I see the exact opposite trend. Netflix is growing by gangbusters, but is the epitome of having many shows that "you aren't paying for". It's not a la carte... at all! You pay a flat rate of $8/month and stream whatever you like.

If you combine horrible customer service, high prices, and synchronized broadcasting, and you have unhappy customers switching to clearly better alternatives. "Paying for channels you don't use" is a symptom. The real problem is that they are horrible companies offering a previous generation, substandard service at ridiculous prices that have risen much faster than inflation.

So the view of the other single wide mobile homes and the washer dryer sets in the front "yard" will be obscured?

  Nevada, for the most part, is dirt and weeds.

As an American, I find the multitudes of taxes, fees, charges, and other blood sucking extortion schemes run by Government to be bizarre.

Of of them tried, but were slapped with gag orders so they couldn't even mention it to anyone.

Since when did Google test android apps?

... Right because Redmond doesn't know anything about forcing a tablet style UI on desktop/laptop users and having it fail utterly.

While theres nothing wrong with a Chromebook, pretending its going to take over the world is kind of silly.

Native Client ... REALLY? Let me put a VM in your VM so you can run VMs ...

This may sound like a great idea, but I suspect you'll find after using it a minor amount that its not all that great in reality.

You don't know Microsoft very well, then. They've literally never done anything else!

1) They were late to the party with DOS. They ripped off QDOS and sold it to IBM. It was IBM who launched Microsoft, it was Microsoft's non-exclusive contract with IBM that allowed the IBM compatible market to begin. That had never been done before, and only happened because IBM didn't take the microcomputer seriously.

2) They were late to the party for GUI. Windows was quickly thrown together after trying to work together with IBM and deciding to be dicks to IBM and steal lots of their design work.

3) Windows '95 was a rebrand of "Windows". So was Windows CE ME NT, XP, Vista, Mobile, and RT. In a sense, Windows 7 is the first "debranding" of Windows back to its marketing roots.

4) Microsoft goes through a major change in structure every 2-5 years. It's always made the tech rags, all the way back to the 1980s.

5) Their now dominant office was a rebrand of their MS Word, Excel, and Power Point, which were sold separately.

6) Each of these Office products was a late comer in its field, in part winning due to strange incompatibilities encountered by the "other guys". Remember the phrase "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run". Lotus 123 was the leading spreadsheet at the time.

and so on.... Just don't pretend that this BS is anything *new*. Market conditions were right, and MS had a combination of luck and determination to make the best of it. The market conditions have changed remarkably.

You're not really understanding how ZFS does and can work. It already has hooks to provide 'features' such as you talk about. It does require crossing several traditional Unix boundaries, thats true, but its an accepted trade off to get the benefits that go with ZFS, but the hooks to include such features at the typical boundary points still exist in the ZFS code. Pretending that ZFS has to be totally and completely aware of what you hook in isn't really fair. What you hook in has to integrate with the API, which is well defined, and that really isn't any different than with the approach you seem to prefer.

And for reference: dm-cache and cache are not needed with ZFS, l2arc already covers them, and it does it better because it knows whats going on across all 3 layers. I seem to have no problem doing iscsi sharing of ZFS storage space nor do I seem to have any problem using iscsi targets as part of zdevs. Hell, technically you can still use dm-cache and bcache with ZFS, if you're ignorant enough to do so. You can even run whatever file system you want on top of zvols. You'd be stupid to do it in most cases, but the ability is there if need be.

Since you want to use the word Unix, lets get a few things clear. Linux is not and likely never will have a Unix certification. Sun on the other hand had two operating systems that were certified Unix and they were doing it before Linus had a computer to start Linux on. Drop the 'my OS does it right' bullshit because your OS isn't what you're claiming it to be, and the system you arguing against was written by people who did make something you're claiming it isn't.

I don't disagree with the Unix tradition in the least, compartmentalized code with strong boundaries and good interoperablility where ever possible ... and occasionally you tear down the walls for specific reasons. Graphical performance is an example where your philosophy sucks, which is why Windows kicks the ever living shit out of Linux performance. Note: Linux, NOT Unix. SGI had a terrific graphics stack as an example, and Sun's wasn't too horrible.

Scrubbing doesn't thrash your CPU as much as it thrashes I/O. Remember that both I/O and CPU are part of your "load average". This would be expected; it's reading every block on every device in your system.

