The power plants produce power continuously, if it isn't used, it is dissipated as heat or other losses, there's nothing to gain there unless you have huge pumping stations to store that energy somewhere. While technically correct, it's such a simplistic view of the way power is generated that it can be considered moronically misleading. Look up the difference between base load power and peaking power.
People love to overreact to accidents with inappropriate "fixes".
Examples:
An intersection in my area is known to be dangerous. I'm there once a month with the fire department. Several accidents have been fatals. The 25 MPH road has a stop sign in each direction crossing the 45 MPH road. People can not see traffic when coming from the smaller 25 MPH road that crosses the formerly 45 MPH road because of brush on one side and a homeowner's fence and the grade of their yard on the other side. What was the solution? Lower the speed limit of the 45 MPH road to 40 MPH. Net effect? Nothing. Proper solution? Expensive: improve visibility at the stop sign.
Another road was 50 MPH. A young woman was killed in a head-on accident with a truck. The truck driver was coming in the opposite direction, drifted off of the road into the huge drainage ditch that runs along both sides. Their outside tire got hung in the ditch, and they over-corrected, sending the truck into the oncoming traffic lane. Both were doing the speed limit. Result: People got together a ballot initiative at the next election to "fix" the problem. One would think widening the road/fixing the ditch would be the appropriate response. Was that what was asked for? Of course not. The speed limit has been lowered to 40. If both drivers in the event that caused this outrage had been doing 35 MPH, it still would have been a fatal accident. Why? Because even at 35 MPH, this would have been a combined 70 MPH collision, and the plow frame on the truck would have still gone through the windshield of the Honda Accord. It's simply not a fair fight. So this was another totally useless exercise.
And if you're going to say that it matches voice pitch and stuff instead of just the word, duh, press record on your laptop when they say it and play it back through the phone.
That's not how voice verification technology works. If it did, it would be totally useless.
Typically, voice sample are requested at random (out of a defined set - like the number 0 through 9) and sane engines look at how the phonemes are strung together when you say something, for example, in the middle of the phrase as opposed to at the end of the phrase. The engine knows about this because the enrollment process has you speak the phrase components in different orders several times.
Improvised side-auto glass breaking 101:
1.) Get an antenna from your car or the nearest one. Break it off.
2.) Make it into a U - hold both free ends in your one hand.
3.) Place this hand just outside the one corner of the window (your hand on the body of the car) with the rest of your "u" going across the window at an angle. Try to get the tip to hit in the bottom right or left corner of the window, about an inch or 2 from the edge.
4.) Pull the tip back with your other hand. Let go.
I mention this for one reason only - the getting child out situation. Anyone with malicious intent will simply use a brick, or, the proper tool (a spring loaded center punch). This way minimizes and flying glass, and make the window pretty much fall straight down in small pieces. Obviously you want to choose the window furthest from the child if you need to do this. Front and rear glass will likely not work with this technique, as they are laminated. We have specific saws and picks for this (glass masters).
Yes....I'm a PA certified vehicle rescue technician. Yes, I've pulled people out of cars using this method in a pinch.
Can't believe this happening in a country which promotes itself as a global exporter of freedom.
I'm sorry sir, but we are currently experiencing a freedom trade deficit. If you would like freedom, I suggest handing over the laptop and continuing on to a country we have democratized.
-US Customs
Bacardi 151. Or anything else that actually has a flame arrestor on the bottle.
You need little more than to take off the flame arrestor and/or pour it into something with more surface area than the next of the bottle and the vapors will ignite with matches or a standard lighter.
You are forgetting that there are repeaters all along these cables already. So in the parent's theory, you simply cut, move on to the next repeater and either replace it with your own repeater/splitter, or splice your splitter in directly on either side of the existing repeater.
Am I the only one who stops reading a post as soon as there's an egregious grammatical error like that? It really undermines the credibility of someone trying to sound intelligent.
I had the problem when I was with T-Mobile. I could see the AT&T towers, had good signal through field test, etc. I was told by T-Mobile that "we have coverage in that area.....I know it's not very strong, but it's there, so you can't roam on those AT&T towers there. Only in places where we have no coverage at all can you use an AT&T tower."
So it appears that it's not as simple as grabbing whichever tower is closest....it's pretty much contractual by area.
