Right, just don't forget, that means you can see something happen when you brush your hair. Electromagnetism has been a useful model but like every piece of philosophy but especially science and maths it is just that, a model and not a definition of reality, forget that and you box yourself into the idea that model being useful for many things or lasting a long time means it is the TRUTH instead of a form of very effective hammer. Do that and assume every model has to explain the results of the last and you might just get lost in a system too large where your models all have to decay because they've grown too large and they limit your ability to look at old incompatible models and recombine them in ways that provide useful tools.
Ummm... no, I don't take things on faith other than the idea there is some sort of higher power and I'm not it and I don't take that on faith either, it is a model built on axiom that has been extremely effective in allowing me retain the idea that every idea and external thing can be used as a form of entropy for personal growth while retaining the ability to break out of the box reasonably consistently.
I can, have, and do produce electricity pretty effortlessly.
I'm sorry but plea to authority is a logical fallacy, do you have any rebuttal that can stand on it's own merit without rhetoric? Rhetoric is a means of winning a debate, which is a means of achieving consensus WITHOUT having an argument that doesn't rely on fallacy and therefore breaks the chain of rational logic.
" actually trust the NSA to do exactly what they were created to do. They have never tried to misrepresent what they do. And they are legally permitted and oblige to do what they do."
Ummm... you do know the Constitution doesn't empower them to do what they do or any body of our government to empower themselves or one another to do what the NSA does right?
Umm... humans built computers, they currently each have neural nets with billions of neurons, a light based interface, trillions of synapses, and an insane amount of data in a highly redundant and compact redundant code encoded in billions of cells in a self healing system. All this has been true across tens of thousands of years and their information network that is the emergent brain of the collective has grown. Oh and there are billions of them. That is some pretty impressive scaling if you ask me.
Yeah, it's just a dangerous path. The slippery slope is a logical fallacy only because it isn't a given not because it doesn't tend to happen, once something becomes the new normal the next step does seem less dramatic. IT automation has been almost entirely driven by replacing one piece at a time.
No but the people really running the show aren't merely the corporations, they control the tap for the virtual money, the global banks. Those people have less concern about how long it takes to manufacture humans until fully functioning... they can just ride the information field.
Look you won't find much support from me for copyright as it exists but if it is going to continue to exist we need to keep remembering why it was made that way it is. Copyright is automatic so that poor people who can't afford to file have their ideas protected. There should be no benefits to wealth under the law.
As one whose back is more likely to be pushed than that point than not I certainly will. The solution is to stop pushing people to the point of breaking and continue to convert weaknesses into strengths like we did with the model of capitalism. Pretending it is the final and last answer instead of revising and building on the reason that model was successful is forgetting the lessons of history, pretending it wasn't successful because it isn't the final answer is also forgetting the lessons of history.
Maybe but someone figured there was enough chance it would contribute to people buying tickets to pay someone to make that section as part of a for-profit effort. Anything you do THINKING it will contribute to making a profit is for-profit, including bad ideas that actually cost you money.
Copyright is automatic, the default is not that you can grab stuff you find and use it, the default is that you can't grab stuff you didn't make and use it unless there is something indicating you CAN use it.
There can't be 2 without assuming some sort of "God" or "Creator" those are the elements of myth.
3) Natural right.
Under 3) there is no such thing as theft, your natural right as related to possession of thing stops applying the moment someone else possess the thing. As for 1), you ignore that the law and rights granted under it are an extension of 3), that when more than one party combines their strength the collective is stronger than the individual. Why should the collective make or honor any law or "right" that weakens the collective? I don't mean weaken in some short sighted sense where one ignores that making individuals stronger makes for a stronger collective, I mean something like we are discussing wherein a tiny population is being given a mechanism through which they recursively enjoy the fruits of everyone elses labor without any contribution except loaning those fruits back to those who produced them on the successive cycle.
We currently use an economic system wherein the poor have to borrow from those with historic wealth to generate new wealth for society and then pay back interest and/or a share of ownership in their venture. For the next round they will need to do it again. With social funding of these ventures people would keep the fruit of their labor but with the current system we pretend disrupting the tiny fraction of the population who have 40% of the historical wealth would be evil rather than less disruptive than building a highway.
That is true, no one has the right to force others to support them and create an artificial right to property, right to pass property across generations, pretend wealth redistribution is a crime, etc. Life isn't fair, deal with it.
There are usage patterns where it can work this way for small entities and a few niche needs like scientific computing on a temporary basis but in practice is almost always ends up costing more because this usage pattern is extremely uncommon in the real world. An enterprise scale organization is going to have many departments and solutions across it and there are quite a few that pretty much every enterprise is going to have along with the load requirements that go with them.
