Directly pursuant to the topic of the OP: very poor network throughput, as well as discovery just how marginal its design, components and construction was. The deal-breaker was the poor data-rate, because that's why I had the gigabit network set up in the first place, when I could have otherwise settled for cheaper 100base-T components; that wireless/wired gigabit router set me back a bit at that time, when equivalent 100base-T ones were plentiful and dime a dozen.
I wound up building a RAID 5 subsystem internal to my main system, based around an LSI MegaRAID HBA. I got 40% more storage and full drive bandwidth for the same cost as the Buffalo.
I bought a Buffalo NAS about three years ago; I bought it because of the 1000base-T interface and low cost. I persevered with it for about three months, and then demanded and got a full refund from the retailer.
"(FTD) patients present changes in personality and behaviour. They find it difficult to interact with people, they don't pick up on social cues, they lack empathy, they make bad judgements."
That sounds almost like a textbook description of Asperger's Syndrome. Hmmmm....
Why are there repeat references to articles at cosmosmagazine.com when it's already been established recently that it can't handle Slashdot traffic? A quick Google search with "sarcasm dementia" shows that there are TONS of other sources reporting this same news. Please reference another source that can actually handle the traffic so we can actually RTFA, okay?
At the very least it would be difficult for whoever wins the bid to not work with Telstra at some point, because of the amount of infrastructure they control.
So... how about forcing them to sell it back to the People for whom they built it? It's common shared infrastructure, like roads, after all. It will be ridiculously costly, but leaving it in their control will mean that you'll all pay for it time and time and time again. This is exactly the same advice I had for our own Public Utilities Commission; I hope you don't (continue to) repeat every bloody mistake we've made! We had Bush, you had Mini-Me Bush John Howard....
Some are quite a bit more able and willing than others. Generally they all have what we call "ambition" in common. Coincidentally, that is also one of the common shared traits of captains of industry and politicians....
Ah, that ship has already sailed. I dare say the French, Italians, Germans, Scots, Irish, Spanish, and other cultures too numerous to name would have a similar admonition for the Anglo-Saxon English.;-)
I'm not so petty that I feel compelled to mod-down anyone else's good-natured attempts at humor; the only time I make exception to that is when it's clear the humor has malicious intent. Why do you or anyone else feel that compulsion? If it merely doesn't make you laugh, why not just keep your mouth shut and your fingers off the mod button? Clearly the intent is not to improve the quality of others' humor but to belittle it in a way that makes the perpetrator feel somehow superior or less inferior. That isn't a very constructive of anyone's energy.
If that's the most cogent criticism you can muster, why waste the keystrokes?
If you weren't so hellbent on being a sourpuss at the moment, you would concede that sometimes it's the tired old, obvious, see-it-coming-a-mile-away jokes that are perversely the funniest. It's not often the case for me, but it does happen, and it happens often enough even for me while reading Slashdot.
As I said, I found Windows Desktop Search to be much more functional than Google's. Much as I hate having to set my anti-Microsoft dogma aside;-), this is one that Microsoft got right and Google didn't.
I didn't mention Google Toolbar; I have little trust for any browser toolbar. That is a distinct product that does not have the same purpose. Why are you trying to muddy the conversation with non sequiturs?
Have you heard of Google, I presume? You know what its primary service does, right? Did you also know that you can apply that index-and-search paradigm to locally stored content on a single personal computer? No fewer than two (actually many more) products have actually done it:
Microsoft: Windows Indexing Service and Windows Desktop Search Google: Google Desktop Search
With these devices, when properly installed and used, you don't need to remember the name of a file: all you need to recall is some relevant fact about the file, whether it's a snippet of the file name or something from within its (textual) content.
Believe it or not, Microsoft's product is actually far more effective at this task, once all the available third-party "IFilters" are installed on top of it. On my system, WDS recognizes and indexes text and hints from about three times more files than GDS, which amounts to literally hundreds of thousands more files.
