Some of my larger san volumes show 2TB/day of writes which means according to Intel's x-25e datasheet a 64GB drive would last ~1,000 days or under 3 years.
I don't get it. Is that 2TB/day per 64GB of storage? (Approx 40 total rewrites of your entire storage capacity per day?) Or 2TB/day spread across a much larger storage capacity? I would guess the latter, in which case the writes would be spread across a large number of drives and less intensive on each drive.
I can't seem to care about team sports either, but I kind of wish I could. Just zoning out on the couch once in a while, arousing dusty old instincts, picking a tribe to belong to, having all these strong vicarious emotions, which (after a designated amount of time) come to a tidy conclusion one way or another, and you go on with your real life with an inconsequential little thing to celebrate or complain about.
My plan is to learn American football by getting Madden late this summer so I can appreciate more of the complexity of the game and get drawn in. Maybe that will work.
EVERY Apple product release in recent memory is accompanied by a press release claiming they just can't keep up with demand. Ohmygosh, it's like, everybody is getting one!! If you don't, you'll be the only one!!!
Did somebody question whether youtube videos could be art? The Guggenheim already said they would have an exhibit. The only question is which videos will be selected.
The other question is whether youtube videos play any better at the Guggenheim than they do on your PC at home, i.e. do we really need a Guggenheim any more? Artists love exploring those kids of questions so I'm sure it is part of the purpose of the exhibit.
Games with an element of driving differ hugely in how realistic they are. I don't think games like Microsoft CART, Grand Prix Legends, Gran Turismo, and Forza have hurt my driving any. But when I play Burnout with my son, I like to remind him that we both die at least 10 times during every race.
Looks like it's a good day to be Chinese - they certainly won't be bothered by our moral concerns.
That's a strange thing to say. China has less record of imperialism than other comparably rich (in other centuries) nations. Are you predicting they might change their policy and start invading nations all the time? If so, it would still only make us even.
But in the long run, economic strength is more fundamental than military strength (which is just a side effect of economic strength). What is more fundamental to economic strength than affordable energy? The free ride of pumping it straight from the ground is coming to an end, and we are not preparing.
Heh, coincidentally I bought my XBox 360 specifically for Forza 3, haven't played any other multi-disc games on it, and assumed all the games work that way.
The fact that non HD models are available should be less of an issue now that you can use USB storage to bring an Arcade to about the same storage that my 20 GB model has. (I haven't tried the external storage so maybe there is a caveat).
Current consoles have a big advantage - a hard drive. Multiple discs isn't so bad if you just need them for install, and not to play thereafter. I wouldn't want to get back to 7 disk installs like with floppies, but we don't seem to be on the verge of that.
China is really testing the whole theory that capitalism and democracy are inseparable. China's extreme economic growth has made them happy with their government, whatever ideology it is. India, meanwhile, is democratic, yet many languish in poverty and its economic rise has been nothing like China's.
The argument is you go broke because the "have nots" are as well or better off than the "haves", so people stop working. Which, taken to the extreme of ensuring economic equality for everybody, would be true. Personally I don't think we're very close to that in the US though. Pandering politicans have lowered taxes so many times a huge number of people aren't even paying, and that is making is broke.
Some are better than others, but all incentive systems have perverse incentives. Even something as simple as paying a real estate agent:
Pay them a fixed price: their incentive is for you to buy / sell ASAP, good deal or bad.
Pay by the hour: they could milk you forever.
Pay a percentage: buy / sell ASAP, since holding out for a better deal could easily double their work and still only increase their haul by a few percent.
Even in the simple case - a company paying salesman a percentage of what they sell - can easily turn bad for the company through infighting salesmen, lying to customers, and customers with buyer's remorse who won't come back.
Really, if this were the same thing but with a webcam taped to a ballcap, it would accomplish almost exactly the same thing (but with better image quality) but nobody would care.
I agree, I had previously imagined a soldier seeing something disturbing and speaking out about it. But what I think I see in that story is more like a plain old spy.
Slashdot even covered United Airlines stock dropping from $12 to $3 when the news crawler for one of these tools thought an old story was new and the tool proceeded to dump its entire United holdings causing a massive sell off by other investors.
You could see that as an argument these tools harm the economy (i.e. decrease overall growth). But if the United Airlines price sprang back fairly quickly, and the people placing unjustified reliance on faulty models took a bath practically giving away valuable stocks, doesn't that just imply this will be self-limiting?
But is not all investment gambling? The fact that you hope to make a profit in 20 minutes instead of 20 months doesn't really change the gambling aspect.
I'm not sure where the true boundary between investing and gambling falls, but in any case 20 minute vs 20 month outlooks seem to be two different types of investing that don't really interfere anyways. Whether it takes 30 seconds or 3 minutes for the quarterly report to impact the stock price doesn't change what it's going to be two years from now. The people harmed by this new system are not those making long-term forecasts (or just relying on overall growth over time), but rather the day traders already doing the same thing, but on a timescale of minutes instead of seconds.
