Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:EMC compliance (Score 3, Informative) 811

According to wikipedia ( I know I know ) Salt Lake City uses MM wave and not backscatter. Either way they microwaved and damaged a piece of medical equipment after assuring the user that it was perfectly save for that equipment. Unlike an implanted medical device the insulin pump would be susceptible to MM scans.

Comment Re:What an arrogant ass... (Score -1) 195

You want semantics.

LightSquared does not interfere with GPS transmitters and GPS receivers with proper filter are not affected either. The FCC ruling admits that the utility of the GPS receivers outweigh the right to use the adjacent bands ( even with buffers ) for alternate uses because manufacturers didn't install proper filtering on the receivers.

Comment Re:Oh come on. (Score 0) 195

The basic fact is GPS was in violation of their part B license first. LightSquare would be able to operate if it were not for the GPS industry cheaping out on their filters. The FCC ruling is a tough one since they are forced to take the side of a ubiquitous service which is in violation of their license or rule for the startup that could potentially bring competition to the broadband market nationwide.

Comment It's more than piracy (Score 5, Interesting) 516

Studios live on a strong distribution model where they control the vast majority of the content and the distribution channels. Any tool that is viable for "piracy" is also viable by independent distributors as well. While I don't condone copyright infringement I think studios are more interested in their long term viability than to protect their content from "piracy". I expect similar behavior from the major publishing houses in the next couple of years as ebooks break their hold on the distribution channels.

Comment Re:fsck speed, want safety (Score 4, Informative) 196

Backups simply are not really an option past 20+ terabytes of storage, and simply not feasible if the storage is volatile in nature. AFAIK everyone has gone to redundancy over backups at scale.

200TB/130TB usable clustered/distributed system with 4x LTO5 drives and we do a full snapshot to tape every week. With data that size you either pay up-front for proper engineering or you pay for the life of the system for poor performance and eventual cleanup of the mess.

Comment Re:Why bother? (Score 3, Interesting) 196

Our BTRFS evaluation resulted in rejecting it for some very serious problems ( what they claim are snapshots are actually clones, panic in low memory situations, no fsck, horrible support tools, developers who are hostile to criticism, pre-release software, ... ). ZFS was nice, but limited to non-distributed systems and still had a non-trivial amount of volume and backend management headaches. Personally I use ZFS for my personal servers at home ( incremental snapshots are the bomb ) but out production systems needed more.

Slashdot Top Deals

Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.

Working...