Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: 11 Trillion Gallons of Water Needed to Water R (Score 1) 321

by afidel (#48615269) Attached to: 11 Trillion Gallons of Water Needed To End California Drought

That's too high, most estimates are ~80-100 gallons per person per day, average houshold size is 2.6 so that puts you closer to 100,000 gallons per household per year. I also question how those estimates are so high, my family of 4 averages closer to 50 gallons per day at home based on our water bill and we don't do anything extreme, we take regular baths, wash our clothes by machine wash, run the dishwasher every other day on average, brush our teeth twice a day, etc. The only "conservation" effort we put into water is not watering our lawn, in fact I drilled out the restrictor in my shower head because I HATE low flow showers and I believe I've got an old school high GPF toilet since my house is from 1963 and most things have not been updated in it.

Comment: Re:Question doesn't match (Score 1) 240

by afidel (#48585139) Attached to: Is Enterprise IT More Difficult To Manage Now Than Ever?

I doubt it was new then, either. Businesses don't like to spend money, and IT gets classified as a cost center.

Then your IT department needs to become a business partner and enabler. That's the tact we've taken, the vast majority of our costs are in projects, and we let the business drive those with us helping to steer them, if someone complains about IT spending we ask them which of their projects they want us to defund. We recently completed an acquisition equal to about 40% of the size of the company, without adding any significant headcount, all because our IT systems have gotten to the point where the business can absorb that many extra units without adding significantly to their workload and the work around the new assets is mostly loading the data into the system which we do for them. Since we've taken this approach our budget issues have become almost non-existent and our interaction with the business have become much less adversarial.

Comment: Re:Power failure to the computer (Score 2) 68

by afidel (#48584355) Attached to: Computer Error Grounds Flights In the UK

So stupid, it's not hard to achieve damn near 100% uptime on power, get feeds from two substations A and B, put each one through two UPS's and use two different sets of generators with different fuel sources as backup so you have A, A', B, and B', use a transfer switch to feed your equipment's A side supply from A with A' in reserve, and the B side supply from B' and have B in reserve (that way one of your power sources stays up without a transfer switchover even if you have a fuel problem). If you want to further reduce the chances of an outage at the cost of some increased complexity use different UPS vendors and different transfer switch vendors so you don't have a possible common design flaw in both paths. The whole setup would probably cost as much as shutting down Heathrow for around 10 minutes. I've got this setup minus the redundant generators and I'm just running a midsized enterprise, not a freaking critical piece of national (and international) infrastructure.

Comment: Re:The trend in servers seems to be "lousy cooling (Score 2) 24

by afidel (#48570599) Attached to: Liquid Cooling On the Rise As Data Centers Crunch Bigger Data

but replacement costs are still lower that energy costs long term.

I'm not buying it, my VMWare hosts are pretty large boxes and they've used 630kWhrs since June when they were installed, that comes out to $128/year or so, and that's for primary usage, DX CRAC units have a PUE of ~1.28 which means it costs around $36/year to cool. Even with really cheap servers you'd have to have a LOT of them and have very little effect on AFR to justify it. I'm sure at some scale it makes sense or everyone wouldn't be researching it so hard and doing so many pilot datacenters, but if you don't have thousands and thousands of identical servers (99.999+% of installations) it's just not worth it.

Comment: Re:End of flight as we know it (Score 2) 225

by afidel (#48569375) Attached to: US Navy Authorizes Use of Laser In Combat

Huh? There's no way a missile can outmaneuver the optical targeting system on these things, the biggest threat will be surface skimming that will reduce the targeting systems reaction time, but the newest class of ships have pretty good synthetic aperture radar and the computer aided target discrimination is getting better all the time.

Comment: Re:Reduced revenues != lost profit (Score 1) 280

by afidel (#48568555) Attached to: Utilities Face Billions In Losses From Distributed Renewables

One can either massively over produce in summer or rely on grid power in the winter. If one is relying on winter grid power then the equipment generating that power will only be used a fraction of the year.
My average power draw during the summer is ~4x my winter draw since I use natural gas heat but air conditioning, and I'm fairly typical. So you design your solar system to produce ~75% of summer demand and your grid demand remains relatively constant yet significantly lower than today which should actually reduce the utilities costs significantly since they will need fewer plants and less grid infrastructure and fewer grid upgrades.

Comment: Re: Reduced revenues != lost profit (Score 2) 280

by afidel (#48568463) Attached to: Utilities Face Billions In Losses From Distributed Renewables

Do you watch use your computer after dark? There is 400 watts.
LOL, on slashdot that's funny. My VMWare hosts which are dual 10 core Xeon's with 384GB of ram, multiple network cards and fiber channel HBA's peak just over 300W:
Last Week-
average 183 W | 625 BTU/hr
peak 301 W | 1027 BTU/hr

Unless you're running dual GPU with a 60" display there's no way you're using 400W.

Comment: Re:Reduced revenues != lost profit (Score 1) 280

by afidel (#48568287) Attached to: Utilities Face Billions In Losses From Distributed Renewables

The problem is off-grid systems are a LOT more than 2x wholesale grid prices, and storage tech isn't moving anywhere near the pace of panel production (it turns out storing electricity chemically in an efficient and reversible process is really, really tough to do economically)

Comment: Re: There is a reason for this! (Score 2) 317

by afidel (#48554045) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Are Any Certifications Worth Going For?

You're misreading, the QuantumFlow Processor IS the ASIC
Further, each PPE can access hardware feature acceleration of network address and prefix lookups, hash lookups, WRED, Traffic Policers, range lookups, and TCAM for advanced classification and access-control-list (ACL) acceleration as it processes packets

If you turn off dCEF and force all packets through the RP CPU you'd quickly bring an ASR to it's knees. By comparison the Cisco 7200 did everything in CPU, but it had much lower bounds to its capabilities.

I have never seen anything fill up a vacuum so fast and still suck. -- Rob Pike, on X.