Sounds right to me, except for the assumption that link batching would necessarily increase latency. I believe tor already handles asycnronously in most cases and only rotates circuits as needed or about every 10 minutes.

So circuit creation time, generally speaking, should have little effect that the user can see (unless he requests a new circuit through a control app).

I came here to say a lot of this. Especially since, as I have gotten into the devops world myself, and there is a bit of an equalizer in that a lot of the big buzzwords are things that most people have kind of similar and easily obtainable levels of experience with.

Chef hasn't been around so long that there are many people with more than a couple of years epxerience....but its also all done in ruby, which is decently easy to pick up at a basic level, especially if you know perl. You could easily get yourself up to speed, especially with any sysadmin background.

If you can make it through the level of the advanced chef courses, which, seriously, for someone who knows what they are doing we are talking, a few weeks here you could be up to speed with most candidates out there. Which isn't a dig on them at all, its just that, most of the experience from administrative work or writing, running services is directly translatable, its really just a new toolbox to get get familiar with; for someone who can already fill admin and dev shoes, its a very natural move

Hard to say but it will happen eventually. I have seen it go a few years, then lose 2 within a few months. Always make sure monitoring works and will alert you if its degraded. You can run degraded mode for a long time without monitoring.....till the next one fails.

They are mechanical, so manufacturing quality and environment will factor in. My drives likely see a lot of shake and heat being on the third floor of a 100 year old house, between the wind, the washing machine and seasonal heat.... its no data center in here.

Well for starters, the people on Hacker's List apparently. If you really wanted to know who they are, you can, in fact, easily go ask them.

I have been running a 4 disk RAID 5 array for a few years now at home, and did a replacement upgrade a couple of years back.

Overall I find in a 4 disk scenario I lose just a bit less than one disk per year. Maybe one disk every year and a half.

So when you say RAID 0 that is 3 years old, that sounds about right. I would call such an array in serious danger of loss.

>The other reason to regenerate frequently is to limit the window of opportunity for brute force attacks, but that doesn't make much sense either:

Lets not lose sight of the fact that, even doing it only once EVER, even if you then redistribute that result to every future machine you build, is already far better than the status quo.

The current standard appears to be "use the same default ones distributed to everyone else". So really even "each unique machine generates a new set once" is a massive improvement and downgrade to the usefulness of breaking any given prime.

That was my solution too, it took longer to realize it wasn't trickier than that than it did to realize the solution.

Though the solution only works if you assume the earth is a sphere and north means the where the current pole of the planets spin is and not magnetic north. However those are pretty normal assumptions for a brain teaser.

as a gauge of how easy it is I asked my wife since, she isn't someone who has done math for fun or played 1000+ hours of kerbal..... and well her answer was "Why are you asking me this? does this have a point?" Maybe I would have gotten better data after she finished her coffee?

Why when you are not a taxi but a person providing a service out of your own personal transportation?

Just because you want to shoehorn all new services into the same regulation as old ones doesn't mean its justified.

Why need? Because its required for some other older services so you just assume the regulation makes sense here too because you want them to be the same in every way and you can't admit that an existing restriction may not make sense to continue in a new paradigm?

I see no reason why a person deciding to use his personal car occasionally to make some extra cash should require commercial plates. Hell, I could see a stronger case for requiring pizza delivery drivers to have commercial plates, and nobody requires that.

Those are services, if you can't tell the difference between making laws to threaten people with punishment if they don't do what you want and providing a service to people to help those who want it....then i don't know what more I can explain that would be helpful.

Except that isn't the case, individuals are insuring their own cars, and this new offering from the insurance companies is between them and the insurance companies, it has nothing to do with Uber specifically.

In fact, if anything what I don't see is any need for a new law. Existing law clearly already covers it by requiring insurance, and insurance company policies not covering that usage....so where is a law needed where we already have one and already have people working to comply with the ones we have?

I don't have one, I have a competitors product the RSA key, which has no USB port at all, you type in the numbers it gives you. Little LCD screen and a buttion. I don't keep mine on any chain, I carry it seperately from anything else.

However, I have to say, for what it is, I have been quite impressed with its durability, in fact, I would say it sets a standard that few devices I have encountered have met, but most all really should....has it ever been through the wash?

My wife has unceremoniously washed, and dried (not hanging dry, in the electric dryer) my RSA key no less than 3 times. Each time it has stopped working properly for a few hours, occasionally displaying gibberish, but it has always started working ust fine again, and usually the visible water drops under the screen go away within a few days.

After the first couple of times I paniced, I have since decided this is in fact the standard of quality we should expect from more devices.

> And yes, I have heard of that Google thing, but one of the prime tenets of good communication is to not make your audience go elsewhere for fundamental information.

No, I don't think you quite got it there.

However the fundamental tennent of answering a question is actually answering it. If all you have to say is "I know, but I am not going to tell you", you haven't actually communicated anything because knowing that you know is, in every way, equivalent to not knowing at all.

Its not communication at all, its just noise like pans falling down stairs, noise without signal.

So basically a new situation arose specifically around insurance and insurance companies, seeing this new gap are already moving to fill it? So what you are saying is, this problem is self correcting? Nice. Good to hear.

Except for the fact that they were already addicts before they became customers, and that the alternative was that they do what exactly? Tell them to go elsewhere to someone who wouldn't even do that much?

The only evil here is the people who make laws out of ignorance. Idiots who think drug laws work are the true evil and the ones responsible for the entire mess. Its sad that we have to allow prohibitionists to share the clean air and sunshine that the good people of the world enjoy.

They are the ONLY ones to blame here, their policies created exactly the situation they did before. They are the ones who filled our burn units with meth cooks; how many houses went up in flames before prohibitionist scum came along and gave them financial incentive to burn?