Instead of spewing stupid platitudes who about looking at some of those attempts to centralize vote-counting that actually reinforced democracy? Clue number one - it's done in public with representatives from all the people on the ballot watching. The UK, Australia, a lot of places have something a thousand times better run than the Florida hanging chad bullshit or people having to wait in line for hours on a fucking Tuesday just because the local electoral office just cannot get their shit together.
It doesn't mean anything because the "superdelagates" had disproportionate power so it did not resemble what most people would consider an election. It's a bit creepy seeing that in a place that is supposed to be "for the people" and not for King and aristocrats.
I thought you were too busy pretending to be far too stupid to read but here you are back again. Election fraud hasn't seemed to have happened much in the USA in the last half century, you have been played by this Senator as if you are as stupid as you have been pretending to be. He's using the spectre of fraud to push an agenda.
Then fix it like everywhere else did years ago and have enough volunteers running things so that people do not have to wait for anything close to an hour. America is supposed to be great so surely you can get your shit together enough so that it doesn't look like Pakistan are the professionals instead?
Did you forget that the court decided instead of there being a full count or do you just want an excuse to put a boot in to a Union? Gore would most definitely have been a better President than "mission from God when I'm not on vacation" Bush, but so would have Cheney, Powell, Rice and maybe even at a stretch Rumsfeld.
If you're going to be that paranoid, how do you know that ballot booth isn't rigged to take your picture, record your biometrics, and the button or level also takes a small dna sample?
Because it's made of fucking cardboard. I suggest you take a look at a sane voting system like the one in Australia instead of your "hanging chads" and other bullshit. Paper. Pencil. Fast electronic scanners with a serious automatic feed. Australia runs it's elections well. The results - well sometimes we get the utter pricks we seem to deserve but at least we know a lot of people voted for them.
It's things like that which call for doing it all independently on a Federal level with competency instead of things like Florida 2000 that the world is still laughing at. You already have the core of people who do it. Plenty of Americans are among those to conduct elections in some places on behalf of the U.N. - especially in the most recent elections in Iraq and Afganistan.
Where I am the choice was to go with paper and pencil then feed the sheets into huge scanners. It's quick and leaves everything available for a manual recount when the inevitable court case from a prick that does not want to admit defeat happens.
did they force them to go drive to the right one? Nope they just pulled them aside and got on the phone and had it all worked out in under 5 minutes
Where I am there is always someone appointed to deal with absentee votes and they certainly don't take five minutes per person. Something like an "electoral commission" done at a Federal level as seen in other countries would make it as smooth as you've seen (or IMHO a lot smoother, no waiting for a voting official to reset the machine) everywhere instead of good in some places, insane in others and on a fucking Tuesday so only the obsessed take time off work to vote.
Currently election fraud fits into the category of "non-problem" - it MIGHT be easy to buy/intimidate votes but it does not appear to actually be happening, especially since it seems to be very easy to detect after the fact (unless it's a Diebold machine or other voodoo voting "solution"). The question here is not how to solve a "non-problem" but why this Senator is kicking up a stink about it. Previous efforts of this type have blatantly been used as an excuse to make it more difficult to vote and turn specific groups of people away. Jeb for instance got up to a lot of games of that type in Florida some years ago which was a scandal that attracted international notice.
In areas where it IS a real problem there have been plenty of solutions to stop ballot stuffing or theft of ballot boxes. I like the one in India where a very cheap mechanical voting machine has a very small maximum number of votes so that even if someone steals it and maxes it out with votes for one canditate it is unlikely to skew the vote. A perpetrator would have to steal a lot of the machines and that is likely to be noticed by a large number of people.
Fair enough, but the nuke death thing is not only close to a divide by zero error (so few installations) but it also conveniently excludes handling accidents, accidents where the material is intended for military use, accidents involving waste storage, mining accidents, pollution and nearly everything from China and Russia where nuclear incidents tend to be kept secret. Conversely your coal figures include mining accidents and an estimate of deaths from pollution. It's a bit hard to draw a comparison so putting numbers down in the illusion of accuracy is somewhat of a vicious insult to the readers intelligence - hence my reaction.
For what it's worth I've seen plenty of "resilvers" take around a quarter of the time an array rebuild with a replaced drive used to take on that same hardware before it had ZFS and used the CPU instead. Maybe those LSI RAID cards are crap compared with others but they definitely choke on doing the calculations.
nobody really builds out single server storage anyway
Apart from the people who do. There seems to be a lot of those "nobodies" in scientific computing. There seem to be a lot in other areas too.
I've seen that all my life not just with millenials but with the narrow band often referred to as "trust fund kiddies" - did your failures resemble that group at all? Were they a bunch that did not actually need to work?
However I have been accused of being the sort of person you describe, and more, when I quit because my pay was eight weeks late (not the first delay in that place but the worst) due to the employer spending a vast amount on his daughter's 21st birthday party.
