I personally went with software raid, and I'm pretty happy with it. I've had a few system failures in the past and was able to easily recover them because any linux kernel 2.4 or later will auto detect and initialize the raid, in any order. I've also had a tendency of rebuilding the system every year or so - but I'm breaking out of that mold. It runs, I have quiet fans, and the drives spin down after 10 minutes of inactivity. I'm happy ^_^
Also, there's the unexpected benefit of being able to grow the raid by swapping them out individually for larger disks! Although they are IDE, I'd love to get SATA. I just can't afford to buy new drives - but the comp to run it is really only about 150$
But it's not cheap to develop effective drugs. The cost to produce them (effort vs gains) and the limited timespan they have to recoup said costs is a large reason they are so expensive.
What might work is a repository of failed experiments that isn't too stringent on the peer reviewing or reproduction. This way you get some history as to what was done (and didn't work) without the cost associated with PROVING that it did work.
If at any time in the future these results would be called into question - the person doing the research can verify the results or not, but they'll at least know it was done and can assess the potential gains.
Well, enough armchair speculation. I'm not qualified to given an opinion of consequence anyway.
To my knowledge, this isn't possible because nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.
To expand on that, Information cannot travel faster than the speed of light either, which means neither can gravitational forces, or... well, anything else we're aware of.
Unless of course, you're implying that our limit of perception isn't the limit of the speed of light, but something else.
I know that people will fight against this. People want to say "well, that's not science and doesn't belong in a science class". How about pointing out - yes, even in science class - that the scientific method can only teach you about objective observation, and that your own intuition should guide your beliefs.
They did that for me in biology, without mentioning creationalism.
Whenever we went over theories or laws, such as how do you define life, or the theory of evolution, there was always a section that pointed out the flaws with these theories.
In the definition of life, or a cell, where was the first cell? Evolution (at the time) didn't know how complex scenarios involved, such as a beetle that had two chemicals that were explosive when mixed.
Make no mistake, you don't need to point out "Intelligent Design" to highlight these weaknesses, and they should already be pointed out to begin with.
but there was something recently about Mozilla being more persistent about people upgrading from ff2 to ff3, in that they would pop up a dialog asking you to upgrade periodically, even if you selected never.
But then again, a quick google search reveals nothing, so maybe i'm imagining it/typing in the wrong words to search from
Jackinthebox has them But they don't work usefully.. I think the cash register person has to actually bring up your order or some such for it to register... so it defeats the point.
More to the point, Energy can be gotten from other sources besides oil. Whereas plastics (A medical revolution) may not be, and can be recycled.
My point is this. There will be higher priorities to use crude oil than energy because there are alternatives to produce said energy where there might not be in others.
Plug it in: Risk: Baby dies. You directly caused it, and are now sued into oblivion. Reward: Baby lives, you get lots of press, someone buys your design and you never have to worry about money again.
I think a lot of this is due to the high barrier of entry for these drugs. Also - Pharmaceutical companies are given rediculously low ammounts of time to capitalize on their patents. This combined with high costs mean they need to maximize their profits.
If it were easier to recoup costs, we might see them less anal about maximizing profits. Then again, this is capitalizm and public companies are held accountable by their share holders if they DON'T maximize profits so *shrug*
no grid upgrades are needed, especially since charging will likely be mostly at night.
Peak usage fluctuates between 5-9am and pm during the winter and 1pm to 8pm during the summer, at least here in Arizona.
Unless there is a timer to start charging after peak usage, Us lazy americans will plug our cars in when we get out and not after peak usage..
Granted - We have a tremendous incentive to do just that. Peak power costs a lot more per watt than other times of the day. Ultimately, Unless such a system is put in place (could be a grid update, a car design, whatever - this is what they are discussing) I don't think we would adopt the technology at all, rather than go out just before bed to start charging our car...
Peak usage is after all the time when people are home and businesses are open and operating.
As someone with roommates, I would pretty much require some sort of measuring device be used that would record the time and powerdraw before I'd agree to pay 1/3rd (or whatever) the electric bill... Also - not everyone has a Garrage.. Such as anyone who lives in an apartment complex.
