They went for the little sheild circle thing and accidently hit the button for hyperspace. The little triangle ship reapeared brieftly but was shot out of the sky by a small saucer shaped imagine with little dots.
I'm aware of some very very large server connected to extremely high speed connections who's sole job is to stream damaged versions of popular music specifically to currupt as many torrent sites as possible.
I actually like this approach. There's something of the payback built into it.
What a waste of time though, over just getting a decent business model that pays the artists, provides value to the consumer, and gets the media business out of the plastic and paper shipping business.
Important production servers need dual homed, highly reliable connectivity. Public facing servers are a commodity. The commonality of blade servers and big data center technology are escallating this.
Case in point: I've run my own data center for 12 years (18 if you could dial up bbs crap). This week, I'm shutting it down. I need more reliability for an important application, and it will be cheaper for me to outsource the public facing side to a data center (In my case, linux boxes at ServerBeach -- I can plug them, they've made me happy).
This is coming from someone with 13 years running his own shop; who owns good firewall, routing, and standby power equipment; as well as servers. Still, it will be cheaper from month 1 to outsource today. For less money, I don't have to buy (or maintain) hardware, get more bandwidth, multi-homed servers, way more reliable power and facilities, and a lower power bill.
The market is changing. More and more consumer broadband utilities (which is what they are) will have to drop out of the single homed dedidcated circuit market. Dissagree? Time Warner doesn't. Why do you think they're building state of the art colocation facilities and datacenters in the markets they serve?
Because soon public facing servers for any serious purpose will live primarily in big datacenters. The only companies to host their own, will be hosting them in their own big corporate data centers.
Its news to me. Of course, less than 56% of the exchange market has gone past version 5.5 so I suppose that could be the reason I'm unaware of the change.
Hypothetically (since nobody is dumb enough to believe this is a real life case of a million users being defined by someone betting his career on slashdot trolls)
If it were me starting from scratch -- the model for a million uses is the internet itself. SMTP, DNS, and mabe a big LDAP directory tool. For calendaring, you're SOL, but nobody calendars with a million poeple. That's meaningless. Calendaring is only useful at the workgroup level anyway. Look to any good workgroup calendaring tool and let users define thir own working groups.
Now, backing off the big million user stupid number. In the real corporate world, you have two real players and a ton of also-rans. The two real players are IBM/Lotus with Notes and Microsoft with Exchange.
The market is split roughly evenly. In the US Microsoft leads a bit, in Europe and EMEA IBM/Lotus leads. How much and actual numbers are hard as hell to track down. IBM doesn't release them and Microsoft likes to count every copy of Office as an Outlook seat. Suffice it to say both companies own about a hundred million actual users.
The basic trade off between the two - With Exchange you get tighter integration with Active Directory and smooth look and feel integration on windows. It feels like all part of the operating system. On purpose. On the other hand, you're forced to use Active Directory, forced to use Win32, and all that integration without any real security means viruses are unstopable. With Notes you get a bulky client that many users find hard to understand. You also get almost 100% prevention of virus spread (it has built in security) and other goodies. Its also a development platform and its cross platform. The client is Win32 and Mac, and users have writen howto docs for WINE. The server is linux, win32, AIX, ZSeries, and iSeries (as/400).
You may not know this, but BOTH can use the Outlook client. Yes, the outlook client is supported with a Domino mail infrastructure. Who'd have thunk it?
Oh, and Domino supports other mail clients too. Pop3, IMAP, and a very good Web Browser -- all at once for the same person if you like. Its got native SMTP support, as well.
What Notes isn't, its pretty. Most people say Outlook is prettier. Ok. Easy to do if you own the OS and make software that only runs in one environment.
So, I hear rants about Notes. I hear trolls whining about a product that runs in Linux as a server and (using Wine) as a client. Runs on Mac. Has a fully functional JAVA environment for development and a remote API through CORBA and DIIOP.
No no, instead they'll use a proprietary only -- Windows Only, Active Directory Only, Virus Distribution Engine from Microsoft.
Simple. Its cross platform. The entire product is cross platform. Yeah, like java. Only they did it before java was a pipe dream. Late 80's.
It has this thing called a seperation layer. All the code except the ui is the same on all the platforms. Clients used to be for os/2, mac, win16, win32, and solaris. Client side that got scalled back because nobody paid for the others -- client is win32 and mac now -- soon with code under linux as part of the next generation client. Lots of people are using on Wine.
Now, the server is still cross platform. Win32, Linux, Aix, iseries (as/400), zseries.
