For now, hard disks far beat anything else for cost per MB, reliability and data density.
Agreed, no argument there. However, I thought this whole conversation was about the future of data storage. So again, I'm not saying HDD's are bad/evil/whatever but I just don't think they are going to be around for another 10-20 years as the dominant storage medium.
I'm not saying that flash memory is the answer, but it has zero moving parts.
The last time I checked two is an infinitely larger number than zero.
So I'm not knocking HDDs as the R&D, and precision engineering involved is noting to scoff at, but I think we can all agree that it isn't the ideal medium for storage.
Give an idiot a hammer and tell him to knock down a wall and he'll take down the house. Give an expert a hammer and he'll knock the wall down without causing any damage to the building at all.
So you're saying we should get rid of hammers because idiots can tear down a house with them???
Not saying your are, but there seems to be a lot of this type of thinking here lately and quite frankly it is annoying. Stupid people will do stupid things, and there is not much you can do about it. There is, however, a flip side to that. We probably shouldn't allow just anyone to have a nuclear weapon in their closet, but a gun is a different story. Just because someone can kill someone else with a gun doesn't mean must get rid of them all.
Not the best analogy, but still. Just because people can misuse tools doesn't mean that the tools are to blame.
I'm a little confused. I thought that this post should be modded insightful for offering shorter more efficient code, whereas the GP was the one actually making the joke (although there may be some truth in it).
While you *may* be correct in your lack of trust. We (younger generations) are either more trusting (or more apathetic) about who knows what about us. Targeted advertising...bring it on.
That said, *if* the overall experience of using a web interface is comparable to a desktop equivalent then it may not matter if they knowingly sell the information out their back door. So just because YOU don't trust another organization doesn't mean that nobody will.
One other thing is that individuals and businesses are two different things. Individuals, in general, care less about their private information that a corporation will. So, it all depends on what type of application and target audience we are talking about.
Just read through all of the comments, but still not the article (true/. style). I didn't see any discussion on how much these little suckers cost/will cost.
$1/generatior and you are talking about $40,500,000 for your little "experiment." So yeah, this is really cool technology, but is it practical to implement on a large scale as compared to other traditional/established methods of power generation. Environmental benefits aside if it isn't at least close on value, then you *probably* won't see this for those type of applications.
I see several solutions.
1) Make him chase you outside and wait till it rains. Then just sit tight for several years and wait for the armor to rust. Once it rusts enough that he can no longer move then you can do whatever you want.
2) Have someone else sneak up behind him and crouch down. Then you pretend like you are going to surrender and go up to shake his hand. Once you are close enough just push him and watch him fall over the guy crouched behind him. Man is that funny.
3) Completely ignore him and act like you are chasing butterflies. He'll be very confused. If he asks you what you are doing, tell him "catching butterflies." He'll be even more confused. Just wait till he pulls up his visor to try to see them. Then spray him with pepper spray.
I could go on, but there are just too many possibilities. All it really requires is a little "out of the box" thinking.
And possibly by that time we'll be wondering when 128 bit computing is going to take off and rescue us from 64 bit hell. Its a never ending cycle...technology becomes obsolete. Its really not a matter of if, but when. Something, at some point, will spark a new technology breakthrough that will make anything we are using right now obsolete. So, we do the best with what we have now, but keep improving it and make sure the best aspects move on and the worst get left behind to be looked back at like "what were we thinking?"
Probably, but luckily Dyson is working on a Roomba killer. At least this way will have some competition in the automated database garbage collection tools.
Is 4 = 4.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000?
I didn't think so, one has wayyy more numbers, so it can't be equal, not even if they are all zeros. Because zeros don't matter that much by themselves, but if you get a whole pack of them together then they can really do some damage. Don't believe me, just ask Google about Intel
FTW, I got hit by/.'s "Lameness filter"!!!
Here is what it told me: "Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition. Comment aborted."
Call me short-sighted, a capitalistic pig, or...an American I don't care. But pretty much the bottom line is that things must make money (or at least not lose money) in order to keep doing whatever it is that they are doing. That is unless this venture will receive funding from outside sources that do not expect any return on their investment, and that very well could be the case here...and if so, then sorry for sounding "American."
