This is not Linux software RAID though. From TFA, we are talking about hardware raid. The drives don't fail catastrophically, they just have other features which cause the controller card to think they are failed. You can tell the controller to just rebuild the array. This is fine as long as only one drive does this at a time...
Yes the premium paid for RAID edition drives is outlandish, but the reason to use them in hardware RAID configurations is the tighter response times and to other firmware features that come with the drives.
Ignoring the fact that $1000 isn't even close to what this system cost, it doesn't say anything about the raid setup, stripe size, bloc size, other configurations. It doesn't mention rebuild or expansion time on the Raid 5 array. It would be at least marginally worth reading to some of the people looking at expanding their storage capacities if they had mentioned a few of those things. Also, if you got your hands on a high performance raid6 card, why not benchmark raid6 versus raid5?!
This article doesn't do anything but publish a glorified spec sheet for Samsung and Areca. Also notice that they decided to stick desktop drives in a Raid array, a big no-no if you want your array to last more than a few weeks.
Yea I'm surprised this topic got through... tags of Obvious, notnews, and flamebait come to mind.
This may have been a minor story after someone shoved a camera in the West Virginia women's face who said, "I'm not votin' for no Damn Who-Sain, I've had enough of Who-Sain, and I will never vote for a negro man." (all spelling mistakes intentional) The sad thing is this is a measurably significant portion of America. If you want a higher percentage of American's to be educated on science, the trick isn't in schools or programs but in forced chemical sterilization. CHLORINATE THE GENE POOL!
Name one science issue (short of gas) issue that has even been debated, let alone decisive as part of a major American Election. It's just not relevant because people aren't that smart. It's about fear mongering and 30-second sound bytes. that's it.
Only with the current gas prices have they even started addressing anything relevant to science, but watch the campaigns and debates and try and find anything related to science. "we need alternative fuel sources"; "we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil." Great geniuses but what do you propose we do about it.
We all know what they trot out there for election issues. Health care; Social Security; Crime (or more recently Terrorism); Jobs; and Gays, Abortion, and a general value assault of the children.
Don't you remember Hillary Clinton proposing a suspension of the Fed. Gas tax? She proposed reducing the income of the already heavily in debt government so American's could save less than $.25 on a more than $4 gallon of gas. Great idea. How about the actually implemented policy to stop stock piling the strategic national oil reserve so there would be less pressure on demand... by $.06 - less than 2%, and now we have less oil if a real supply disruption comes along. Its more surprising to me that we have been as successful as we are considering how appallingly retarded much of our population is.
Not true, many debts and assets do not survive death. I agree in principal that there is little ethical delima in trying to open his digital life for closure of his survivors, but just thought I would indicate that many assets, debts, and obligations terminate the instant of death.
The primary example here is credit card debt. The debt may reach the estate, but not the beneficiaries. I.E. I die with $10k in assets and $20k in debt. I leave a will saying everything goes to my son Jimmy. Jimmy will get nothing as the estate is consumed by the debt. But the $10k in remaining unsatisfied debt is not passed on, it is written down as a loss by the credit card company.
Every provider is going to be different depending on use policies, jurisdiction, and security certifications desired by the party, however ultimately you can compell compliance through the method above. It doesn't hurt to ask, but expect to be turned down unless you have a death cirtificate and proof you are a parent (it seems from the article this was either a minor / major with no issue (wife/kids/etc).
While I would normally agree, the closer we get to 1-21-09 (I think that's the date) the more people in the administration worry about their legacy and what the history will think of their role. This would be a landmark move back in the right direction after 8 years of "super" secret doctrine.
This is just logical enough to work at a time when the people are starting to be angry at their secretive government.