At a large organization you can take advantage of the same thing the cloud host is, virtual resources, to more efficiently use your resources. At a blush virtualization actually costs resources in abstraction layers but a large organization needs a highly redundant infrastructure you will have a lot of "warm" resources sitting idle, you should always make sure that your typical day-to-day demands don't exceed 50% utilization which means you have 50% sitting idle to absorb peaks like this and that is just production. You also need a staging environment where you can test successful deployment and stress test that should be a complete mirror of your prod environment, these resources can be used for other things outside of these test windows. Not mention your actual dev environments where there is any significant time savings to be had from being able to spin up fresh instances on the fly. By the time you've built all these and built out the hardware you need to make sure none of them go above 50% utilization, you'll have plenty of warm idle resources for a project with an odd load pattern somewhere. If you have a niche requirement that is blowing that out of the water you look to custom hardware not third party virtualized general purpose hardware to fill the gap.
"Running your own system doesn't fix anything. Yes, you won't go down because someone forgot to renew the credit card, but you will go down because of a faulty RAM chip, or an air-conditioner going out, or a ISP getting a route wrong, or a backhoe going through a cable. None of those failures are likely to take out Google as they will just move you to new working hardware in a working location - both of which they have in abundance along with well tested procedures to do the move. In fact it will probably happen automatically without you having to raise a finger."
There is no failover capability a cloud provider can offer that you can't build in-house, and have quality control while doing it.
Netflix gets less and less stable daily... were you under the impression that large enterprises are making good decisions lately? As someone who works on enterprise infrastructure I can give you a hint, they aren't.
"Then you shouldn't blindly be advocating "roll your own"."
No but he is right, mostly he is right because "cloud" solutions are comprised of about 40+ layers of roll your own always run ultra bleeding edge code continuous integration solutions on top of frameworks that are the same bleeding edge crap. When you move your solid in house solution to one it improves your stability in the same way bundling a bunch of bad mortgages together to "diversify" improves the stability of your bad investments... it doesn't.
Of course cloud computing is more expensive than running your own dedicated servers... they have to buy the same equipment you do to run the service, then charge you enough to pay for it plus make a profit.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, just don't forget, that means you can see something happen when you brush your hair. Electromagnetism has been a useful model but like every piece of philosophy but especially science and maths it is just that, a model and not a definition of reality, forget that and you box yourself into the idea that model being useful for many things or lasting a long time means it is the TRUTH instead of a form of very effective hammer. Do that and assume every model has to explain the results of the last and you might just get lost in a system too large where your models all have to decay because they've grown too large and they limit your ability to look at old incompatible models and recombine them in ways that provide useful tools.
Ummm... no, I don't take things on faith other than the idea there is some sort of higher power and I'm not it and I don't take that on faith either, it is a model built on axiom that has been extremely effective in allowing me retain the idea that every idea and external thing can be used as a form of entropy for personal growth while retaining the ability to break out of the box reasonably consistently.
I can, have, and do produce electricity pretty effortlessly.
I'm sorry but plea to authority is a logical fallacy, do you have any rebuttal that can stand on it's own merit without rhetoric? Rhetoric is a means of winning a debate, which is a means of achieving consensus WITHOUT having an argument that doesn't rely on fallacy and therefore breaks the chain of rational logic.
" actually trust the NSA to do exactly what they were created to do. They have never tried to misrepresent what they do. And they are legally permitted and oblige to do what they do."
Ummm... you do know the Constitution doesn't empower them to do what they do or any body of our government to empower themselves or one another to do what the NSA does right?
Umm... humans built computers, they currently each have neural nets with billions of neurons, a light based interface, trillions of synapses, and an insane amount of data in a highly redundant and compact redundant code encoded in billions of cells in a self healing system. All this has been true across tens of thousands of years and their information network that is the emergent brain of the collective has grown. Oh and there are billions of them. That is some pretty impressive scaling if you ask me.
Yeah, it's just a dangerous path. The slippery slope is a logical fallacy only because it isn't a given not because it doesn't tend to happen, once something becomes the new normal the next step does seem less dramatic. IT automation has been almost entirely driven by replacing one piece at a time.
ding ding ding
No but the people really running the show aren't merely the corporations, they control the tap for the virtual money, the global banks. Those people have less concern about how long it takes to manufacture humans until fully functioning... they can just ride the information field.
Look you won't find much support from me for copyright as it exists but if it is going to continue to exist we need to keep remembering why it was made that way it is. Copyright is automatic so that poor people who can't afford to file have their ideas protected. There should be no benefits to wealth under the law.