I don't see any difference between "consumer" problems and the ones that they are going to be faced with from their other (intended) users, unless those people are just going to be SOOO happy that they don't want bugs fixed, etc.
So to you, Mr whoever, that thinks that Americans are the root of all evil. Don't take our money when we try to give it to you, or at least ideas of how to take it. And don't complain when these people that DO get the computers end up giving us theirs when we offer services in exchange for what's the word I'm looking for....money, thats it.
Money DOES make the world go round. Its a (possibly) sad truth, but truth nonetheless. You can dream up your socialist ideals all you want, but stop complaining to us when our models (capitalism) work, "deal with it".
As the great philosopher Jack Handy once said:
Contrary to what most people say, the most dangerous animal in the world is not the lion or the tiger or even the elephant. It's a shark riding on an elephant's back, just trampling and eating everything they see.
Ok, I'll bite on at least the off-topic wii rant. I am a proud wii owner, and I play with my wii daily (haha, like you haven't heard THAT one before). But seriously, you mean to tell me that you can in the same post admit to buying a sub $200 laptop and also think the wii has shortcomings. Because the only shortcoming that I have found (and it really isn't even a big one) is the graphics. So that nullifies your opinion on graphics since the wii will probably perform better than your cheapo laptop.
Your may have a point about the few thousand geeks thing. But at the same time, it might be easier to get a few average joe's to drop $200 to "just do email and surf" instead of the $400+ for a new dell. Also, I was advocating that someone else purchase the million units and resell, so it would still be operating in the "blocks of millions of units" category.
Ahh, I've got mod points that I want to use, but I just...can't...stop...typing.
Anyway, first marketing costs? There are people practically begging to get these devices...and even willing to pay more than the "targeted" cost of ~$100. So, if there was ever a case of a product selling itself, then this is it.
Distribution costs are understandable. But at the same time, they have been saying that they won't take orders of less than a million (isn't that right?). So, it isn't necessarily a supply problem...that is if they could actually meet those demands. So couple that with the above paragraph and it seems like there would be at least one millionaire out there that would see this enormous opportunity to snap up a million or so of these and resell for a handsome profit.
All of this makes me casually raise an eyebrow. There are a couple of floating thoughts. First, maybe they feel like this is a *special* project and so only *special* (read: people in 3rd world countries) should get them. Second, (which the parent mentioned) is that maybe they aren't as high quality as us *non-special* (read: spoiled developed nation brats) would demand, and therefore wouldn't even sell in the first place. Third, (my own little thought) is that there are some interesting politics happening behind closed doors.
To the first, I say "get off your high horse" sell them at a markup and re-invest your profits in something you deem worthwhile. To the second, I say "don't knock it till you (or some other schmuck) tries it". There is practically no potential for loss here. If somebody wants to purchase 1 million units, take their money and run...after you give them the laptops that is. To the third I say, well actually I have nothing to say since I have no idea is this is the case or what is being said behind those closed doors.
I hope this project succeeds just as much as the next (excluding Dell, HP, Intel, etc shareholders) person. But let's not count any chickens (or laptops) before they hatch.
government (which is nominally devoted to the public welfare)
I'm not going to continue this since it is soo offtopic, but haven't you ever heard of the saying "crooked politician"? Just to give the counter argument, I don't know why people are so quick to put government up on a pedestal? They (politicians) are going to make choices that are beneficial to them (buyouts, kickbacks, etc).
All of this said, I'm not (overly) critical of government. I just think that it has more power than it should.
One thing I find amusing here on/. is that in other arguements (M$ vs linux or Intel vs AMD) there is a consistent mantra "choice is good for the consumer" and "monopolies are bad." Well what exactly do you think private sector programs are? The government has a monopoly on most of these programs...where if there were in the public sector then there could be multiple companies competing...which if I'm not mistaken another commonly quoted line is "competition is good for the end user." Ironic, isn't it?
Ok, well you might be the exception. But don't let that distort the bigger picture.