You're right about the memory; I've forgotten that detail since RAM is cheap. 1 GB per TB is the recommended amount, though I've worked with far less in practice in low/medium write load environments.

Being in the midst of trying to control mine, here is a basic explanation provided by my Endocrinologists with some help from Wikipedia.

It all comes down to the Renin–angiotensin system.

When the Kidneys think they don't have enough fluid volume to do their job, they send out signals that ultimately come back to themselves, causing them to retain salt and ditch potassium. Water, naturally, follows the salt and results in increased blood volume and subsequently, pressure. That's why many BP meds contains diuretics.

Too much salts mucks up all the complex feedback mechanisms.

Something that is apparently under diagnosed is a condition called Aldosteronism, where the adrenal glands make too much of a hormone called aldosterone, a primary messenger in this cycle. Aldosterone levels are not part of the standard blood workup done by your average family physician and diagnosing the condition requires a special, hours long process. It's is kind of a Zebra in diagnostic terms but is looking more and more like a horse.

So if you are afflicted with High BP and you're not having much luck controlling it, ask your doctor about aldosterone levels. High BP that is a result of this condition is more dangerous in the long term, but possibly curable by suppressing the aldosterone or removing one of the adrenal glands.

There are so many pros for ZFS that I don't even. Until you try it, you won't "get it" - it's more like trying to describe purple to a life long blind guy. But, I'd adjust your list to at least include:

Pros:
- Data integrity
- Effortless handling of failure scenarios (RAIDZ makes normal RAID look like a child's crayon drawing)
- Snapshots.
- Replication. Imagine being able to DD a drive partition without taking it offline, and with perfect data integrity.
- Clones. Imagine being able to remount an rsync backup from last tuesday, and make changes to it, in seconds, without affecting your backup?
- Scrub. Do an fsck mid-day without affecting any end users. Not only "fix" errors, but actually guarantee the accuracy of the "fix" so that no data is lost or corrupted.
- Expandable. Add capacity at any time with no downtime. Replace every disk in your array with no downtime, and it can automatically use the extra space.
- Redundancy, even on a single device! Can't provide multiple disks, but want to defend against having a block failure corrupting your data?
- Flexible. Imagine having several partitions in your array, and be able to resize them at any time. In seconds. Or, don't bother to specify a size and have each partition use whatever space they need.
- Native compression. Double your disk space, while (sometimes) improving performance! We compressed our database backup filesystem and not only do we see some 70% reduction in disk space usage, we saw a net reduction in system load as IO overhead was significantly reduced.
- Sharp cost savings. ZFS obviates the need for exotic RAID hardware to do all the above. It brings back the "Inexpensive" in RAID. (Remember: "Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks"?)

Cons:
- CPU and RAM overhead comparable to Software RAID 5.
- Requires you to be competent and know how it operates, particularly when adding capacity to an existing pool.
- ECC RAM strongly recommended if using scrub.
- Strongly recommended for data partitions, YMMV for native O/S partitions. (EG: /)

Which is why he said right sizing instead of downsizing, just because you have that sort of position doesn't mean you aren't aware of it.

:( No doubt, why are we not focusing on this bastard! Why does this guy get nothing, not even a ANY slap on the wrist!

Because has dirt on everyone in Washington, thats why.

... It probably had more to do with visiting a convicted member of a terrorist organization IN PRISON that they considered to be a lie.

Having been through this particular type of interview process, they'll hint at you what they know giving you plenty of opportunity to own up to anything like that, incase you legitimately forget. In my experience going through the process, twice, you really do have to lie to have an issue.

No, but when you deny knowing the pastor when asked, red flags go off.

Every member of a Seal team (as an easy example) has certainly associated with someone who was 'dedicated to the use of violence' and attempting to overthrow the us government by loose definitions. That doesn't make them untouchable.

If they claimed they never knew anyone who was dedicated to the use of violence, THAT IS ANOTHER STORY.

Having worked for the government and filled out these same forms, all you have to do is answer honestly. I too know members of both groups (violence and anarchy/overthrow the government). I know KKK members, and I'm fairly certain I know a former member of the black panthers, though he won't admit it.

That didn't stop me from getting the job, because I told them. In fact, I told them more than they could find! And they found some things I forgot to mention, but as soon as they made the slightest mention of it, and I remembered, I TOLD THEM FULL DETAILS. Thats all it took.

Its not even a little bit hard unless you're intentionally trying to cover up something, and thats where they get pissy.