I've worked for multiple Fortune 500 companies. All used spinning tape. And nearly everywhere I've worked has used tape. It's cheaper and easier to buy tapes. You sound like a salesman, but I've never seen the numbers work for an off-site storage, Tapes are cheaper than hard drive storage, and more controlable (having them physically stored where you want, restoring only what you want, good for lawsuits).

SSD for boot/OS/swap, and slow spinner for data gives 99% of the performance for 99% of people. And cheap spinners are much cheaper than cheap SSDs. Sadly, there was a time, 2-5 years ago when you could find laptops with spare mSATA slots, and a spinner in them. Put an SSD in the mSATA slot, and biggest drive possible in the spinner slot, and get huge storage for cheap cost.

Though, one of the ones I got then, had the mSATA already holding a 20GB SSD, set up as a cache for the slow spinner. It runs surprisingly well, especially if you run the same things repeatedly. 100% of the performance of SSD for 95% of what you do. And cheaper than the 256GB/1TB I am running in my laptop.

Why charge anyone? Civil forfeiture of all assets held by Intel, MS, and anyone associated with making any of the servers or owning any of the servers in this case. When civil forfeiture is used as broadly as used in the drug war, it would be ended quickly.

Nope. If everyone voted for different third parties, then that would gum up the works enough to trouble the main parties, and if a 3rd party saw an opening, it would form a real policy, kinda like the LP keeps thinking will happen, but without all the 'shrooms.

If it is as non-sequitur as your posts, it's a waste of everyone's time.

There is a misunderstanding here.
Light does not behave both as a wave and a particle.
Light behaves only as a wave, with peculiar properties, called quantum waves.
Light is always a wave-packet extended out in space, not localized into a very limited domain as a particle would be, but it always interacts or collapses and disappears as a particle, at a single location, as a quantum jump or quantum transition of suddenness a pointlike point in space. That's all.
They only way to get a continuous-like energy transmission out of light is to have many such "atoms" of energy act like they are an infinitesimal and continuous phenomena, just like pressure on an engine cylinder piston might seem like some smooth, continuous uniform function, but in reality, according to the kinetic theory of gases, or even observable under the microscope as the Brownian motion, the force on the cylinder piston is actually quantized and happens in jumps, in a sort of non-smooth, non-differentiable mathematical function way, when you inspect the devil in the details part.

Light is a quantum wave, not a quantum particle, nor a continuous smoothly variable wave.
Which is what Max Planck came up with as the only possible answer to solve the ultraviolet catastrophy paradox.
He never said light was a particle, in that it is limited to a point like region of space.
That's all the double slit experiment proves:
Light or electrons or all quantum waves (we customarily call quantum particles) are:
1. Extended and spread out in space as they travel about as spread out waves in between quantum interactions, including they self diffract, i.e. they only interact with themselves.
2. Every time they interact with other particles, or in ways we call "quantum transitions" they seem to pick a seemingly random point to do it at, based on probabilities as far as we can describe, and they interact in a very sudden way in a very limited infinitesimal point like point in space, which causes their wave function collapse suddenly everywhere else, including halfway across the galaxy and all come together concentrated in on local point, and as a consequence give birth to another quantum thing, which may be spread out in space freely traveling about, like the electron was before in the double slit electron, or it may give rise to a "captured", limited to a very local domain of vibration, but still not infinitesimally small along the lines of a wavefunction collapse interaction, but still somewhat extended in space, such as stuck in an electron shell in an atom, or inside the nucleus in a weird way, an electron joined with a proton and antineutrino giving a neutron, but it's more complicated than that, instead we ascribe it as quarks, an electron is one configuration of quarks, a proton another, etc, quarks being 1/3, 2/3 in value, and only combinations of quarks that yield whole numbers are allowed, or something like that.

