If you're asking for me to pay the up front fee, I will do so. Via avian carrier. A recent experiment shows that it's more effective than internet based communications.
Now all the need to do is make the most gigantic media spectacle they possibly can, including releasing evidence to the general public, so that we can all think to ourselves "Gee, I'm glad we gave up all those civil liberties and allowed the expansion of government power."
If terrorists are so common, how come this one is so special that they're actually releasing evidence? Oh, and if they *can* release evidence in cases like this, how come they seal the evidence in all those trials where the accused appears to have a good defense?
Hooray for governments knowing how to string the population along like trained rats.
Revenge? It's not revenge. It's their resources, they can CHOOSE to sell it to us, or they can CHOOSE to hoard it for their own use, or they can CHOOSE to turn it into a life sized replica of the pyramids just because they can. That's the nature of it being THEIRS.
Looking at the history of things like rubber, tea, diamonds and oil, it would seem that we are not aware that we have no God given right to the resources of others, no matter how much we tell ourselves we need it for our survival. Has UK/US historical foreign policy gotten that far into the public mindset that we now get all angsty and self-righteous whenever some country decides that they need their resources more than we need their resources? Seriously people, if we're going to think this way and then acquiesce to the military being used to go fetch those resources and destroy the other country in the process, then lets at least not act all surprised when they get fed up and fly planes into our buildings.
I, for one, reject our new, not-the-same-as-before, intellectually emasculated Lego makers. Lego, with movie tie-ins, reduced part counts and reduced numbers of unique pieces may be more profitable for the company, but the ability to build just about anything has been hamstrung; gone are the days where once you've bulit the big dinosaur on the front (which takes an hour or two) you can sit down for another 3 days building a whole range of other things. My personal favorite Lego project was building moon bases from scratch, and I had accumulated an enormous box of lego from the many lego boxes that my parents and relatives bought for me.
Now, with each box containing the barest minimum of parts, a much more specific goal (some stupid object from even stupider movie) and "encouraged part re-use" amassing such a vast lego treasure trove would be far more difficult, and the range of parts would be smaller, reducing the flexibility children would have to experiment using key unique parts for novel purposes, such as an upside down excavator shovel as an airlock hatch.
Actually no, language is *not* what is defined by the lowest common denominator, if that were the case, then modern science would go out the window as every technical term in every paper completely lost all hope of having intelligible meaning in the anarchy of broken syntax.
Communication would be damn near impossible if every time I read a text I was not able to refer to a dictionary, but instead had to take a walk outside and poll all the halfwits hanging out the front of the local shopping mall what a given word means in a given context. I can imagine it now:
"Hey fellas, sorry to interrupt your skateboarding and pot smoking, but would you mind telling me what you understand by the word 'pontification'? I do apologize, but I have a term paper in linguistics due in a week and I need to bring my semantics up to date according to the current popular lexicon."
"Language evolves" is not the same as "Uneducated dipshits get to set standards".
As an open source evangelist, I also regretfully agree. While there are substitutes for many *parts* of the Exchange ecosystem, there is no other truly integrated system that works as well, is as comprehensive, provides the full gamut of functionality and is as mature and easy to use.
If you want to know how Google Apps as a whole compares to Exchange as a whole, compare the Google Apps spreadsheet application to MS Excel. Sure, it covers the functionality needed by little Johnny figuring out what a spreadsheet is, but the minute you need to do any *real* spreadsheet work, Google Apps just doesn't deliver.
That is true of the whole Google Apps framework. It's great for high school study groups and perhaps even university clubhouses, but when heavy lifting needs to be done, it doesn't cut the mustard. Anyone who thinkos otherwise hasn't spent any/enough time in a real, productive office workplace.
As I said, I regret to have to say this, as I'm a Linux only desktop user, and hate it every time I have to troubleshoot some guy's virus infested workstation. I *wish* open source could deliver, but it just can't - YET. Google Apps, THANK GOD, doesn't deliver. Moving from platform lock in on the desktop to another platform lock in where not only the software that I'm using but also my frakkin' USER DATA is also locked in is literally jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.
Can the Google fanboys please stop? Can't you idiots see that Google has the makings of an evil monopoly that makes Microsoft look like your friendly local corner store.
