Both sides can make their claims. But unless someone can do a proper experiment with a control planet, and make that experiment repeatable while you're at it, its all speculation. Not proper science.
That is a ridiculous view of science. You have just declared history to be non-science.
And Smith forgot to make an important point about the Keystone Pipeline. Stopping it doesn't mean that carbon stays in the ground. It means the Chinese will burn it. And they will do so with less rigorous emissions standards. But then I can't prove that either. Its all speculation.
Indeed, you cannot prove that. It is difficult to transport bitumen to anywhere useful in reasonable quantities without the Keystone Pipeline. Without the Keystone Pipeline, there is a limit on how much you can economically extract. It is possible that the bitumen will get extracted eventually, but without the pipeline this extraction will at least be delayed.
I have a Linux XBMC HTPC connected to my TV and I have a Linux laptop. Tell me how I can control my HTPC from my Linux laptop using X. Opening a new XBMC on the HTPC with the display remoted to my laptop is not particularly useful, especially when doing so loses all hardware video acceleration. Even running a 3D game that way does not work, for the same reason. The use cases you are proposing are not handled by X today, so your implication that Wayland is a step backwards is unfounded.
Using tablets as X terminals does not really work anyway, as the risk of losing all windows due to a connection interruption is too great.
Luckily GUI config programs are going away. Most things can be configured either on the command line or through HTTP.
Keeping remote X around just for the sake of Oracle seems a bit excessive. Someone else suggested system-config-lvm as a reason -- if Red Hat Linux has evolved to the point where we need GUI utilities just to do disk management, it is probably time to switch to something better.
I am a bit surprised at the number of people who fight for the cause of remote X. It was IMHO a rather cool thing to be able to do on workstations in the 90's, but remote X has not evolved since. As soon as the TCP session drops, all your windows are gone. Is that really useful these days? It means you cannot bring the applications with you when you change IP address, and that is a show-stopper for me. Maybe everyone tunnels X over VPN (not SSH) to get around that.
VNC is crap, but at least you do not lose everything when the network dies.
Also, remote X performance is absolutely dreadful with modern clients. X cannot handle latency.
There is another reason against 10Gb LOMs: power. Current RJ-45 products emit two to ten times the heat compared to a 1 Gb LOM.
THIS! I looked through all the comments, and this is the one major problem. Only recently has 10GBase-T reached somewhat acceptable power usage. For datacenter use it is still not clear whether SFP+ DAC or 10Gbase-T is the best solution. 10GBase-T SFP+ does not exist due to the power problems, so if you pick the wrong standard or some of your equipment uses SFP+ and other equipment uses 10Gbase-T you can easily end up with wasted ports.
Hopefully most 10Gbase-T equipment will implement 802.3az to save power.
You are complaining that DSL is dependent on POTS. This is not the case. DSL just cares that there is copper in the ground, it does not care whether you run voice service on said copper. You keep saying that it is dying out, but only POTS dies. The wires are still there.
There are technical reasons for why it is difficult to offer cable Internet without some kind of TV service (it means special filters to block even the basic unencrypted subscription, or alternatively it means that all channels must be encrypted).
15Mbps is not particularly impressive downstream for DSL or cable. If you cannot get 15Mbps out of your DSL, you are statistically unlikely to be near a fiber run.
All this is not some kind of attack on fiber. Fiber is clearly the future. However the fact is that the future is not there yet for most people, and when it arrives it tends to be in the form of GPON, perhaps even with RFoG. I.e. new builds are using already-obsolete technology and upgrading to proper direct fiber tends to imply digging again.
It's no different than walking by your neighbors, hearing them having an argument and recording it.
Hearing it is fine. Recording it is a grey area. Sharing the recording or talking about what you heard is wrong.
Now there are obviously exceptions to that, if you hear someone describing their murder plans, then you can certainly share that. In this case the public good (if any) that came from the release does not seem to outweigh the damage done.
What is wrong with DSL? It is unshared last-mile (well, more like last-100m these days) unlike cable, and it is already in the ground unlike fiber. The shared nature of cable means that it is difficult for regulators to get rid of the monopoly of the cable company. In contrast, the copper for DSL could until recently be wired directly to whichever competitor DSLAM the customer chose, although with DSLAMs in the cabinets this is becoming less feasible.
The effective bandwidth provided by cable and fiber to each subscriber is similar, but a cable network with very small loops will obviously beat DSL over long wires and vice versa. Both technologies currently top out around 100Mbps downstream in practice.
In Denmark it is cable that is dying, not DSL. In England there is no clear winner yet but the market is rather dysfunctional due to insufficient (and wrong) regulation.