I agree, but I think this is what the whole point of this question is? I think we can reasonably agree that Education doesn't get you a job, it gets you an interview. I would say that a technical school can get you more interviews in the first 5 years than your typical Liberal Arts can. Now obviously the HR department people likely went to that or similar LA college, but at least in my experience hr people only gets you a mention, not an interview. (We the developers did 80% of the interviewing - and 99% of the decision)
With few exceptions you are going to be seen as a better developer/engineer from the technical school. You will likely get more interviews, especially for competitive positions. However, I will point out in the interest of full disclosure you will likely have opportunities to be a more well rounded person at the LA school. You don't spend time discussing philosophy, literature or world history in a technical CS program. This may lead to a better success rate on the interviews you do get. (Better discussion/connection with interviewer - no one wants to hire a poindexter)
I would play to my weakness here. If you are very studious/nerdy go for the LA college, hopefully you can become a bit more 'normal'. Same goes true for the opposite. Ultimately you do have to spend roughly 5% of your expected life at this institution so go with the one you like more above all else, and only use this discussion as a tie breaker. If you are extremely arty you may feel too out of place at the Tech school and be very unhapy - same in reverse so becareful of extremes
Exactly - I want to know what their calculation is on this? Are they measuring power draw and then applying the purely theoretical stored energy of a gallon of gas? How do you have a mpg of solar!?!? Yes fill 'er up, 30 gals of ultra violet please.
As a law student who has had this debate at length in my Civil Procedure course I'm going to have to step up and chime in for the non-automatic payment of the losers fees. First there are routes of counter suits and counter claims if it's important and needed. But the main reason is that it will make the idea of profiteering law suits more dangerous just differently structured. It's just a numbers game. If you get a threatening letter stating a claim which could cost $2m to litigate and you have a 10% chance of losing you are theoretically on the hook for $200k - if they offer to settle for $100k more than most would settle. The rare few who didn't settle would be at the risk of the other side spending anything and everything to help them win. EVERYBODY would hire Johny Cochran et al to represent them and we would have far more trial circuses and fewer settlements an end the courts and legislature have already determined they don't like.
Basically the system sucks as it is now, but it could be worse and you need only imagine the situation where David gets sued by Goliath and has to pay Goliath's fees for losing.
College is expensive, yes. But only if you don't know how it works. First of all there is the FAFSA plan which basically is a federal program where colleges automatically adjust your tuition and aid based on your ability to pay. Then you have loans, grants, aid and etc that can greatly reduce the amount of money required to attend. The only reason not to go to college is that you are stupid. The government/some charity will pay for you to go if you are at least half-way competent. You may be in debt, but hey if you have a degree from MIT you should be able to make that up.
If you are actually as smart as your post makes you seem, you should be looking at a large portion of your tuition that is paid for (I wasn't 'smart' but I was able to get my entire state school undergrad tuition paid for - that left me able to go to law school on the 'rents dime. Very nice.) Basically what happens with major schools is as long as you are willing to fill out the proper paperwork you pay less or you go completely on the gov't's dime. I am about to graduate with a degree in Software development (not cs) from a top 10 school, and a law degree from a t1 law school and my total amount out of pocket spent (by the 'rents) will be under 100k for 7+ years. Play the system, work the angles you can do it. Do NOT let the sticker shock detour you form going to the best school possible.
Don't go to community college. If you must, take Pell grants and other federal loans to go to a 4-year true college. In the end you will have a better education (at least to employers) that is more marketable and serves you better in the long run. In this day in age there is no reason not to go to a full 4-year college in any discipline (save culinary). Your student-loans can be paid off in full much quicker than you think as long as you don't take 50k a year to live like a fat cat.
This is somewhat how it works with the Office of Legal Council who reviews proposed bills to check for Constitutionality and consistency (from the acting president's perspective.) The problem with making actual judges the reviewers is that those are 'advisory' opinions and unconstitutional in this country (USA). Under the very first court, SCOTUS said it undermined their authority and the separation of powers doctrine to issue advisory opinions for the Executive branch, and one can reasonably infer the legislative branch into this.
This is the reciprocal case of where the technologically adept don't understand the full process of making laws. Which is refreshing considering how often the reverse happens.
Am I the only one who noticed this interview is from Nov. 1st? In political terms it might as well be from 5 years ago. Seriously. With the softball questions and archaic date on a little publicized blog this looks to be pretty blatant attempt at courting the tech vote through slashdot.
Slightly more complicated but I think relevant is the fact that Open software theoretically could have general public contributions that were made without monetary compensation that were only done because the programmer feels it's for the greater good. To close that off and start making money from their work without their consent and forwarding on their payments is wrong. The other side of the coin is closed software which developed code at likely a great expense, by paying many developers salaries. Their decision to give this software away for free when they have already paid for the creation of the software is the exact opposite as the other action, even if they arrive in the same place.