It had better be durable enough to withstand the chafing of hard plastic and metal because everyone knows that the only things Apple users like to make love to are their Apple products.
I think anyone who cares and knows anything about this debate is hoping Linus sees the light and allows work to begin on pluggable schedulers. There are no definitive arguments against having pluggable schedulers, and plenty of formidable ones for them. I never really understood Linus' handling of Con in the past, I really hope that, this time round, the new BFS is given a fair assessment, and if it's found to be better under desktop use patterns, adopted for use in desktop distros.
The idea that the Nokia N900 smartphone uses the same process scheduler as my now-dated laptop as well as my 8 core server is just silly.
"Americans, of which I am one, have often displayed a willingness to risk life and limb for progress and discovery."
Some perhaps, but the space race as well as health care are both the result of political and commercial greed. The suit wearing decisions makers don't give two shits about human progress, and are only focussed on their own political and financial gain.
a) Your math is wrong, as they are using RAID6 and you failed to account for redundant drives. b) In the article they state that they use internal software to break up data amongst their many pods. Presumably, redundancy in their system means that all data is still accessible even when i pod goes offline, kind of like the way a RAID6 array can still be online while a dead drive is being replaced. They're using software to eliminate the need for high priced hot-swap gear.
It's easy to say after a fire "there should have been a fire break here". In reality, the hundreds of thousands of hectares of land that is nearby human activity is nearly impossible to cover, and as someone from Victoria who knew personally people who lost everything in the recent Vic bushfires, I would like to tell you and the rest of you armchair firefighters that you have no idea what you are talking about. The only way to preemptively fight fires is to ensure that everyone knows how to respond and doesn't panic.
Like any natural disaster, really. No matter how well prepared we are, and how much we like to fool ourselves with our shiny techno-scientific society that has all the Answers, nature will always be our master whether we acknowledge it or not.
Disgustingly, this is also true of big pharmaceuticals. They spend close to 2:1 marketing to research. Given that marketing cures is not something that you need to do, a sick person will come looking for it, one has to wonder why they need to spend such massive (we're talking billions here) amounts of money on, and why.
Well, after having spent hours with many pharma reps, the answer seems to be that they promote their brands over generics. Despite the fact that a geneic is chemically identical to a branded drug (once it has come out of its 6 year patent period anyone can copy it), they spend money convincing doctors to keep prescribing their several multiples more expensive drug anyway. Here in Australia, that price is neither paid for by the doctor as the patient gets the script, and the government subsidizes a huge amount of drugs costs under the PBS scheme. So the ridiculous markup ends up coming out of the taxpayers' pockets. Big pharma is marketing their right to collect from general taxes.
They also spend enormous amounts of their marketing funds on lobbying. Getting your drug listed on the PBS is essentially a free ride on taxpayers, so pharma pays huge amounts of money inviting prominent doctors and other members of the medico-political fraternity to lavish "conferences" in exotic locations, showering them with luxury after luxury. I've been to a few of these events, and the thinly veiled palm greasing in such a socially crucial industry is sickening.
Marketing is an industry that needs regulation. I don't know how, but there needs to be some way to prevent marketing from deliberately destroying the ability of people to make informed decisions. Yes, yes, caveat emptor and all that. In the real world, not everyone can spend a year researching every decision exhaustively; we need to make decisions with incomplete information, and the marketing industry is designed to ensure that the first information that comes to hand is as misleading as they can get away with.
And holy cow, what a rant. I originally intended to whine about EA's marketing spending as being the reason we don't get any groundbreaking new games like Syndicate or XCom any more.
If you've been clicking posted links then I bet you found out far more than you ever wanted to know about the appearance of the insides of a man's posterior.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're asking for me to pay the up front fee, I will do so. Via avian carrier. A recent experiment shows that it's more effective than internet based communications.
This is Web 2.0. Common sense has no business here.
So China is setting its policy to suit its own internal needs rather than America's?
How mean of them.
Now all the need to do is make the most gigantic media spectacle they possibly can, including releasing evidence to the general public, so that we can all think to ourselves "Gee, I'm glad we gave up all those civil liberties and allowed the expansion of government power."
