Frankly, I'd want higher TX speed for the prices they're asking. I think I'll be sticking to CAT-5 for the months to come...
Think about it. What's the point of paying more for optical relaying when the workstations have to be in the line of sight to receive anyhow? I don't know about you, but my office isn't one big room. I certainly understand the benefits for building-to-buidling transmission, but I'd use more "conventional" means of networking boxes inside each facility.
Most appreciated! Thank you for an intelligent response. I'm actually in the U.S. Southeast, and the thought of permafrost didn't even cross my mind (duh).
After reading your response, I was at least relieved to note that my piece ended up with a "2: Funny" rating;)... yeah, I know, points-whoring and all that bit...
... subterranean data centers? No, this is not a "joke" post...
It may be that this is already quite widespread, but that's not the case from my experience in the field (== substantial). Let's stop to think about this for a second.
"Going down, instead of out" preserves land space and offers several additional benefits:
Relatively constant temperature.
Heightened protection from the elements (earthqakes included to a certain degree, since your buidling won't "fall over."
Of course, this doesn't help the environment out much on the pollution scene, unless of course you happen to utilize local geothermal energy. This frequently has the side effect of putting you at high risk for tremors, however...
All personal feelings on this topic aside (and I assure, I've got 'em), let's stop for a second and ask ourselves what people really want out of NASA, anyhow?
Yes, I know I'm risking a science/culture/gov holy war here (so please DON'T GO THERE). I simply pose the question: What do the people want?
NASA is funded by YOUR tax dollars (at least, "your" applies to American/.'ers) as well as the guy/gal next door's. On the one hand, you have the fact that a lot of emphasis recently has been put on "staying close to home" with federal R&D money, which is what NASA funding essential boils down to. For people who lean this way opinion-wise, NASA should spend its time figuring out ways to enhance human life on Earth through space research.
On the other side you've got the folks who are advocate pure research and "science for the sake of science." This crowd might as well start slapping "Mars or Bust" bumper stickers on their cars tomorrow.
I tend to go for a more middle-of-the road approach, as in "leverage *all* forms of space research, whether far from or close to home, for the direct benefit of all on Earth." Unfortunately, this requires more of the average citizen than is commonly found: the ability and interest in taking the time to *really* research what's actually happening in space tech, *really* research what's actually lacking in our societies as a whole, and merge the two into concrete objectives.
I'm as guilty of this as the next Joe, but it's generally a true statement the most people who are heavily involved in hard science and research aren't heavily involved in "human matters." Kind of a paradox, I suppose.
But let's not jump too far into the murky realm of conclusions on this one. Yes, this is tragic, but by the same token ALL suicides are tragic, inasmuch as they represent the depths people can reach.
Personally, I don't think too much emphasis should be placed on the "hacking" component of this event. Realistically, should one replace the action in question ("hacking", as it were) with anything else "criminal" (and I cringe at the use of the term "hack" in that sense), such as breaking into the school library, the end result could very well be the same.
This youth was troubled, no doubt, and probably terrified of the concept of going to jail more than anything else. I DO need to point out my suspicion that the school system quite possibly went entirely too far in the administration of mental abuse in this case, using fear tactics in the hopes of "making an example of him."
Reminds me of when I was 13, and got nabbed accessing some stuff I "shouldn't have" on my junior high network. Funny how differently I was treated, tho... they actually asked for my help in sealing up some holes.
... with web-based applications. Think about it: with web-based apps moving into the forefront as serious competition for desktop software, the plot thickens even more.
With "subscription model" desktop software, if worst comes to worst, it's usually possible to crack the app and continue using it. With web-based apps, when the server goes "buh-bye", you're simply screwed.
This raises an interesting conflict in my mind: (1) I love the potential for web-based apps [for many reaons, including the fact that I code], (2) I definitely don't want to be screwed, and there are a lot of programs I wouldn't dream of using as a hosted service (think "personal info abuse").
I won't be losing sleep tonight, but there are serious concerns here. I sure as hell wouldn't want my customers losing apps or data because my company went out of business.
I'm in the dark concerning the whole legal situation that arose here, and very interested as a Perl lover. Anyone have the scoop on the legalities of what originally went down? Thanks!
Good riddance. The entire concept ended up being FAR more annoying than helpful.
Think about it for a moment. Microsoft took a stab at "humanizing" their apps with a "helpful" assistant, but how much help did Clippy really offer? I'd wager not much, since the helper was designed to assist those who unacquanted with the apps in the first place. The entire assistant model was actually more complex than the core functions of the software itself.
Just my 3.14 cents.
Slashdot Mirror
My God, I just realized I posted this to the wrong story... meant to post to the optical networking story... note to self: SLEEP IS A GOOD THING.