So this is what was keeping Linux market share from increasing? I thought it was that most people were too used to windows and not willing to learn a new operating system. Thanks for clearing that up.
Can we please get a bit of perspective on this. Linux is doomed to a fringe market share unless something extremely bad happens from Microsoft... yes even worse than Vista. This suit was not hindering all that many people from installing Linux. I know here at work we were running it on our servers, with nothing but mild amusement every time one of these stories came down.
Linux will primarily be run in the server space with fringe desktop user space for the foreseeable future. Those who's management is in bed with Microsoft for what ever reason will continue to run Windows Server in their servers. Those who hate M$ and don't have any problems with some of the unsupported functionality will run Linux. This suit changes nothing.
This is already happening to a functional point. Navisite, the host we use here at this company, charges by the square foot, however you only get so many watts per square foot. We have (2) 19" racks about half full of hardware with a total physical footprint of under 9 square feet; we could even get it under 5. However due to the power density we have 100 square feet of space that we rent. Because we use hyper dense blade servers for the management efficiency we fill a "racks" space of power with aproxamately a single blade chassis. So while we aren't physicly using 100 square feet, we have to have that space blocked out because we are drawing that much power off of their infrastructure, and so we pay for it. Same concept, just different implementation.
I would say that 1% of the nation's power for every computer isn't that much when you consider how incredibly tied in we are, and the savings in power created by the use of those computers. Simple example. Before the electronic age if one wanted to buy something over a specific value they would comparison shop, likely driving all over town to find the lowest price. Now you just hop online, find who has the lowest price and go pick it up, or better yet have it delivered in which case many trips are "car pooled" into one more efficient trip.
Power is a concern for computing, but we need to quit being Chicken Little about this problem.
Incoming L1 in the 2010 Law class at IU. Question one on Wednesday, August 22nd in my Ethics 101 class will be:
"What are the ethical implications of a former CEO of a floundering company taking a job at a new large institution and then mandating that it use the failing company's technology at a major increase in cost with negligible potential benefit and substantial increase in risk while still retaining stock in the previous company?"
So much for not being known as the smart ass at my new school.
The DMCA goes hand in hand with Fair Use principles which have time and again been upheld by the US Supreme Court. It criminalizes tools necessary to implement freedoms upheld by previous USSC decisions. The law goes so far as to not only make telling anyone that a Sharpie can beat Sony's copy protection, but make the magic marker its self illegal. It makes the ability to gain a backup copy illegal, and thus in the great 4th grade tradition: 'You have no clue!'
As a college student with a facebook profile and who has to constantly put up with these stories being printed by the "journalists" at the campus paper - Facebook is a public website. It is no different than putting your information on a bathroom wall... except that it's indexed and readily searchable. No one requires you to be on facebook - put any information on facebook - or even guarantees that any of that information is accurate.
If you are woried about your privacy of facebook - don't be on it. It's that simple. It isn't like your employer is going through your bank records or other "personal" information - which I am sure they are doing anyway.
I too have noticed a downward trend of the quality of article posted by slashdot. However this debate is just like the linux debate. The actual non-enterprise market will for the foreseable future be Windows. Being a programmer and doing a lot of linux work with a lot of fanboys I enevitably take some ribbing for running Micro$oft. However, I tried the switch to linux - purely on the influence of my co-workers - last time I built a pc. I spent about 25% of my time looking for an application like X where X was something I already used on Windows. I eventually realized it was insane to try and be windows LIKE when I could actually have windows.
Mac is going to find this out the same way. The hardcore graphics people will likely always use Mac, but they are likely to lose their recent converts to windows. Why bother paying an extra 30% for hardware/software only to run the SAME as any other computer?
Unfortunatly 80%+ of the world is too stupid to really consider switching. It took them 5 years just to learn where their any key was and they aren't going to be switching to go back to knowing less than nothing. The Mac has always been a great Mac. It is now a crappy PC and unfortunatly that's what they are marketing it as.