1.) Testifying about the data collected by credentialed forensic experts doesn't necessarily, and probably will not be construed as to require, being credentialed to actually collect such evidence.
2.) Computer forensics is NOT being singled out. This is obviously something that is poorly worded and too general/being taken too genreally - but one should understand basic legal concepts related to evidence if they are going to be collecting it - and creating credentials probably isn't a bad idea. Lack of a discernible chain of custody and spoliation are rampant in computer crimes/civil cases.
But what do I know? I'm just a sworn law enforcement officer (fire marshal) as a part time job, certified to collect evidence and with court experience behind me. And my DA brings in experts to testify about what my evidence means - experts who typically are not people who could actually collect the evidence themselves (because of skill sets, authority, etc.)
To give expert testimony you have to be accepted by the jurisdiction you are testifying in as an expert first. This is a very old concept. Please learn something about court procedure before excitedly exclaiming injustice.
Even a very technical potential user of a product may be intimidated by the product because of the facade that the developers/users have built around the product.
Exactly. Just look at Nagios and Asterisk. On the flip side, other projects have taken off to handle the nasty setup/config duties of each of these.
I do, and I don't count a Porsche 924 as expensive or high performance
Nor do I. But a 951 is most definitely high performance, and fortunately not all that expensive overall.
But that's hardly my point. On many vehicles, it's simply too expensive to toss rotors that can be machined back within factory tolerances. Even rotors off of a 25 year old 924.
Mine are $359 each for the real ones. Yes, each. And there' is a noticeable difference with the after market stuff. And that's a German car so I doubt it's just an American thing. I can get them resurfaced for about $20 each - which is important when you have a new set on that you just glazed at the track (I know this doesn't alloy to everyone, but it's the most common reason I would need to do it)
On my Ford pickup, I just toss them in the scrap metal pile that goes to the recyclers on occasion. They are too cheap to bother with resurfacing.
Maybe if you drove more expensive/higher performance cars you'd be familiar with this. It's not really all that uncommon, even in Europe.
People in SUVs who don't know any better (which is a LOT of them) seem to think that 4x4 means that they can both stop and turn better as well. They fail to realize that they have ALWAYS HAVE 4-WHEEL BRAKES, and 2 wheels that turn.
Yes, I drive a 4x4 pickup that gets 23 MPG on a good day. I use it to haul things. I use it when it snows because I live in a rural area that doesn't plow promptly/very well even when they do. When it's nice out and I'm not hauling things, I drive a small car that gets more like 30 MPG.
Yes, this is a rant that went way off topic - but what's the big deal? If you need vehicles for 2 wildly different purposes, buy 2 different vehicles.
Understand that my point is to stop the ghettoization you've obviously seen: again, real, proper data centers don't operate that way. Every been to 365 Main in SF? Horrible. 60 Hudson? It's a travesty. This is what happens when you colo: morons put whatever they want in whatever rack you lease them and plug it into anything they can get an extension cord to. This is not a real data center.
With containerized units being used as commodity infrastructure (which is increasingly easy to do with things like VMWare), this all goes away. No, it won't cover every possibility. You're still going to need somewhere to put those machines with weird cards, be they satellite connectivity, PSTN, etc. But the pure processing power portions of the DC can be kept "clean" and to spec with a few simple rules: the machines are what they are. If they break, an identical unit will be swapped back in.
Yes, it takes a different approach to server utilization, but it's one that becoming increasingly common in both large and small traditional data centers.
I'm tired of spaghetti. I'm tired of some idiot plugging both inputs of PDUs into two whips on the same generator. I'm tired of morons putting server labels over the only cooling vents on the front/back of the machine (if they even bother to label them). I'm tired of waiting for some kid at the colo facility to find a crash cart to tell me what some customer's server that has gone unreachable says on the console. I'm tired of idiots not racking machines with rails, and simply stacking a few on top of each other.
And let's face it - the guy putting his hands ont he equipment in a noisy DC is usually not the best trained or most experienced. And that's not going to change any time soon. It's simple economics.
To have tens of millions of dollars just sitting in a nice convenient portable container that can be hauled by anyone with a truck seems all too tempting.
Its a sea container. It doesn't have wheels.
