OMG! Something might eat dead plants... Something biological in nature! The fibers might break down, and release nutrients into the soil! I propose we call this menace... "biodegradation". Materials that can be broken down and destroyed by these new biological menaces could be said to be "biodegradable".
Well, all the corn growers who grow corn for food that gets bought for inefficient production of ethanol for fuel can now sell the corn for food and the stalks for ethanol. The stalks tend to just get plowed under.
How much metal are you willing to dig ore for, smelt, pour into blocks, cut, and transport to replace millions of gasoline engines with diesel ones? Ethanol burns in gasoline engines, and very minor tweaks are required to make a gasoline-powered car's gaskets and computer ready for it to be used well.
Biodiesel and ethanol both have a place in the near future if cellulose can cheaply produce ethanol.
If the demand that an application ask for an explicit synchronization of the data it is responsible for handling is broken (as you say it is), then Microsoft is vindicated in not following thousands of other points in the POSIX specs? Is that really your position? That if one minor nit can be picked out of thousands of rules in a spec, then throwing the spec wholesale out the window is vindicated?
Remind me never to let you empty the washtub with my baby in it.
They do. The other ones that force syncs from within the FS code every X seconds just have a very short X second window during which it can happen. The ext4 FS code happens to allow a very long window for implicit synchronization because it allows great performance and any application compliant with the spec is already explicitly asking for a sync when they really need one.
It does store data reliably on the drive that has been properly synchronized by the application's author. This data that is lost is what has been sent to a filehandle but not yet synchronized when the system loses power or crashes.
The FS isn't the problem, but it is exposing problems in applications. If you need your FS to be a safety net for such applications, nobody is taking ext3 away just because ext4 is available. IF you want the higher performance of ext4, buy a damn UPS already.
These folks already have some loop to the CO, because they already have bandwidth. That's likely already fiber. The local carrier usually doesn't much care what data rate you push across the loop. The buildout and port charges are probably moot.
These folks already have a cable TV business, and serve cable TV over their plant to the customer from their facility. The data center can be a couple of racks in that facility.
The OP is the support staff. He does it part time on top of cable TV duties. If he was already on staff full-time and not busy full-time, then that was a sunk cost they're just now recovering by giving him new duties.
Neither of us know the specifics of the existing plant in this guy's area, but the chances are that they could at least get four or five DS-1 lines. The smart way to go about locating a data center in a smaller town where real estate is mostly uniform in price (at least within the same order of magnitude) is to lease space where there's already fiber to the facility. It's not exactly uncommon for five or six companies that need high bandwidth to be in a business park with an OC-3 or OC-12 running into it.
Parrot is at a higher level than LLVM. Parrot deals with things like multiple dispatch, garbage collection, closures, and more at the virtual machine level. LLVM is meant to be an efficient way to target a real machine in the back end of a compiler that supports optimization and JIT.
Parrot could actually target LLVM as a backend. There have actually been tests showing that Parrot compiles under llvm-gcc. Something has to be the front end for any compiler or virtual machine, and Parrot is that. The back end will need to be tweaked for different targets anyway, and LLVM may well be one of those.
Considering the JVM is a stack machine VM for statically typed languages,.NET is a stack machine VM for statically-typed languages, and Parrot is a register machine VM built for dynamically-typed languages perhaps it's not so "me too".
You're right. We can't know if it is a violation. All we can say is that if it's a violation, there are only three really plausible explanations.
First, AMD's lawyers might not have considered the GF rollout when the cross-licensing deal was struck, and forgot to consider (or were ignored by management) the cross-licensing deal when the rollout was pending. Second, AMD's lawyers could be just useless, but that I doubt. Third, AMD knows it's a violation but they feel secure enough in the other legal wrangling against Intel that they're willing to renegotiate everything between the two and are using this as a bargaining point.
Yes, yes. I'm sure AMD's raft of lawyers is as specifically aware of the definitions that matter in this specific instance as are Intel's raft of lawyers. If there is a specific definition to reduce ambiguity, then they both have copies. If not, then they can argue either way and the judge can choose his or her own definition.
