Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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:Interesting idea, nasty downsides (Score 2) 61

by AK Marc (#49169107) Attached to: New Seagate Shingled Hard Drive Teardown
I've worked for multiple Fortune 500 companies. All used spinning tape. And nearly everywhere I've worked has used tape. It's cheaper and easier to buy tapes. You sound like a salesman, but I've never seen the numbers work for an off-site storage, Tapes are cheaper than hard drive storage, and more controlable (having them physically stored where you want, restoring only what you want, good for lawsuits).

Comment: Re:Interesting idea, nasty downsides (Score 1) 61

by AK Marc (#49169055) Attached to: New Seagate Shingled Hard Drive Teardown
SSD for boot/OS/swap, and slow spinner for data gives 99% of the performance for 99% of people. And cheap spinners are much cheaper than cheap SSDs. Sadly, there was a time, 2-5 years ago when you could find laptops with spare mSATA slots, and a spinner in them. Put an SSD in the mSATA slot, and biggest drive possible in the spinner slot, and get huge storage for cheap cost.

Though, one of the ones I got then, had the mSATA already holding a 20GB SSD, set up as a cache for the slow spinner. It runs surprisingly well, especially if you run the same things repeatedly. 100% of the performance of SSD for 95% of what you do. And cheaper than the 256GB/1TB I am running in my laptop.

Comment: Re:Default Government Stance (Score 1) 161

by AK Marc (#49167321) Attached to: Feds Admit Stingray Can Disrupt Bystanders' Communications
I believe that they'd just be more open about their vote tampering. The closed ballot leads to massive fraud. Tee margin of error has been larger than the vote difference for many recent elections. And the solution to that, supported by both Democrats and Republicans, over 3rd parties, was electronic voting.

And they've been doing the "punish the 3rd party" method for years. The only 3rd party in recent history to make all 50 states ballots was apparently the LP for one presidential election. 3rd party candidates who were not party candidates made it, Ross Perot and Patrick Buchanan were on all 50, but were presumed Republicans, despite no official party membership.

Comment: Re:Citations are for wussies (Score 1) 161

by AK Marc (#49167263) Attached to: Feds Admit Stingray Can Disrupt Bystanders' Communications
Are you saying they could work? You seem to have a closed mind, and are looking for confirmation of your opinions, with strong selection bias. My read of you is that there's nothing I could say, and nobody I could cite that could change your mind. As you imply you didn't read past seeing the first thing you could find objectionable, that proved the point I made. That there exists no cite I could have given that you'd believe, if it contradicted your personal opinion.

Would you like citations about what it is that contradict the Wikipedia page?

Would you like citations that increased minimum wage increases jobs more than increasing the pay of the upper management?

What of what I mentioned would you like to see cites of?

[citation needed] is a ploy by closed-minded bigots to waste the time of the "enemy" for things they won't read anyway. You didn't cite anything that supported you, either. Just linked to something that isn't much more than a definition, but certainly didn't say anything like what you implied.

Comment: Re:Did *everyone* miss the point here? :-( (Score 1) 363

by Anonymous Brave Guy (#49166827) Attached to: Google Wants To Rank Websites Based On Facts Not Links

It remains the case that either my original statement is true, meaning a counter-example for the reliability of fact-based ranking has been identified, or my original statement is false, in which case the statement itself becomes a counter-example because it is widely repeated but incorrect.

Comment: Re:Viewing Launches (Score 1) 22

by Bruce Perens (#49166815) Attached to: SpaceX Falcon 9 Launches Dual Satellite Mission

With luck, they'll start incorporating our radio transceivers. I hear that SpaceX flies with several USRPs now, so that's not completely unrealistic. That might be as close as I can get. Anyone who can get me a base invitation, though, would be greatly appreciated and I'd be happy to do some entertaining speeches while there. I need a base invite for Vandenberg, too. I got in to the official viewing site for the first try of the last launch (and that scrubbed too), but this next one is on Pad 6.

Comment: Re:Default Government Stance (Score 4, Insightful) 161

by AK Marc (#49166801) Attached to: Feds Admit Stingray Can Disrupt Bystanders' Communications
Anyone who demands citations for "Voodoo Economics" should be 12 or under. Despite Bush deriding it, he practiced it, along with his son. We've had it for many years, and the result is that it harms the economy. Increasing the minimum wage increases the number of jobs. Increasing the pay spread between the lowest paid and highest paid people in a company (expecting some trickle-down), has been shown to decrease jobs.

But citations don't work. No true scotsman is the standard response, and then the rhetorical games begin that end with the true statement that "Tobacco has never been proven to cause cancer." We only have a correlation that smoking causes cancer, and there's never been a "pure" study done on it (mainly because of ethical issues, but also some practical issues). So someone could still claim that smoking doesn't cause cancer, and you can't prove them wrong. Voodoo Economics is in the same camp. It's been shown wrong many times, but can't be "proven" wrong in a purely scientific method because the supporters of it wander off into Rhetorical Games territory.

Chemist who falls in acid is absorbed in work.