Re: Own hypervisor
Turtles, all the way down.
836 posts • joined 4 Jun 2007
Turtles, all the way down.
That doesn't look so bad. It's probably more nutritious than what my university cafeteria served, and it might even taste better.
And cricket is, let's face it, barely a sport at all.
Craig Brittain, Craig Brittain, Craig Brittain
(best if read in Morgan Freeman's voice)
My experience with the CS degree requirement was that it's BS. I was certainly brought in for interviews for positions that nominally required qualifications I didn't possess such as a four-year CS degree; I can no longer remember the specific qualifications for the jobs I've worked at, otherwise I would say I was hired despite my lack of on-paper qualifications. On the other hand, having a degree or certification is useful for checking certain boxes when you either lack experience or are facing hot competition for a position.
I, for one, await the many enlightened and tolerant posts sure to ensue in this thread.
'As for simplicity because it's "just Ethernet" I'd say FC is way harder for newbies to get wrong. Just plug it all in and it's normally good enough. ISCSI on the other hand needs all sorts of fettling to get it performing correctly.'
Pull the other one, mate, it's got bells on.
Tape is easy to eliminate, as long as you don't have any regulatory obligations or other needs to archive data over a long period. Otherwise, tape is still king for archival storage.
Yes. Yes, it definitely has. You should take your iPad to the nearest large body of water or open volcano and throw it in. iPads have been known to float, especially if running iOS 7 or later, so be sure to weight it down with a large amount of a highly dense substance such as gold. Before doing so, you should be sure to wipe all the data that might have come in contact with it, of course, including all cloud backups. You can never be too careful!
Not only do we know how to pronounce aluminum, we know how to spell it correctly!
"How does it help me to have a driverless car to get me from Milton Keynes bus station up to the shopping centre [...]"
Let's be honest, don't you have worse things to deal with already? Try counting the concrete cows to calm down.
Uhhhh . . . what? The big names out there are companies like EMC and Symantec, which are most certainly not funded by venture capital!
From what I can tell, the main reason that there are so many backup vendors is that most backup technology has significant limitations in terms of speed, cost, flexibility, usability, etc., so there's no good one-size-fits-all solution even for a particular market segment, leaving lots of room for competition.
It's very interesting that the same pressure is not brought to bear on incumbent taxi services. Because lord knows taxi drivers are never abusive, incompetent, drunk, dangerous, crooked, or otherwise hazardous. Having used traditional taxis for years and Uber more recently, I can tell you where my preference lies, surge pricing aside.
Have fun trying to shoot "The Google." PROTIP: I bet Larry and Sergei can afford to buy better marksmen than you.
Upvoted for excellent rantiness.
On the point about price for raw flash capacity, it's always worth asking what your immediate loss to provisioned overhead will be. For example, what RAID level are you going to implement, and what ratio of data disk to parity will you use? Going with a VMAX deployment, for example, you will lose 25% of raw capacity immediately to parity, assuming you use the recommended 3+1 configuration, which drives the cost per usable GB up into Pure's raw cost territory. Pure is counting on their array logic to bring that price down, and they seem to be able to do so, although with what effectiveness is unpredictable, which would also make Pure arrays challenging to manage, given that one might have a hard time knowing when the array is actually going to fill up.
 And how.
It was obvious that my FF installation had been changed to Yahoo! (without my consent) when the search results started to mysteriously suck.
I was going to make the same comment. It probably makes for excellent excuse fodder, though: "We've got a BSOD on the PDC, so we need to TTFO it PDQ so we can see if it's DOA."
"Why not upgrade?"
So what does App Graph actually do? From the horse's mouth: “collecting the list of applications you have installed”, so it can (of course) “build a more personal Twitter experience for you” to “deliver tailored content that you might be interested in”.
In short, the application is collecting data about what you have installed and sending it back to Twitter for the data to be analyzed so that more focused ads can be served. On Android, they at least have the defense that the user agreed to that particular "feature" when installation Twitter; on iOS, not so much.
While I agree with your assessment of Twitter as a <cough> "platform," I think you have misunderstood the scope of the issue. In this case, Twitter is to be applauded for revealing that Android allows this kind of malfeasance.
