Comment: Self-Serving? (Score 4, Interesting) 115
Comment: Re:DDOS by any other name (Score 1) 148
Comment: Re:OT: You are mostly wrong (Score 1) 515
Comment: Re:Nothing new here (Score 2) 253
Comment: Re:Never? (Score 1) 267
While I cannot think of a scenario that would warrant wireless service shutdown I'm sure there are some. I'm also pretty sure that those situations would be severe enough that they should also probably shut down passenger service as well.
Comment: Re:Pirated and still paid for tickets (Score 5, Insightful) 663
The reason The Avengers succeeded where other movies performed poorly is because it was a special and unique movie. Specifically, it was a good movie that lots of people wanted to see.
Sincerely,
Me.
Comment: Re:QLab? (Score 1) 120
Comment: Re:Forget this garbage (Score 4, Informative) 323
Comment: Re:Why? (Score 1) 297
I wholeheartedly agree. The question isn't if a drive is going to go bad, the question is when will a drive go bad. Just accept that the drive will go bad and be prepared for it with redundancy. In my experience, the MTBF has a very high variance. It's either going to fail within four weeks or last more than four years. Keep your eye on the S.M.A.R.T. stats. Reallocation of sectors is a very bad omen of pending drive failure.
One other thing I haven't seen mentioned is the difference between consumer drives and server drives. Consumer drives will go through Herculean efforts to silently recover from media errors. The host computer is often never aware of it. Server drives will report errors back to the host computer sooner with the expectation that RAID subsystems want to know about media problems sooner rather than later.