The problem with making something cross platform is, you don't use all the nifty little Windows specific integration and custom pretty things. You don't get something for nothing -- you have to make all those bits.
Oh, the other thing? Outlook feels integrated because everything automatically does the windows automatica launch active-x thing. Just highlight a message subjet, bingo! Embedded code launches! that's why viruses and worms.
If stuff wants to run in Notes, it has to be have a signature. OHHH, public/private key signatures and encryption. When? 1991. Hunh? Yeah, since 1991.
If something wants to run in Notes -- It need PERMISSION to run. Thus, no viruses or worms unless you're stupid enough to tell them "OK, sure, go screw up my machine".
Yes -- the development environment is weird and pretty unsophisticated. It takes a lot of time to learn because its not like other things. BUT -- I can make it do cool, secure, reliable things at a tenth of the cost you can in J2EE or MS.NET.
Excited about JSR170? Ah, me too. The Notes database internals match it almost perfectly. Domino will make a great JSR170 back end. Hell, its almost that already.
Meantime, you trolls are whining about a product that runs in Linux as a server and (using Wine) as a client. Runs on Mac. Has a fully functional JAVA environment for development and a remote API through CORBA and DIIOP. No no, instead you'll use a proprietary only -- Windows Only, Active Directory Only, Virus Distribution Engine from Microsoft.
We burn oxygen in nearly every fuel we use at present. Its also poisonous. Pure oxygen will kill you. Admitedly, flourine will kill you more quickly.
My point was that if you go to the trouble of stripping Hydrogen from water, you're missing out on the other white meat (er...combustable).
I've had hazmat training, have you? Ever wondered what would happen if you had a tanker full of liquifed oxygen break open in an accident? Say it didn't blow up right away, but spilled on the ground as it boiled off. Someone drops a wrench or something and....well....crater.
Actually, the problem with water as a storage is all that damn extra oxygen in there. Most of the mass in fact is oxygen, not hydrogen. True, oxygen is also combustable -- I wonder why they don't use both the hydrogen and the oxygen from water.
The issue remains, however, that the content is just too easily available. You're not going to someone's home town and finding a yearbook in a library. You're typing a few words into a browser on a whim. As a culture, we're going to need to figure out what is and is not within the bounds of propriety. That is by necessity always going to be more ambiguous than law.
In 1987, while reading posts on my favorite Tucson based BBS (run at that time by a guy who called himself Zen Master on an APPLE IIe by the way) I remember reading a comment from someone that "ours is a medium where the snap response lives on indefinately." (or something really close to that) He was describing how weeks later old arguements would restart when someone came across an obnoxious post.
They used to say "Fish and visitors smell after three days". I think web content probably fits in there somewhere.
Leaving the law to the lawyers, to me there are valid questions about such a thing as the internet archive. Do I want the crappy first try web pages I wrote popping back up ten or twelve -- or twenty for that matter -- years later to be viewed out of context?
Isn't it a bit like having your old yearbook pictures published from highschool? Sure, they were out there, but are they either relevant or helpful -- and do you have the [moral] right to control their distribution?
What about company information, product offerings, and political views? Old jokes? Times change, styles change. Politics change.
I believe its up to me to decide the longevity of content on publish on my own servers. I suppose its up to Commander Taco to determine the longevity of the content I create here.
New things happen now at a pace dictated by how quickly society can adapt to them, not how quickly new ideas can be considered.
I sit in my HOME OFFICE (something I couldn't have had 20 years ago) surrounded by technology based things which didn't exist 10 or 20 years ago. Some are new enough that the underpinnings that make them possible didn't exist 30 years ago.
I'm typing on wireless keyboard, viewing a 19" plasma flat screen. My phone is VoIP, running on a software PBX. Its wireless. I'm watching a movie on HDTV from my DVR while blogging.
Add salt to the ice, and the water flowing will be much colder in the copper pipes.
Of course, this doesn't take into account the cost of producing the ice at all.
Depending on the local humidity levels, a swamp cooler (straw pads kept wet with a small drip pump with a fan passing air through) would be more effective and predictable. Won't work here in new england where temperature and dew point are nearly the same on hot days, but its a staple of life in Arizona (or was when I was there).
Now -- if only you had a nearby source of inexpensive cold water.
What could be more extensible than the original five books of Moses? They've been extended to dozens or hundreds of fully realized religious texts, and their internal objects are in reuse through metaphore in nearly every spoken language and nearly all literature.
I'm still totally unconvinced WRT solar. Show me cost effective solar that won't leave me in the poor house and I'll convert my home. So far, all I get when I look is a promise of payoff in 20 years, assuming no interest on the money I didn't have to spend.
