Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Honestly... (Score 4, Insightful) 396

by More_Cowbell (#39082487) Attached to: Do you like your cell phone?
You are currently marked 'Insightful', and I would agree with the mods, in that your comment IS Insightful. I actually agree with much if it - however in this context (as a reply to the GP) it is almost, if not completely off-topic. Which is sort of ironic, since it proves the GP comment all the more accurate! (yes, I get he or she was going for humor, but the point was still accurate).
Take all time constraints out of the picture if you must and compare an asynchronous verbal exchange of anything resembling nuanced conversation to one in text, and you can not help but notice the failings of the latter. Enter a few more variables into the mix, say one party is texting the other and is using heavy sarcasm for effect, and the other is unfamiliar with the first persons habits... you have a recipe for disaster, as I have seen in person many times. There are so many cues in verbal communication that come from tone, cadence, and other aspects I'm missing, that are nearly impossible to communicate through text, it's not even a close race. (admittedly html helps a tiny bit)

Comment: Re:Hand gestures (Score 3, Informative) 295

by More_Cowbell (#35618564) Attached to: Top French Chess Players Suspended For Cheating
Possibly, but it's not like it was how they were caught, so does it matter?
From TFA:

The alleged strategy was discovered by French chess federation Vice President Joanna Pomian, who spotted a text message on the mobile phone of one of the three players while the French team was involved in a game.

Comment: Re:Efficiency (Score 1) 405

by More_Cowbell (#35413678) Attached to: The Car Faster Than a Speeding Bullet
When under way, I'd have to agree with your doubts. Did a little reading, and from what I can tell maintaining 20 knots (at least for the ships I read about) would get somewhere between 15 and 24 feet per gallon. That said, these carriers don't shut their engines off, and the efficiency is obviously going to drop to zero if they are stationary... http://www.envirosagainstwar.org/know/read.php?itemid=593 http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA231847&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

Comment: Re:Goodbye Orwell (Score 2) 124

by More_Cowbell (#34734694) Attached to: Replacing Traditional Storage, Databases With In-Memory Analytics

I work for a large (global) web hosting company, and I'd just like to counter the 'low cost of RAM' idea... Yes, most RAM is cheap, but when you start looking at 'large data sets', cheap is a relative term.

For example, the HP DL580 G7 can hold a Terabyte of RAM, but to do so it uses 16GB DIMMs, at $1000 each. http://h30094.www3.hp.com/product/sku/5100299/mfg_partno/500666-B21

When you add that up, it's $64,000 just for RAM in ONE server. And we don't sell it to you, (in fact we only lease it from HP ourselves) we add a ridiculous additional monthly charge to your bill, well above what it costs us. Also keep in mind, anybody spending that kind of money has a multiple times redundant system... So, no, I would not call it 'low cost'.

Mathemeticians stand on each other's shoulders while computer scientists stand on each other's toes. -- Richard Hamming

Working...