If you are good, you deserve a good wage. As long as you continue to be good, you shouldn't have to keep checking the Help Wanted ads. If there are better employees to be had, that are willing to work for your same wage. You NEED to be gotten rid of. If you continually improve yourself and stay ahead of the game, then THAT is what should create your "stable employment environment." and All jobs should be like THAT.
Corporate greed can be a good thing. It forces a bottom line. Which in turn benefits consumers with cheaper products (cost). Now that has to be balanced with corporate greed cutting corners and customers getting cheaper products (quality).
With happiness comes productivity
Nope, productivity produces productivity. Hire productive people, keep productive people. Get rid of anyone that isn't.
Bottom line, workers are a commodity and should be treated as such. At the same time, workers are also human beings and should also be treated as such. A good corporation is one that knows how to balance the two.
FYI, I'm not yet a business owner (but I will be). That said, I have zero expectation or desire of being kept here at my job "just because." However, I fully believe that I am worth the wage that I am paid because I produce results. I wish others would adopt this mindset and stop feeling like they are entitled to a job despite their abilities/qualifications/whatever, or lack thereof.
Don't blame government employees that they have it so good, blame corporate pigs that they screw their employees.
I'm not blaming government employees. If I could get money for nothing, I'd probably take it. However, I DO blame the government for allowing such entities to continue ineffectively using tax money (my tax money). So this isn't a personal attack against you. I just wish that you could be fired...that is only if you weren't as good as others competing for the same job. In fact, you should want that. Because then they could pay more for your position as they wouldn't have to continue to fund other non-productive employees that "will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever"
I wanted to mod this up, but I decided to go ahead and respond because I completely agree.
On the whole, government agencies are completely apathetic, I know I've been involved with some of them. Now here is where politics get interesting. One side thinks that government programs are good (and most are, or at least have good intentions). Their noble goals make you seem like a bad person to oppose them. So they get funding. Then the reality that no matter what happens they will probably keep that funding sets in...and so does the apathy. The result, good intentions gone wrong and a whole lot of tax payer money as well.
I am not against government programs. But I am against government programs being run like government programs. If I knew that everything would *just work* then I would say get rid of all gov't programs and let the private sector figure it out, because hey competition is a good thing. But there are many unprofitable aspects/programs that are essential, that would be neglected.
I know that this was a huge oversimplification, but the concept remains. *Most* government programs are inefficient due to lack of competition. I want my government small, and to do what government is supposed to do...govern and get rid of these people: "I work for the government. I'm a "civil servant". I make high 5 figures, and I'm not management. I'm a member of a union. I will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever."
One last thing. There is no way in hell that I would vote for Hillary. I'd take 4 more years of Bush before that...but hopefully we'll have better options.
Slashdot Mirror
The last time I checked two is an infinitely larger number than zero.
So I'm not knocking HDDs as the R&D, and precision engineering involved is noting to scoff at, but I think we can all agree that it isn't the ideal medium for storage.
Not saying your are, but there seems to be a lot of this type of thinking here lately and quite frankly it is annoying. Stupid people will do stupid things, and there is not much you can do about it. There is, however, a flip side to that. We probably shouldn't allow just anyone to have a nuclear weapon in their closet, but a gun is a different story. Just because someone can kill someone else with a gun doesn't mean must get rid of them all.
Not the best analogy, but still. Just because people can misuse tools doesn't mean that the tools are to blame.
They should have used IPv5 as a practice round to get all the bugs out...
Point taken...but do you mind posting that list?
I know the parent was making a joke, but the name might actually have a bigger impact than expected.
If it really wanted to take some market share, why not ext3+?
I'm a little confused. I thought that this post should be modded insightful for offering shorter more efficient code, whereas the GP was the one actually making the joke (although there may be some truth in it).
While you *may* be correct in your lack of trust. We (younger generations) are either more trusting (or more apathetic) about who knows what about us. Targeted advertising...bring it on.
That said, *if* the overall experience of using a web interface is comparable to a desktop equivalent then it may not matter if they knowingly sell the information out their back door. So just because YOU don't trust another organization doesn't mean that nobody will.
One other thing is that individuals and businesses are two different things. Individuals, in general, care less about their private information that a corporation will. So, it all depends on what type of application and target audience we are talking about.