... should be given a dictionary that includes city names and a fast slap on the ass by the door. It's "Decatur", after the famous Commodore Stephen Decatur, Jr. who served with distinction in the Barbary Wars and the War of 1812.
Perhaps they're only giddy with excitement over their glorious near-future assignments because they are being interviewed by a twit who throws around small, historically important names without even knowing how to spell them.
...but isn't that generally what a company that is in majority controlled by another company called?
Also, would AMD really have been so short-sighted as to sign a cross-licensing agreement with Intel that wouldn't allow AMD to contract an unlicensed third party to fabricate AMD's designs under AMD's licenses as an agent of AMD?
I'm sure usage for the average customer has gone up since I was in the business, but 6:1 to 11:1 was typical oversell on local capacity and (assuming you hosted your own mail servers on that local network) 4:1 to 6:1 was a reasonable local to backhaul oversell to actually never peak the backhaul lines or to peak them rarely for a few minutes at a time (like for 5-10 minutes at a time between 4pm and 10 pm the day a hot new patch for a major game came out).
At the time, a DS-3 at 6 Mb/s 95% burstable to the full 45 Mb/s ran between $2,500 and $7,500 a month depending on the market. Let's say conservatively you're using a 6:1 local usage ratio and a 25% of local users hitting the backhaul line at any given second. That means a 6 Mbps burstable line could cover 144 Mbps of sold bandwidth. If you're selling that bandwidth to 400 customers, they only get 0.36 Mbps each even assuming old usage data.
A quick Google search for "DS-3 pricing" shows a full DS-3 for $2200. That means 45 Mbps, so overselling that based on 5-year-old usage data means an ISP could sell 1080 Mbps. Across 400 customers, that's 2.7 Mbps each for $2,200 a month.
What are these customers paying for Internet service? $50 a month? That's $20,000 a month in revenue. So lease two DS-3 backhauls, and assume they're double the rate I found advertised. You'd still only be paying $8,800 a month for bandwidth. For three at that inflated price it'd be $13,200 a month for the lines.
With 3 DS-3s, a 4:1 local usage oversell and a 3:1 local usage to backhaul oversell, you'd have about 4 Mbps service and would be making $6,800 a month to pay other expenses to offer the service. The cable infrastructure is already paid for out of your cable TV service, I'm sure. If anything was left after that, then that'd be profit. Considering I doubled the advertised price of the line and most providers give a handsome discount for ordering multiple lines, this cable company could likely still make a few thousand dollars a month on Internet access service while offering a fairly modern customer experience.
This company by overselling 70:1 is raking in excess profit now at the expense of losing these customers when someone who cares about the customer's experience opens shop in town. The problem with overcharging a captive audience because you can is that they'll remember it when they are no longer captive.
Right now, unless the advertised speed that's being oversold so aggressively is in the tens of megabits per second, the customers are just as well off with satellite at 40 kbps and high latency, and aren't much better off than using dialup.
Philip Morris said cigarettes were non-addicting. They didn't say they were addictive but that the addiction can be overcome. This is a possible red herring for the current discussion.
Smoking a cigarette and taking in nicotine is the same act as smoking a cigarette and taking in nicotine. Committing simulated violence in a game and committing an actual act of violence against an actual person are not the same act. Any attempt at making one of these equivalent to the other, as one is a tautology and one is the very link in question, show that you are begging the question of the link from simulated violence to commission of actual acts of violence.
Even if someone becomes physiologically addicted to committing simulated violence in a computer game, there remains a difference between that addiction and performing an actual physical act against an actual living person.
The causal link between simulated violence in computer games and actual acts of violence is exactly what is at question. You are begging that question. (You cannot assume a priori the answer to a question and use that answer as support for answering the question. That's the fallacy of circular reasoning) or "begging the question".)
Your use of demonizing Philip Morris and comparing myself to that company appears to be the genetic fallacy or somethign related to it.
