If you're playing an online video game, should your bytes have the same priority as someone who is trying to download a 10Gb file?
If that's what you are selling - yes, whoever gets in first clogs the pipe. As for why, if you promised raw bandwith and not details it's about keeping a promise. However if you tell the customers that certain traffic gets bumped up in priority and they agree to remain your customers then go for whatever QoS scheme you want. It's perfectly acceptable in workplaces for instance if the people running the workplace agree.
Arguably nuclear weapons prevented the US/Europe from invading the Soviet Union as much as they kept the Soviet Union from invading Europe/US.
Due to the ridiculous outcome and backdown over the Cuban missile crisis I'd say there's not much of an argument, instead it looks like the USSR were aware that they had already bitten off more than they could chew and had to work hard to sustain their empire at it's current size.They had Kennedy's balls in that crisis, and squeezed with an offer and a worse offer until he gave in. Johnson interfered with a French colonial war to try to show he had balls without risking them in contact with Russians. Nixon flashed his balls at the Russians with his "madman theory" but the Russians had a lot of experience with real madman, so barely noticed his antics. Ford's balls were for sale. Carter lost due to actually having the balls to go up against Iran. Reagan put his, and America's, balls in the mouth of the dying Russian bear and kept kicking it with the hope that it was going to bite. We owe our survival to some mid ranking Russian officers with a fragmented chain of command above them and little intelligence about the NATO troops massing in front of them.
No you are being insultingly ridiculous. We're not talking about Star Trek here with generic energy and feeling hostility from a planet, but discussing something a little closer to reality.
relevant because the factor of three greater cost of liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen over diesel fuel/liquid oxygen
Not in the slightest - if it becomes a lot cheaper to run a kerosene/liquid oxygen rocket it becomes even cheaper to run a kerosene/air jet engine. If a different rocket fuel is suddenly vastly cheaper then air burning stuff is goign to start using that too, require less of it, and not need an oxidizer. There is not a situation where your suggestion holds as I'm sure you are aware - it's just an empty carrier for a childish dominance display you should have grown out of. If you have to assert something for the sake of dominance I suggest you try something that is true instead of turkey slapping us with bullshit.
The actual cost of the energy of something in orbit is a lot cheaper than the cost of putting something in orbit
We are clearly discussing suborbital versus conventional flight - your pathetic goalpost shift where you pretend that I'm denying something I'm not even discussing only reveals more about yourself than I suspect you want on display. Play with others instead of playing with yourself in public.
You've forgotten that "top" reported 100% of the memory in the video cards as used by X and then added that to what X was using onboard. It was amusing in machines with large video cards when it reported that X was using more memory than was on the motherboard.
The most alternative of them, Enlightenment, now has a better Wayland compositor than the Wayland project has - which sadly didn't stop Daniel Stone making fun of the earlier e16 in his Wayland presentations just like he makes fun of X where a lot of the Wayland code is borrowed from. So all Wayland needs now is some applications and some people who want to use them. They have no excuses since others are giving them a lot of help. If Wayland takes off then fluxbox etc may follow with support for it, and since Wayland is designed to hopefully do one simple task well it probably won't be too hard for fluxbox to render to it. Thankfully the fully monolithic (and stupid) idea originally pushed of having only one compositor, one window manager, one etc etc has been abandoned so it's turning into something cross-platform, flexible and potentially of future use. However I see it as likely to be "as well as" X instead of rendering X extinct because it has different goals and a different niche. Daniel Stone wants it for phones, make sense. Other people want it for single user desktops where all remote access is via web browsers etc, makes sense. It doesn't make sense in a workstation environment which is why X has been in various offices for close to two decades, but that's not a niche that is being aimed for and X isn't going extinct there any time soon. To fill that niche Wayland would have to be far too much like X and the simple model wouldn't fit anymore - it can't stay single user and non-network aware like a MSDOS framebuffer in such an environment and be useful - so it's a choice of lean and potentially fast some day versus a tool that does everything.
Misread "then" for "they" while skimming, but my point stands that security, customs and quarantine are rarely arranged to be seamlessly convenient to the traveller. Budgets are not arranged that way. Come in late at night when there are few staff on, or at a busy time when there are few staff available per traveller and you have to wait.
If this is the future and you had a maglev/hyperloop type transport you could get to a remote spaceport in under an hour completely isolated from an urban area
If this was the past we could have even a steam train get us to the airport in under an hour (or a 1968 bullet train for longer distances), but oddly transport infrastructure between city centres and airports frequently sucks - however you do have a very good point that it doesn't have to. Furture airport design IMHO should take that more into consideration instead of an airport corporation making a major chunk of their money from car parking fees.
Also it wouldn't have that much security since the only threat would be a bomb
Plus quarantine stuff in that case, or smuggled items. There's stil a lot of waiting in lines.