So you'd really need "anyone with a 60 ton or larger crane" as well as their friend "with a truck and sea container trailer or low bed trailer". As well as "someone who can get into the secure warehouse these things will most likely be stored/installed in" and your scenario seems highly unlikely.
Oh....and "someone who can disconnect 400 Amp service and high volume cooling lines while they are still running".
I think you're missing the point - what takes longer to build - 1.) the equipment facilities area of a datacenter (power, cooling, etc.) plus the fit-out portion with the raised floor, racks, etc., or 2.) the equipment facilities area of a datacenter plus open warehouse space to stack sea containers in (portable data centers).
lack of maneuvering room for operations like relocating racks or having a bank of projector screens to monitor large arrays of systems
You do realize that in real data centers, the operations center where people sit is not in the same room as the equipment. No....looks like you don't realize that.
And cooling has to be managed very carefully, along with power consumption: you can't simply put in another fan to route the cool air where you want, and you don't have floor space to disassemble equipment on site the way you would in a more standard environment.
They're pre-built for a specific density of machines at a certain BTU/Hr load. The power consumption and heat dissipation is a known quantity.....as it is in all real data centers. And psssst....if you see a fan (other than those permanently attached/in machines and racks) in a data center, somebody screwed up, whether it was in the design, or the equipment loading.
Oh...and you don't take things apart on the floor. And the racks of the portable data centers all appear to be very well laid out for equipment swaps (which, by the way, is what you do - not play high-speed part changer inside the data center).
If you experiences differ, you haven't worked in a proper data center. Many are not. This type of data center in a box is a good way to fix all of the getto DC build-outs out there - you don't even have to hire a proper facilities engineer to design the place - it's already done properly, and as long as you follow the specifications for how to operate and use it, all should go well.
Slashdot Mirror
People love to overreact to accidents with inappropriate "fixes".
Examples:
An intersection in my area is known to be dangerous. I'm there once a month with the fire department. Several accidents have been fatals. The 25 MPH road has a stop sign in each direction crossing the 45 MPH road. People can not see traffic when coming from the smaller 25 MPH road that crosses the formerly 45 MPH road because of brush on one side and a homeowner's fence and the grade of their yard on the other side. What was the solution? Lower the speed limit of the 45 MPH road to 40 MPH. Net effect? Nothing. Proper solution? Expensive: improve visibility at the stop sign.
Another road was 50 MPH. A young woman was killed in a head-on accident with a truck. The truck driver was coming in the opposite direction, drifted off of the road into the huge drainage ditch that runs along both sides. Their outside tire got hung in the ditch, and they over-corrected, sending the truck into the oncoming traffic lane. Both were doing the speed limit. Result: People got together a ballot initiative at the next election to "fix" the problem. One would think widening the road/fixing the ditch would be the appropriate response. Was that what was asked for? Of course not. The speed limit has been lowered to 40. If both drivers in the event that caused this outrage had been doing 35 MPH, it still would have been a fatal accident. Why? Because even at 35 MPH, this would have been a combined 70 MPH collision, and the plow frame on the truck would have still gone through the windshield of the Honda Accord. It's simply not a fair fight. So this was another totally useless exercise.
My picture is of me when I was 15. I'm 26 now.
You're talking about an expired passport. So what?
(If you are 15 or younger, you passport is only good for 5 years. 10 Years if you're 16 or older.)
And if you're going to say that it matches voice pitch and stuff instead of just the word, duh, press record on your laptop when they say it and play it back through the phone.
That's not how voice verification technology works. If it did, it would be totally useless.
Typically, voice sample are requested at random (out of a defined set - like the number 0 through 9) and sane engines look at how the phonemes are strung together when you say something, for example, in the middle of the phrase as opposed to at the end of the phrase. The engine knows about this because the enrollment process has you speak the phrase components in different orders several times.
But what do I know.
You did it wrong.
Improvised side-auto glass breaking 101:
1.) Get an antenna from your car or the nearest one. Break it off.
2.) Make it into a U - hold both free ends in your one hand.
3.) Place this hand just outside the one corner of the window (your hand on the body of the car) with the rest of your "u" going across the window at an angle. Try to get the tip to hit in the bottom right or left corner of the window, about an inch or 2 from the edge.