Finally to you fanboys out there talking about efficient Mac development - Mac's are more like consoles than computers - Windows has a billion different pieces of hardware and software it has to deal with - Mac has a few hundred pieces of hardware and a few thousand software titles. It's a bit smaller scope project.
While you need to remember your histrory - you don't necessarily need to always do what hasn't been tried before. There is a huge difference here between blue ray and every other failed proprietary technology in the past. People want it, BADLY. The HD-DVD is not going to be included as the only reader in a gaming system (360 thinks they are going to do an add on). People want HD content. There is a market for it. For large TV's there is nothing like HD. Sony has the Nutt Flush here. The PS1 and PS2 are by far the most successful consoles with Xbox running a distant second. The PS3 looks primed to sell 4 million units in 6 months at $500 each. They are going to succeed because of the PS3 - not the other way around. To think the BlueRay is going to be the betamax is forgetting what happened in the bettamax case. Betamax lost not because it was inferior, or cost more but because it didn't have the library. More people are onboard for Blue-ray so if I had to pick a horse now, I would be on BlueRay all the way.
I am cool with the school busting kids for talking about illegal activities. Are you really that stupid. Way to talk about breaking the law in public. I could care less if the school monitors their blogs. The line they shouldn't cross was posted earlier about the teen being expelled for posting about the school harassing him when he was posting at his own home (NOT THE SCHOOL!). The second ironic thing about this pair of stories though is that this town is Libertyville.
I am no expert but it seems to me that me saying "I wish they would go #$@@ their self" or "I think he is a @$#*$" would be considered statement of personal belief or opinion - protected by free speach and as long as it wasn't done from school should be fine. It's expressing the statement "I am going to kill bob" that gets you in trouble. But I could be wrong.
I understand that your basically a needle in a haystack on the interent - and with out the Google metal detector your unlikely to be discovered... however to call this censorship is the most assenine thing I can think of. The website is still out there, they still have the ability to diseminate their message - Google just refuses to help them. It's no different than if a newspaper decides not to buy a story from the AP news wire for what ever reason. The story is there, someone is willing to run it.
I think the real news story here is that Google while may have done nothing technicly wrong has shown their lack of innocence. For years people have believed that Google has been a neutral third party of the internet not caring about what anyone was doing. In recent months it has come to light that Google, just like any other business, is doing things to help shape it's image and protect it's brand presence. While their is nothing wrong with what they have done, the controversy rages mainly because of geeks who are embarased to have been preeching their praises for the last 10 or so years. Get over it - if MSN(BC)/FOX/CNN was doing this no one would care.
Am I the only one who noticed that the New York Times is bashing WMP11 for not giving people a choice for what store to download from, but applauds the ease and integration of Apple's iTunes software. The only differecne is that MTV is not a sub company of microsoft(YET!). On the other hand, at least WMP11 and URGE give you a choice of player. Try downloading iTunes Store material to a non-iPod. Say what you want about WMP being bloated (don't get me started on the Windows version of iTunes) or buggy or what ever... but the simple fact remains that it's darn easy to replace as your default media player. Also iTunes Store didn't work with previous versions of iTunes. Finally, and I'm sure this will get this post flamed, deleted, or edited, you don't have to be on any other operating system besides Windows to be comercially successful. Roughly 94% of the world's personal computers are running some flavor of windows with 90+% of that being Windows XP! To say that a program only supports windows or only supports windows XP is like saying it only targeted at 90% of the population. Put your religious soapboxes down and think about it logically for a minute. Those of you who program know what a pain in the butt programing for multiple OS's can be. Would you pay double the cost to develop for 5% more target market? I don't think so! 80% effect with 20% of the money is the general business principle behind the most comercially successful companies.
Definatly just shaddy financing with a new lable. Purchase only the time you need only works for a centrally located service. Cell phones work that way because you buy the phone (more or less) and then you are purchasing the network which you phyically don't own. Same with mainframe time. You likely didn't own the mainframe when you were purchasing time on it. The only way a personal computer would be practicle (at least to me) is if it was personal. Same settings, profile, files, etc. And it would likely have to be in my residence. So you can't really have anyone else using it. This doesn't really add up as a concept. Unless microsoft is getting into the Net Cafe business.