If terrorists are so common, how come this one is so special that they're actually releasing evidence? Oh, and if they *can* release evidence in cases like this, how come they seal the evidence in all those trials where the accused appears to have a good defense?
Hooray for governments knowing how to string the population along like trained rats.
Actually, the moderation *system* works fine. It's the moderators who are broken.
Incidentally, in this case, I agree with the mods; GP was off topic. So, in this case, it's your opinion that's broken.
Revenge? It's not revenge. It's their resources, they can CHOOSE to sell it to us, or they can CHOOSE to hoard it for their own use, or they can CHOOSE to turn it into a life sized replica of the pyramids just because they can. That's the nature of it being THEIRS.
Looking at the history of things like rubber, tea, diamonds and oil, it would seem that we are not aware that we have no God given right to the resources of others, no matter how much we tell ourselves we need it for our survival. Has UK/US historical foreign policy gotten that far into the public mindset that we now get all angsty and self-righteous whenever some country decides that they need their resources more than we need their resources? Seriously people, if we're going to think this way and then acquiesce to the military being used to go fetch those resources and destroy the other country in the process, then lets at least not act all surprised when they get fed up and fly planes into our buildings.
If it's a South African freeway, you'll have to factor in some serious packet loss due to carjackings.
Disclaimer: I'm from South Africa.
I, for one, reject our new, not-the-same-as-before, intellectually emasculated Lego makers. Lego, with movie tie-ins, reduced part counts and reduced numbers of unique pieces may be more profitable for the company, but the ability to build just about anything has been hamstrung; gone are the days where once you've bulit the big dinosaur on the front (which takes an hour or two) you can sit down for another 3 days building a whole range of other things. My personal favorite Lego project was building moon bases from scratch, and I had accumulated an enormous box of lego from the many lego boxes that my parents and relatives bought for me.
Now, with each box containing the barest minimum of parts, a much more specific goal (some stupid object from even stupider movie) and "encouraged part re-use" amassing such a vast lego treasure trove would be far more difficult, and the range of parts would be smaller, reducing the flexibility children would have to experiment using key unique parts for novel purposes, such as an upside down excavator shovel as an airlock hatch.
RIP Lego - 1934 - 2004.
Actually no, language is *not* what is defined by the lowest common denominator, if that were the case, then modern science would go out the window as every technical term in every paper completely lost all hope of having intelligible meaning in the anarchy of broken syntax.
Communication would be damn near impossible if every time I read a text I was not able to refer to a dictionary, but instead had to take a walk outside and poll all the halfwits hanging out the front of the local shopping mall what a given word means in a given context. I can imagine it now:
"Hey fellas, sorry to interrupt your skateboarding and pot smoking, but would you mind telling me what you understand by the word 'pontification'? I do apologize, but I have a term paper in linguistics due in a week and I need to bring my semantics up to date according to the current popular lexicon."
"Language evolves" is not the same as "Uneducated dipshits get to set standards".
As an open source evangelist, I also regretfully agree. While there are substitutes for many *parts* of the Exchange ecosystem, there is no other truly integrated system that works as well, is as comprehensive, provides the full gamut of functionality and is as mature and easy to use.
If you want to know how Google Apps as a whole compares to Exchange as a whole, compare the Google Apps spreadsheet application to MS Excel. Sure, it covers the functionality needed by little Johnny figuring out what a spreadsheet is, but the minute you need to do any *real* spreadsheet work, Google Apps just doesn't deliver.
That is true of the whole Google Apps framework. It's great for high school study groups and perhaps even university clubhouses, but when heavy lifting needs to be done, it doesn't cut the mustard. Anyone who thinkos otherwise hasn't spent any/enough time in a real, productive office workplace.
As I said, I regret to have to say this, as I'm a Linux only desktop user, and hate it every time I have to troubleshoot some guy's virus infested workstation. I *wish* open source could deliver, but it just can't - YET. Google Apps, THANK GOD, doesn't deliver. Moving from platform lock in on the desktop to another platform lock in where not only the software that I'm using but also my frakkin' USER DATA is also locked in is literally jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.
Can the Google fanboys please stop? Can't you idiots see that Google has the makings of an evil monopoly that makes Microsoft look like your friendly local corner store.
My opinions contain no factors as they are prime opinions.
