Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

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).


Comment: Re: Because you're an idiot? (Score 1) 93

by amorsen (#49169781) Attached to: New Seagate Shingled Hard Drive Teardown

If you block-level deduplicate a file on an HDD, and even a small fraction of the blocks from an otherwise sequential file are replaced by pointers, you have completely destroyed read performance for that file. Block-level deduplication is not a viable technology on hard drives except for very specific use patterns.

In contrast, almost no workloads suffer when doing block-level deduplication on an SSD.

Comment: Re:It's almost like the Concord verses the 747 aga (Score 1) 157

by amorsen (#49157931) Attached to: Hyperloop Testing Starts Next Year

Actually, high speed rail can climb much better than regular trains.

Why? Both types should be limited to the friction between the driving wheels and the tracks. You can put a motor in every carriage, but regular trains often have that as well. Where is the advantage for high speed rail?

Comment: Re:Relative terms. (Score 1) 311

by amorsen (#49070399) Attached to: Nuclear Plant Taken Down In Anticipation of Snowstorm

Insults do not help your arguments.

If you don't use nuclear power (once the power station is built) you lose it. Exactly the same as solar and wind. You can turn solar and wind off if you want, exactly the same as nuclear power, but economic reasons make it infeasible to do so very often, again exactly the same as nuclear power.

Nuclear power is notoriously difficult to integrate into the grid; you need a lot of fossil fuel or hydro plants to handle the peak load that nuclear cannot handle economically.

Comment: Re:Not really changed (Score 1) 309

by amorsen (#49021551) Attached to: The IPCC's Shifting Position On Nuclear Energy

Norway is hydro limited by how much water they can store from spring and summer for the winter heating needs. Wind power in Scandinavia produces most power in winter, right when hydro reservoirs are closest to running dry. If Canada is similar, it can integrate amazing amounts of wind power into the hydro system.

Comment: Re:About time. (Score 1) 309

by amorsen (#49021501) Attached to: The IPCC's Shifting Position On Nuclear Energy

The cost of nuclear is paid for up front. Fuel is effectively free. If you have a nuclear power plant and do not run it at full capacity at all times, you are throwing away free money.

If you only run your nuclear reactor at 33% output on average, your price per kWh has tripled. This would not matter if nuclear power was cheap, of course.

Comment: Re:Linux distributions that don't use systemd (Score 1) 471

by amorsen (#48971953) Attached to: Systemd Getting UEFI Boot Loader

It is not a realistic prospect. For daemons, the automatic handling by systemd is so much of an advantage that we will see server software depending on it. It will have to be emulated by the other init daemons, and so far I have not seen any of them work in that direction.

For GUI stuff, GNOME is already partially dependent on systemd, and KDE is going that way too.

Comment: Re:Datacaps? (Score 1) 132

The only "throttling" you get is at peak times due to network congestion, but even then i'am still unable to see any service impact or major delay.

There is no excuse for having congestion in your network on a daily or weekly. It can happen once in a blue moon when a line becomes unexpectedly busy, but it should never be the normal mode of operations.

At least not in a pretend-first-world-country where it is easy to lay backbone fiber.

Comment: Re:call me skeptical (Score 1) 360

by amorsen (#48835575) Attached to: NASA, NOAA: 2014 Was the Warmest Year In the Modern Record

Of course there is. One powerful negative feedback is that CO2 lets less and less infrared radiation escape, so every new added CO2 atom in the atmosphere has less effect than the previous one -- it cannot block radiation which was already blocked by other CO2 atoms.

This is part of the reason why doubling of CO2 levels "only" causes a linear temperature rise. CO2 only has a logarithmic effect on the temperature.

Which is lucky. Anything more complex than bacteria would have trouble surviving the wild temperature swings that a linear correlation between CO2 and temperature would cause.

Mommy, what happens to your files when you die?