Slashdot Mirror
This is not Linux software RAID though. From TFA, we are talking about hardware raid. The drives don't fail catastrophically, they just have other features which cause the controller card to think they are failed. You can tell the controller to just rebuild the array. This is fine as long as only one drive does this at a time...
Yes the premium paid for RAID edition drives is outlandish, but the reason to use them in hardware RAID configurations is the tighter response times and to other firmware features that come with the drives.
Ignoring the fact that $1000 isn't even close to what this system cost, it doesn't say anything about the raid setup, stripe size, bloc size, other configurations. It doesn't mention rebuild or expansion time on the Raid 5 array. It would be at least marginally worth reading to some of the people looking at expanding their storage capacities if they had mentioned a few of those things. Also, if you got your hands on a high performance raid6 card, why not benchmark raid6 versus raid5?!
This article doesn't do anything but publish a glorified spec sheet for Samsung and Areca. Also notice that they decided to stick desktop drives in a Raid array, a big no-no if you want your array to last more than a few weeks.
Yea I'm surprised this topic got through... tags of Obvious, notnews, and flamebait come to mind.
This may have been a minor story after someone shoved a camera in the West Virginia women's face who said, "I'm not votin' for no Damn Who-Sain, I've had enough of Who-Sain, and I will never vote for a negro man." (all spelling mistakes intentional) The sad thing is this is a measurably significant portion of America. If you want a higher percentage of American's to be educated on science, the trick isn't in schools or programs but in forced chemical sterilization. CHLORINATE THE GENE POOL!
Name one science issue (short of gas) issue that has even been debated, let alone decisive as part of a major American Election. It's just not relevant because people aren't that smart. It's about fear mongering and 30-second sound bytes. that's it.
Only with the current gas prices have they even started addressing anything relevant to science, but watch the campaigns and debates and try and find anything related to science. "we need alternative fuel sources"; "we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil." Great geniuses but what do you propose we do about it.
We all know what they trot out there for election issues. Health care; Social Security; Crime (or more recently Terrorism); Jobs; and Gays, Abortion, and a general value assault of the children.
Don't you remember Hillary Clinton proposing a suspension of the Fed. Gas tax? She proposed reducing the income of the already heavily in debt government so American's could save less than $.25 on a more than $4 gallon of gas. Great idea. How about the actually implemented policy to stop stock piling the strategic national oil reserve so there would be less pressure on demand... by $.06 - less than 2%, and now we have less oil if a real supply disruption comes along. Its more surprising to me that we have been as successful as we are considering how appallingly retarded much of our population is.
The primary example here is credit card debt. The debt may reach the estate, but not the beneficiaries. I.E. I die with $10k in assets and $20k in debt. I leave a will saying everything goes to my son Jimmy. Jimmy will get nothing as the estate is consumed by the debt. But the $10k in remaining unsatisfied debt is not passed on, it is written down as a loss by the credit card company.
Every provider is going to be different depending on use policies, jurisdiction, and security certifications desired by the party, however ultimately you can compell compliance through the method above. It doesn't hurt to ask, but expect to be turned down unless you have a death cirtificate and proof you are a parent (it seems from the article this was either a minor / major with no issue (wife/kids/etc).While I would normally agree, the closer we get to 1-21-09 (I think that's the date) the more people in the administration worry about their legacy and what the history will think of their role. This would be a landmark move back in the right direction after 8 years of "super" secret doctrine. This is just logical enough to work at a time when the people are starting to be angry at their secretive government.
I agree, but I think this is what the whole point of this question is? I think we can reasonably agree that Education doesn't get you a job, it gets you an interview. I would say that a technical school can get you more interviews in the first 5 years than your typical Liberal Arts can. Now obviously the HR department people likely went to that or similar LA college, but at least in my experience hr people only gets you a mention, not an interview. (We the developers did 80% of the interviewing - and 99% of the decision)
With few exceptions you are going to be seen as a better developer/engineer from the technical school. You will likely get more interviews, especially for competitive positions. However, I will point out in the interest of full disclosure you will likely have opportunities to be a more well rounded person at the LA school. You don't spend time discussing philosophy, literature or world history in a technical CS program. This may lead to a better success rate on the interviews you do get. (Better discussion/connection with interviewer - no one wants to hire a poindexter)
I would play to my weakness here. If you are very studious/nerdy go for the LA college, hopefully you can become a bit more 'normal'. Same goes true for the opposite. Ultimately you do have to spend roughly 5% of your expected life at this institution so go with the one you like more above all else, and only use this discussion as a tie breaker. If you are extremely arty you may feel too out of place at the Tech school and be very unhapy - same in reverse so becareful of extremes
Exactly - I want to know what their calculation is on this? Are they measuring power draw and then applying the purely theoretical stored energy of a gallon of gas? How do you have a mpg of solar!?!?