The press linking a few game players to crimes and that meaning all players of violent video games commit violent acts is the spotlight fallacy.
Even if there's a correlation between players of violent video games and commissions of violent acts, one still has to consider and rule out the fallacies of confusing cause and effect, post hoc, ignoring a common cause, and even division (since the link between the two would likely to be stronger for certain types of people (like those with a mental failure distinguishing between fantasy and reality already)).
Saying that either games cause real violence or they don't is a fallacy in itself, that of false dilemma. Surely even if playing violent video games is a contributing factor to actual violent acts, it is unlikely to be a sole or final cause. It is also unlikely to be a major cause compared to more significantly correlated contributing factors. It is unlikely to be the same level of contributing factor for people with different mentalities and different levels of faculties.
If you want to argue logically, please get your factual information correct and police your statements for logical fallacies.
Google wants to build a profile of every site people on your IP address visit that has AdWords on it, and use that information about people at your IP address to sell more ad space to advertisers targeted to the people who view web pages from your IP address. How is that not a malicious invasion of your privacy?
That's actually the mental image I had upon reading TFS. Millions (I guess I didn't stack as many together as you did) of little flywheels storing then giving off energy.
There's significant legal use for keyboard sniffing. Parents watching children and employers watching employees on company computers are both legal in the US.
If it's anything like the US lately, it has tons of Japanese-owned car factories selling more units than American-owned ones. Yes, that's right. Japanese companies hire US workers to build cars in the US. US car companies lay off Us employees and hire Chinese and Mexicans. So in many cases, you help the US economy as much or more by buying a "Japanese" car.
Why make a new Geode? They have Imageon, Sempron, Turion, and Conesus (part of the Yukon platform). They just sold off their small device graphics chips division to Qualcomm.
AMD holds a large position in their very recently spun off GlobalFoundries, which is likely to be competitive to fabricate some ARM-based chips and other things AMD doesn't itself design.
I'd say their bases are pretty well covered without the Geode.
I'm pretty sure Debian can be used for desktops. I used to run Debian on my Psion Series 5mx, which was much less powerful than the specs for these new ARM-based SCCs.
No. The point is that if you fix the cause of the crimes, the crimes won't happen. If you take away one tool that can be used to commit the crimes, you'll get the same crimes from the same criminals using different tools.
I'm afraid the UK will have a difficult time banning private ownership of kitchen knives. Even if they manage some idiotic, tyrannical regulation on knives, they're not going to burn all the tree branches and break down the entire island into soft soil. There will always be pointy sticks, heavy clubs, and rocks. People looking for a weapon will find one.
Now, if someone's not looking to commit a violent crime in the first place, why does it matter what tools they have available to them for the projection of force?
Slashdot Mirror
OMG! Something might eat dead plants... Something biological in nature! The fibers might break down, and release nutrients into the soil! I propose we call this menace... "biodegradation". Materials that can be broken down and destroyed by these new biological menaces could be said to be "biodegradable".
Well, all the corn growers who grow corn for food that gets bought for inefficient production of ethanol for fuel can now sell the corn for food and the stalks for ethanol. The stalks tend to just get plowed under.
How much metal are you willing to dig ore for, smelt, pour into blocks, cut, and transport to replace millions of gasoline engines with diesel ones? Ethanol burns in gasoline engines, and very minor tweaks are required to make a gasoline-powered car's gaskets and computer ready for it to be used well.
Biodiesel and ethanol both have a place in the near future if cellulose can cheaply produce ethanol.
If the demand that an application ask for an explicit synchronization of the data it is responsible for handling is broken (as you say it is), then Microsoft is vindicated in not following thousands of other points in the POSIX specs? Is that really your position? That if one minor nit can be picked out of thousands of rules in a spec, then throwing the spec wholesale out the window is vindicated?
Remind me never to let you empty the washtub with my baby in it.
They do. The other ones that force syncs from within the FS code every X seconds just have a very short X second window during which it can happen. The ext4 FS code happens to allow a very long window for implicit synchronization because it allows great performance and any application compliant with the spec is already explicitly asking for a sync when they really need one.