There are most definitely massive changes that need to be made to support this kind of transportation as we currently know it.
I've never ran an antivirus in the 8 years I've used windows.
I've periodically ran scans from antivirus.com to confirm that I have no viruses, and I haven't had any obnoxious (I won't say no spyware, the definition is rather broad...) spyware in the last 5 years...
Really, safer web habits and nat based firewall are an excellent defense. You don't always need resource hogging programs or top tier firewalls to protect your computer, just think twice before clicking random links!
I think that's all fine and easy to say, but I for one am tired of more of the same. From where I'm sitting, I don't think we can afford to not try something else. One thing you can give Obama partial credit for is getting people (particularly younger) to take a more active roll in our government. I for one still hope Obama's mind can be changed, if only for his integrity. What other option do I have?
Lets turn this around a bit. What makes you think McCain is going to do any better than Bush did? He is, after all, a supporter of this very same bill, and we have effectively two options right now..
I have never held delusions about how difficult a task he is claiming to undertake. Changing the ways of old, wealthy, corrupt, and very very comfortable men is impossible at best. I am, however, tired of corporations throwing money at our government to create laws in their favor, putting unrelated (and very unpopular) additions to low profile bills, and a president who seems determined to move the US into a police state controlled by corporate entities who have an obligation to make as much money as possible, regardless of means. Unless you have a better idea, then please, keep your sheeple statements to yourself and consider just why everyone is so attracted to the words hope and change. In the end, if our two options turned out to be the same on some issues, but different (positive, since I'm clearly pro Obama aka change =p ) in others, does that really mean we've lost by trying something else?
Well, there's also a reduced number of a certain type of equipment, which you would be depriving others of. If enough people were to do this, they could sufficiently occupy said type of equipment to the point where others will either wait in line or do something else. If you want, you can expand that to multiple types of machines. The net result is the same. Limited resources being consumed excessively by a few serve to detriment everyone else unfairly when those limited resources become scarce.
Realistically, an internet connection has a hard cap on how much you can upload in any given second. The total bandwidth going to your area is probably higher than that, so your impact isn't total, but if a few people do that then there isn't enough of that bandwidth left for everyone else. You get the same situation.
Sorry, I just don't see how your disagreement is valid. As far as I can see, the analogy is accurate enough.
Why would that answer even be relevent anyways. Or the question for that matter. Our society is against assisted suicide, under the guise that anyone who doesn't want to live automatically isn't fit to make that decision.
If one is not allowed to make a decision one way, then how can you assume that a decision the other way is totally his own?
At the rate everyone is going, we might as well just not pay health care costs at all, and deposit our 100$ a month into a savings account. If that's not enough to cover it, we get a loan (possibly federal, with low interist?)
That way each individual pays 100% of their healthcare costs, and those who don't use it have extra money.
I think it's more of an issue that support costs a company money. This is normally fine, as it is factored into the cost of the game. If you pirate a game you really have no right to expect a paid employee to assist you in getting the game to run. You're on your own.
This sounds more like a statement of principle than anything else, but maybe I'm wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
I think they are 250 gigs
let me log in and check ... 7 disks, 250 gig.
I personally went with software raid, and I'm pretty happy with it. I've had a few system failures in the past and was able to easily recover them because any linux kernel 2.4 or later will auto detect and initialize the raid, in any order. I've also had a tendency of rebuilding the system every year or so - but I'm breaking out of that mold. It runs, I have quiet fans, and the drives spin down after 10 minutes of inactivity. I'm happy ^_^
Also, there's the unexpected benefit of being able to grow the raid by swapping them out individually for larger disks! Although they are IDE, I'd love to get SATA. I just can't afford to buy new drives - but the comp to run it is really only about 150$
I use a raid 5 as a lazy man's backup.
I'm well aware that if one drive dies, the others probably aren't far behind, and may well die while they restore a replacement.
I'm willing to accept this risk because I use the raid5 as more of a convenient large storage medium that is less likely to dissapear.
