Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Way to lose an easy case... (Score 1) 126

by Rich0 (#46786379) Attached to: Lavabit Loses Contempt Appeal

If somebody who didn't do anything bad is suspected of breaking the law, that somebody will have to be investigated, and is well advised to defend himself or herself.

By all means let them provide the investigators with information, but that shouldn't require being physically present in a courtroom at a specified time.

Since you're trying to establish good or bad here rather than legal or illegal, you need to do a lot of investigation and consideration, and get the facts nailed down to make a good decision. That's going to occupy the defendant for some time.

I don't see why it has to. A defendant should only be tried if it is clear they did something wrong.

I'm not suggesting that defendants won't end up spending ANY time resolving issues that come up. However, the system needs to be optimized for their convenience, not the convenience of the court. Also, investigators should be personally liable if they contribute to an investigation that comes to an incorrect conclusion.

I'm fairly confident that this will GREATLY increase the costs of running the courts, but I don't think that jailing the most accused per dollar spent should really be a metric we use to evaluate the performance of the "justice" system.

Comment: Re:In Mother Russa... (Score 1) 351

by Rich0 (#46785043) Attached to: Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance

Well, Snowden is clearly a pawn, but in some sense so is Putin. Why shouldn't Snowden play this game? His goal is to get some accountability for the US surveillance state and rein it in a bit. So he stirs the pot.

Right now the US and EU are struggling to find an approach they can agree on for dealing with Russia. Snowden brings up the NSA which is a sore subject with the EU, making it harder for the US to get them on-board. If the US ends up agreeing to more transparency or less surveillance in order to get the EU to back more sanctions against Russia, how is that a bad deal for anybody but Putin?

Comment: Re:Useful Idiot (Score 1) 351

by Rich0 (#46785019) Attached to: Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance

So you would rather that he should have stayed to be broken like Manning?

A safer, and more intellectually sound, option would be to become an anonymous whistleblower, like Deep Throat / Mark Felt. You don't get the notoriety, but then you also don't become Vladimir Putin's sock puppet when it becomes convenient.

That is REALLY hard to pull off these days. There are only so many people with access to that kind of data, and the NSA/CIA/etc could do quite a bit to try to figure out who he was. If he remained in a country friendly to the US he could have been extradited.

I don't think he went to Russia because he's sympathetic to the Russians. He just knows they would do anything to embarrass the US so they'd be likely to harbor him. This just seems like mutual interest.

Comment: Re:Useful Idiot (Score 1) 351

by Rich0 (#46785009) Attached to: Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance

Well, it might be hypocrisy, but pretty much every nation both engages in espionage and outlaws it at the same time. That's how it has worked since as long as anybody can tell. Some nations admit that they do it, some don't, but they basically all do it anyway. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if the Vatican engaged in espionage.

Comment: Re:Simple problem, simple solution (Score 1) 352

by Rich0 (#46784887) Attached to: San Francisco's Housing Crisis Explained

Sure, it would be easy for people who live in the exurbs to commute to a Google office in their particular exurb, but there just aren't enough potential Google employees to run a Google office living in a single exurb.

Hardly. The office I work at has about 7k people working at, in a suburb 20 miles from the major city (which isn't NYC). It used to have over 10k - mostly with STEM majors. Sure, most of them wouldn't work at Google, but the point is that you can find people with advanced skills in suburbs. Quite a few are willing to drive a fair distance to get there as well, but with a LOT less hassle than a commute into a major city.

Comment: Re:RAID? (Score 1) 239

by Rich0 (#46782333) Attached to: SSD-HDD Price Gap Won't Go Away Anytime Soon

Agree. I run an SSD myself for my OS drive, and RAID for general storage (which keeps the cost WAY down). Things go WAY faster on the SSD, though not quite as fast as I'd expected, actually.

The advantage of RAID1 is in parallel seeks, which is a big advantage if your drives have a lot of reads. However, the latency of any read is still the same so if reads must be sequential they will be slow.

Comment: Re:Way to lose an easy case... (Score 1) 126

by Rich0 (#46781049) Attached to: Lavabit Loses Contempt Appeal

They're going to have to investigate. To work at all efficiently, the courts have to abide by procedures. If you want the judge to handhold people's hands in general, we're going to have to put a lot more money into the court system. This means that the alleged lawbreaker is going to have to do things on the court's schedule, and is going to have to know what sort of arguments to make. I suspect this gets into what you mean by harassment.

I don't see how the one follows from the other. Sure, they need to investigate. I don't see why that requires everybody to show up in a room at the same time. Investigate and figure out whether there is any truth to the defense. If there is, then dismiss charges before wasting time on anything more formal.