That makes more sense but it's worth noting that the "disadvantaged" backgrounds also means not just those from difficult backgrounds but also those from those backgrounds who could not get work for themselves, making it just as difficult to generalise about them as my anecdotes about my former students having a lot of trouble getting work around 2000 and getting put into schemes far more superficial than the one you were involved with.
With respect, expecting much of a work ethic in a temporary part time job with a nebulous future is a bit misguided. You are looking at something totally different with a point of view distorted by a secure job while others from the outside would be looking at it as little more than a distraction from their search for a real job. During the tech crash around 2000 I saw a lot of that where engineers and programmers were supposed to be fanatically grateful for a couple of days a month putting junk mail in letterboxes. That sort of stuff was just time wasting getting in the way of writing applications, going to interviews and doing a bit of extra study related to the products produced by the employers that were hiring that week.
Give someone a real job and you get to see if they have a real work ethic.
Another thing is those employers who appear to try hard to give themselves problems. Unpaid trial periods are a thing for some places, but they just do not seem to get that they are selecting for people who can afford not to work and can behave like the characters the GP is describing. However each time they get disappointed they go out of their way to discourage the sort of people who will work hard and stick around. The sort of employees they actually want look at the prospect of no money for a while and decide it's pointless when they are good enough that other employers will actually be paying them something elsewhere.
What if the winner is not clear and the court uses a newspaper article as a source to declare the winner? We ended up wanting "America to Be Great Again" due the the decline that happened after that.
We still elect politicians, but they no longer run the country
They are never supposed to. They are supposed to set policy to provide a direction instead of micromanaging.
The idea that they actually run the country is very common but still incredibly naive. We also don't really want them to do it directly, there was a war to take control away from a King remember.
It would be essential if you don't have a file system designed to cope with pulling the plug. However there are several that are. I have not bothered to replace the batteries in my older RAID cards because there is no longer any need, just as it's now better to run them in JBOD mode. A lot of those SAN devices use ZFS and do the heavy lifting in software.
which leads me to believe the bottleneck may have been eased
So long as you don't have to replace a failed disk and do a rebuild of the array to repopulate that disk. In that situation beyond a small array it's going to want as much CPU as it can get and not be bound by the disk speed.
Ah yes - the usual systemD fanboy shit of attacking the person with the bug instead of addressing the bug. Look up parallel instead of providing a new fanboy definition that includes many single points of failure.
Sure, you can still use a hardware RAID in BSD, but if you have to shut the system off to do maintenance because there is no RAID controller software that can run from userspace
There is "mfiutils" for the LSI stuff, even the older 3ware stuff has RAID controller software that can run from userspace on FreeBSD - via a web browser or via the 3dm2 tool. There is other stuff for other vendors RAID cards but I'm not familiar with it.
Slashdot Mirror
Instead of spewing stupid platitudes who about looking at some of those attempts to centralize vote-counting that actually reinforced democracy?
Clue number one - it's done in public with representatives from all the people on the ballot watching. The UK, Australia, a lot of places have something a thousand times better run than the Florida hanging chad bullshit or people having to wait in line for hours on a fucking Tuesday just because the local electoral office just cannot get their shit together.
It doesn't mean anything because the "superdelagates" had disproportionate power so it did not resemble what most people would consider an election.
It's a bit creepy seeing that in a place that is supposed to be "for the people" and not for King and aristocrats.
I thought you were too busy pretending to be far too stupid to read but here you are back again.
Election fraud hasn't seemed to have happened much in the USA in the last half century, you have been played by this Senator as if you are as stupid as you have been pretending to be. He's using the spectre of fraud to push an agenda.
Then fix it like everywhere else did years ago and have enough volunteers running things so that people do not have to wait for anything close to an hour.
America is supposed to be great so surely you can get your shit together enough so that it doesn't look like Pakistan are the professionals instead?
Did you forget that the court decided instead of there being a full count or do you just want an excuse to put a boot in to a Union?
Gore would most definitely have been a better President than "mission from God when I'm not on vacation" Bush, but so would have Cheney, Powell, Rice and maybe even at a stretch Rumsfeld.
If you're going to be that paranoid, how do you know that ballot booth isn't rigged to take your picture, record your biometrics, and the button or level also takes a small dna sample?
Because it's made of fucking cardboard.
I suggest you take a look at a sane voting system like the one in Australia instead of your "hanging chads" and other bullshit.
Paper. Pencil. Fast electronic scanners with a serious automatic feed.
Australia runs it's elections well. The results - well sometimes we get the utter pricks we seem to deserve but at least we know a lot of people voted for them.
It's things like that which call for doing it all independently on a Federal level with competency instead of things like Florida 2000 that the world is still laughing at.
You already have the core of people who do it. Plenty of Americans are among those to conduct elections in some places on behalf of the U.N. - especially in the most recent elections in Iraq and Afganistan.
It's quick and leaves everything available for a manual recount when the inevitable court case from a prick that does not want to admit defeat happens.
Where I am there is always someone appointed to deal with absentee votes and they certainly don't take five minutes per person.