Frankly, I'd want higher TX speed for the prices they're asking. I think I'll be sticking to CAT-5 for the months to come...
Think about it. What's the point of paying more for optical relaying when the workstations have to be in the line of sight to receive anyhow? I don't know about you, but my office isn't one big room. I certainly understand the benefits for building-to-buidling transmission, but I'd use more "conventional" means of networking boxes inside each facility.
Most appreciated! Thank you for an intelligent response. I'm actually in the U.S. Southeast, and the thought of permafrost didn't even cross my mind (duh).
After reading your response, I was at least relieved to note that my piece ended up with a "2: Funny" rating
I'd love to see Alaska someday. Thanks again!
It may be that this is already quite widespread, but that's not the case from my experience in the field (== substantial). Let's stop to think about this for a second.
"Going down, instead of out" preserves land space and offers several additional benefits:
Of course, this doesn't help the environment out much on the pollution scene, unless of course you happen to utilize local geothermal energy. This frequently has the side effect of putting you at high risk for tremors, however...
Any thoughts?
peering through my shiny new Edmund Scientific 2.5" telescope early this morn, I found the DeCSS code inscribed in a Martian plain!!!
Better send a few MPAA laywers up there with a coupla million gallons of whiteout before the whole world finds out...
All personal feelings on this topic aside (and I assure, I've got 'em), let's stop for a second and ask ourselves what people really want out of NASA, anyhow?
/.'ers) as well as the guy/gal next door's. On the one hand, you have the fact that a lot of emphasis recently has been put on "staying close to home" with federal R&D money, which is what NASA funding essential boils down to. For people who lean this way opinion-wise, NASA should spend its time figuring out ways to enhance human life on Earth through space research.
Yes, I know I'm risking a science/culture/gov holy war here (so please DON'T GO THERE). I simply pose the question: What do the people want?
NASA is funded by YOUR tax dollars (at least, "your" applies to American
On the other side you've got the folks who are advocate pure research and "science for the sake of science." This crowd might as well start slapping "Mars or Bust" bumper stickers on their cars tomorrow.
I tend to go for a more middle-of-the road approach, as in "leverage *all* forms of space research, whether far from or close to home, for the direct benefit of all on Earth." Unfortunately, this requires more of the average citizen than is commonly found: the ability and interest in taking the time to *really* research what's actually happening in space tech, *really* research what's actually lacking in our societies as a whole, and merge the two into concrete objectives.
I'm as guilty of this as the next Joe, but it's generally a true statement the most people who are heavily involved in hard science and research aren't heavily involved in "human matters." Kind of a paradox, I suppose.
I'd appreciate comments on this (seeming) issue.
But let's not jump too far into the murky realm of conclusions on this one. Yes, this is tragic, but by the same token ALL suicides are tragic, inasmuch as they represent the depths people can reach.
Personally, I don't think too much emphasis should be placed on the "hacking" component of this event. Realistically, should one replace the action in question ("hacking", as it were) with anything else "criminal" (and I cringe at the use of the term "hack" in that sense), such as breaking into the school library, the end result could very well be the same.
This youth was troubled, no doubt, and probably terrified of the concept of going to jail more than anything else. I DO need to point out my suspicion that the school system quite possibly went entirely too far in the administration of mental abuse in this case, using fear tactics in the hopes of "making an example of him."
Reminds me of when I was 13, and got nabbed accessing some stuff I "shouldn't have" on my junior high network. Funny how differently I was treated, tho... they actually asked for my help in sealing up some holes.
"Brought to you by Mozilla Build ID: 2001050716"
... with web-based applications. Think about it: with web-based apps moving into the forefront as serious competition for desktop software, the plot thickens even more.
With "subscription model" desktop software, if worst comes to worst, it's usually possible to crack the app and continue using it. With web-based apps, when the server goes "buh-bye", you're simply screwed.
This raises an interesting conflict in my mind: (1) I love the potential for web-based apps [for many reaons, including the fact that I code], (2) I definitely don't want to be screwed, and there are a lot of programs I wouldn't dream of using as a hosted service (think "personal info abuse").
I won't be losing sleep tonight, but there are serious concerns here. I sure as hell wouldn't want my customers losing apps or data because my company went out of business.
I'm in the dark concerning the whole legal situation that arose here, and very interested as a Perl lover. Anyone have the scoop on the legalities of what originally went down? Thanks!
Good riddance. The entire concept ended up being FAR more annoying than helpful. Think about it for a moment. Microsoft took a stab at "humanizing" their apps with a "helpful" assistant, but how much help did Clippy really offer? I'd wager not much, since the helper was designed to assist those who unacquanted with the apps in the first place. The entire assistant model was actually more complex than the core functions of the software itself. Just my 3.14 cents.