Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×
Google

Google Caffeine Drops MapReduce, Adds "Colossus" 65

Posted by samzenpus
from the time-to-upgrade dept.
An anonymous reader writes "With its new Caffeine search indexing system, Google has moved away from its MapReduce distributed number crunching platform in favor of a setup that mirrors database programming. The index is stored in Google's BigTable distributed database, and Caffeine allows for incremental changes to the database itself. The system also uses an update to the Google File System codenamed 'Colossus.'"

Comment: Re:*illions lost to piracy, counterfeit goods... (Score 2, Insightful) 283

by Kongzilla (#33119732) Attached to: $200B Lost To Counterfeiting? Back It Up
"You also have to consider that the market price is artificially inflated to "cover the damage" of piracy. Thus, if there was no piracy, the prices would (hypothetically) be lower. " This isn't necessarily true if a competitive market isn't in place. Goods sold under a monopoly regime are typically more highly priced. In this case, piracy and counterfeiting introduce competition into the market, so hypothetically, if there was no piracy, prices would be higher. Your argument holds well enough for fake Gucci bags or Rolex watches, but not so well for creative works, which are monopolies in the economic sense due to their treatment under copyright and patent law.

Comment: Re:oscillation (Score 1) 191

by Kongzilla (#32418062) Attached to: Chameleon-Like Behavior of Neutrino Confirmed
Perhaps someone with more background than I have could explain this, since the argument for neutrinos having mass seems tenuous to me. Neutrinos are thought to have mass because they oscillate, presumably requiring the passage of time, which can only happen at sublight speeds. Yet photons are oscillating electromagnetic fields, and they have no mass and travel at the speed of light. Why do they get a free pass? For that matter, why is it that particles travelling at less than light speed must have mass? This always seems to be presented as a given; is there a line of reasoning behind it that I'm unaware of? Note: IANAP, though I have taken several courses at the undergrad level.

Always try to do things in chronological order; it's less confusing that way.

Working...