It does store data reliably on the drive that has been properly synchronized by the application's author. This data that is lost is what has been sent to a filehandle but not yet synchronized when the system loses power or crashes.
The FS isn't the problem, but it is exposing problems in applications. If you need your FS to be a safety net for such applications, nobody is taking ext3 away just because ext4 is available. IF you want the higher performance of ext4, buy a damn UPS already.
These folks already have some loop to the CO, because they already have bandwidth. That's likely already fiber. The local carrier usually doesn't much care what data rate you push across the loop. The buildout and port charges are probably moot.
These folks already have a cable TV business, and serve cable TV over their plant to the customer from their facility. The data center can be a couple of racks in that facility.
The OP is the support staff. He does it part time on top of cable TV duties. If he was already on staff full-time and not busy full-time, then that was a sunk cost they're just now recovering by giving him new duties.
Neither of us know the specifics of the existing plant in this guy's area, but the chances are that they could at least get four or five DS-1 lines. The smart way to go about locating a data center in a smaller town where real estate is mostly uniform in price (at least within the same order of magnitude) is to lease space where there's already fiber to the facility. It's not exactly uncommon for five or six companies that need high bandwidth to be in a business park with an OC-3 or OC-12 running into it.
Parrot is at a higher level than LLVM. Parrot deals with things like multiple dispatch, garbage collection, closures, and more at the virtual machine level. LLVM is meant to be an efficient way to target a real machine in the back end of a compiler that supports optimization and JIT.
Parrot could actually target LLVM as a backend. There have actually been tests showing that Parrot compiles under llvm-gcc. Something has to be the front end for any compiler or virtual machine, and Parrot is that. The back end will need to be tweaked for different targets anyway, and LLVM may well be one of those.
Considering the JVM is a stack machine VM for statically typed languages, .NET is a stack machine VM for statically-typed languages, and Parrot is a register machine VM built for dynamically-typed languages perhaps it's not so "me too".
You're right. We can't know if it is a violation. All we can say is that if it's a violation, there are only three really plausible explanations.
First, AMD's lawyers might not have considered the GF rollout when the cross-licensing deal was struck, and forgot to consider (or were ignored by management) the cross-licensing deal when the rollout was pending. Second, AMD's lawyers could be just useless, but that I doubt. Third, AMD knows it's a violation but they feel secure enough in the other legal wrangling against Intel that they're willing to renegotiate everything between the two and are using this as a bargaining point.
Yes, yes. I'm sure AMD's raft of lawyers is as specifically aware of the definitions that matter in this specific instance as are Intel's raft of lawyers. If there is a specific definition to reduce ambiguity, then they both have copies. If not, then they can argue either way and the judge can choose his or her own definition.
... should be given a dictionary that includes city names and a fast slap on the ass by the door. It's "Decatur", after the famous Commodore Stephen Decatur, Jr. who served with distinction in the Barbary Wars and the War of 1812.
Perhaps they're only giddy with excitement over their glorious near-future assignments because they are being interviewed by a twit who throws around small, historically important names without even knowing how to spell them.
...but isn't that generally what a company that is in majority controlled by another company called?
Also, would AMD really have been so short-sighted as to sign a cross-licensing agreement with Intel that wouldn't allow AMD to contract an unlicensed third party to fabricate AMD's designs under AMD's licenses as an agent of AMD?
I'm sure usage for the average customer has gone up since I was in the business, but 6:1 to 11:1 was typical oversell on local capacity and (assuming you hosted your own mail servers on that local network) 4:1 to 6:1 was a reasonable local to backhaul oversell to actually never peak the backhaul lines or to peak them rarely for a few minutes at a time (like for 5-10 minutes at a time between 4pm and 10 pm the day a hot new patch for a major game came out).
