically, they say that they think that $600 is a reasonable fee, they'll pay $500 of that, and you only owe $100 ($600 - $500) and not $500 ($1000 - $500). Medicaid is the worst about this; many times their reimbursement doesn't cover the cost of the raw supplies to perform the procedure, let alone other overhead. If a doctor bills $500 for a minor surgery, and Medicaid allows $10 (no, that's not an exaggeration!), and the sterile supplies cost $20, then the doctor actually just paid $10 out of his pocket for the privilege of doing the surgery. That's why so many doctors either flat-out refuse Medicaid, or only accept Medicaid patients on referral from another doctor ("hey, Bob, can you afford to donate work today?").
In a more complex model, some practitioners would start spending more time with each patient (and reducing the backlog of time spent in the waiting room) while other practitioners would simply take the afternoon off and go golfing.
Those are the two categories that would go out of business. Particularly for young doctors, medicine isn't exactly the path to riches.
It's certainly true that practitioners (e.g. your wife) would make less money (and they would also be doing less work - but not half as little work because they would also have to provide better service).
Um, no. You have rent, malpractice insurance, professional certifications, and student loans. I'd say that a 75% overhead is a reasonable estimate of overhead for new doctors. If such a doctor dropped back to 75% of their current workload, their take home income would drop to zero. Since doctors typically enjoy food and shelter, that's extremely unlikely to happen.
I understand that you don't want to get off the doctor monopoly gravy train but you're living in massive denial if you deny that the AMA has engineered as massive shortage of medical doctors.
Uh-huh. Back in reality, I'm enjoying my paid-off Oldsmobile and hoping to have the mortgage and student loans paid off before the kids start college.
Florida and Massachusetts are great examples of that, especially considering the former's persecution of pediatricians and pediatric surgeons (among other professions) in the past which has resulted in the vast majority of child health care specialists leaving or retiring.
Then wouldn't that be a logical problem to address before trying to crank out more doctors: figure out how not to drive off the ones we already have?
There are not enough doctors, not enough competition.
So, what exactly are they to compete on? My wife's a doctor, and she can't fit any more patients into a day without sacrificing quality of care. She can't compete on price because Medica{re,id} and insurance companies effectively set her prices. All she can do is try to keep her patients happy so that they come back when they need to see someone, and she's apparently doing that pretty well (judging by her appointment schedule). If you doubled the number of practitioners in her specialty in our city, the only long-term effect would be that half of them would go out of business.
Yeah, but is that what you're getting paid to do? Does your boss agree that it's worth $xx an hour to have you make cables when you could just buy them for half the price?
First, I'm reading Slashdot at work (until the compile is finished, anyway).
Second, I do lots of stuff that's not explicitly on my job description. Sometimes it feels good to get away from programming to go install a server or run cable for a few minutes. It's healthier than a smoke break, gets needed work done for less than it would cost to pay someone else to do it, and gives me a much needed break so that I'm more productive at my core job.
Finally, I wouldn't trust a network admin that isn't capable of making a cable. While they may not have to on a regular basis, they darn well better be able to when something fails at 3AM and they don't have prefab cables of the right length on hand.
If something happens with the Belkin cable, you can blame Belkin.
That presumes:
You make crappy cables.
Your boss is watching over your shoulder to see whether it's a homemade or bought cable.
All of your bought cables are labeled by the manufacturer.
Your boss cares beyond "is it fixed yet?"
Besides, do you really want to crimp your own cables?
Yeah, but I'm one of those crazy people who fix their own fences, hang their own ceiling fans, build treehouses for their kids, and generally like to do things not conducive to the strictly consumer lifestyle.
While it may be cost effective to crimp and cut your own cable when you are making less than 20 dollars an hour once you are making 20 dollar+ just buy it.
I promise you I can make more than $20 worth of test-worthy cables in one hour.
Mexico hovers on martial law and the US declares emergency. Government responses will be increasingly strong before they admit the truth of the zombie uprising.
Swine flu, my butt. It's the Solanum virus and we won't know until it's too late to contain.
Slashdot Mirror
A range of companies with wireless LANs are discovering that 50% to 90% or more of Ethernet ports now go unused, because Wi-Fi has become so prevalent.
At this moment, the only wireless device on the WAP at my end of the building is my iPod. There are a whole slew of wired devices, though, from servers to desktops to printers.
They look at racks of unused switches, ports, Ethernet wall jacks, the cabling that connects them all, the yearly maintenance charges for unused switches, electrical charges, and cooling costs.
Uh-huh, because WAPs run on fairy dust and ponies' daydreams.
Keeping systems up-to-date, both base system and userspace stuff, is much easier on Debian-based systems, IMO.