The US tends to do lots of elections, which means that counting speed is more of a concern there than elsewhere. At the same time, community involvement in counting can be difficult to achieve uniformly across such a diverse country.
Paper and pen is still superior of course, but it makes sense that the US is where they look for alternatives.
Now if you could explain to me why the current Danish government goes "Oh shiny! Does it come with a 3D screen? When can we get them?" whenever anyone shows them an electronic voting machine... Luckily Danish politics are such that the government does not always get what it asks for, but sanity is unlikely to prevail forever.
"A better Windows than Windows" was a main selling point of OS/2 2.0. It is argued that few developed for OS/2 because the Windows compatibility was so good that there was little point in doing native applications.
Is there a risk that the same thing can happen to Meego?
Because mine is that it is useless to focus and put blame on the west when most emissions, and a greater share of emissions (per capita and aggregate) come from India and China.
a) Aggregate is not true today. One day it may be true, but the Western world today still emits more than India and China combined. b) Per capita is really ridiculously far from being true.
If our purpose is simply to self-flagellate, then by all means be like the GP and persist in whining about selfish Americans (and Danes, too).
It is the selfish Americans and Danes that are the problem. That is also where a lot of the goods that cause the pollution in China and India end up. The Chinese and the Indians do not get to enjoy them, they just get the pollution. Shifting blame to those who have little and can do nothing about the problems is immoral at best.
If your AC is 400% efficient, your PUE is 1.25, which is nice but not ground-breaking. And that is just for the AC, on top of that you waste power on transmission losses and UPS (if you run double-conversion, that is another 10% loss) and everything else a datacenter needs.
Also, 400% is mostly a marketing number. The efficiency depends on the temperature difference. If the outside air is cooler than the temperature you need, you can get infinitely high efficiency -- in theory you can even get electricity back out by using a Stirling engine (in practice that is not possible, the temperature differences are too small). On the other hand, if you are trying to deliver air to the servers at 22C and it is 40C and humid outside, you have a problem. Your AC will not deliver 400% efficiency in those conditions.
The environment doesn't care about the ratio between population and GHG output. China is doing more harm than the US, full stop.
I have the perfect solution then: Split China into 100 separate countries, then none of them will be doing a significant amount of harm on its own.
If we then split USA and Australia and Canada into states, CO2 levels must surely drop, as no country single country emits anything worth worrying about. We're all saved!
I would expect rising energy costs to be a temporary blip. Once solar hits price parity, energy costs will only go down. Until we run out of desert and have to switch to energy satellites at least.
It is not a chip, it is just firmware and/or drivers. As for definite information, try scanning money sometime, or copy it if you have a combination scanner/printer. There is a specific yellow dot pattern on currency to avoid having to teach scanners/printers about all currencies in the world. Have a look, it is not hard to see once you know it is there. If you remove the dot pattern, the counterfeit money is not detected as money by machines (not that most people could make money that even the cheapest machines would accept, dot pattern or otherwise).
If you manage to get a scan, you can print it if you enlarge or shrink the notes, then the pattern will not be recognized -- but people get suspicious when they receive double-size currency.
It would be a lot more difficult to tell the firmware not to scan/print guns. A gun does not depend on yellow dots to function.
Disposing of humans through disasters, man-made or otherwise, has historically been unsuccessful. When you lower the number of humans that way, birth rates go up dramatically.
It is possible that the increased killing efficiency of a robot-human war would be able to change that pattern.
they could just start disallowing this traffic now.
If Microsoft is at all clever, the request headers are identical to the ones sent by the default WP8 browser. That is not technically faking anything (they probably even use the same code to do the requests) and it would be bad PR for Google to block that.
So you are saying in Europe young people are only allowed to drive scooters/small motorcycles which rarely kill anyone except possibly the driver, and that means that when they get their car driving license they are less likely to kill someone in their first years of driving? How is that an argument AGAINST doing it like Europe?
Making a car follow a line is fairly simple though. You can add sides to the lanes if you are worried that the cars will try to do their own thing. It has the major advantage of allowing autonomous turns. With steel-on-steel, you have to let the track do the switching, and that is a fairly slow process. It can work for street cars because they at least switch something with a capacity of 50+ passengers; waiting for the switch for almost every passenger sounds unworkable.
Slashdot Mirror
Not much. Most of that population growth comes from other areas, like China or India.
China? Population growth? Seriously?
Both sides can make their claims. But unless someone can do a proper experiment with a control planet, and make that experiment repeatable while you're at it, its all speculation. Not proper science.
That is a ridiculous view of science. You have just declared history to be non-science.