He doesn't actually say a thing about fuel consumption costs. It's all about "expending energy" which is not actually a significant cost constraint in rocketry.
Your electricity example appears to be a gross insult to the intelligence of the readers if not intended as a direct one to myself, plus of course if fuel becomes cheap for these things it ALSO BECOMES CHEAP FOR CONVENTIONAL FLIGHT.
Thus addressing energy expenditure is a case of addressing fuel costs, as you are well aware but apparently want to be obtuse, insulting and appear to be somewhat dumber than you could possibly be in an effort to wriggle out of a previous mistake. A lot of the posts on this site appear to be a fucking schoolyard dominance display instead of having anything to do with the topic.
It's likely to be like this. First you have to get to New Mexico to get on the sub-orbital flight, and it only flies on Tuesdays. Not a lot of use if you are in a hurry. I recommend reading the full article on the website, it isn't very long and I should have read it before I wrote my single point post above. The article covers many more points including those you raised above.
At no time did he ever mention real world constraints like fuel consumption
Try reading it again (or for the first time) and you'll find the following:
Yes, we can save some fuel by travelling above the atmosphere and cutting air resistance, but it's not a free lunch: you expend energy getting up to altitude and speed, and the fuel burn for going faster rises nonlinearly with speed. Concorde, flying trans-Atlantic at Mach 2.0, burned about the same amount of fuel as a Boeing 747 of similar vintage flying trans-Atlantic at Mach 0.85... while carrying less than a quarter as many passengers.
The article (well worth reading this time) argues that such a target market has left the building and is already on "bizjets" to avoid the time consuming fuss of getting onto an airliner and having to stick to a schedule. It also points out that suborbital spaceports are not going to be in the middle of cities so the time to get to and from them also has to be considered. Those factors seem to reduce the small market you suggest to zero. Expensive, fixed timetables and little or no time saved compared with "bizjets" in the same or lower price range that leave when you want and land closer to where you want to be.
Sucks, but all that extra effort to go supersonic/hypersonic prices it out of most civilian situations.
I think the thing being missed here is that people are in a hurry. If I can fly a 747 from Seattle to Japan and the flight takes 14 hours, I would pay more to be able to do it in 7
It's pointed to in the summary and was not missed - there were not enough people in a hurry to sustain Concorde flights. An ironic thing is the 747 was opposed within Boeing in the late 1960s because it was thought that only supersonic airliners would have a place on long hauls in the 1970s - so very few were built in the first batch. As mentioned in the summary the 747 went on to render Concorde mostly irrelevant.
Right after you get your Nobel Prize for creating a self aware bot then as it's gaurdian you'll still have to take responsibility for whatever crimes it commits. Since we haven't got that far this is a simple "my dog bit someone" or "I left the handbrake off and my car rolled away and hit something" situation.
Personally I see this situation as a simple one of not defining tasks properly for a machine and the results are obvious in hindsight.
If you set a machine to do a task and it fucks up due to poor task definition then the responsibility clearly lies with the person who set it loose in such a state.
Such as a tablet where large performance sacrifices have been made in the interest of battery life and weight reduction. Your silly cheering while far out of your depth is annoying - there are obviously some situations where one tool is good and others where another is good but you clearly just want to pretend otherwise with a bit of mindless "go team go" bullshit.
I suggest you discuss something where you can feel at least an equal to others in the discussion instead of just inflating all our egos by acting as the idiot we can all feel superior to.
With respect, it is vastly more bloated than it was ten years ago which is why I still have win2k on one small special purpose machine where the memory is glued in - and linux on other things that would like to be an Atom when they grow up. I suggest you comment on topics that you know about instead of spouting guesses into the page and add meaningless noise to what should be a sensible discussion. It's fine being a cheerleader making noise about something you like but do not know much about, but I really think the discussion has moved beyond that point - the mindless cheerleading section looks like it's elsewhere. I think we're in the "best tool for the task on limited hardware" section instead of the mega gaming rig phallic showdown section.
To me it seems that the trend of forcibly replacing every Windows device with Linux is still alive, even though Linux does not offer big benefits anymore.
On low end hardware it does. Current versions of MS Windows require significantly more powerful hardware than a current linux distro assumes is going to be available.
They used to say linux was for people with far too much spare time to fiddle with things to get them to work - but now MS Windows 8 fills that niche. I've had to do a few "downgrades" to MS Windows 7 for people and waste a lot of time on the care and feeding of a very small number of MS Win8 machines. I've never seen MS Office crap out on MS Win7 but I'm getting used to having to do reinstalls of it on MS Win8.
Or just one terminal running tmux to multiplex virtual terminals as tabs and panes is another option. A bonus is you can connect to it from multiple endpoints so that you can see your work desktop from home without the overhead of VNC or X.