Just read through all of the comments, but still not the article (true /. style). I didn't see any discussion on how much these little suckers cost/will cost.
$1/generatior and you are talking about $40,500,000 for your little "experiment." So yeah, this is really cool technology, but is it practical to implement on a large scale as compared to other traditional/established methods of power generation. Environmental benefits aside if it isn't at least close on value, then you *probably* won't see this for those type of applications.
Besides who wants to run a stripped down Microsoft database on their handheld anyway? Lame.
There is probably a reason that most of the IT types lock themselves in their basements.
P.S. If you are an IT hottie, then I give you my most sincere apologies.
Hold on, that actually might be funny. A beowulf cluster of oil covered female tech workers?
Upgrading hardware just got easier. Its as simple as issuing a few commands Too bad we just missed April Fools. Maybe I can use that one for Larry in 2014.
I see several solutions.
1) Make him chase you outside and wait till it rains. Then just sit tight for several years and wait for the armor to rust. Once it rusts enough that he can no longer move then you can do whatever you want.
2) Have someone else sneak up behind him and crouch down. Then you pretend like you are going to surrender and go up to shake his hand. Once you are close enough just push him and watch him fall over the guy crouched behind him. Man is that funny.
3) Completely ignore him and act like you are chasing butterflies. He'll be very confused. If he asks you what you are doing, tell him "catching butterflies." He'll be even more confused. Just wait till he pulls up his visor to try to see them. Then spray him with pepper spray.
I could go on, but there are just too many possibilities. All it really requires is a little "out of the box" thinking.
And possibly by that time we'll be wondering when 128 bit computing is going to take off and rescue us from 64 bit hell. Its a never ending cycle...technology becomes obsolete. Its really not a matter of if, but when. Something, at some point, will spark a new technology breakthrough that will make anything we are using right now obsolete. So, we do the best with what we have now, but keep improving it and make sure the best aspects move on and the worst get left behind to be looked back at like "what were we thinking?"
Got nothing except the subject...
All Honda would need to do is create a /. theme...
Probably, but luckily Dyson is working on a Roomba killer. At least this way will have some competition in the automated database garbage collection tools.
Ok, Mr. smarty pants. But what about this?
0 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000?
/.'s "Lameness filter"!!!
Is 4 = 4.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
I didn't think so, one has wayyy more numbers, so it can't be equal, not even if they are all zeros. Because zeros don't matter that much by themselves, but if you get a whole pack of them together then they can really do some damage. Don't believe me, just ask Google about Intel
FTW, I got hit by
Here is what it told me: "Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition. Comment aborted."
Otherwise there would have been a lot more zeros.
I don't see any difference between "consumer" problems and the ones that they are going to be faced with from their other (intended) users, unless those people are just going to be SOOO happy that they don't want bugs fixed, etc.
So to you, Mr whoever, that thinks that Americans are the root of all evil. Don't take our money when we try to give it to you, or at least ideas of how to take it. And don't complain when these people that DO get the computers end up giving us theirs when we offer services in exchange for what's the word I'm looking for....money, thats it.
Money DOES make the world go round. Its a (possibly) sad truth, but truth nonetheless. You can dream up your socialist ideals all you want, but stop complaining to us when our models (capitalism) work, "deal with it".
As the great philosopher Jack Handy once said:
Ok, I'll bite on at least the off-topic wii rant. I am a proud wii owner, and I play with my wii daily (haha, like you haven't heard THAT one before). But seriously, you mean to tell me that you can in the same post admit to buying a sub $200 laptop and also think the wii has shortcomings. Because the only shortcoming that I have found (and it really isn't even a big one) is the graphics. So that nullifies your opinion on graphics since the wii will probably perform better than your cheapo laptop.
Your may have a point about the few thousand geeks thing. But at the same time, it might be easier to get a few average joe's to drop $200 to "just do email and surf" instead of the $400+ for a new dell. Also, I was advocating that someone else purchase the million units and resell, so it would still be operating in the "blocks of millions of units" category.
Ahh, I've got mod points that I want to use, but I just...can't...stop...typing.
