Racks have been fairly standard size for the last half a century originating from Ma Bells standardized telephone equipment. Originally 23 (or somewhere around that) 19" came later due to miniaturization of components. Even 19" is too big these days when you can fit 2 units and their power supplies in 1U 19". Not sure why they're going bigger again especially towards the future, it seems to me this is just a consortium of the most expensive manufacturers (HP, Amax) that want to maintain a market in competition with SuperMicro and others that are powering the modern data centers.
Their premise is incorrect however, you need to be able to mass manufacture your solution to be viable. Backblaze is the perfect example - a product that only works in specific circumstances (usually not yours) and due to the low production numbers, way more expensive than buying a simple SuperMicro box with better hardware.
I'm sure there are data centers and companies that need to design hardware around their workforce and their software but unless you maintain a single product across multiple continents, it's pretty pointless.
If Trump wins (and that's a big if), the establishment most likely would form a coalition to get the delegates required. It would destroy both parties but the. There would finally be the true single party that rules the USA, perhaps a coup or riots would then reinstate democracy.
So I'm interested in buying something "open". This is the description of the 'rack':
The Open Rack is the first rack standard that’s designed for data centers, integrating the rack into the data center infrastructure, part of the Open Compute Project’s “grid to gates” philosophy, a holistic design process that considers the interdependence of everything from the power grid to the gates in the chips on each motherboard.
What does this group do exactly? All I can see is that they're peddling Intel or AMD hardware (which isn't Open) in non-standard form factors.
GNU doesn't like dynamically linking to libraries, instead preferring to statically link all the code. This results in (obviously) all statically linked packages having to be recompiled from scratch every time something in a core package (like OpenSSL) changes.
Now, however they've figured out a way to dynamically link dependent packages so that their statically linked packages will recompile correctly. Oh, and wanton disabling SSLv2 breaks shit.
The FBI is screwing over the American economy really. NO big company, foreign or domestic that cares about their security will use any American product. Heck, even Apple might decide to simply leave the US, it has enough cash to relocate all it's core designers and developers and their extended families to some other place.
Well, if you want to enable SSL, you go to the documentation right? NEITHER Apache 2.4 nor nginx documentation mention the SSL Protocol directives on their pages or any warning about why you should disable them. Vendor defaults (I just went through it on Ubuntu LTS) do have commented out SSL directives for Postfix/Dovecot but do not have any warning nor SSL protocols disabled.
If you don't explicitly disable it, it will be enabled. Yes, the defaults is to not have SSL, but this is the documentation https://httpd.apache.org/docs/... This page doesn't even make mention of the SSLProtocol directive.
The problem is not in the library but in the protocol, the reason people continue to use OpenSSL is BECAUSE it supports all sorts of SSL versions and thus more flexible to use than any other OpenSSL-wannabe-dropin.
This OpenSSL version however breaks stuff by disabling it by default and changing the API when you DO want to use it; given that the only applications that would use it are ancient, I doubt there would be any fixes for those applications to use the new API. This is a protocol issue, not a library issue, leave the API's intact, throw up a giant warning and let people manage their own security. Now what will happen is that people requiring SSLv2 support (for whatever reason) will probably revert to older versions of the library that have bigger issues than SSLv2 support.
The default in most packages (I'm talking Exchange, IIS, Apache, nginx, Postfix, Dovecot,...) is that it is enabled. The problem is that disabling it could break a lot of clients, especially those on Windows XP, IE6 or older versions of Java.
I think Trump is the closest to an option the 'establishment' has put up. Who else would you vote for? Career politicians like Clinton or Rubio? Religious nutcases like all the other GOP candidates? A guy that is more likely to die before the election is over?
Off course Trump won't be elected as president, the establishment won't allow it. Even if he gets voted in, he'll either end up just like the last presidents that made any meaningful change (JFK (assassinated), Clinton (scandalized)) or he'll end up buckling in return for protection like the last president that promised meaningful change (Obama) or perhaps he'll just go along with it for personal profits (like Bush).
It is trivial for "us", but for people that have no idea how their systems work, this isn't. If it's not available within a click or by installing a program from a CD, they won't be able to do it.
You're describing Bonjour/mDNS and yes it works within LANs but not if you want to connect from outside your network. People want convenience, punching a hole in your firewall is a "lot of work" and sometimes impossible depending on your configuration.
And yes, anyone with the information could possibly have your camera talking to them but most people don't care or refuse to understand the issue. Whether it's China or the NSA, as long as people have "bread and circuses" they'll be fine.
They typically stay in their position. It's hard to fuck up in these circles short of a little boy sex scandal; if you can't manage the money well, you just raise tuition and the higher your tuition the 'better' your school is considered to be.