An even shittier version of Amazon Video with ads? Sign me up!
I'm sure that Destroy All Monsters and Matt Bryant will be along shortly to tell me how wrong I am, but this is exactly the sort of thing that union representation is for: collective bargaining on behalf of an unskilled or semi-skilled workforce. I hope that it signals a boost in the visibility of unionization throughout Silicon Valley, the USA, and the world. Workers, especially workers with limited means and education, deserve the power that unionization and collective bargaining agreements bring them. It's time for the power of unions to rebound and spread throughout the world.
Most people . . . apart from hipsters and the elderly.
Because a) they wouldn't be able to afford it and b) if they could, it would have been stolen along with everything else from the looted corpse. Also, c) the coffee shop was looted and burned years ago.
What's needed is some sort of head-mounted induction plate so you can charge the phone while you're talking on the phone. It might make your head warm, but that could be a feature!
How can you tell when a storage vendor is lying? When the spokesman's lips are moving.
This artificial distinction between "software-based" and "software-defined" is a case in point. It serves no purpose but to muddy the waters. Most storage arrays offer programmatic or API-level access; the question is, what is the hardware dependency? To my mind, "software-defined" means that the logical units of storage (volumes, containers, whatever) and any higher-level storage functions are governed by a control plane that is not dependent on a particular vendor's hardware, so I can drop the control software in a VM or on white box hardware and manipulate vendor-independent storage with it instead of having to pay for a particular array. That's it. Obviously, the individual vendors want to define "software-defined" as whatever suits their needs. (Now, one could argue that Nutanix is not SDS on that basis, and I would say that it falls into a gray area, where the storage is technically software-defined but tied to a particular vendor's architecture.)
Personally, I could give a rat's ass, I just want the vendors to be up-front with their product's limitations. I'm filled to the brim with storage buyer's remorse, so they can all die in a fire as far as I'm concerned (with one notable exception, who I won't name so as not to be called a shill by the usual suspects).
The problem is not just one of income disparity (software engineers, CEOs, and other tech employees receiving orders of magnitude more income than workers in other fields), although that issue is significant, it's one of outflow. Because the Silicon Valley economy has so many highly-paid employees in tech and related fields (e.g., IP lawyers), prices for all goods rise. The well-to-do don't feel those price rises especially, but the people barely scraping by definitely do. Housing tops the list by a country mile, but the issue with housing is not just one of income disparity (demand), it's also a question of supply. San Francisco proper exists within a 49 square mile grid, and there's a limit to how much it even can be built up, to say nothing of all the issues caused by anti-growth crusaders. South of San Francisco, however, dwellers on the Peninsula and in the South Bay have made themselves a big part of the problem. From South San Francisco to San Jose, try finding more than a handful of residential buildings outside of downtown San Jose that are taller than three stories. Housing in and for the Valley has been artificially constrained by growth limits, while demand continues to grow, both in terms of population and income, meaning that there's no choice but for housing costs to spiral ever upward. It's all well and good to claim that someone should build more housing (and more housing is constantly being built), but the anti-growth laws on the books throughout the Bay Area are ruinous for the poor.
If the tech CEOs really want to do something helpful, they can lean on the mayors and city councils throughout the Bay Area to remove growth limits and fund improved public transportation. Rather than contributing handouts, they can contribute political will and financial capital towards fixing the one dominant issue that makes the Bay Area so expensive. They can also pay their damn taxes.
Free . . . you mean like The Register?
. . . resulting, presumably, in an uptick in the sales of short range cellular jammers.
"The company has recently changed its CEO to Frankie Roohparvar, with co-founder Radoslav Danilak giving up that position to become the CTO."
Chris, don't lie: you just made those names up to see if we're paying attention.
How else would you construct that sentence:
". . . ever to leave in the back of a truck a Samsung assembly plant"? Awkward.
". . . ever to leave, in the back of a truck, a Samsung assembly plant"? Even more awkward.
". . . ever to leave a Samsung assembly plant, in the back of a truck"? Incorrect use of a dependent clause.
For anyone with even the minutest grasp of context, the sentence is perfectly clear. You could, I suppose, write "ever to depart a Samsung assembly plant in the back of a truck," but the assiduous pedant will still find a way to misconstrue it.