Build the nuke plants, build a fusion plant if its going to be safer, cleaner, or cheaper. Build Geothermal plants if you can find a way to do it near enough to where I live to matter.
Show me a product set that I can reasonable switch to which would provide most or all of my energy needs and be cost effective without some kind of 20 year plus payoff.
I'm a reasonably skilled person with most of his own tools, and with some but not vast disposable income. I have a Gambrel style house with fairly good expanses of unshaded rooftop facing in four directions about equally, squared about 25 degrees off the compass points. The house is in Maine, where I have admitedly some pretty high energy bills. I use a electricity for the server farm and household, and LP gas to heat the house, the hot water, and for a brief period of the year a swimming pool.
NASA's Mars rovers are amazing, no doubt. They are also very limited. The require extremely careful management in what is a rarified atmosphere.
In space, solar power works -- its clear. On mars, it just barely works. On Earth, it could work as well -- but not to power our human technology for the masses.
Thanks. You beat me to it. He's right in much of his reasoning, which is why his math didn't make sense even to him.
If you treat it as kilocalories as you point out, the 2500 number works out to 2.5 million of his calories, and the rest of his math actually bears out fairly well. Good thing he's not a plant.
So, if you happen to want to sit all day perfectly exposed on the beach without moving, you need about 71W. Of the maximum potential 1020 you could get during the day, you would not have enough left to last the night. Perhaps you could store some as sugar. Oh, yes, then you are in fact a PLANT.
As soon as you try to move, or it gets cloudy, or its winter... you'd better eat something.
Slashdot Mirror
They went for the little sheild circle thing and accidently hit the button for hyperspace. The little triangle ship reapeared brieftly but was shot out of the sky by a small saucer shaped imagine with little dots.
if you don't think HBO is into all things masturbatory, clearly you're turning it off by 10pm. :-)
I'm aware of some very very large server connected to extremely high speed connections who's sole job is to stream damaged versions of popular music specifically to currupt as many torrent sites as possible.
I actually like this approach. There's something of the payback built into it.
What a waste of time though, over just getting a decent business model that pays the artists, provides value to the consumer, and gets the media business out of the plastic and paper shipping business.
Important production servers need dual homed, highly reliable connectivity. Public facing servers are a commodity. The commonality of blade servers and big data center technology are escallating this.
Case in point: I've run my own data center for 12 years (18 if you could dial up bbs crap). This week, I'm shutting it down. I need more reliability for an important application, and it will be cheaper for me to outsource the public facing side to a data center (In my case, linux boxes at ServerBeach -- I can plug them, they've made me happy).
This is coming from someone with 13 years running his own shop; who owns good firewall, routing, and standby power equipment; as well as servers. Still, it will be cheaper from month 1 to outsource today. For less money, I don't have to buy (or maintain) hardware, get more bandwidth, multi-homed servers, way more reliable power and facilities, and a lower power bill.
The market is changing. More and more consumer broadband utilities (which is what they are) will have to drop out of the single homed dedidcated circuit market. Dissagree? Time Warner doesn't. Why do you think they're building state of the art colocation facilities and datacenters in the markets they serve?
Because soon public facing servers for any serious purpose will live primarily in big datacenters. The only companies to host their own, will be hosting them in their own big corporate data centers.
Its news to me. Of course, less than 56% of the exchange market has gone past version 5.5 so I suppose that could be the reason I'm unaware of the change.
Hypothetically (since nobody is dumb enough to believe this is a real life case of a million users being defined by someone betting his career on slashdot trolls)
If it were me starting from scratch -- the model for a million uses is the internet itself. SMTP, DNS, and mabe a big LDAP directory tool. For calendaring, you're SOL, but nobody calendars with a million poeple. That's meaningless. Calendaring is only useful at the workgroup level anyway. Look to any good workgroup calendaring tool and let users define thir own working groups.
Now, backing off the big million user stupid number. In the real corporate world, you have two real players and a ton of also-rans. The two real players are IBM/Lotus with Notes and Microsoft with Exchange.
The market is split roughly evenly. In the US Microsoft leads a bit, in Europe and EMEA IBM/Lotus leads. How much and actual numbers are hard as hell to track down. IBM doesn't release them and Microsoft likes to count every copy of Office as an Outlook seat. Suffice it to say both companies own about a hundred million actual users.