Of course, it's 6 disks for 1.3 terabytes... But I can no longer afford to upgrade it. I could buy 1 drive and back it up.
Or just don't volunteer information needlessly.
google can't index livejournal if you mark the posts private, for example.
I know - anonymous coward and all..
But it's not cheap to develop effective drugs. The cost to produce them (effort vs gains) and the limited timespan they have to recoup said costs is a large reason they are so expensive.
What might work is a repository of failed experiments that isn't too stringent on the peer reviewing or reproduction. This way you get some history as to what was done (and didn't work) without the cost associated with PROVING that it did work.
If at any time in the future these results would be called into question - the person doing the research can verify the results or not, but they'll at least know it was done and can assess the potential gains.
Well, enough armchair speculation. I'm not qualified to given an opinion of consequence anyway.
I cant stand our over the air digital signal. Instead of just getting fuzzy or grainy now it stops, and sometimes all together loses signal...
It's impossible to watch an action show with 6 second pauses all the damn place...
I'd say i should get cable (I have cable internet) but dammit I'm just gonna download the shows and buy dvd's when they're released....
I wish I could explain things this concisely...
To my knowledge, this isn't possible because nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.
To expand on that, Information cannot travel faster than the speed of light either, which means neither can gravitational forces, or ... well, anything else we're aware of.
Unless of course, you're implying that our limit of perception isn't the limit of the speed of light, but something else.
Why not regulate a steady temperature at 90f instead of 70f ?
As long as the temperature doesn't fluctuate too much the hardware should be fine.
I know that people will fight against this. People want to say "well, that's not science and doesn't belong in a science class". How about pointing out - yes, even in science class - that the scientific method can only teach you about objective observation, and that your own intuition should guide your beliefs.
They did that for me in biology, without mentioning creationalism.
Whenever we went over theories or laws, such as how do you define life, or the theory of evolution, there was always a section that pointed out the flaws with these theories.
In the definition of life, or a cell, where was the first cell? Evolution (at the time) didn't know how complex scenarios involved, such as a beetle that had two chemicals that were explosive when mixed.
Make no mistake, you don't need to point out "Intelligent Design" to highlight these weaknesses, and they should already be pointed out to begin with.
I donno if you're the same guy as ShawnC
but there was something recently about Mozilla being more persistent about people upgrading from ff2 to ff3, in that they would pop up a dialog asking you to upgrade periodically, even if you selected never.
But then again, a quick google search reveals nothing, so maybe i'm imagining it/typing in the wrong words to search from
Jackinthebox has them ... so it defeats the point.
But they don't work usefully.. I think the cash register person has to actually bring up your order or some such for it to register
More to the point, Energy can be gotten from other sources besides oil. Whereas plastics (A medical revolution) may not be, and can be recycled.
My point is this. There will be higher priorities to use crude oil than energy because there are alternatives to produce said energy where there might not be in others.
Plug it in:
Risk: Baby dies. You directly caused it, and are now sued into oblivion.
Reward: Baby lives, you get lots of press, someone buys your design and you never have to worry about money again.
I think a lot of this is due to the high barrier of entry for these drugs. Also - Pharmaceutical companies are given rediculously low ammounts of time to capitalize on their patents. This combined with high costs mean they need to maximize their profits.
If it were easier to recoup costs, we might see them less anal about maximizing profits.
Then again, this is capitalizm and public companies are held accountable by their share holders if they DON'T maximize profits so *shrug*
no grid upgrades are needed, especially since charging will likely be mostly at night.
Peak usage fluctuates between 5-9am and pm during the winter and 1pm to 8pm during the summer, at least here in Arizona.
Unless there is a timer to start charging after peak usage, Us lazy americans will plug our cars in when we get out and not after peak usage ..
Granted - We have a tremendous incentive to do just that. Peak power costs a lot more per watt than other times of the day. Ultimately, Unless such a system is put in place (could be a grid update, a car design, whatever - this is what they are discussing) I don't think we would adopt the technology at all, rather than go out just before bed to start charging our car ...