Yes fill 'er up, 30 gals of ultra violet please.
I get txt alerts from ESPN/CBS and others on sports scores. The great thing is when I get an alert on Thursday about a football game played on Sunday.
I can envision a world where people are getting Katrina warnings 3 days after the storm hits.
The system is way too ad-hoc and fragile to support mission critical alerts of upcoming disasters.
As a law student who has had this debate at length in my Civil Procedure course I'm going to have to step up and chime in for the non-automatic payment of the losers fees. First there are routes of counter suits and counter claims if it's important and needed. But the main reason is that it will make the idea of profiteering law suits more dangerous just differently structured. It's just a numbers game. If you get a threatening letter stating a claim which could cost $2m to litigate and you have a 10% chance of losing you are theoretically on the hook for $200k - if they offer to settle for $100k more than most would settle. The rare few who didn't settle would be at the risk of the other side spending anything and everything to help them win. EVERYBODY would hire Johny Cochran et al to represent them and we would have far more trial circuses and fewer settlements an end the courts and legislature have already determined they don't like.
Basically the system sucks as it is now, but it could be worse and you need only imagine the situation where David gets sued by Goliath and has to pay Goliath's fees for losing.
College is expensive, yes. But only if you don't know how it works. First of all there is the FAFSA plan which basically is a federal program where colleges automatically adjust your tuition and aid based on your ability to pay. Then you have loans, grants, aid and etc that can greatly reduce the amount of money required to attend. The only reason not to go to college is that you are stupid. The government/some charity will pay for you to go if you are at least half-way competent. You may be in debt, but hey if you have a degree from MIT you should be able to make that up. If you are actually as smart as your post makes you seem, you should be looking at a large portion of your tuition that is paid for (I wasn't 'smart' but I was able to get my entire state school undergrad tuition paid for - that left me able to go to law school on the 'rents dime. Very nice.) Basically what happens with major schools is as long as you are willing to fill out the proper paperwork you pay less or you go completely on the gov't's dime. I am about to graduate with a degree in Software development (not cs) from a top 10 school, and a law degree from a t1 law school and my total amount out of pocket spent (by the 'rents) will be under 100k for 7+ years. Play the system, work the angles you can do it. Do NOT let the sticker shock detour you form going to the best school possible. Don't go to community college. If you must, take Pell grants and other federal loans to go to a 4-year true college. In the end you will have a better education (at least to employers) that is more marketable and serves you better in the long run. In this day in age there is no reason not to go to a full 4-year college in any discipline (save culinary). Your student-loans can be paid off in full much quicker than you think as long as you don't take 50k a year to live like a fat cat.
This is somewhat how it works with the Office of Legal Council who reviews proposed bills to check for Constitutionality and consistency (from the acting president's perspective.) The problem with making actual judges the reviewers is that those are 'advisory' opinions and unconstitutional in this country (USA). Under the very first court, SCOTUS said it undermined their authority and the separation of powers doctrine to issue advisory opinions for the Executive branch, and one can reasonably infer the legislative branch into this. This is the reciprocal case of where the technologically adept don't understand the full process of making laws. Which is refreshing considering how often the reverse happens.
Am I the only one who noticed this interview is from Nov. 1st? In political terms it might as well be from 5 years ago. Seriously. With the softball questions and archaic date on a little publicized blog this looks to be pretty blatant attempt at courting the tech vote through slashdot.
Slightly more complicated but I think relevant is the fact that Open software theoretically could have general public contributions that were made without monetary compensation that were only done because the programmer feels it's for the greater good. To close that off and start making money from their work without their consent and forwarding on their payments is wrong. The other side of the coin is closed software which developed code at likely a great expense, by paying many developers salaries. Their decision to give this software away for free when they have already paid for the creation of the software is the exact opposite as the other action, even if they arrive in the same place.