I upgraded to 4.5 this morning, and the package upgrade instructions were to run pkg_add -ui -F update -F updatedepends. Now, I'm typing this on Ubuntu, and I use FreeBSD on most of "my" servers, but that just about as convenient as it gets.
Gotta love how a business class line from many telcos give you 8 IPs.
That's mainly because a 4-IP block is hugely wasteful. Remove the router and broadcast addresses and you're left with 2 usable IPs. At least with a /29, you get to use 6 of 8 of those addresses.
They should have planned for that so, so long ago.
They did, by acquiring a /8 so they never had to worry about it again.
Nobody uses /48, they use /64.
We do. We have a /48 from HE.net, and using the GP's example of aaaa:aaaa:bbbb:cccc:dddd:dddd:dddd:dddd, we use cccc to number netblocks on the router. For instance, aaaa:aaaa:1:: is the main LAN, aaaa:aaaa:2:: is the server block, aaaa:aaaa:3:: is Wi-Fi, etc. That way we still have 64 bits left for autoconfig, and the router doesn't have to memorize routes to every single host on our network.
Why couldn't we just add another octect.
Because if we're going to completely break networking, we might as well switch to something that fixes a lot of IPv4's problems (such as, say, IPv6).
Since encryption implements a lossless conversion then the data is not random. BECAUSE random data is just that random.
Really? What algorithm will detect patterns in a OTP-encrypted block? Your assertion has some pretty major loopholes.
Here's a few from the list:
[snip 10 /8s]
OK, that takes care of 4% of the IPv4 address space. What's your next great idea?
Security. We believe that reducing the amount of code running is the first step to a more secure environment. In the Linux world the trend has been exactly the opposite even with so-called enterprise distributions. From NetBSD 5.0 we look forward to ASLR and security features inspired by PaX, the technology which we believe in with our Linux systems. This is one area where there is a big minus sign for FreeBSD.
Which part of that does FreeBSD lack to earn the big minus sign?
more "traditional" operating systems?
What's more traditional than one of the "Big Three" BSDs? As descendants of AT&T Unix, they're practically the definition of traditional.
Hold on... those things were "venerable" in the early 80s?
I was playing around on a Xerox Star system in '81 or so. Even the teletypes were mostly silent by then.
Because I had never heard of the (incredibly vague) term
Example of a push polling question: "would you still vote for Joe Candidate if news of his secret heroin addiction were to become public?" Basically, it's a speech disguised as an opinion poll.
The GOP has shrunk a great deal in the last 4 years. Moderates and Independents left the party. Millions of them. The result is a GOP that is far more conservative than it was as recently as the 2004 election.
You're only looking at one trait. From talking to friends and family, I believe that a huge number of fiscal conservatives have left the party, leaving only social conservatives who are bad at math. I had been a Republican before Bush came along, but now I just try to vote for any Conservatives (if any happen to be running).
You don't know a damn thing about him other than that he doesn't always vote with the groupthink.
I know a litte about him from reading Slashdot: he urged renewal of the PATRIOT Act and sponsored the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act of 2008. Am I allowed to say he was a Republican jackass before he became a Democrat jackass, or does that make me a sheeple?
Sure, he's done some good things over the years. A stopped clock is correct twice a day, right? That doesn't make him a good guy. Paul and Kucinich at least stood on principles, but I'll be darned if I can see what Specter ever stood on beyond political expedience. He's a fickle little punk, always has been, and always will be. That isn't something that just started last week.
Lord preserve us from such conservative wishing.
You misunderstood. What Shivetya described is what he thinks is going to happen now, not what he wishes to happen. And when it does, he wants there to be no one else to blame but the people he believes are responsible for it.
In short: he wants good things for the country, but if bad things happen, we should know unequivocally who caused them.
For example, I've got a fair amount of respect for Obama. He seems like a reasonably bright guy with the right set of priorities. But when Obama talks about fixing health care, why isn't the shortage of medical doctors front and center?
Because a big part of the problem is that doctors have insanely high liability for things outside their control. Have a bad reaction to anesthesia? Sue the anesthesiologist and let the courts sort it out! Never mind that his insurance premiums will triple even if he wins. Why would any bright young student want to get themselves into that mess when business school is easier and more profitable?
When Obama shakes the unions off his back and does something about tort reform, you'll know he actually cares about the problem. Anything short of that is just posturing.
So then why aren't her prices down at minimum wage (or even zero)?
Because the overhead in a medical practice is tremendous and largely irreducible.
I'll agree that insurance companies are siphoning off some of the monopoly profits that would otherwise go to medical doctors but they certainly don't set her prices.