And Smith forgot to make an important point about the Keystone Pipeline. Stopping it doesn't mean that carbon stays in the ground. It means the Chinese will burn it. And they will do so with less rigorous emissions standards. But then I can't prove that either. Its all speculation.
Indeed, you cannot prove that. It is difficult to transport bitumen to anywhere useful in reasonable quantities without the Keystone Pipeline. Without the Keystone Pipeline, there is a limit on how much you can economically extract. It is possible that the bitumen will get extracted eventually, but without the pipeline this extraction will at least be delayed.
I have a Linux XBMC HTPC connected to my TV and I have a Linux laptop. Tell me how I can control my HTPC from my Linux laptop using X. Opening a new XBMC on the HTPC with the display remoted to my laptop is not particularly useful, especially when doing so loses all hardware video acceleration. Even running a 3D game that way does not work, for the same reason. The use cases you are proposing are not handled by X today, so your implication that Wayland is a step backwards is unfounded.
Using tablets as X terminals does not really work anyway, as the risk of losing all windows due to a connection interruption is too great.
Luckily GUI config programs are going away. Most things can be configured either on the command line or through HTTP.
Keeping remote X around just for the sake of Oracle seems a bit excessive. Someone else suggested system-config-lvm as a reason -- if Red Hat Linux has evolved to the point where we need GUI utilities just to do disk management, it is probably time to switch to something better.
I am a bit surprised at the number of people who fight for the cause of remote X. It was IMHO a rather cool thing to be able to do on workstations in the 90's, but remote X has not evolved since. As soon as the TCP session drops, all your windows are gone. Is that really useful these days? It means you cannot bring the applications with you when you change IP address, and that is a show-stopper for me. Maybe everyone tunnels X over VPN (not SSH) to get around that.
VNC is crap, but at least you do not lose everything when the network dies.
Also, remote X performance is absolutely dreadful with modern clients. X cannot handle latency.
There is another reason against 10Gb LOMs: power. Current RJ-45 products emit two to ten times the heat compared to a 1 Gb LOM.
THIS! I looked through all the comments, and this is the one major problem. Only recently has 10GBase-T reached somewhat acceptable power usage. For datacenter use it is still not clear whether SFP+ DAC or 10Gbase-T is the best solution. 10GBase-T SFP+ does not exist due to the power problems, so if you pick the wrong standard or some of your equipment uses SFP+ and other equipment uses 10Gbase-T you can easily end up with wasted ports.
Hopefully most 10Gbase-T equipment will implement 802.3az to save power.
You are complaining that DSL is dependent on POTS. This is not the case. DSL just cares that there is copper in the ground, it does not care whether you run voice service on said copper. You keep saying that it is dying out, but only POTS dies. The wires are still there.
There are technical reasons for why it is difficult to offer cable Internet without some kind of TV service (it means special filters to block even the basic unencrypted subscription, or alternatively it means that all channels must be encrypted).
15Mbps is not particularly impressive downstream for DSL or cable. If you cannot get 15Mbps out of your DSL, you are statistically unlikely to be near a fiber run.
All this is not some kind of attack on fiber. Fiber is clearly the future. However the fact is that the future is not there yet for most people, and when it arrives it tends to be in the form of GPON, perhaps even with RFoG. I.e. new builds are using already-obsolete technology and upgrading to proper direct fiber tends to imply digging again.
It's no different than walking by your neighbors, hearing them having an argument and recording it.
Hearing it is fine. Recording it is a grey area. Sharing the recording or talking about what you heard is wrong.
Now there are obviously exceptions to that, if you hear someone describing their murder plans, then you can certainly share that. In this case the public good (if any) that came from the release does not seem to outweigh the damage done.
What is wrong with DSL? It is unshared last-mile (well, more like last-100m these days) unlike cable, and it is already in the ground unlike fiber. The shared nature of cable means that it is difficult for regulators to get rid of the monopoly of the cable company. In contrast, the copper for DSL could until recently be wired directly to whichever competitor DSLAM the customer chose, although with DSLAMs in the cabinets this is becoming less feasible.
The effective bandwidth provided by cable and fiber to each subscriber is similar, but a cable network with very small loops will obviously beat DSL over long wires and vice versa. Both technologies currently top out around 100Mbps downstream in practice.
In Denmark it is cable that is dying, not DSL. In England there is no clear winner yet but the market is rather dysfunctional due to insufficient (and wrong) regulation.
The US tends to do lots of elections, which means that counting speed is more of a concern there than elsewhere. At the same time, community involvement in counting can be difficult to achieve uniformly across such a diverse country.