Anyway, first marketing costs? There are people practically begging to get these devices...and even willing to pay more than the "targeted" cost of ~$100. So, if there was ever a case of a product selling itself, then this is it.
Distribution costs are understandable. But at the same time, they have been saying that they won't take orders of less than a million (isn't that right?). So, it isn't necessarily a supply problem...that is if they could actually meet those demands. So couple that with the above paragraph and it seems like there would be at least one millionaire out there that would see this enormous opportunity to snap up a million or so of these and resell for a handsome profit.
All of this makes me casually raise an eyebrow. There are a couple of floating thoughts. First, maybe they feel like this is a *special* project and so only *special* (read: people in 3rd world countries) should get them. Second, (which the parent mentioned) is that maybe they aren't as high quality as us *non-special* (read: spoiled developed nation brats) would demand, and therefore wouldn't even sell in the first place. Third, (my own little thought) is that there are some interesting politics happening behind closed doors.
To the first, I say "get off your high horse" sell them at a markup and re-invest your profits in something you deem worthwhile.
To the second, I say "don't knock it till you (or some other schmuck) tries it". There is practically no potential for loss here. If somebody wants to purchase 1 million units, take their money and run...after you give them the laptops that is.
To the third I say, well actually I have nothing to say since I have no idea is this is the case or what is being said behind those closed doors.
I hope this project succeeds just as much as the next (excluding Dell, HP, Intel, etc shareholders) person. But let's not count any chickens (or laptops) before they hatch.
All of this said, I'm not (overly) critical of government. I just think that it has more power than it should.
One thing I find amusing here on
Ironic, isn't it?
If you are good, you deserve a good wage. As long as you continue to be good, you shouldn't have to keep checking the Help Wanted ads. If there are better employees to be had, that are willing to work for your same wage. You NEED to be gotten rid of. If you continually improve yourself and stay ahead of the game, then THAT is what should create your "stable employment environment." and All jobs should be like THAT.
Corporate greed can be a good thing. It forces a bottom line. Which in turn benefits consumers with cheaper products (cost). Now that has to be balanced with corporate greed cutting corners and customers getting cheaper products (quality).
Nope, productivity produces productivity. Hire productive people, keep productive people. Get rid of anyone that isn't.
Bottom line, workers are a commodity and should be treated as such. At the same time, workers are also human beings and should also be treated as such. A good corporation is one that knows how to balance the two.
FYI, I'm not yet a business owner (but I will be). That said, I have zero expectation or desire of being kept here at my job "just because." However, I fully believe that I am worth the wage that I am paid because I produce results. I wish others would adopt this mindset and stop feeling like they are entitled to a job despite their abilities/qualifications/whatever, or lack thereof. I'm not blaming government employees. If I could get money for nothing, I'd probably take it. However, I DO blame the government for allowing such entities to continue ineffectively using tax money (my tax money). So this isn't a personal attack against you. I just wish that you could be fired...that is only if you weren't as good as others competing for the same job. In fact, you should want that. Because then they could pay more for your position as they wouldn't have to continue to fund other non-productive employees that "will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever"
I wanted to mod this up, but I decided to go ahead and respond because I completely agree.
On the whole, government agencies are completely apathetic, I know I've been involved with some of them. Now here is where politics get interesting. One side thinks that government programs are good (and most are, or at least have good intentions). Their noble goals make you seem like a bad person to oppose them. So they get funding. Then the reality that no matter what happens they will probably keep that funding sets in...and so does the apathy. The result, good intentions gone wrong and a whole lot of tax payer money as well.
I am not against government programs. But I am against government programs being run like government programs. If I knew that everything would *just work* then I would say get rid of all gov't programs and let the private sector figure it out, because hey competition is a good thing. But there are many unprofitable aspects/programs that are essential, that would be neglected.
I know that this was a huge oversimplification, but the concept remains. *Most* government programs are inefficient due to lack of competition. I want my government small, and to do what government is supposed to do...govern and get rid of these people: "I work for the government. I'm a "civil servant". I make high 5 figures, and I'm not management. I'm a member of a union. I will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever."
One last thing. There is no way in hell that I would vote for Hillary. I'd take 4 more years of Bush before that...but hopefully we'll have better options.