Except Muslims. Muslims in Europe's first generation was in the 50s to work in the mining and construction industry as well as factories and the like. Forward 50 years (early 2000's) and the majority still hasn't integrated, the majority of male children born in the EU are named Muhammed, large portions of female children are in the "system" and instead of integrating they are opting to create Islam Sharia Law political parties with large cities now having politicians favoring Sharia Law and police no longer enforcing the country's law in certain parts of the city and subsequent riots because no business development exists and thus they have no work. Forward another 10 (now) and they're importing their brethren en masse with the only purpose of extending the Islam State and extinguishing all opposers.
That's all well and good but if you have a device that hasn't been updated since the mainstreaming of SHA2 (about a decade ago?), what other issues and vulnerabilities does that hardware/software have?
But that's not really a neural network then. To "find" subsets of an image within a set of other images, even a (large) database of them is relatively trivial (from a coding perspective) even if things like color, lighting and compression change and doesn't require any "special sauce" like AI or neural networks.
What's next: Apple Siri can guess songs it hears from their iTunes catalog? FaceBook can identify faces within pictures? YouTube has a search function.
Most of those expenses have been offloaded to the localities. It would be a LOT more expensive to have a cell phone if they all had to pay their fair share in physical space, taxes, spectrum and energy but most of that is subsidized. The real savings would come if they were actually forced to share the stuff the government gave them through your tax money.
Read the article - his model is ONLY based on the planets we know exist and within those planets his model predicts that it's extremely rare to have an earth-like planet. The problem is we're only looking at about 1% of the things we can see and that is with ALL of our current telescopes spread out over a wide range of frequencies (light, radio, x-ray). So based on our limited 'knowledge' of about 1% of our visible universe, much of the 1% we're not even fully focusing on, we can derive that 1 earth is very unlikely. That still sounds reasonable.
Says who? There are a number of assumptions in the FBI's argument: 1) It's possible to break 256-bit encryption 2) The mythical man month 3) There is a flaw that would allow which the FBI/NSA doesn't already have access to 4) It's Apple's responsibility to create and maintain a rather expensive forensic analysis tool for the state 5) It will only be used once and once it exists they won't be forced to repeat or release the tool
Since when does anyone hold the copyright to the Linux kernel? Anyone that has contributed to the kernel is copyright holder as well as anyone who has 'purchased' it (even for free).
Slashdot Mirror
One estimate is that 24,000 people are killed by lightning strikes around the world each year and about 240,000 are injured.
That's a hell of a lot of planes
Racks have been fairly standard size for the last half a century originating from Ma Bells standardized telephone equipment. Originally 23 (or somewhere around that) 19" came later due to miniaturization of components. Even 19" is too big these days when you can fit 2 units and their power supplies in 1U 19". Not sure why they're going bigger again especially towards the future, it seems to me this is just a consortium of the most expensive manufacturers (HP, Amax) that want to maintain a market in competition with SuperMicro and others that are powering the modern data centers.
Their premise is incorrect however, you need to be able to mass manufacture your solution to be viable. Backblaze is the perfect example - a product that only works in specific circumstances (usually not yours) and due to the low production numbers, way more expensive than buying a simple SuperMicro box with better hardware.
I'm sure there are data centers and companies that need to design hardware around their workforce and their software but unless you maintain a single product across multiple continents, it's pretty pointless.
If Trump wins (and that's a big if), the establishment most likely would form a coalition to get the delegates required. It would destroy both parties but the. There would finally be the true single party that rules the USA, perhaps a coup or riots would then reinstate democracy.
So I'm interested in buying something "open". This is the description of the 'rack':
The Open Rack is the first rack standard that’s designed for data centers, integrating the rack into the data center infrastructure, part of the Open Compute Project’s “grid to gates” philosophy, a holistic design process that considers the interdependence of everything from the power grid to the gates in the chips on each motherboard.
What does this group do exactly? All I can see is that they're peddling Intel or AMD hardware (which isn't Open) in non-standard form factors.
GNU doesn't like dynamically linking to libraries, instead preferring to statically link all the code. This results in (obviously) all statically linked packages having to be recompiled from scratch every time something in a core package (like OpenSSL) changes.
Now, however they've figured out a way to dynamically link dependent packages so that their statically linked packages will recompile correctly. Oh, and wanton disabling SSLv2 breaks shit.
The FBI is screwing over the American economy really. NO big company, foreign or domestic that cares about their security will use any American product. Heck, even Apple might decide to simply leave the US, it has enough cash to relocate all it's core designers and developers and their extended families to some other place.
Well, if you want to enable SSL, you go to the documentation right? NEITHER Apache 2.4 nor nginx documentation mention the SSL Protocol directives on their pages or any warning about why you should disable them. Vendor defaults (I just went through it on Ubuntu LTS) do have commented out SSL directives for Postfix/Dovecot but do not have any warning nor SSL protocols disabled.
If you don't explicitly disable it, it will be enabled. Yes, the defaults is to not have SSL, but this is the documentation
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/...
This page doesn't even make mention of the SSLProtocol directive.
Obviously because it doesn't support SSLv2.