Paper and pen is still superior of course, but it makes sense that the US is where they look for alternatives.
Now if you could explain to me why the current Danish government goes "Oh shiny! Does it come with a 3D screen? When can we get them?" whenever anyone shows them an electronic voting machine... Luckily Danish politics are such that the government does not always get what it asks for, but sanity is unlikely to prevail forever.
If it conducts electricity, it will show up on a metal detector.
"A better Windows than Windows" was a main selling point of OS/2 2.0. It is argued that few developed for OS/2 because the Windows compatibility was so good that there was little point in doing native applications.
Is there a risk that the same thing can happen to Meego?
There are more than 5000 secret patents in the US today. See Invention Secrecy Act.
Because mine is that it is useless to focus and put blame on the west when most emissions, and a greater share of emissions (per capita and aggregate) come from India and China.
a) Aggregate is not true today. One day it may be true, but the Western world today still emits more than India and China combined.
b) Per capita is really ridiculously far from being true.
If our purpose is simply to self-flagellate, then by all means be like the GP and persist in whining about selfish Americans (and Danes, too).
It is the selfish Americans and Danes that are the problem. That is also where a lot of the goods that cause the pollution in China and India end up. The Chinese and the Indians do not get to enjoy them, they just get the pollution. Shifting blame to those who have little and can do nothing about the problems is immoral at best.
You will not see price parity spend in your lifetime. You really need to do some research for the cost of the infrastructure you speak of.
It is always a pleasure to see such well reasoned arguments, particularly from an Anonymous Coward.
If your AC is 400% efficient, your PUE is 1.25, which is nice but not ground-breaking. And that is just for the AC, on top of that you waste power on transmission losses and UPS (if you run double-conversion, that is another 10% loss) and everything else a datacenter needs.
Also, 400% is mostly a marketing number. The efficiency depends on the temperature difference. If the outside air is cooler than the temperature you need, you can get infinitely high efficiency -- in theory you can even get electricity back out by using a Stirling engine (in practice that is not possible, the temperature differences are too small). On the other hand, if you are trying to deliver air to the servers at 22C and it is 40C and humid outside, you have a problem. Your AC will not deliver 400% efficiency in those conditions.
The environment doesn't care about the ratio between population and GHG output. China is doing more harm than the US, full stop.
I have the perfect solution then: Split China into 100 separate countries, then none of them will be doing a significant amount of harm on its own.
If we then split USA and Australia and Canada into states, CO2 levels must surely drop, as no country single country emits anything worth worrying about. We're all saved!
I would expect rising energy costs to be a temporary blip. Once solar hits price parity, energy costs will only go down. Until we run out of desert and have to switch to energy satellites at least.
It is not a chip, it is just firmware and/or drivers. As for definite information, try scanning money sometime, or copy it if you have a combination scanner/printer. There is a specific yellow dot pattern on currency to avoid having to teach scanners/printers about all currencies in the world. Have a look, it is not hard to see once you know it is there. If you remove the dot pattern, the counterfeit money is not detected as money by machines (not that most people could make money that even the cheapest machines would accept, dot pattern or otherwise).
If you manage to get a scan, you can print it if you enlarge or shrink the notes, then the pattern will not be recognized -- but people get suspicious when they receive double-size currency.
It would be a lot more difficult to tell the firmware not to scan/print guns. A gun does not depend on yellow dots to function.
Disposing of humans through disasters, man-made or otherwise, has historically been unsuccessful. When you lower the number of humans that way, birth rates go up dramatically.
It is possible that the increased killing efficiency of a robot-human war would be able to change that pattern.
they could just start disallowing this traffic now.
If Microsoft is at all clever, the request headers are identical to the ones sent by the default WP8 browser. That is not technically faking anything (they probably even use the same code to do the requests) and it would be bad PR for Google to block that.
The main complaint about Firefox, right from the start, has been memory leaks. You are rewriting history, Firefox was never lean and mean.
If anything Firefox is like Emacs in that the median power of computers is increasing faster than the resource consumption.
So you are saying in Europe young people are only allowed to drive scooters/small motorcycles which rarely kill anyone except possibly the driver, and that means that when they get their car driving license they are less likely to kill someone in their first years of driving? How is that an argument AGAINST doing it like Europe?
Making a car follow a line is fairly simple though. You can add sides to the lanes if you are worried that the cars will try to do their own thing. It has the major advantage of allowing autonomous turns. With steel-on-steel, you have to let the track do the switching, and that is a fairly slow process. It can work for street cars because they at least switch something with a capacity of 50+ passengers; waiting for the switch for almost every passenger sounds unworkable.
The system stops working. So what?