At the time, a DS-3 at 6 Mb/s 95% burstable to the full 45 Mb/s ran between $2,500 and $7,500 a month depending on the market. Let's say conservatively you're using a 6:1 local usage ratio and a 25% of local users hitting the backhaul line at any given second. That means a 6 Mbps burstable line could cover 144 Mbps of sold bandwidth. If you're selling that bandwidth to 400 customers, they only get 0.36 Mbps each even assuming old usage data.
A quick Google search for "DS-3 pricing" shows a full DS-3 for $2200. That means 45 Mbps, so overselling that based on 5-year-old usage data means an ISP could sell 1080 Mbps. Across 400 customers, that's 2.7 Mbps each for $2,200 a month.
What are these customers paying for Internet service? $50 a month? That's $20,000 a month in revenue. So lease two DS-3 backhauls, and assume they're double the rate I found advertised. You'd still only be paying $8,800 a month for bandwidth. For three at that inflated price it'd be $13,200 a month for the lines.
With 3 DS-3s, a 4:1 local usage oversell and a 3:1 local usage to backhaul oversell, you'd have about 4 Mbps service and would be making $6,800 a month to pay other expenses to offer the service. The cable infrastructure is already paid for out of your cable TV service, I'm sure. If anything was left after that, then that'd be profit. Considering I doubled the advertised price of the line and most providers give a handsome discount for ordering multiple lines, this cable company could likely still make a few thousand dollars a month on Internet access service while offering a fairly modern customer experience.
This company by overselling 70:1 is raking in excess profit now at the expense of losing these customers when someone who cares about the customer's experience opens shop in town. The problem with overcharging a captive audience because you can is that they'll remember it when they are no longer captive.
Right now, unless the advertised speed that's being oversold so aggressively is in the tens of megabits per second, the customers are just as well off with satellite at 40 kbps and high latency, and aren't much better off than using dialup.
That's a different scenario.
If you want to argue logically, please get your factual information correct and police your statements for logical fallacies.
Google wants to build a profile of every site people on your IP address visit that has AdWords on it, and use that information about people at your IP address to sell more ad space to advertisers targeted to the people who view web pages from your IP address. How is that not a malicious invasion of your privacy?
"diminish" !== "remove"
One can imagine something getting smaller without going completely away.
That's actually the mental image I had upon reading TFS. Millions (I guess I didn't stack as many together as you did) of little flywheels storing then giving off energy.
There's significant legal use for keyboard sniffing. Parents watching children and employers watching employees on company computers are both legal in the US.
You let your desktop users install and update their own software packages? Remind me never to come to work in your IT department.
The menus in OpenOffice.org are more similar to pre-Office 2007 than the Office 2007 ribbon is.
If it's anything like the US lately, it has tons of Japanese-owned car factories selling more units than American-owned ones. Yes, that's right. Japanese companies hire US workers to build cars in the US. US car companies lay off Us employees and hire Chinese and Mexicans. So in many cases, you help the US economy as much or more by buying a "Japanese" car.
Why make a new Geode? They have Imageon, Sempron, Turion, and Conesus (part of the Yukon platform). They just sold off their small device graphics chips division to Qualcomm.
AMD holds a large position in their very recently spun off GlobalFoundries, which is likely to be competitive to fabricate some ARM-based chips and other things AMD doesn't itself design.
I'd say their bases are pretty well covered without the Geode.
I wonder if the big batch of 10" touchscreen LCD panels they are rumored to have bought are for an educational market killer.
I'm pretty sure Debian can be used for desktops. I used to run Debian on my Psion Series 5mx, which was much less powerful than the specs for these new ARM-based SCCs.
No. The point is that if you fix the cause of the crimes, the crimes won't happen. If you take away one tool that can be used to commit the crimes, you'll get the same crimes from the same criminals using different tools.
I'm afraid the UK will have a difficult time banning private ownership of kitchen knives. Even if they manage some idiotic, tyrannical regulation on knives, they're not going to burn all the tree branches and break down the entire island into soft soil. There will always be pointy sticks, heavy clubs, and rocks. People looking for a weapon will find one.
Now, if someone's not looking to commit a violent crime in the first place, why does it matter what tools they have available to them for the projection of force?