That is what you should do. I use rssh for something like this all the time and each process has it own user. That takes planning though and people are lazy.
Insurances premiums still would not exceed the cost of launch and cargo. Which means insurance will not more than double launch cost. Which is still not half what the competitors want. You can insure for that as well, either with additional insurance or just build two of everything and sell any leftover units. Still cheaper than the other provider. At some point cost savings of this magnitude change the market that much.
If launch + cargo cost $150million, then you can take three attempts and still break even. Which means if you can get the job done in two attempts, you do it that way every time.
I disagree with your last point. Both Boeing and Airbus have had such events occur. Such events will occur at some rate no matter how much money is spent. At some point diminishing returns makes it entirely pointless to continue with such spending.
Really? You would not drop in cost comparable to what we see in the summary for that risk?
I would in a heartbeat. I fly fairly often, and when I do it tends to be over one of the worlds large oceans or the other one. If I could get there for $200 instead of $2000 I would consider giving up some safety margin for that. The odds of dying in a plane crash are so low they are not even a thought I have.
Your odds of dying in car crash per year, over a lifetime or per mile are hundreds of times more likely, yet no one suggests paying 10 times more for a slightly safer car.
If your life depends on getting to the destination would you rather have a NASA rocket you cannot afford at all or a unit at a tenth the cost with a very minor increase in risk?
Risk is part of life, even the shuttle killed a crew every hundred launches and that thing cost a ridiculous amount. You could double that rate and kill two crew every hundred launches but get the cost down to a tenth it would surely be worth it. You would still have no problem finding qualified candidates for those missions.
I think they insure those launches. If you can save $400 million per launch having to launch two $100M satellites to get one in orbit is fine. You still come out $200 Million to the good.
I use screen daily. How else would I run user interacting programs that take 12+ hours to run some activities. Think database rebuilds and the like. Sure that is not the most common usecase, but I would rather not be crippled because you want teh shiny and all your friends to run linux.
Pointing out a use case professionals have is not elitism it is reality. This is just like the people who flipped when final cut was updated and nerfed to make it easier for noobs.
You might not be speaking about game servers, but I have seen them that require a display because they run the whole game to run. That is insane. That is the sort of braindead thinking your ideas bring with them.
From the edges of the green house at the bottom. It is shaped like an inverted cone. Their air does not need to be cold, only cooler than the air at the top which was heated to make it rise.
The bigger the delta the better, but it does not mean you can't use normal outside temperatures.
Everything in its path would not be fried at all with those plans that use microwaves to transmit power from space. The amount of energy per square meter is held low enough to ensure that. Then a very large(in area coverd) antenna grid is used to relieve this. Are you afraid of being burned to death by your cell phone?
Either way it would reduce reliance on fossil fuel. If you have a coal burning power plant making X megawatts and you can get another Y megawatts for "free" that means either less peaking plants need to be run or X can be reduced by some amount by burning less fuel.
How hot it is matters not one bit, the limit to how much energy you can extract is the temperature difference. Your doubt of global warming seems likely cause by a lack of basic scientific understanding.
I am not sure why it has to be the case, but look at ubuntu and unity. Enough said. If that was not enough said think what unity does to FFM and other geek type norms.
Whenever something becomes very popular it does that by sacrificing everything at the alter of that. Look at the worlds most popular beer, bud light, it got that way by being very nearly water.
Your easy to use tabbed terminal solves different problems than screen. Screen is great because I can use it remotely and detach and reattach at will. Some times big boys run programs that take a long time and may not play well with tools like nohup.
Lots of image editors and image manipulation software have command line interfaces for automated changes to images. Even if you can't imagine it, they exist for a damn good reason. Even games. Hosting a minecraft server should not require a display. There is very little that is done better graphically if you ever want to be able to automate it or extend it in the future. A nice example of that is emulators that launch from a cli making it possible to use one GUI tool for lots of them. If each emulator had its own gui and did not take command input that would not be possible.
That is not what I am talking about. I am speaking of a business sending wanted information to customers or contractors who supplied their own email accounts that might well be hotmail or yahoo. The company in this case is using its own email servers to send those, but the recipients do not have accounts with them.
Why would exchange be so specially blessed? Why not postfix, or sendmail? What would companies that send out notifications to clients. partners, customers do?
Not spam, think "This is to bring to your attention that Monday Feb 32 2013 from the hours of 1am to 11pm a technician will arrive to install your shark tank. Thank you for your purchase".
Which will of course mean Linux becomes useless for those of us not inclined to stick to the shiny buttons and poke at the screen.
I would rather have less users, than cripple what we have now.
A common ground can be found, but it is hard. It means remembering that every program should run fine without X(even VLC has text output video), that the display and the program may not be on the same machine and that the pipe is still a useful tool. Frontends are nice, but if you program requires it you are already going down the wrong path.
If we give up on the fundamentals we might as well all move to windows 8 with touchscreens only.
Slashdot Mirror
That is what you should do.
I use rssh for something like this all the time and each process has it own user. That takes planning though and people are lazy.
Insurances premiums still would not exceed the cost of launch and cargo. Which means insurance will not more than double launch cost. Which is still not half what the competitors want. You can insure for that as well, either with additional insurance or just build two of everything and sell any leftover units. Still cheaper than the other provider. At some point cost savings of this magnitude change the market that much.
If launch + cargo cost $150million, then you can take three attempts and still break even. Which means if you can get the job done in two attempts, you do it that way every time.
I disagree with your last point. Both Boeing and Airbus have had such events occur. Such events will occur at some rate no matter how much money is spent. At some point diminishing returns makes it entirely pointless to continue with such spending.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Airliner_accidents_and_incidents_caused_by_design_or_manufacturing_errors
Really?