In this case, at least, it's Google Desktop Search that performs more poorly at the primary task. Google wasted too much effort on the froofy "widgets" and other unnecessary crap, and apparently failed to open up the spec so that interested parties could create the equivalents of IFilters for it.
I think I have a fanboi, following me around and modding my posts down. He might have started off as an Anonymous Coward making comments, but that was making him look bad so he's retreated to truly anonymous moderating. Isn't anonymity just a wonderful precious thing?
Yes, I did, though I had to shorten the argument and question to a ridiculous degree to make it fit within their restrictions. Talk about "dumbing down"....
Yes. Those few people will be followed by more. That is how migration always occurs; weren't you paying attention in history classes?
Every single birth that DOESN'T occur on Earth results in a whole cascade of eventual progeny that DOESN'T further tax the resources of Earth. You do the math... assuming you didn't sleep through those classes as well.
I am very skeptical that even the "Web-savvy" general population is able to correctly identify the most important issues facing humanity. Even so-called experts often can't properly place that emphasis. Take the Sierra Club, for instance: overpopulation is the 800-pound gorilla of environmental problems, yet they only give it lip service and then spend all their money dashing hither and thither fighting the myriad symptoms of that. It's really the 800-pound gorilla thrashing around that is causing all the damage, but they do nothing to restrain the beast.
Given that overpopulation is the one single most pressing problem facing humanity, and further given that we are completely incapable of voluntarily resolving it, there really is only one single solution which should be the entire planet's primary focus:
Establishing other sustainable colonies of humanity that can at least provide a migration opportunity and remove some of the pressure on the Earth's ecosystem and our social structures.
Slashdot Mirror
Directly pursuant to the topic of the OP: very poor network throughput, as well as discovery just how marginal its design, components and construction was. The deal-breaker was the poor data-rate, because that's why I had the gigabit network set up in the first place, when I could have otherwise settled for cheaper 100base-T components; that wireless/wired gigabit router set me back a bit at that time, when equivalent 100base-T ones were plentiful and dime a dozen.
I wound up building a RAID 5 subsystem internal to my main system, based around an LSI MegaRAID HBA. I got 40% more storage and full drive bandwidth for the same cost as the Buffalo.
Ah, the wonders of anonymity strike again, eh?
I bought a Buffalo NAS about three years ago; I bought it because of the 1000base-T interface and low cost. I persevered with it for about three months, and then demanded and got a full refund from the retailer.
Not entirely. There might be causal overlap there.
Oh, wait... you were being sarcastic! I failed, didn't I? So... am I demented or just autistic?
From TFA:
That sounds almost like a textbook description of Asperger's Syndrome. Hmmmm....
Why are there repeat references to articles at cosmosmagazine.com when it's already been established recently that it can't handle Slashdot traffic? A quick Google search with "sarcasm dementia" shows that there are TONS of other sources reporting this same news. Please reference another source that can actually handle the traffic so we can actually RTFA, okay?
I was whispering and I still used two of them in their appropriate places... ain't that good enough?
At the very least it would be difficult for whoever wins the bid to not work with Telstra at some point, because of the amount of infrastructure they control.
So... how about forcing them to sell it back to the People for whom they built it? It's common shared infrastructure, like roads, after all. It will be ridiculously costly, but leaving it in their control will mean that you'll all pay for it time and time and time again. This is exactly the same advice I had for our own Public Utilities Commission; I hope you don't (continue to) repeat every bloody mistake we've made! We had Bush, you had Mini-Me Bush John Howard....
Capitalists are people obsessed with capitals. They are very much present tense. :-)
Ah, lemme finish your sentence for ya:
Some are quite a bit more able and willing than others. Generally they all have what we call "ambition" in common. Coincidentally, that is also one of the common shared traits of captains of industry and politicians....
Capitalists call it "persuasion".