So this is what was keeping Linux market share from increasing? I thought it was that most people were too used to windows and not willing to learn a new operating system. Thanks for clearing that up. Can we please get a bit of perspective on this. Linux is doomed to a fringe market share unless something extremely bad happens from Microsoft... yes even worse than Vista. This suit was not hindering all that many people from installing Linux. I know here at work we were running it on our servers, with nothing but mild amusement every time one of these stories came down. Linux will primarily be run in the server space with fringe desktop user space for the foreseeable future. Those who's management is in bed with Microsoft for what ever reason will continue to run Windows Server in their servers. Those who hate M$ and don't have any problems with some of the unsupported functionality will run Linux. This suit changes nothing.
This is already happening to a functional point. Navisite, the host we use here at this company, charges by the square foot, however you only get so many watts per square foot. We have (2) 19" racks about half full of hardware with a total physical footprint of under 9 square feet; we could even get it under 5. However due to the power density we have 100 square feet of space that we rent. Because we use hyper dense blade servers for the management efficiency we fill a "racks" space of power with aproxamately a single blade chassis. So while we aren't physicly using 100 square feet, we have to have that space blocked out because we are drawing that much power off of their infrastructure, and so we pay for it. Same concept, just different implementation.
I would say that 1% of the nation's power for every computer isn't that much when you consider how incredibly tied in we are, and the savings in power created by the use of those computers. Simple example. Before the electronic age if one wanted to buy something over a specific value they would comparison shop, likely driving all over town to find the lowest price. Now you just hop online, find who has the lowest price and go pick it up, or better yet have it delivered in which case many trips are "car pooled" into one more efficient trip.
Power is a concern for computing, but we need to quit being Chicken Little about this problem.
Incoming L1 in the 2010 Law class at IU. Question one on Wednesday, August 22nd in my Ethics 101 class will be:
"What are the ethical implications of a former CEO of a floundering company taking a job at a new large institution and then mandating that it use the failing company's technology at a major increase in cost with negligible potential benefit and substantial increase in risk while still retaining stock in the previous company?"
So much for not being known as the smart ass at my new school.
Troll much?
The DMCA goes hand in hand with Fair Use principles which have time and again been upheld by the US Supreme Court. It criminalizes tools necessary to implement freedoms upheld by previous USSC decisions. The law goes so far as to not only make telling anyone that a Sharpie can beat Sony's copy protection, but make the magic marker its self illegal. It makes the ability to gain a backup copy illegal, and thus in the great 4th grade tradition: 'You have no clue!'
As a college student with a facebook profile and who has to constantly put up with these stories being printed by the "journalists" at the campus paper - Facebook is a public website. It is no different than putting your information on a bathroom wall... except that it's indexed and readily searchable. No one requires you to be on facebook - put any information on facebook - or even guarantees that any of that information is accurate. If you are woried about your privacy of facebook - don't be on it. It's that simple. It isn't like your employer is going through your bank records or other "personal" information - which I am sure they are doing anyway.
I too have noticed a downward trend of the quality of article posted by slashdot. However this debate is just like the linux debate. The actual non-enterprise market will for the foreseable future be Windows. Being a programmer and doing a lot of linux work with a lot of fanboys I enevitably take some ribbing for running Micro$oft. However, I tried the switch to linux - purely on the influence of my co-workers - last time I built a pc. I spent about 25% of my time looking for an application like X where X was something I already used on Windows. I eventually realized it was insane to try and be windows LIKE when I could actually have windows. Mac is going to find this out the same way. The hardcore graphics people will likely always use Mac, but they are likely to lose their recent converts to windows. Why bother paying an extra 30% for hardware/software only to run the SAME as any other computer? Unfortunatly 80%+ of the world is too stupid to really consider switching. It took them 5 years just to learn where their any key was and they aren't going to be switching to go back to knowing less than nothing. The Mac has always been a great Mac. It is now a crappy PC and unfortunatly that's what they are marketing it as. Finally to you fanboys out there talking about efficient Mac development - Mac's are more like consoles than computers - Windows has a billion different pieces of hardware and software it has to deal with - Mac has a few hundred pieces of hardware and a few thousand software titles. It's a bit smaller scope project.