I am more of a buy-and-hold guy, not because I think it is inherently more moral, but because I don't manage enough money to justify spending all my time managing it. By trying to time stock purchases, I would just open myself up to being fleeced by specialists who do nothing else. Thus, I think it is better for me to avoid all the transaction costs, essentially letting the specialists set the prices and duke it out for fractions of cent that only matter at huge volumes, and place my bets on the growth of the overall economy over time. Over this history of the Wall Street, this has been an effective strategy. I suppose it's possible the economy is done growing forever and the indices will be flat for the next 30 years until I retire (like they were for the last 10 or so since I started investing). But I doubt it.
Isn't the rationale something along the lines that this kind of high volume, quick selling flattens out the (inherent) irrationality of the market?
I really think the premise of this is simply to beat everybody to the punch by a few seconds. It is expected that good and bad news moves the market; by moving first, you get money. They're not trying to make better decisions, just a little faster. It's not an inherently productive activity, and it's a pity so many of our brightest minds are wasting their lives gaming the system (taking big slices of pie without helping make more). But I wouldn't pretend to have the solution.
Who wants to cover the land in PV cells as far as the eye can see when you can build a few miniature stars with a few tonnes of superconducter and a vacuum chamber and have done with it?*
The land is already covered as far as the eye can see, with roofs, roads, and parking lots. (Which is why cities are so unnaturally hot and a second reason harvesting that energy would be nice to do).
And, though I make no guarantees for the distant future, for the foreseeable future solar is incontrovertibly cheaper than home-grown fusion.
Granted, solar isn't really an option until we can make it cheaper and store it and distribute it better. A lot of that technology exists but maybe not quite good enough yet, but again... compared to fusion?
Yup, wake me up when somebody "tweets" the contemporary equivalent of The Pentagon Papers, and fights the court battles up to the Supreme Court to do so.
How much data does it really take to position the graphical objects that fit on a cellphone screen? It should be a fraction of the bandwidth consumed by a phone call.
The odd thing is, were this Linux you would be flamed for trying to get modern things running with such old versions. But as this is Windows, you feel entitled to complain about having to re-learn something new and brag about the "effort" you save.
Actually there is a huge difference. For me, a primary motivation for updating linux is getting driver support for new devices. On windows, the stable driver abi and supply of 3rd party drivers means XP supports everything on my laptop, even though it came out years after XP was released.
As for python and Mozilla, you don't need the latest kernel to run those. (That's right, I don't update my linux kernel unless I have a specific need, either. Call me crazy).
If someone needs to be trained to use Windows 7 then there is something wrong with them.
I have a PhD in computer science and still use XP (when I'm not using Linux) because of the "training costs" of migration. Am I going to go take a class on Windows 7? No. But it's annoying and time-consuming to hunt around for things and figure out how they're done now, set up all the network printer connections again, etc., when I could be getting stuff done, or posting to slashdot:) After switching to Office 2007 about 1 1/2 years ago, I am now accustomed to it, but I *still* don't see what I gained by migrating to the Ribbon interface and re-learning where to find everything. If anything, I still think it's *less* productive than the previous straightforward menu system augmented by toolbars.
You might argue I'll have to migrate eventually so why not now. In the case of Windows 7 that's true, but I did skip Vista entirely and am very glad I did.
Again, I am not against keeping up with technology and retraining myself but only when there is a benefit to doing so.
Slashdot Mirror
"A bit beyond us" is exactly what the XPrize is for.
I don't get it. Is that 2TB/day per 64GB of storage? (Approx 40 total rewrites of your entire storage capacity per day?) Or 2TB/day spread across a much larger storage capacity? I would guess the latter, in which case the writes would be spread across a large number of drives and less intensive on each drive.
My plan is to learn American football by getting Madden late this summer so I can appreciate more of the complexity of the game and get drawn in. Maybe that will work.
EVERY Apple product release in recent memory is accompanied by a press release claiming they just can't keep up with demand. Ohmygosh, it's like, everybody is getting one!! If you don't, you'll be the only one!!!
The other question is whether youtube videos play any better at the Guggenheim than they do on your PC at home, i.e. do we really need a Guggenheim any more? Artists love exploring those kids of questions so I'm sure it is part of the purpose of the exhibit.
Games with an element of driving differ hugely in how realistic they are. I don't think games like Microsoft CART, Grand Prix Legends, Gran Turismo, and Forza have hurt my driving any. But when I play Burnout with my son, I like to remind him that we both die at least 10 times during every race.
That's a strange thing to say. China has less record of imperialism than other comparably rich (in other centuries) nations. Are you predicting they might change their policy and start invading nations all the time? If so, it would still only make us even.
And, how parallel is your workload.
But in the long run, economic strength is more fundamental than military strength (which is just a side effect of economic strength). What is more fundamental to economic strength than affordable energy? The free ride of pumping it straight from the ground is coming to an end, and we are not preparing.
The fact that non HD models are available should be less of an issue now that you can use USB storage to bring an Arcade to about the same storage that my 20 GB model has. (I haven't tried the external storage so maybe there is a caveat).