4.) Pull the tip back with your other hand. Let go.
I mention this for one reason only - the getting child out situation. Anyone with malicious intent will simply use a brick, or, the proper tool (a spring loaded center punch). This way minimizes and flying glass, and make the window pretty much fall straight down in small pieces. Obviously you want to choose the window furthest from the child if you need to do this. Front and rear glass will likely not work with this technique, as they are laminated. We have specific saws and picks for this (glass masters).
Yes....I'm a PA certified vehicle rescue technician. Yes, I've pulled people out of cars using this method in a pinch.
Can't believe this happening in a country which promotes itself as a global exporter of freedom.
I'm sorry sir, but we are currently experiencing a freedom trade deficit. If you would like freedom, I suggest handing over the laptop and continuing on to a country we have democratized.
-US Customs
Bacardi 151. Or anything else that actually has a flame arrestor on the bottle. You need little more than to take off the flame arrestor and/or pour it into something with more surface area than the next of the bottle and the vapors will ignite with matches or a standard lighter.
You are forgetting that there are repeaters all along these cables already. So in the parent's theory, you simply cut, move on to the next repeater and either replace it with your own repeater/splitter, or splice your splitter in directly on either side of the existing repeater.
I don't know where the hell you got that from, but, dammit, that's my new sig.
Am I the only one who stops reading a post as soon as there's an egregious grammatical error like that? It really undermines the credibility of someone trying to sound intelligent.
I absolutely agree. But that doesn't change my point.
I don't think you know how to drive a car unless you can drive a manual transmission.
most US cars start at 240 HP
Ummm...no. A 2.7L 6 cylinder Porsche Boxter barely breaks that figure.
At least around my parts, the "typical" American cars are Toyota Corollas and Honda Accords at about 130 and 170 HP.
I had the problem when I was with T-Mobile. I could see the AT&T towers, had good signal through field test, etc. I was told by T-Mobile that "we have coverage in that area.....I know it's not very strong, but it's there, so you can't roam on those AT&T towers there. Only in places where we have no coverage at all can you use an AT&T tower."
So it appears that it's not as simple as grabbing whichever tower is closest....it's pretty much contractual by area.
1.) Testifying about the data collected by credentialed forensic experts doesn't necessarily, and probably will not be construed as to require, being credentialed to actually collect such evidence.
2.) Computer forensics is NOT being singled out. This is obviously something that is poorly worded and too general/being taken too genreally - but one should understand basic legal concepts related to evidence if they are going to be collecting it - and creating credentials probably isn't a bad idea. Lack of a discernible chain of custody and spoliation are rampant in computer crimes/civil cases.
But what do I know? I'm just a sworn law enforcement officer (fire marshal) as a part time job, certified to collect evidence and with court experience behind me. And my DA brings in experts to testify about what my evidence means - experts who typically are not people who could actually collect the evidence themselves (because of skill sets, authority, etc.)
That's quite a leap. Make sure you have a double layer tin foil hat on when you make it.
To give expert testimony you have to be accepted by the jurisdiction you are testifying in as an expert first. This is a very old concept. Please learn something about court procedure before excitedly exclaiming injustice.
Even a very technical potential user of a product may be intimidated by the product because of the facade that the developers/users have built around the product.
Exactly. Just look at Nagios and Asterisk. On the flip side, other projects have taken off to handle the nasty setup/config duties of each of these.
I do, and I don't count a Porsche 924 as expensive or high performance
Nor do I. But a 951 is most definitely high performance, and fortunately not all that expensive overall.
But that's hardly my point. On many vehicles, it's simply too expensive to toss rotors that can be machined back within factory tolerances. Even rotors off of a 25 year old 924.
Mine are $359 each for the real ones. Yes, each. And there' is a noticeable difference with the after market stuff. And that's a German car so I doubt it's just an American thing. I can get them resurfaced for about $20 each - which is important when you have a new set on that you just glazed at the track (I know this doesn't alloy to everyone, but it's the most common reason I would need to do it)
On my Ford pickup, I just toss them in the scrap metal pile that goes to the recyclers on occasion. They are too cheap to bother with resurfacing.
Maybe if you drove more expensive/higher performance cars you'd be familiar with this. It's not really all that uncommon, even in Europe.