Also, saying that the courts should be about justice rather than legality is a dangerous way to go. Laws both restrict and protect you, but they're written down. It would be better to have the courts about legality with an eye to justice. If the courts are given discretion to dispense justice sometimes, they will do so to somebody who makes a clear argument of injustice and is otherwise cooperative. LavaBit was in contempt because they demonstrated contempt for the legal system.

Why should one have respect for the legal system, if it isn't about justice? I'm fine with there being laws as guidelines so that we can all agree on what right/wrong generally looks like. However, following the law should not be an excuse when you do something that harms others, and breaking the law shouldn't be reason to punish somebody who does nobody else harm.

Comment: Re:You can probably thank Microsoft for this... (Score 1) 250

by Rich0 (#46779539) Attached to: Apache OpenOffice Reaches 100 Million Downloads. Now What?

Some of the bigger changes have to do with things like sharepoint integration, which really does work fairly well in newer versions of Office in a corporate setting.

However, it still can be rather buggy, and doesn't play nicely with Chrome unless there is some plugin I'm not aware of (that is, the more web-based parts - if you just directly open a file from Office no browser is involved).

Comment: Re:oh how wrong this is (Score 1) 239

by Rich0 (#46779057) Attached to: SSD-HDD Price Gap Won't Go Away Anytime Soon

A 480GB Crucial M500 is slightly cheaper per GB than a 4TB spinning drive right now. I think the 960GB SSD is as well.

That comparison is meaningless because a 4TB is at a premium price. If you think you need 500GB, use should compare a 500GB HDD with an SSD (480GB being close enough). I can get a 500GB 7200RPM SATA drive for about $50. A Crucial M500 is about $120. The SSD is 140% more costly or 2.4 times the price per GB.

Even that comparison is a poor one. Really this all depends on your mission.

If all you want is an OS drive for your Chromebook/etc, then you want to look at the cost of 16-32GB of SSD and that is as cheap as any hard drive you could get in that size configuration. The SSD is an obvious choice here.

If you want to store your video collection and your options are RAID HD or SSD, then you don't care how big the individual drives are so you look at price per GB. That usually will end up costing $80-110 for the hard drive in any year - the only thing that changes is the size. That will get you about 2-3TB of HD, which is about 4 cents/GB. Compare that to something like 50 cents/GB for SSD. Clearly if you're storing video the SSD is a really bad choice.

When you look at HD prices you need to stay close to $100. You don't save much money by cutting capacity below that, and you don't get much capacity by spending more than that. I'm not as familiar with the dynamics of SSD, but I imagine that they too tend to have a sweet spot, and it only makes sense to compare apples to apples.

Comment: Re:not really (Score 1) 239

by Rich0 (#46778955) Attached to: SSD-HDD Price Gap Won't Go Away Anytime Soon

When 2TB ssd come on the market, you'll see the rest drop in price as well. I'm not quite sure where the author is getting their information. Check the price drops over the last two years and you can see they haven't hit bottom yet.

Sure, but neither have hard drives. The 1TB SSD of tomorrow may very well be competitive with the 1TB HD of today, but will it be competitive against the 64TB HD of tomorrow?

Comment: Re:RAID? (Score 3, Interesting) 239

by Rich0 (#46778935) Attached to: SSD-HDD Price Gap Won't Go Away Anytime Soon

No RAID does not allow HDD to perform as SSDs. RAID increases throughput but it does not decrease access time, which in many cases is fare more important than throughput.

Having a seek time of 8ms when you are working with many small files is a huge hit on performance. The seek time of SSDs is well under a millisecond. RAID does not help this no matter how many disks you stripe.

RAID does not always mean stripe. Mirroring does improve seek performance. It increases the chance that a drive has a head closer to the data you want already (if the implementation is smart enough to be aware of this), and it also allows seeks to occur in parallel (which isn't exactly the same as latency reduction, but is fairly equivalent in practice since drives are almost always busy).

Comment: Re:RAID? (Score 1) 239

by Rich0 (#46778913) Attached to: SSD-HDD Price Gap Won't Go Away Anytime Soon

RAID 0 really only buys you throughput, and I don't think SSD really has any advantage over HD for throughput (I'm open to correction there).

The big difference is in seek time. RAID 1 is what buys you seek time for reads, and of course it has no safety issues. There is nothing that limits RAID 1 to only one mirror either beyond the implementation (mdadm supports any number of mirrors and will divide reads across them). Of course, if you have a RAID1 with 8 drives in it, and write is going to block across all 8 of them.

But, write performance on SSD isn't quite as good as read performance either.

So, I imagine whether RAID competes with SSD is going to depend on the task. Of course, you can always put SSDs in a RAID as well.

Life's the same, except for the shoes. - The Cars

Working...