Current consoles have a big advantage - a hard drive. Multiple discs isn't so bad if you just need them for install, and not to play thereafter. I wouldn't want to get back to 7 disk installs like with floppies, but we don't seem to be on the verge of that.
China is really testing the whole theory that capitalism and democracy are inseparable. China's extreme economic growth has made them happy with their government, whatever ideology it is. India, meanwhile, is democratic, yet many languish in poverty and its economic rise has been nothing like China's.
Well, it's hard to accuse China of not taking action on that front.
The argument is you go broke because the "have nots" are as well or better off than the "haves", so people stop working. Which, taken to the extreme of ensuring economic equality for everybody, would be true. Personally I don't think we're very close to that in the US though. Pandering politicans have lowered taxes so many times a huge number of people aren't even paying, and that is making is broke.
Pay them a fixed price: their incentive is for you to buy / sell ASAP, good deal or bad.
Pay by the hour: they could milk you forever.
Pay a percentage: buy / sell ASAP, since holding out for a better deal could easily double their work and still only increase their haul by a few percent.
Even in the simple case - a company paying salesman a percentage of what they sell - can easily turn bad for the company through infighting salesmen, lying to customers, and customers with buyer's remorse who won't come back.
Really, if this were the same thing but with a webcam taped to a ballcap, it would accomplish almost exactly the same thing (but with better image quality) but nobody would care.
I agree, I had previously imagined a soldier seeing something disturbing and speaking out about it. But what I think I see in that story is more like a plain old spy.
You could see that as an argument these tools harm the economy (i.e. decrease overall growth). But if the United Airlines price sprang back fairly quickly, and the people placing unjustified reliance on faulty models took a bath practically giving away valuable stocks, doesn't that just imply this will be self-limiting?
I'm not sure where the true boundary between investing and gambling falls, but in any case 20 minute vs 20 month outlooks seem to be two different types of investing that don't really interfere anyways. Whether it takes 30 seconds or 3 minutes for the quarterly report to impact the stock price doesn't change what it's going to be two years from now. The people harmed by this new system are not those making long-term forecasts (or just relying on overall growth over time), but rather the day traders already doing the same thing, but on a timescale of minutes instead of seconds.
I am more of a buy-and-hold guy, not because I think it is inherently more moral, but because I don't manage enough money to justify spending all my time managing it. By trying to time stock purchases, I would just open myself up to being fleeced by specialists who do nothing else. Thus, I think it is better for me to avoid all the transaction costs, essentially letting the specialists set the prices and duke it out for fractions of cent that only matter at huge volumes, and place my bets on the growth of the overall economy over time. Over this history of the Wall Street, this has been an effective strategy. I suppose it's possible the economy is done growing forever and the indices will be flat for the next 30 years until I retire (like they were for the last 10 or so since I started investing). But I doubt it.
I really think the premise of this is simply to beat everybody to the punch by a few seconds. It is expected that good and bad news moves the market; by moving first, you get money. They're not trying to make better decisions, just a little faster. It's not an inherently productive activity, and it's a pity so many of our brightest minds are wasting their lives gaming the system (taking big slices of pie without helping make more). But I wouldn't pretend to have the solution.
The land is already covered as far as the eye can see, with roofs, roads, and parking lots. (Which is why cities are so unnaturally hot and a second reason harvesting that energy would be nice to do).
And, though I make no guarantees for the distant future, for the foreseeable future solar is incontrovertibly cheaper than home-grown fusion.
Granted, solar isn't really an option until we can make it cheaper and store it and distribute it better. A lot of that technology exists but maybe not quite good enough yet, but again... compared to fusion?
Yup, wake me up when somebody "tweets" the contemporary equivalent of The Pentagon Papers, and fights the court battles up to the Supreme Court to do so.
How much data does it really take to position the graphical objects that fit on a cellphone screen? It should be a fraction of the bandwidth consumed by a phone call.
Actually there is a huge difference. For me, a primary motivation for updating linux is getting driver support for new devices. On windows, the stable driver abi and supply of 3rd party drivers means XP supports everything on my laptop, even though it came out years after XP was released.
As for python and Mozilla, you don't need the latest kernel to run those. (That's right, I don't update my linux kernel unless I have a specific need, either. Call me crazy).
I have a PhD in computer science and still use XP (when I'm not using Linux) because of the "training costs" of migration. Am I going to go take a class on Windows 7? No. But it's annoying and time-consuming to hunt around for things and figure out how they're done now, set up all the network printer connections again, etc., when I could be getting stuff done, or posting to slashdot :) After switching to Office 2007 about 1 1/2 years ago, I am now accustomed to it, but I *still* don't see what I gained by migrating to the Ribbon interface and re-learning where to find everything. If anything, I still think it's *less* productive than the previous straightforward menu system augmented by toolbars.
You might argue I'll have to migrate eventually so why not now. In the case of Windows 7 that's true, but I did skip Vista entirely and am very glad I did.
Again, I am not against keeping up with technology and retraining myself but only when there is a benefit to doing so.