They most certainly do. Insurance decides the customary rates for a given procedure, then pays a fixed percentage of that. If the average price of a elbowectomy is $1,000 where you live, then insurance will typically pay $600 to a doctor that performs one. Since most doctors take insurance "on assignment", they agree to accept whatever rate the insurance company offers as their fee. When you get older and get a job with insurance, look at your explanation of benefits. It'll say something like:
Basically, they say that they think that $600 is a reasonable fee, they'll pay $500 of that, and you only owe $100 ($600 - $500) and not $500 ($1000 - $500). Medicaid is the worst about this; many times their reimbursement doesn't cover the cost of the raw supplies to perform the procedure, let alone other overhead. If a doctor bills $500 for a minor surgery, and Medicaid allows $10 (no, that's not an exaggeration!), and the sterile supplies cost $20, then the doctor actually just paid $10 out of his pocket for the privilege of doing the surgery. That's why so many doctors either flat-out refuse Medicaid, or only accept Medicaid patients on referral from another doctor ("hey, Bob, can you afford to donate work today?").
In a more complex model, some practitioners would start spending more time with each patient (and reducing the backlog of time spent in the waiting room) while other practitioners would simply take the afternoon off and go golfing.
Those are the two categories that would go out of business. Particularly for young doctors, medicine isn't exactly the path to riches.
It's certainly true that practitioners (e.g. your wife) would make less money (and they would also be doing less work - but not half as little work because they would also have to provide better service).
Um, no. You have rent, malpractice insurance, professional certifications, and student loans. I'd say that a 75% overhead is a reasonable estimate of overhead for new doctors. If such a doctor dropped back to 75% of their current workload, their take home income would drop to zero. Since doctors typically enjoy food and shelter, that's extremely unlikely to happen.
I understand that you don't want to get off the doctor monopoly gravy train but you're living in massive denial if you deny that the AMA has engineered as massive shortage of medical doctors.
Uh-huh. Back in reality, I'm enjoying my paid-off Oldsmobile and hoping to have the mortgage and student loans paid off before the kids start college.
Florida and Massachusetts are great examples of that, especially considering the former's persecution of pediatricians and pediatric surgeons (among other professions) in the past which has resulted in the vast majority of child health care specialists leaving or retiring.
Then wouldn't that be a logical problem to address before trying to crank out more doctors: figure out how not to drive off the ones we already have?
There are not enough doctors, not enough competition.
So, what exactly are they to compete on? My wife's a doctor, and she can't fit any more patients into a day without sacrificing quality of care. She can't compete on price because Medica{re,id} and insurance companies effectively set her prices. All she can do is try to keep her patients happy so that they come back when they need to see someone, and she's apparently doing that pretty well (judging by her appointment schedule). If you doubled the number of practitioners in her specialty in our city, the only long-term effect would be that half of them would go out of business.
Andy said at LCA2007 it was a 30% hit, I don't see a 30% performance hit being 'slightly' slower.
Yeah. Moore says [1] you'd have to wait an extra six months for hardware to catch up.
[1] Don't get all pedantic on me. I know what he really said.
Dropping C... for what exactly?
Anything else that compiles to native opcodes? It's not like C is the only magical language capable of talking to hardware.
Yeah, but is that what you're getting paid to do? Does your boss agree that it's worth $xx an hour to have you make cables when you could just buy them for half the price?
First, I'm reading Slashdot at work (until the compile is finished, anyway).
Second, I do lots of stuff that's not explicitly on my job description. Sometimes it feels good to get away from programming to go install a server or run cable for a few minutes. It's healthier than a smoke break, gets needed work done for less than it would cost to pay someone else to do it, and gives me a much needed break so that I'm more productive at my core job.
Finally, I wouldn't trust a network admin that isn't capable of making a cable. While they may not have to on a regular basis, they darn well better be able to when something fails at 3AM and they don't have prefab cables of the right length on hand.
If something happens with the Belkin cable, you can blame Belkin.
That presumes:
Besides, do you really want to crimp your own cables?
Yeah, but I'm one of those crazy people who fix their own fences, hang their own ceiling fans, build treehouses for their kids, and generally like to do things not conducive to the strictly consumer lifestyle.
While it may be cost effective to crimp and cut your own cable when you are making less than 20 dollars an hour once you are making 20 dollar+ just buy it.
I promise you I can make more than $20 worth of test-worthy cables in one hour.
Mexico hovers on martial law and the US declares emergency. Government responses will be increasingly strong before they admit the truth of the zombie uprising.
Swine flu, my butt. It's the Solanum virus and we won't know until it's too late to contain.