So there is no wave-particle duality, in that quantum particles have wave tasting properties such as diffraction, and they have particle tasting properties, such as momentum, or quantumness. All there is is a single contraption called a quantum wave, which is neither a quantum particle limited in space as it gets around, nor a continuous wave that spreads out as it gets around, including it interacts in a spread out and continuous fractional way. Not possible. Quantum waves travel about spread out, and every time they interact with something other than themselves, they do so suddenly, at an infinitesimal local point which withdraws the spread out parts and annihilates them suddenly even from halfway across the galaxy distance, at speeds faster than the speed of light. We don't know what triggers a collapse, the most we know is statistics and probabilities. For now.

I believe that they'd just be more open about their vote tampering. The closed ballot leads to massive fraud. Tee margin of error has been larger than the vote difference for many recent elections. And the solution to that, supported by both Democrats and Republicans, over 3rd parties, was electronic voting.

And they've been doing the "punish the 3rd party" method for years. The only 3rd party in recent history to make all 50 states ballots was apparently the LP for one presidential election. 3rd party candidates who were not party candidates made it, Ross Perot and Patrick Buchanan were on all 50, but were presumed Republicans, despite no official party membership.

Are you saying they could work? You seem to have a closed mind, and are looking for confirmation of your opinions, with strong selection bias. My read of you is that there's nothing I could say, and nobody I could cite that could change your mind. As you imply you didn't read past seeing the first thing you could find objectionable, that proved the point I made. That there exists no cite I could have given that you'd believe, if it contradicted your personal opinion.

Would you like citations about what it is that contradict the Wikipedia page?

Would you like citations that increased minimum wage increases jobs more than increasing the pay of the upper management?

What of what I mentioned would you like to see cites of?

[citation needed] is a ploy by closed-minded bigots to waste the time of the "enemy" for things they won't read anyway. You didn't cite anything that supported you, either. Just linked to something that isn't much more than a definition, but certainly didn't say anything like what you implied.

Anyone who demands citations for "Voodoo Economics" should be 12 or under. Despite Bush deriding it, he practiced it, along with his son. We've had it for many years, and the result is that it harms the economy. Increasing the minimum wage increases the number of jobs. Increasing the pay spread between the lowest paid and highest paid people in a company (expecting some trickle-down), has been shown to decrease jobs.

But citations don't work. No true scotsman is the standard response, and then the rhetorical games begin that end with the true statement that "Tobacco has never been proven to cause cancer." We only have a correlation that smoking causes cancer, and there's never been a "pure" study done on it (mainly because of ethical issues, but also some practical issues). So someone could still claim that smoking doesn't cause cancer, and you can't prove them wrong. Voodoo Economics is in the same camp. It's been shown wrong many times, but can't be "proven" wrong in a purely scientific method because the supporters of it wander off into Rhetorical Games territory.

Vote 3rd party. But everyone considers that a waste. If everyone did that, we'd have real change, but nobody will. When you are surrounded by dumb people, democracy is the worst form of government. The solution is to move.

Fox News gets facts right because there are so few of them. Most of the programming is "opinion" shows that don't count facts. Wrong opinions, "I think that humans are descended from Thetans" or "a clear sky is a brilliant vermilion" don't count for the total.

One can't help but count opinions as facts, when doing something automated, so I'd expect Fox News to get a lower rank because of errors, even if errors of opinion.

Yes, it is.

There are about 10,000 known objects in "Earth's orbit" The orbit isn't cleared. I've seen numbers for similar numbers for the other planets. The arbitrary rule in that is that the sum of same-orbit objects should be under 0.01% of the mass of the clearing object, or something along those lines. Again, we have to put some arbitrary line in there, because no absolute ever works.

Every rule is arbitrary, so it comes down to which arbitrary do you prefer?

(true) 2+2=4, (wrong) global warming is a lie, (true) Al Gore was VP. You mix deliberate lies in surrounded by irrelevant truths, to increase the truthiness of the page.

No, we want a quick way to do a 100% reboot

I'm an IOS developer and I've never had to do anything more than a device reset (which is instant). Usually powering off and on is enough (though not as quick, it's still pretty quick at around a minute total).

If that's really your reason it's even more absurd.

The resource allocation in this case is time thinking or talking about it.