While you need to remember your histrory - you don't necessarily need to always do what hasn't been tried before. There is a huge difference here between blue ray and every other failed proprietary technology in the past. People want it, BADLY. The HD-DVD is not going to be included as the only reader in a gaming system (360 thinks they are going to do an add on). People want HD content. There is a market for it. For large TV's there is nothing like HD. Sony has the Nutt Flush here. The PS1 and PS2 are by far the most successful consoles with Xbox running a distant second. The PS3 looks primed to sell 4 million units in 6 months at $500 each. They are going to succeed because of the PS3 - not the other way around. To think the BlueRay is going to be the betamax is forgetting what happened in the bettamax case. Betamax lost not because it was inferior, or cost more but because it didn't have the library. More people are onboard for Blue-ray so if I had to pick a horse now, I would be on BlueRay all the way.
I am cool with the school busting kids for talking about illegal activities. Are you really that stupid. Way to talk about breaking the law in public. I could care less if the school monitors their blogs. The line they shouldn't cross was posted earlier about the teen being expelled for posting about the school harassing him when he was posting at his own home (NOT THE SCHOOL!). The second ironic thing about this pair of stories though is that this town is Libertyville. I am no expert but it seems to me that me saying "I wish they would go #$@@ their self" or "I think he is a @$#*$" would be considered statement of personal belief or opinion - protected by free speach and as long as it wasn't done from school should be fine. It's expressing the statement "I am going to kill bob" that gets you in trouble. But I could be wrong.
I understand that your basically a needle in a haystack on the interent - and with out the Google metal detector your unlikely to be discovered... however to call this censorship is the most assenine thing I can think of. The website is still out there, they still have the ability to diseminate their message - Google just refuses to help them. It's no different than if a newspaper decides not to buy a story from the AP news wire for what ever reason. The story is there, someone is willing to run it. I think the real news story here is that Google while may have done nothing technicly wrong has shown their lack of innocence. For years people have believed that Google has been a neutral third party of the internet not caring about what anyone was doing. In recent months it has come to light that Google, just like any other business, is doing things to help shape it's image and protect it's brand presence. While their is nothing wrong with what they have done, the controversy rages mainly because of geeks who are embarased to have been preeching their praises for the last 10 or so years. Get over it - if MSN(BC)/FOX/CNN was doing this no one would care.
Am I the only one who noticed that the New York Times is bashing WMP11 for not giving people a choice for what store to download from, but applauds the ease and integration of Apple's iTunes software. The only differecne is that MTV is not a sub company of microsoft(YET!). On the other hand, at least WMP11 and URGE give you a choice of player. Try downloading iTunes Store material to a non-iPod. Say what you want about WMP being bloated (don't get me started on the Windows version of iTunes) or buggy or what ever... but the simple fact remains that it's darn easy to replace as your default media player. Also iTunes Store didn't work with previous versions of iTunes. Finally, and I'm sure this will get this post flamed, deleted, or edited, you don't have to be on any other operating system besides Windows to be comercially successful. Roughly 94% of the world's personal computers are running some flavor of windows with 90+% of that being Windows XP! To say that a program only supports windows or only supports windows XP is like saying it only targeted at 90% of the population. Put your religious soapboxes down and think about it logically for a minute. Those of you who program know what a pain in the butt programing for multiple OS's can be. Would you pay double the cost to develop for 5% more target market? I don't think so! 80% effect with 20% of the money is the general business principle behind the most comercially successful companies.
Definatly just shaddy financing with a new lable. Purchase only the time you need only works for a centrally located service. Cell phones work that way because you buy the phone (more or less) and then you are purchasing the network which you phyically don't own. Same with mainframe time. You likely didn't own the mainframe when you were purchasing time on it. The only way a personal computer would be practicle (at least to me) is if it was personal. Same settings, profile, files, etc. And it would likely have to be in my residence. So you can't really have anyone else using it. This doesn't really add up as a concept. Unless microsoft is getting into the Net Cafe business.