I've got an 85 944. Same thing - goes just fine in the snow as long as things have been somewhat plowed, and I've got my winter wheels/tires on it.
Granted, I still usually take the 4x4 just in case. But I was really surprised as how well the car did in the snow.
People in SUVs who don't know any better (which is a LOT of them) seem to think that 4x4 means that they can both stop and turn better as well. They fail to realize that they have ALWAYS HAVE 4-WHEEL BRAKES, and 2 wheels that turn.
Yes, I drive a 4x4 pickup that gets 23 MPG on a good day. I use it to haul things. I use it when it snows because I live in a rural area that doesn't plow promptly/very well even when they do. When it's nice out and I'm not hauling things, I drive a small car that gets more like 30 MPG.
Yes, this is a rant that went way off topic - but what's the big deal? If you need vehicles for 2 wildly different purposes, buy 2 different vehicles.
Understand that my point is to stop the ghettoization you've obviously seen: again, real, proper data centers don't operate that way. Every been to 365 Main in SF? Horrible. 60 Hudson? It's a travesty. This is what happens when you colo: morons put whatever they want in whatever rack you lease them and plug it into anything they can get an extension cord to. This is not a real data center.
With containerized units being used as commodity infrastructure (which is increasingly easy to do with things like VMWare), this all goes away. No, it won't cover every possibility. You're still going to need somewhere to put those machines with weird cards, be they satellite connectivity, PSTN, etc. But the pure processing power portions of the DC can be kept "clean" and to spec with a few simple rules: the machines are what they are. If they break, an identical unit will be swapped back in.
Yes, it takes a different approach to server utilization, but it's one that becoming increasingly common in both large and small traditional data centers.
I'm tired of spaghetti. I'm tired of some idiot plugging both inputs of PDUs into two whips on the same generator. I'm tired of morons putting server labels over the only cooling vents on the front/back of the machine (if they even bother to label them). I'm tired of waiting for some kid at the colo facility to find a crash cart to tell me what some customer's server that has gone unreachable says on the console. I'm tired of idiots not racking machines with rails, and simply stacking a few on top of each other.
And let's face it - the guy putting his hands ont he equipment in a noisy DC is usually not the best trained or most experienced. And that's not going to change any time soon. It's simple economics.
These portable DCs are my OCD dream.
To have tens of millions of dollars just sitting in a nice convenient portable container that can be hauled by anyone with a truck seems all too tempting.
Its a sea container. It doesn't have wheels.
So you'd really need "anyone with a 60 ton or larger crane" as well as their friend "with a truck and sea container trailer or low bed trailer". As well as "someone who can get into the secure warehouse these things will most likely be stored/installed in" and your scenario seems highly unlikely.
Oh....and "someone who can disconnect 400 Amp service and high volume cooling lines while they are still running".
I think you're missing the point - what takes longer to build - 1.) the equipment facilities area of a datacenter (power, cooling, etc.) plus the fit-out portion with the raised floor, racks, etc., or 2.) the equipment facilities area of a datacenter plus open warehouse space to stack sea containers in (portable data centers).
They don't have to be left outside.
lack of maneuvering room for operations like relocating racks or having a bank of projector screens to monitor large arrays of systems
You do realize that in real data centers, the operations center where people sit is not in the same room as the equipment. No....looks like you don't realize that.
And cooling has to be managed very carefully, along with power consumption: you can't simply put in another fan to route the cool air where you want, and you don't have floor space to disassemble equipment on site the way you would in a more standard environment.
They're pre-built for a specific density of machines at a certain BTU/Hr load. The power consumption and heat dissipation is a known quantity.....as it is in all real data centers. And psssst....if you see a fan (other than those permanently attached/in machines and racks) in a data center, somebody screwed up, whether it was in the design, or the equipment loading.
Oh...and you don't take things apart on the floor. And the racks of the portable data centers all appear to be very well laid out for equipment swaps (which, by the way, is what you do - not play high-speed part changer inside the data center). If you experiences differ, you haven't worked in a proper data center. Many are not. This type of data center in a box is a good way to fix all of the getto DC build-outs out there - you don't even have to hire a proper facilities engineer to design the place - it's already done properly, and as long as you follow the specifications for how to operate and use it, all should go well.