No mainstream 2.5/3.5 in. hard drive manufactured in the last 15 years is recoverable after a zero-out.
Only in a digital sense as being above or below a certain threshold. The relative amount above or below the theshold can indicate what the value used to be, but that's not something you are going to get from the existing disk controller board.
Here is why I chose it as an example of something annoying: https://www.ifixit.com/Answers... Note that is starts AFTER removing the outer case, the faraday cage and one of the boards. So that's really bad design compared with a battery replacement in a recent iphone where it's designed with replacement in mind.
Slashdot Mirror
If that's what you are selling - yes, whoever gets in first clogs the pipe. As for why, if you promised raw bandwith and not details it's about keeping a promise.
However if you tell the customers that certain traffic gets bumped up in priority and they agree to remain your customers then go for whatever QoS scheme you want. It's perfectly acceptable in workplaces for instance if the people running the workplace agree.
Due to the ridiculous outcome and backdown over the Cuban missile crisis I'd say there's not much of an argument, instead it looks like the USSR were aware that they had already bitten off more than they could chew and had to work hard to sustain their empire at it's current size.They had Kennedy's balls in that crisis, and squeezed with an offer and a worse offer until he gave in. Johnson interfered with a French colonial war to try to show he had balls without risking them in contact with Russians. Nixon flashed his balls at the Russians with his "madman theory" but the Russians had a lot of experience with real madman, so barely noticed his antics. Ford's balls were for sale. Carter lost due to actually having the balls to go up against Iran. Reagan put his, and America's, balls in the mouth of the dying Russian bear and kept kicking it with the hope that it was going to bite. We owe our survival to some mid ranking Russian officers with a fragmented chain of command above them and little intelligence about the NATO troops massing in front of them.
No you are being insultingly ridiculous. We're not talking about Star Trek here with generic energy and feeling hostility from a planet, but discussing something a little closer to reality.
Not in the slightest - if it becomes a lot cheaper to run a kerosene/liquid oxygen rocket it becomes even cheaper to run a kerosene/air jet engine. If a different rocket fuel is suddenly vastly cheaper then air burning stuff is goign to start using that too, require less of it, and not need an oxidizer. There is not a situation where your suggestion holds as I'm sure you are aware - it's just an empty carrier for a childish dominance display you should have grown out of. If you have to assert something for the sake of dominance I suggest you try something that is true instead of turkey slapping us with bullshit.
We are clearly discussing suborbital versus conventional flight - your pathetic goalpost shift where you pretend that I'm denying something I'm not even discussing only reveals more about yourself than I suspect you want on display. Play with others instead of playing with yourself in public.
You've forgotten that "top" reported 100% of the memory in the video cards as used by X and then added that to what X was using onboard.
It was amusing in machines with large video cards when it reported that X was using more memory than was on the motherboard.
No. E18 and e19 have support for Wayland once that project catches up. For now it's running on X.
The most alternative of them, Enlightenment, now has a better Wayland compositor than the Wayland project has - which sadly didn't stop Daniel Stone making fun of the earlier e16 in his Wayland presentations just like he makes fun of X where a lot of the Wayland code is borrowed from. So all Wayland needs now is some applications and some people who want to use them. They have no excuses since others are giving them a lot of help.
If Wayland takes off then fluxbox etc may follow with support for it, and since Wayland is designed to hopefully do one simple task well it probably won't be too hard for fluxbox to render to it.
Thankfully the fully monolithic (and stupid) idea originally pushed of having only one compositor, one window manager, one etc etc has been abandoned so it's turning into something cross-platform, flexible and potentially of future use. However I see it as likely to be "as well as" X instead of rendering X extinct because it has different goals and a different niche. Daniel Stone wants it for phones, make sense. Other people want it for single user desktops where all remote access is via web browsers etc, makes sense. It doesn't make sense in a workstation environment which is why X has been in various offices for close to two decades, but that's not a niche that is being aimed for and X isn't going extinct there any time soon. To fill that niche Wayland would have to be far too much like X and the simple model wouldn't fit anymore - it can't stay single user and non-network aware like a MSDOS framebuffer in such an environment and be useful - so it's a choice of lean and potentially fast some day versus a tool that does everything.
Misread "then" for "they" while skimming, but my point stands that security, customs and quarantine are rarely arranged to be seamlessly convenient to the traveller. Budgets are not arranged that way. Come in late at night when there are few staff on, or at a busy time when there are few staff available per traveller and you have to wait.
"They" can do lots of things but it's rarely convenient at the moment, so why any difference with spaceplaces?
If this was the past we could have even a steam train get us to the airport in under an hour (or a 1968 bullet train for longer distances), but oddly transport infrastructure between city centres and airports frequently sucks - however you do have a very good point that it doesn't have to. Furture airport design IMHO should take that more into consideration instead of an airport corporation making a major chunk of their money from car parking fees.