The basic trade off between the two - With Exchange you get tighter integration with Active Directory and smooth look and feel integration on windows. It feels like all part of the operating system. On purpose. On the other hand, you're forced to use Active Directory, forced to use Win32, and all that integration without any real security means viruses are unstopable. With Notes you get a bulky client that many users find hard to understand. You also get almost 100% prevention of virus spread (it has built in security) and other goodies. Its also a development platform and its cross platform. The client is Win32 and Mac, and users have writen howto docs for WINE. The server is linux, win32, AIX, ZSeries, and iSeries (as/400).
You may not know this, but BOTH can use the Outlook client. Yes, the outlook client is supported with a Domino mail infrastructure. Who'd have thunk it?
Oh, and Domino supports other mail clients too. Pop3, IMAP, and a very good Web Browser -- all at once for the same person if you like. Its got native SMTP support, as well.
What Notes isn't, its pretty. Most people say Outlook is prettier. Ok. Easy to do if you own the OS and make software that only runs in one environment.
So, I hear rants about Notes. I hear trolls whining about a product that runs in Linux as a server and (using Wine) as a client. Runs on Mac. Has a fully functional JAVA environment for development and a remote API through CORBA and DIIOP.
No no, instead they'll use a proprietary only -- Windows Only, Active Directory Only, Virus Distribution Engine from Microsoft.
You gotta love that. Why? Well, its pretty.
Simple. Its cross platform. The entire product is cross platform. Yeah, like java. Only they did it before java was a pipe dream. Late 80's.
.NET.
It has this thing called a seperation layer. All the code except the ui is the same on all the platforms. Clients used to be for os/2, mac, win16, win32, and solaris. Client side that got scalled back because nobody paid for the others -- client is win32 and mac now -- soon with code under linux as part of the next generation client. Lots of people are using on Wine.
Now, the server is still cross platform. Win32, Linux, Aix, iseries (as/400), zseries.
The problem with making something cross platform is, you don't use all the nifty little Windows specific integration and custom pretty things. You don't get something for nothing -- you have to make all those bits.
Oh, the other thing? Outlook feels integrated because everything automatically does the windows automatica launch active-x thing. Just highlight a message subjet, bingo! Embedded code launches! that's why viruses and worms.
If stuff wants to run in Notes, it has to be have a signature. OHHH, public/private key signatures and encryption. When? 1991. Hunh? Yeah, since 1991.
If something wants to run in Notes -- It need PERMISSION to run. Thus, no viruses or worms unless you're stupid enough to tell them "OK, sure, go screw up my machine".
Yes -- the development environment is weird and pretty unsophisticated. It takes a lot of time to learn because its not like other things. BUT -- I can make it do cool, secure, reliable things at a tenth of the cost you can in J2EE or MS
Excited about JSR170? Ah, me too. The Notes database internals match it almost perfectly. Domino will make a great JSR170 back end. Hell, its almost that already.
Meantime, you trolls are whining about a product that runs in Linux as a server and (using Wine) as a client. Runs on Mac. Has a fully functional JAVA environment for development and a remote API through CORBA and DIIOP. No no, instead you'll use a proprietary only -- Windows Only, Active Directory Only, Virus Distribution Engine from Microsoft.
ahahahahahaha. Enjoy it!
I have a server that handles 130,000 web access users -- has for something like 7 years. I'm 3000 miles away. I never get called. Its all automated.
Well, I don't really see but I'm not curious enough to explore the chemistry as to why Oxygen can't be its own Oxidizer.
I'll take your word for it. It just seems like a huge waste in terms of the amount of mass you have to store just to get the fuel out of it.
We burn oxygen in nearly every fuel we use at present. Its also poisonous. Pure oxygen will kill you. Admitedly, flourine will kill you more quickly.
....well....crater.
My point was that if you go to the trouble of stripping Hydrogen from water, you're missing out on the other white meat (er...combustable).
I've had hazmat training, have you? Ever wondered what would happen if you had a tanker full of liquifed oxygen break open in an accident? Say it didn't blow up right away, but spilled on the ground as it boiled off. Someone drops a wrench or something and
..African, or European?
Actually, the problem with water as a storage is all that damn extra oxygen in there. Most of the mass in fact is oxygen, not hydrogen. True, oxygen is also combustable -- I wonder why they don't use both the hydrogen and the oxygen from water.
Oh well.
The issue remains, however, that the content is just too easily available. You're not going to someone's home town and finding a yearbook in a library. You're typing a few words into a browser on a whim. As a culture, we're going to need to figure out what is and is not within the bounds of propriety. That is by necessity always going to be more ambiguous than law.
In 1987, while reading posts on my favorite Tucson based BBS (run at that time by a guy who called himself Zen Master on an APPLE IIe by the way) I remember reading a comment from someone that "ours is a medium where the snap response lives on indefinately." (or something really close to that) He was describing how weeks later old arguements would restart when someone came across an obnoxious post.