Ah, that ship has already sailed. I dare say the French, Italians, Germans, Scots, Irish, Spanish, and other cultures too numerous to name would have a similar admonition for the Anglo-Saxon English. ;-)
I'm not so petty that I feel compelled to mod-down anyone else's good-natured attempts at humor; the only time I make exception to that is when it's clear the humor has malicious intent. Why do you or anyone else feel that compulsion? If it merely doesn't make you laugh, why not just keep your mouth shut and your fingers off the mod button? Clearly the intent is not to improve the quality of others' humor but to belittle it in a way that makes the perpetrator feel somehow superior or less inferior. That isn't a very constructive of anyone's energy.
If that's the most cogent criticism you can muster, why waste the keystrokes?
If you weren't so hellbent on being a sourpuss at the moment, you would concede that sometimes it's the tired old, obvious, see-it-coming-a-mile-away jokes that are perversely the funniest. It's not often the case for me, but it does happen, and it happens often enough even for me while reading Slashdot.
As I said, I found Windows Desktop Search to be much more functional than Google's. Much as I hate having to set my anti-Microsoft dogma aside ;-), this is one that Microsoft got right and Google didn't.
I didn't mention Google Toolbar; I have little trust for any browser toolbar. That is a distinct product that does not have the same purpose. Why are you trying to muddy the conversation with non sequiturs?
Have you heard of Google, I presume? You know what its primary service does, right? Did you also know that you can apply that index-and-search paradigm to locally stored content on a single personal computer? No fewer than two (actually many more) products have actually done it:
Microsoft: Windows Indexing Service and Windows Desktop Search
Google: Google Desktop Search
With these devices, when properly installed and used, you don't need to remember the name of a file: all you need to recall is some relevant fact about the file, whether it's a snippet of the file name or something from within its (textual) content.
Believe it or not, Microsoft's product is actually far more effective at this task, once all the available third-party "IFilters" are installed on top of it. On my system, WDS recognizes and indexes text and hints from about three times more files than GDS, which amounts to literally hundreds of thousands more files.
In this case, at least, it's Google Desktop Search that performs more poorly at the primary task. Google wasted too much effort on the froofy "widgets" and other unnecessary crap, and apparently failed to open up the spec so that interested parties could create the equivalents of IFilters for it.
I think I have a fanboi, following me around and modding my posts down. He might have started off as an Anonymous Coward making comments, but that was making him look bad so he's retreated to truly anonymous moderating. Isn't anonymity just a wonderful precious thing?
Can it precisely define the size of Uranus?
I'm still using Windows 2000, though I have a (legal) Windows XP SP2 CD on the shelf. Who's your daddy?
Yes, I did, though I had to shorten the argument and question to a ridiculous degree to make it fit within their restrictions. Talk about "dumbing down"....
Yes. Those few people will be followed by more. That is how migration always occurs; weren't you paying attention in history classes?
Every single birth that DOESN'T occur on Earth results in a whole cascade of eventual progeny that DOESN'T further tax the resources of Earth. You do the math... assuming you didn't sleep through those classes as well.
So you "grew up" to be an ostrich, then? Sounds more like reverse evolution to me. You are full of crap, but not for the reasons you presumed.
I am very skeptical that even the "Web-savvy" general population is able to correctly identify the most important issues facing humanity. Even so-called experts often can't properly place that emphasis. Take the Sierra Club, for instance: overpopulation is the 800-pound gorilla of environmental problems, yet they only give it lip service and then spend all their money dashing hither and thither fighting the myriad symptoms of that. It's really the 800-pound gorilla thrashing around that is causing all the damage, but they do nothing to restrain the beast.
Given that overpopulation is the one single most pressing problem facing humanity, and further given that we are completely incapable of voluntarily resolving it, there really is only one single solution which should be the entire planet's primary focus:
Establishing other sustainable colonies of humanity that can at least provide a migration opportunity and remove some of the pressure on the Earth's ecosystem and our social structures.
... his name will be Mudd.