The problem is not in the library but in the protocol, the reason people continue to use OpenSSL is BECAUSE it supports all sorts of SSL versions and thus more flexible to use than any other OpenSSL-wannabe-dropin.
This OpenSSL version however breaks stuff by disabling it by default and changing the API when you DO want to use it; given that the only applications that would use it are ancient, I doubt there would be any fixes for those applications to use the new API. This is a protocol issue, not a library issue, leave the API's intact, throw up a giant warning and let people manage their own security. Now what will happen is that people requiring SSLv2 support (for whatever reason) will probably revert to older versions of the library that have bigger issues than SSLv2 support.
The default in most packages (I'm talking Exchange, IIS, Apache, nginx, Postfix, Dovecot, ...) is that it is enabled. The problem is that disabling it could break a lot of clients, especially those on Windows XP, IE6 or older versions of Java.
Act of God? The guy is 75 years old, even if he were the nominee he'll probably die of natural causes before getting to the White House.
I think Trump is the closest to an option the 'establishment' has put up. Who else would you vote for? Career politicians like Clinton or Rubio? Religious nutcases like all the other GOP candidates? A guy that is more likely to die before the election is over?
Off course Trump won't be elected as president, the establishment won't allow it. Even if he gets voted in, he'll either end up just like the last presidents that made any meaningful change (JFK (assassinated), Clinton (scandalized)) or he'll end up buckling in return for protection like the last president that promised meaningful change (Obama) or perhaps he'll just go along with it for personal profits (like Bush).
It is trivial for "us", but for people that have no idea how their systems work, this isn't. If it's not available within a click or by installing a program from a CD, they won't be able to do it.
You're describing Bonjour/mDNS and yes it works within LANs but not if you want to connect from outside your network. People want convenience, punching a hole in your firewall is a "lot of work" and sometimes impossible depending on your configuration.
And yes, anyone with the information could possibly have your camera talking to them but most people don't care or refuse to understand the issue. Whether it's China or the NSA, as long as people have "bread and circuses" they'll be fine.
They typically stay in their position. It's hard to fuck up in these circles short of a little boy sex scandal; if you can't manage the money well, you just raise tuition and the higher your tuition the 'better' your school is considered to be.
How the hell do you think face (or any sort of image) recognition works? Never heard of license plate scanners? Those things are relatively trivial.
Except Muslims. Muslims in Europe's first generation was in the 50s to work in the mining and construction industry as well as factories and the like. Forward 50 years (early 2000's) and the majority still hasn't integrated, the majority of male children born in the EU are named Muhammed, large portions of female children are in the "system" and instead of integrating they are opting to create Islam Sharia Law political parties with large cities now having politicians favoring Sharia Law and police no longer enforcing the country's law in certain parts of the city and subsequent riots because no business development exists and thus they have no work. Forward another 10 (now) and they're importing their brethren en masse with the only purpose of extending the Islam State and extinguishing all opposers.
That's all well and good but if you have a device that hasn't been updated since the mainstreaming of SHA2 (about a decade ago?), what other issues and vulnerabilities does that hardware/software have?
But that's not really a neural network then. To "find" subsets of an image within a set of other images, even a (large) database of them is relatively trivial (from a coding perspective) even if things like color, lighting and compression change and doesn't require any "special sauce" like AI or neural networks.
What's next: Apple Siri can guess songs it hears from their iTunes catalog? FaceBook can identify faces within pictures? YouTube has a search function.
Most of those expenses have been offloaded to the localities. It would be a LOT more expensive to have a cell phone if they all had to pay their fair share in physical space, taxes, spectrum and energy but most of that is subsidized. The real savings would come if they were actually forced to share the stuff the government gave them through your tax money.
Please explain further. The ZFS codebase is very simple and lean compared to some other bases with similar features (look at BTRFS or EXT4).
BtrFS already has double the amount of code than ZFS does and it's not even feature-complete or competitive. XFS has even more lines.
If anything is over-designed, I would say BtrFS is.
Read the article - his model is ONLY based on the planets we know exist and within those planets his model predicts that it's extremely rare to have an earth-like planet. The problem is we're only looking at about 1% of the things we can see and that is with ALL of our current telescopes spread out over a wide range of frequencies (light, radio, x-ray). So based on our limited 'knowledge' of about 1% of our visible universe, much of the 1% we're not even fully focusing on, we can derive that 1 earth is very unlikely. That still sounds reasonable.
Says who? There are a number of assumptions in the FBI's argument:
1) It's possible to break 256-bit encryption
2) The mythical man month
3) There is a flaw that would allow which the FBI/NSA doesn't already have access to
4) It's Apple's responsibility to create and maintain a rather expensive forensic analysis tool for the state
5) It will only be used once and once it exists they won't be forced to repeat or release the tool
Since when does anyone hold the copyright to the Linux kernel? Anyone that has contributed to the kernel is copyright holder as well as anyone who has 'purchased' it (even for free).
It simply demonstrates that they don't care what the outcome is going to be because most people (51% or so) don't care.