Something like an "electoral commission" done at a Federal level as seen in other countries would make it as smooth as you've seen (or IMHO a lot smoother, no waiting for a voting official to reset the machine) everywhere instead of good in some places, insane in others and on a fucking Tuesday so only the obsessed take time off work to vote.
Currently election fraud fits into the category of "non-problem" - it MIGHT be easy to buy/intimidate votes but it does not appear to actually be happening, especially since it seems to be very easy to detect after the fact (unless it's a Diebold machine or other voodoo voting "solution").
The question here is not how to solve a "non-problem" but why this Senator is kicking up a stink about it. Previous efforts of this type have blatantly been used as an excuse to make it more difficult to vote and turn specific groups of people away. Jeb for instance got up to a lot of games of that type in Florida some years ago which was a scandal that attracted international notice.
In areas where it IS a real problem there have been plenty of solutions to stop ballot stuffing or theft of ballot boxes. I like the one in India where a very cheap mechanical voting machine has a very small maximum number of votes so that even if someone steals it and maxes it out with votes for one canditate it is unlikely to skew the vote. A perpetrator would have to steal a lot of the machines and that is likely to be noticed by a large number of people.
Fair enough, but the nuke death thing is not only close to a divide by zero error (so few installations) but it also conveniently excludes handling accidents, accidents where the material is intended for military use, accidents involving waste storage, mining accidents, pollution and nearly everything from China and Russia where nuclear incidents tend to be kept secret.
Conversely your coal figures include mining accidents and an estimate of deaths from pollution.
It's a bit hard to draw a comparison so putting numbers down in the illusion of accuracy is somewhat of a vicious insult to the readers intelligence - hence my reaction.
Maybe those LSI RAID cards are crap compared with others but they definitely choke on doing the calculations.
Apart from the people who do. There seems to be a lot of those "nobodies" in scientific computing. There seem to be a lot in other areas too.
Pity I can't mod you up.
I've seen that all my life not just with millenials but with the narrow band often referred to as "trust fund kiddies" - did your failures resemble that group at all? Were they a bunch that did not actually need to work?
However I have been accused of being the sort of person you describe, and more, when I quit because my pay was eight weeks late (not the first delay in that place but the worst) due to the employer spending a vast amount on his daughter's 21st birthday party.
What if it's clear they never will? What if it's obvious that a person is only being parked somewhere so that a box can be ticked on a form?
True - you have been condescending to the point of insult (while demonstrating ignorance of the subject matter) instead of attacking.
That makes more sense but it's worth noting that the "disadvantaged" backgrounds also means not just those from difficult backgrounds but also those from those backgrounds who could not get work for themselves, making it just as difficult to generalise about them as my anecdotes about my former students having a lot of trouble getting work around 2000 and getting put into schemes far more superficial than the one you were involved with.
With respect, expecting much of a work ethic in a temporary part time job with a nebulous future is a bit misguided.
You are looking at something totally different with a point of view distorted by a secure job while others from the outside would be looking at it as little more than a distraction from their search for a real job. During the tech crash around 2000 I saw a lot of that where engineers and programmers were supposed to be fanatically grateful for a couple of days a month putting junk mail in letterboxes. That sort of stuff was just time wasting getting in the way of writing applications, going to interviews and doing a bit of extra study related to the products produced by the employers that were hiring that week.
Give someone a real job and you get to see if they have a real work ethic.
Another thing is those employers who appear to try hard to give themselves problems.
Unpaid trial periods are a thing for some places, but they just do not seem to get that they are selecting for people who can afford not to work and can behave like the characters the GP is describing. However each time they get disappointed they go out of their way to discourage the sort of people who will work hard and stick around.
The sort of employees they actually want look at the prospect of no money for a while and decide it's pointless when they are good enough that other employers will actually be paying them something elsewhere.
Just the fax ma'am.
What if the winner is not clear and the court uses a newspaper article as a source to declare the winner?
We ended up wanting "America to Be Great Again" due the the decline that happened after that.
They are never supposed to.
They are supposed to set policy to provide a direction instead of micromanaging.
The idea that they actually run the country is very common but still incredibly naive. We also don't really want them to do it directly, there was a war to take control away from a King remember.
It would be essential if you don't have a file system designed to cope with pulling the plug. However there are several that are.
I have not bothered to replace the batteries in my older RAID cards because there is no longer any need, just as it's now better to run them in JBOD mode.
A lot of those SAN devices use ZFS and do the heavy lifting in software.
So long as you don't have to replace a failed disk and do a rebuild of the array to repopulate that disk.
In that situation beyond a small array it's going to want as much CPU as it can get and not be bound by the disk speed.
Ah yes - the usual systemD fanboy shit of attacking the person with the bug instead of addressing the bug.
Look up parallel instead of providing a new fanboy definition that includes many single points of failure.
There is "mfiutils" for the LSI stuff, even the older 3ware stuff has RAID controller software that can run from userspace on FreeBSD - via a web browser or via the 3dm2 tool. There is other stuff for other vendors RAID cards but I'm not familiar with it.