As one whose back is more likely to be pushed than that point than not I certainly will. The solution is to stop pushing people to the point of breaking and continue to convert weaknesses into strengths like we did with the model of capitalism. Pretending it is the final and last answer instead of revising and building on the reason that model was successful is forgetting the lessons of history, pretending it wasn't successful because it isn't the final answer is also forgetting the lessons of history.
Maybe but someone figured there was enough chance it would contribute to people buying tickets to pay someone to make that section as part of a for-profit effort. Anything you do THINKING it will contribute to making a profit is for-profit, including bad ideas that actually cost you money.
"1.) Furthermore, this use was noncommercial, because the photo was not used to advertise a product or generate revenue.""
But it was, it was used to advertise a for-profit film festival.
Copyright is automatic, the default is not that you can grab stuff you find and use it, the default is that you can't grab stuff you didn't make and use it unless there is something indicating you CAN use it.
Well said, to paraphrase "nuh uh."
There can't be 2 without assuming some sort of "God" or "Creator" those are the elements of myth.
3) Natural right.
Under 3) there is no such thing as theft, your natural right as related to possession of thing stops applying the moment someone else possess the thing. As for 1), you ignore that the law and rights granted under it are an extension of 3), that when more than one party combines their strength the collective is stronger than the individual. Why should the collective make or honor any law or "right" that weakens the collective? I don't mean weaken in some short sighted sense where one ignores that making individuals stronger makes for a stronger collective, I mean something like we are discussing wherein a tiny population is being given a mechanism through which they recursively enjoy the fruits of everyone elses labor without any contribution except loaning those fruits back to those who produced them on the successive cycle.
"That's true but the costs are not even close and I'm a in-house advocate all the way."
That's true, cloud solutions are much more expensive than in-house solutions with the same capabilities.
We currently use an economic system wherein the poor have to borrow from those with historic wealth to generate new wealth for society and then pay back interest and/or a share of ownership in their venture. For the next round they will need to do it again. With social funding of these ventures people would keep the fruit of their labor but with the current system we pretend disrupting the tiny fraction of the population who have 40% of the historical wealth would be evil rather than less disruptive than building a highway.
That is true, no one has the right to force others to support them and create an artificial right to property, right to pass property across generations, pretend wealth redistribution is a crime, etc. Life isn't fair, deal with it.
There are usage patterns where it can work this way for small entities and a few niche needs like scientific computing on a temporary basis but in practice is almost always ends up costing more because this usage pattern is extremely uncommon in the real world. An enterprise scale organization is going to have many departments and solutions across it and there are quite a few that pretty much every enterprise is going to have along with the load requirements that go with them.
At a large organization you can take advantage of the same thing the cloud host is, virtual resources, to more efficiently use your resources. At a blush virtualization actually costs resources in abstraction layers but a large organization needs a highly redundant infrastructure you will have a lot of "warm" resources sitting idle, you should always make sure that your typical day-to-day demands don't exceed 50% utilization which means you have 50% sitting idle to absorb peaks like this and that is just production. You also need a staging environment where you can test successful deployment and stress test that should be a complete mirror of your prod environment, these resources can be used for other things outside of these test windows. Not mention your actual dev environments where there is any significant time savings to be had from being able to spin up fresh instances on the fly. By the time you've built all these and built out the hardware you need to make sure none of them go above 50% utilization, you'll have plenty of warm idle resources for a project with an odd load pattern somewhere. If you have a niche requirement that is blowing that out of the water you look to custom hardware not third party virtualized general purpose hardware to fill the gap.
Sounds like you are confusing people who buy stock with investors.
No, they can't because you have multiple redundant peerings for your AS... right?
"Running your own system doesn't fix anything. Yes, you won't go down because someone forgot to renew the credit card, but you will go down because of a faulty RAM chip, or an air-conditioner going out, or a ISP getting a route wrong, or a backhoe going through a cable. None of those failures are likely to take out Google as they will just move you to new working hardware in a working location - both of which they have in abundance along with well tested procedures to do the move. In fact it will probably happen automatically without you having to raise a finger."
There is no failover capability a cloud provider can offer that you can't build in-house, and have quality control while doing it.
Netflix gets less and less stable daily... were you under the impression that large enterprises are making good decisions lately? As someone who works on enterprise infrastructure I can give you a hint, they aren't.
"Then you shouldn't blindly be advocating "roll your own"."
No but he is right, mostly he is right because "cloud" solutions are comprised of about 40+ layers of roll your own always run ultra bleeding edge code continuous integration solutions on top of frameworks that are the same bleeding edge crap. When you move your solid in house solution to one it improves your stability in the same way bundling a bunch of bad mortgages together to "diversify" improves the stability of your bad investments... it doesn't.
Of course cloud computing is more expensive than running your own dedicated servers... they have to buy the same equipment you do to run the service, then charge you enough to pay for it plus make a profit.