(My point with that snide response being that it's not major news when some no-name company cranks out a niche piece of technology; it is major news when, say, Apple does it.)
Actually, this is precisely Apple's Faust. They've chosen to deal with the devil (B of A), and exchanged their soul for wealth and power. When you sup with the devil, make sure you dine with a long spoon.
Yes, he was trying to say, "Don't worry your pretty little heads about asking for raises. The men above you will let you know what you're worth."
And we care because . . . ?
Well, right now, his chances are somewhere south of 1 in 300 million, so he must be very cautious indeed if he's concerned about danger to himself!
Maybe, just maybe, he asked the CDC how much they needed, and that's the number they gave him. Or, possibly, he used some other algorithm. Given, as posted above, he's donating more than many entire governments, I'd say it's still generous. Also, perhaps by making an announcement, he's hoping to motivate others to donate as well.
No, you're right, the only possible answer is that it's self-aggrandizement.
"I'm LEAVING the internet as fast as I can"
Clearly not fast enough . . .
"Well, I can see this relationship is something we're all going to have to work at."
. . . it gave me a chance to downvote Matt Bryant a bunch more. I'd previously skipped the porta-potty article altogether.
Is anyone running Hyper-V at a scale where this would be useful? I'm genuinely curious; I've never met anyone running Hyper-V for more than proof-of-concept (and then discarding it).
I am not a network engineer, but I'll take my best shot. IP (Internet Protocol) is basically Layer 3 of the OSI model, which means it can run on top of Ethernet (or whatever your data link protocol is), and it can carry anything from higher up the networking stack. In practice, there are some additional complexities with higher-level protocols and applications, especially those that use IP addresses instead of host names, but a lot of applications should just work. The biggest problem is getting a significant chunk of network infrastructure to run IPv6. Not only does the protocol itself need to be deployed, but addressing schemes need to be vetted, routing and firewall rules implemented, and all the inevitable snafus need to be ironed out. Logistically, it's a significant challenge, probably more than it is a technical one, and it involves a tremendous amount of time and expense, and it requires IPv6 expertise that is not very widespread at the moment, which means that more mistakes than normal will be made along the way, resulting in reputational damage to the implementers.
Beyond all of that, there are plenty of endpoints that either don't run IPv6 still (think: printers) or run it poorly (Windows XP), which means that ISPs and other network providers will need to run in a hybrid mode, employing NAT or protocol tunneling, to support the legacy protocol until the final consumers make the migration. Which, of course, means that the consumers need to be educated and migrated, not so bad when you have a well-educated user base (or at least a captive and docile one), but daunting when you consider how many users will need to be wrangled into compliance and how few of them will even understand why.
So, it's not quite as hard as rebuilding the Internet, but it's still no small task.
"And we tend to be a lot more tolerant of such disruptive and potentially destructive upgrades. Architecturally, as we move to more storage-as-software as opposed to being software wrapped in hardware, this is going to be more common, and we are going to have design infrastructure and applications to cope with this."
If a storage vendor tells me that their upgrade is data-destructive, I'll be planning my transition to a new vendor; that's how I'll deal with it architecturally.
Not to go off on a tangent, but the "software-defined" moniker is somewhat misleading. All advanced storage and networking (anything beyond a JBOD or network hub) relies on software to get its job done. The real shift is towards software that doesn't rely on a particular fixed set of hardware to get its job done, a shift which is mostly complete except in the storage world (and, arguably, in core Layer 2/3 networking, where dedicated hardware is still sensible). What the storage vendors are grappling with, more than anything else, is how to hold onto their ludicrous margins in an industry where so much other hardware is commodity.
No, just using the wrong icon. -->
"I don't need citations. I have first hand experience."
"Data" is not the plural of "anecdote." My experience teaches me that Reg commentards are a bunch of whiny little crybabies who can't deal with the remotest possibility that a woman might have authority or competence, but I don't generalize my experience to all men.
I figured that some cretinous MRA would pop in here, and I could have guessed it would have been you. In re: all of your baseless assertions:
Difficulty: must be a reputable source. I won't hold my breath.
One what, one continent, Congresscritter, replacement clone body? I'm dying to know!