Funny, that's also what the CIA do when hunting terr'rists.
It had better be durable enough to withstand the chafing of hard plastic and metal because everyone knows that the only things Apple users like to make love to are their Apple products.
I think anyone who cares and knows anything about this debate is hoping Linus sees the light and allows work to begin on pluggable schedulers. There are no definitive arguments against having pluggable schedulers, and plenty of formidable ones for them. I never really understood Linus' handling of Con in the past, I really hope that, this time round, the new BFS is given a fair assessment, and if it's found to be better under desktop use patterns, adopted for use in desktop distros.
The idea that the Nokia N900 smartphone uses the same process scheduler as my now-dated laptop as well as my 8 core server is just silly.
No, the correct response is "Amen".
Please can you tell me where I can buy a lively hood, as my old one is all worn and discoloured.
Yea, like how to tweet about the radiation-mutated flesh eating zombies when all local routers are fried.
"Americans, of which I am one, have often displayed a willingness to risk life and limb for progress and discovery."
Some perhaps, but the space race as well as health care are both the result of political and commercial greed. The suit wearing decisions makers don't give two shits about human progress, and are only focussed on their own political and financial gain.
a) Your math is wrong, as they are using RAID6 and you failed to account for redundant drives.
b) In the article they state that they use internal software to break up data amongst their many pods. Presumably, redundancy in their system means that all data is still accessible even when i pod goes offline, kind of like the way a RAID6 array can still be online while a dead drive is being replaced. They're using software to eliminate the need for high priced hot-swap gear.
Redundancy can be had for another $117,000.
Hosting in a DC will not even be a blip in the difference between that and $2.7m.
EMC, Amazon etc are a ripoff and I have no idea why there are so many apologists here.
It's easy to say after a fire "there should have been a fire break here". In reality, the hundreds of thousands of hectares of land that is nearby human activity is nearly impossible to cover, and as someone from Victoria who knew personally people who lost everything in the recent Vic bushfires, I would like to tell you and the rest of you armchair firefighters that you have no idea what you are talking about. The only way to preemptively fight fires is to ensure that everyone knows how to respond and doesn't panic.
Like any natural disaster, really. No matter how well prepared we are, and how much we like to fool ourselves with our shiny techno-scientific society that has all the Answers, nature will always be our master whether we acknowledge it or not.
Enough for anybody, really.
Trust us.
Disgustingly, this is also true of big pharmaceuticals. They spend close to 2:1 marketing to research. Given that marketing cures is not something that you need to do, a sick person will come looking for it, one has to wonder why they need to spend such massive (we're talking billions here) amounts of money on, and why.
Well, after having spent hours with many pharma reps, the answer seems to be that they promote their brands over generics. Despite the fact that a geneic is chemically identical to a branded drug (once it has come out of its 6 year patent period anyone can copy it), they spend money convincing doctors to keep prescribing their several multiples more expensive drug anyway. Here in Australia, that price is neither paid for by the doctor as the patient gets the script, and the government subsidizes a huge amount of drugs costs under the PBS scheme. So the ridiculous markup ends up coming out of the taxpayers' pockets. Big pharma is marketing their right to collect from general taxes.
They also spend enormous amounts of their marketing funds on lobbying. Getting your drug listed on the PBS is essentially a free ride on taxpayers, so pharma pays huge amounts of money inviting prominent doctors and other members of the medico-political fraternity to lavish "conferences" in exotic locations, showering them with luxury after luxury. I've been to a few of these events, and the thinly veiled palm greasing in such a socially crucial industry is sickening.
Marketing is an industry that needs regulation. I don't know how, but there needs to be some way to prevent marketing from deliberately destroying the ability of people to make informed decisions. Yes, yes, caveat emptor and all that. In the real world, not everyone can spend a year researching every decision exhaustively; we need to make decisions with incomplete information, and the marketing industry is designed to ensure that the first information that comes to hand is as misleading as they can get away with.
And holy cow, what a rant. I originally intended to whine about EA's marketing spending as being the reason we don't get any groundbreaking new games like Syndicate or XCom any more.
If you've been clicking posted links then I bet you found out far more than you ever wanted to know about the appearance of the insides of a man's posterior.