You would not drop in cost comparable to what we see in the summary for that risk?
I would in a heartbeat. I fly fairly often, and when I do it tends to be over one of the worlds large oceans or the other one. If I could get there for $200 instead of $2000 I would consider giving up some safety margin for that. The odds of dying in a plane crash are so low they are not even a thought I have.
Your odds of dying in car crash per year, over a lifetime or per mile are hundreds of times more likely, yet no one suggests paying 10 times more for a slightly safer car.
Citation:
http://traveltips.usatoday.com/air-travel-safer-car-travel-1581.html
If your life depends on getting to the destination would you rather have a NASA rocket you cannot afford at all or a unit at a tenth the cost with a very minor increase in risk?
Risk is part of life, even the shuttle killed a crew every hundred launches and that thing cost a ridiculous amount. You could double that rate and kill two crew every hundred launches but get the cost down to a tenth it would surely be worth it. You would still have no problem finding qualified candidates for those missions.
I think they insure those launches. If you can save $400 million per launch having to launch two $100M satellites to get one in orbit is fine. You still come out $200 Million to the good.
I use screen daily. How else would I run user interacting programs that take 12+ hours to run some activities. Think database rebuilds and the like. Sure that is not the most common usecase, but I would rather not be crippled because you want teh shiny and all your friends to run linux.
Pointing out a use case professionals have is not elitism it is reality. This is just like the people who flipped when final cut was updated and nerfed to make it easier for noobs.
You might not be speaking about game servers, but I have seen them that require a display because they run the whole game to run. That is insane. That is the sort of braindead thinking your ideas bring with them.
From the edges of the green house at the bottom.
It is shaped like an inverted cone. Their air does not need to be cold, only cooler than the air at the top which was heated to make it rise.
The bigger the delta the better, but it does not mean you can't use normal outside temperatures.
Everything in its path would not be fried at all with those plans that use microwaves to transmit power from space. The amount of energy per square meter is held low enough to ensure that. Then a very large(in area coverd) antenna grid is used to relieve this. Are you afraid of being burned to death by your cell phone?
THE MORE YOU KNOW .::::'*
Either way it would reduce reliance on fossil fuel. If you have a coal burning power plant making X megawatts and you can get another Y megawatts for "free" that means either less peaking plants need to be run or X can be reduced by some amount by burning less fuel.
How hot it is matters not one bit, the limit to how much energy you can extract is the temperature difference. Your doubt of global warming seems likely cause by a lack of basic scientific understanding.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot's_theorem_(thermodynamics)
I am not sure why it has to be the case, but look at ubuntu and unity. Enough said. If that was not enough said think what unity does to FFM and other geek type norms.
Whenever something becomes very popular it does that by sacrificing everything at the alter of that. Look at the worlds most popular beer, bud light, it got that way by being very nearly water.
Your easy to use tabbed terminal solves different problems than screen. Screen is great because I can use it remotely and detach and reattach at will. Some times big boys run programs that take a long time and may not play well with tools like nohup.
Lots of image editors and image manipulation software have command line interfaces for automated changes to images. Even if you can't imagine it, they exist for a damn good reason. Even games. Hosting a minecraft server should not require a display. There is very little that is done better graphically if you ever want to be able to automate it or extend it in the future. A nice example of that is emulators that launch from a cli making it possible to use one GUI tool for lots of them. If each emulator had its own gui and did not take command input that would not be possible.
Something like that. More like this
From: sales@philspoolsandspas.com
To: tepples@example.com
Subject: [Order 123567] Your service will be performed on 1-1-2012
Body: Your scheduled service will be performed on 1-1-2012 from 8-4 if this time is not acceptable please call 555-555-5555.
In some areas that is true. I have the option of FIOS, DSL from a couple providers or TWC.
I did intentionally limit the areas in my city I would live to select for FIOS though.
Netflix pays for transport, so do you. The problem is the man in the middle it seems.
If this really is a problem for you, you could lower the default stream quality on the netflix website.
I would instead suggest you try to see if there is another provider in your area.
This what exactly what I was thinking of.
That is not what I am talking about.
I am speaking of a business sending wanted information to customers or contractors who supplied their own email accounts that might well be hotmail or yahoo. The company in this case is using its own email servers to send those, but the recipients do not have accounts with them.
Science is not a religion, it is not less valuable when it gets updated. Your belief not withstanding.
Why would exchange be so specially blessed? Why not postfix, or sendmail?
What would companies that send out notifications to clients. partners, customers do?
Not spam, think "This is to bring to your attention that Monday Feb 32 2013 from the hours of 1am to 11pm a technician will arrive to install your shark tank. Thank you for your purchase".
So for $1 can I or can I not send random folks goatse?
Because that might just be worth creating a facebook profile for.
How did they get those images to rip the metadata from?
Which will of course mean Linux becomes useless for those of us not inclined to stick to the shiny buttons and poke at the screen.
I would rather have less users, than cripple what we have now.
A common ground can be found, but it is hard. It means remembering that every program should run fine without X(even VLC has text output video), that the display and the program may not be on the same machine and that the pipe is still a useful tool. Frontends are nice, but if you program requires it you are already going down the wrong path.
If we give up on the fundamentals we might as well all move to windows 8 with touchscreens only.
Will it let you forkbomb it(yourself)?
Can we trick people into doing that again like we used to in the old days?
If you can't do that you are not an Admin, you are an operator.
The Garand is not a bolt action. Yes, most bolt actions are easier to clean with the bolt removed.