Plus quarantine stuff in that case, or smuggled items. There's stil a lot of waiting in lines.
Your electricity example appears to be a gross insult to the intelligence of the readers if not intended as a direct one to myself, plus of course if fuel becomes cheap for these things it ALSO BECOMES CHEAP FOR CONVENTIONAL FLIGHT.
Thus addressing energy expenditure is a case of addressing fuel costs, as you are well aware but apparently want to be obtuse, insulting and appear to be somewhat dumber than you could possibly be in an effort to wriggle out of a previous mistake. A lot of the posts on this site appear to be a fucking schoolyard dominance display instead of having anything to do with the topic.
It's likely to be like this. First you have to get to New Mexico to get on the sub-orbital flight, and it only flies on Tuesdays. Not a lot of use if you are in a hurry.
I recommend reading the full article on the website, it isn't very long and I should have read it before I wrote my single point post above. The article covers many more points including those you raised above.
Try reading it again (or for the first time) and you'll find the following:
The article (well worth reading this time) argues that such a target market has left the building and is already on "bizjets" to avoid the time consuming fuss of getting onto an airliner and having to stick to a schedule. It also points out that suborbital spaceports are not going to be in the middle of cities so the time to get to and from them also has to be considered. Those factors seem to reduce the small market you suggest to zero. Expensive, fixed timetables and little or no time saved compared with "bizjets" in the same or lower price range that leave when you want and land closer to where you want to be.
Sucks, but all that extra effort to go supersonic/hypersonic prices it out of most civilian situations.
It's pointed to in the summary and was not missed - there were not enough people in a hurry to sustain Concorde flights.
An ironic thing is the 747 was opposed within Boeing in the late 1960s because it was thought that only supersonic airliners would have a place on long hauls in the 1970s - so very few were built in the first batch. As mentioned in the summary the 747 went on to render Concorde mostly irrelevant.
Right after you get your Nobel Prize for creating a self aware bot then as it's gaurdian you'll still have to take responsibility for whatever crimes it commits.
Since we haven't got that far this is a simple "my dog bit someone" or "I left the handbrake off and my car rolled away and hit something" situation.
Personally I see this situation as a simple one of not defining tasks properly for a machine and the results are obvious in hindsight.
If you set a machine to do a task and it fucks up due to poor task definition then the responsibility clearly lies with the person who set it loose in such a state.
So you find the consensus view depressing? What does that tell you about yourself?
Such as a tablet where large performance sacrifices have been made in the interest of battery life and weight reduction. Your silly cheering while far out of your depth is annoying - there are obviously some situations where one tool is good and others where another is good but you clearly just want to pretend otherwise with a bit of mindless "go team go" bullshit.
I suggest you discuss something where you can feel at least an equal to others in the discussion instead of just inflating all our egos by acting as the idiot we can all feel superior to.
With respect, it is vastly more bloated than it was ten years ago which is why I still have win2k on one small special purpose machine where the memory is glued in - and linux on other things that would like to be an Atom when they grow up. I suggest you comment on topics that you know about instead of spouting guesses into the page and add meaningless noise to what should be a sensible discussion.
It's fine being a cheerleader making noise about something you like but do not know much about, but I really think the discussion has moved beyond that point - the mindless cheerleading section looks like it's elsewhere. I think we're in the "best tool for the task on limited hardware" section instead of the mega gaming rig phallic showdown section.
Fedora isn't bad, but it's almost bleeding edge with frequent releases and if you get a few versions behind the current one it's hard to get packages.
CentOS is pretty well the default if scientists are in the building.
On low end hardware it does. Current versions of MS Windows require significantly more powerful hardware than a current linux distro assumes is going to be available.
They used to say linux was for people with far too much spare time to fiddle with things to get them to work - but now MS Windows 8 fills that niche. I've had to do a few "downgrades" to MS Windows 7 for people and waste a lot of time on the care and feeding of a very small number of MS Win8 machines. I've never seen MS Office crap out on MS Win7 but I'm getting used to having to do reinstalls of it on MS Win8.
Or just one terminal running tmux to multiplex virtual terminals as tabs and panes is another option. A bonus is you can connect to it from multiple endpoints so that you can see your work desktop from home without the overhead of VNC or X.
Only in a digital sense as being above or below a certain threshold. The relative amount above or below the theshold can indicate what the value used to be, but that's not something you are going to get from the existing disk controller board.
Here is why I chose it as an example of something annoying:
https://www.ifixit.com/Answers...
Note that is starts AFTER removing the outer case, the faraday cage and one of the boards.
So that's really bad design compared with a battery replacement in a recent iphone where it's designed with replacement in mind.