Peak usage is after all the time when people are home and businesses are open and operating.
As someone with roommates, I would pretty much require some sort of measuring device be used that would record the time and powerdraw before I'd agree to pay 1/3rd (or whatever) the electric bill ... Also - not everyone has a Garrage .. Such as anyone who lives in an apartment complex.
There are most definitely massive changes that need to be made to support this kind of transportation as we currently know it.
I can answer at least the first one.
we are supposed to retain 100% of our previous seniority with HP.
Now, mind you, nothing is in writing yet, so that can change...
why not include a few electric contacts, so that your feedback is a slight tingling sensation?
I guess someone would horribly misuse it eventually, but that's what disclaimers are for. heh
I've never ran an antivirus in the 8 years I've used windows.
I've periodically ran scans from antivirus.com to confirm that I have no viruses, and I haven't had any obnoxious (I won't say no spyware, the definition is rather broad ...) spyware in the last 5 years ...
Really, safer web habits and nat based firewall are an excellent defense. You don't always need resource hogging programs or top tier firewalls to protect your computer, just think twice before clicking random links!
Opponent implies a once only thing... Rival might be better still. But yea, not voting isn't exactly a better option in my opinion.
You are actually giving those parties MORE power then, by making an difference between them count for more per person than if you diluted them.
Except that the current president refuses to pass a bill without telco immunity. What's to say Obama couldn't do the same, but opposite?
I think that's all fine and easy to say, but I for one am tired of more of the same. From where I'm sitting, I don't think we can afford to not try something else. One thing you can give Obama partial credit for is getting people (particularly younger) to take a more active roll in our government. I for one still hope Obama's mind can be changed, if only for his integrity. What other option do I have?
Lets turn this around a bit. What makes you think McCain is going to do any better than Bush did? He is, after all, a supporter of this very same bill, and we have effectively two options right now ..
I have never held delusions about how difficult a task he is claiming to undertake. Changing the ways of old, wealthy, corrupt, and very very comfortable men is impossible at best. I am, however, tired of corporations throwing money at our government to create laws in their favor, putting unrelated (and very unpopular) additions to low profile bills, and a president who seems determined to move the US into a police state controlled by corporate entities who have an obligation to make as much money as possible, regardless of means. Unless you have a better idea, then please, keep your sheeple statements to yourself and consider just why everyone is so attracted to the words hope and change. In the end, if our two options turned out to be the same on some issues, but different (positive, since I'm clearly pro Obama aka change =p ) in others, does that really mean we've lost by trying something else?
Well, there's also a reduced number of a certain type of equipment, which you would be depriving others of. If enough people were to do this, they could sufficiently occupy said type of equipment to the point where others will either wait in line or do something else. If you want, you can expand that to multiple types of machines. The net result is the same. Limited resources being consumed excessively by a few serve to detriment everyone else unfairly when those limited resources become scarce.
Realistically, an internet connection has a hard cap on how much you can upload in any given second. The total bandwidth going to your area is probably higher than that, so your impact isn't total, but if a few people do that then there isn't enough of that bandwidth left for everyone else. You get the same situation.
Sorry, I just don't see how your disagreement is valid. As far as I can see, the analogy is accurate enough.
Why would that answer even be relevent anyways.
Or the question for that matter. Our society is against assisted suicide, under the guise that anyone who doesn't want to live automatically isn't fit to make that decision.
If one is not allowed to make a decision one way, then how can you assume that a decision the other way is totally his own?
At the rate everyone is going, we might as well just not pay health care costs at all, and deposit our 100$ a month into a savings account. If that's not enough to cover it, we get a loan (possibly federal, with low interist?)
That way each individual pays 100% of their healthcare costs, and those who don't use it have extra money.
I think it's more of an issue that support costs a company money. This is normally fine, as it is factored into the cost of the game. If you pirate a game you really have no right to expect a paid employee to assist you in getting the game to run. You're on your own.
This sounds more like a statement of principle than anything else, but maybe I'm wrong.