They used to say "Fish and visitors smell after three days". I think web content probably fits in there somewhere.
Leaving the law to the lawyers, to me there are valid questions about such a thing as the internet archive. Do I want the crappy first try web pages I wrote popping back up ten or twelve -- or twenty for that matter -- years later to be viewed out of context?
Isn't it a bit like having your old yearbook pictures published from highschool? Sure, they were out there, but are they either relevant or helpful -- and do you have the [moral] right to control their distribution?
What about company information, product offerings, and political views? Old jokes? Times change, styles change. Politics change.
I believe its up to me to decide the longevity of content on publish on my own servers. I suppose its up to Commander Taco to determine the longevity of the content I create here.
I've had thoughts (only thoughts) that involve a model rocket, a co2 cartrage, a large mylar (radar reflective) balloon, and a national capitol.
Of course, I only advocate thinking about it and smiling -- absolutely not trying it to see if you can provoke a response.
New things happen now at a pace dictated by how quickly society can adapt to them, not how quickly new ideas can be considered.
I sit in my HOME OFFICE (something I couldn't have had 20 years ago) surrounded by technology based things which didn't exist 10 or 20 years ago. Some are new enough that the underpinnings that make them possible didn't exist 30 years ago.
I'm typing on wireless keyboard, viewing a 19" plasma flat screen. My phone is VoIP, running on a software PBX. Its wireless. I'm watching a movie on HDTV from my DVR while blogging.
A shame there's no innovation.
Add salt to the ice, and the water flowing will be much colder in the copper pipes.
Of course, this doesn't take into account the cost of producing the ice at all.
Depending on the local humidity levels, a swamp cooler (straw pads kept wet with a small drip pump with a fan passing air through) would be more effective and predictable. Won't work here in new england where temperature and dew point are nearly the same on hot days, but its a staple of life in Arizona (or was when I was there).
Now -- if only you had a nearby source of inexpensive cold water.
"fusing two hydrogen nuclei together to get helium, famously powers our sun (good), as well as hydrogen bombs (bad)."
Personally, I was confused as to which was good, and which bad. Excellent in depth reporting.
What could be more extensible than the original five books of Moses? They've been extended to dozens or hundreds of fully realized religious texts, and their internal objects are in reuse through metaphore in nearly every spoken language and nearly all literature.
....how long does it take to crash the heap with 25 terabytes to play with?
/dev/null
#: java -Xmx25000000m Universe |
public class Universe() extends Thread {
public Universe() {
this.start();
}
public void run() {
while(!totalSystemicEntropy){
Universe nextUniverse = new Universe();
}
}
}
My 11 year old, on a busride for a ski trip, can only see G rated movies on the bus because some parents won't deal with PG.
I'm still totally unconvinced WRT solar. Show me cost effective solar that won't leave me in the poor house and I'll convert my home. So far, all I get when I look is a promise of payoff in 20 years, assuming no interest on the money I didn't have to spend.
Build the nuke plants, build a fusion plant if its going to be safer, cleaner, or cheaper. Build Geothermal plants if you can find a way to do it near enough to where I live to matter.
I'm just tired of empty sunshine.
Show me a product set that I can reasonable switch to which would provide most or all of my energy needs and be cost effective without some kind of 20 year plus payoff.
I'm a reasonably skilled person with most of his own tools, and with some but not vast disposable income. I have a Gambrel style house with fairly good expanses of unshaded rooftop facing in four directions about equally, squared about 25 degrees off the compass points. The house is in Maine, where I have admitedly some pretty high energy bills. I use a electricity for the server farm and household, and LP gas to heat the house, the hot water, and for a brief period of the year a swimming pool.
NASA's Mars rovers are amazing, no doubt. They are also very limited. The require extremely careful management in what is a rarified atmosphere.
In space, solar power works -- its clear. On mars, it just barely works. On Earth, it could work as well -- but not to power our human technology for the masses.
Thanks. You beat me to it. He's right in much of his reasoning, which is why his math didn't make sense even to him.
If you treat it as kilocalories as you point out, the 2500 number works out to 2.5 million of his calories, and the rest of his math actually bears out fairly well. Good thing he's not a plant.
So, if you happen to want to sit all day perfectly exposed on the beach without moving, you need about 71W. Of the maximum potential 1020 you could get during the day, you would not have enough left to last the night. Perhaps you could store some as sugar. Oh, yes, then you are in fact a PLANT.
As soon as you try to move, or it gets cloudy, or its winter... you'd better eat something.