Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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: Anybody else remember RICHH? (Score 1) 105

by pLnCrZy (#48983873) Attached to: Staples To Buy Office Depot For $6.3 Billion

There's this annoying ad for Staples office supply store on
tv. I call up directory assistance, get their number, and give
'em a buzz.

          "Hello, is this Staples?"
          "Yes it is. How may I help you."
          Too eager to please.
          "I was just wondering how you came up with the name of the
store. I mean, you sell staples, right?"
          "Yes we do. We're the one-stop off--"
          "Yes, I'm sure you are, but tell me. John Wanamaker's. Do
they sell wanamakers?"
          "Well, I--"
          "Do you even know what a wanamaker is?"
          "I think--"
          "No, of course you don't. What do you make? Minimum? Less?
Christ, you sound young, had your first period yet?"
          "Use tampons or pads? You know if you use tampons, no guy'll
believe you're a virgin. Then you'll get a reputation and you'll
never get married. And--"
          "I don't--"
          "Excuse me. I digressed. Now tell me, you sell file cabinets,
          "Yes we do."
          "And you sell those little mail trays you put on your desk
that say 'In' and 'Out', right?"
          "Yes we do. We're the one-stop--"
          But you don't call yourself 'File cabinets', right? I mean,
that's a pretty stupid name. And you sure as hell don't call
yourself 'Those little mail trays you put on your desk that say
"In" and "Out"', right? I mean, that name really sucks."
          "Why, why are--"
          "All right, follow me here. What does a supermarket sell?"
          "Good. Shit, you should earn more than minimum. Christ, I
could have my old man put you on the payroll down here. . .Shit,
what was I--oh yeah, food, right? But does the supermarket call
itself 'Food'? Noooo. It's called a supermarket."
          "I-I didn't--"
          "Listen, I'd love to stay and talk to you longer, but I gotta
go do something to my dog. You understand."
          "Waaahhhhh. . ."
          So it wasn't such a bad day after all.


---- From the RICHH Archives (

Comment: Re:Will we still talk ethernet over it? (Score 1) 101

by pLnCrZy (#46458389) Attached to: Intel Rolling Out 800Gbps Cables This Year

... or I know plenty, and didn't feel the need to wave my nerd around to show you how big it is.

100GBASE-LR4 is still a multiplex. It runs over a single physical fiber pair. That doesn't mean it's a 100Gbps signaling rate.

My comment was to the one above mine, not to the one my magic hat predicted from you in the future. In the comment to which I replied, the poster was grumbling that 100Gbps ethernet is commercially available today in contrast to "something which runs at 25Gb, over 32 fiber pairs."

Was my statement wrong? Or did I just not feel the need to enumerate every single PHY variant to satisfy you?

Comment: Re:Cloud computing platform (Score 1) 118

by pLnCrZy (#44033157) Attached to: Can Red Hat Do For OpenStack What It Did For Linux?

So in the background I can add or remove nodes to the "cloud", and the virtual machines are unaffected; I can spin up more or less, as I need, and they interact with the physical hardware through openstack, which *should* simplify the management of lots of vms.

No, what you're describing is virtualization.

Virtualization management tools do exactly what you just said. You add resources to your pool, and your VM management system decides how to utilize the backend resources within the guidelines that you've configured. VMware, as one example, uses what they call DRS ( Distributed Resources Scheduler) to monitor and reallocate VM load across physical hosts.

Managing VMs with abstraction tools is not a "cloud." It's managing your virtualization infrastructure.

This reinforces my earlier point exactly -- the term "cloud" is far too ambiguous. Virtualization management is *part* of what makes a "cloud" but it does not make a cloud on its own (by most definitions).

Comment: Re:Cloud computing platform (Score 3, Insightful) 118

by pLnCrZy (#44032193) Attached to: Can Red Hat Do For OpenStack What It Did For Linux?

What you're describing is virtualization.

"Cloud" is a stupid buzzword that quite simply means "resides on someone else's stuff."

Whether it's Amazon's stuff, Rackspace's stuff, or Microsoft's stuff -- it's not your stuff. You don't worry about physical servers, disks, or OS (in many cases.) Take it a level higher and if your cloud service includes databases or middleware, you don't worry about that either. Or even applications. Amazon's Elastic Beanstalk basically lets you publish your website code directly to it and the rest is magic that you don't have to mess with.

Then we turn it all around and create "private clouds" which means "we want to be trendy but don't trust someone else's stuff."

The pundits and pedants will mix in all kinds of semi-fabricated points about things that "must" be true in order for something to qualify as a "cloud," private or not, such as auto-provisioning and/or automated management, etc.

We used to call it "hosted services." Some marketing knob decided that the industry needed a more bandwagonny word for people to latch onto. Thus the term "cloud" was born, and it continues to be confused, misunderstood, and abused in perpetuity -- a condition that illustrates what a huge failure the very forces that coined this nonsense have done in making it clear to the consuming public what it actually is supposed to be about.

Comment: Re:No. .Just No. (Score 2) 246

by pLnCrZy (#43723769) Attached to: Firefox 21 Arrives

Why should one have to disable these things? Why are they not turned off by default? Isn't that the mantra of the FOSS community, "Let me decide!"?

If you can disable them, how are you not given a choice?

Your disagreeing with their default state is not equivalent to not having a choice.

Comment: Re:what is a "gun safe"? (Score 2) 646

by pLnCrZy (#40795137) Attached to: How a 3-Year-Old Can Open a Gun Safe

From here it sounds like paranoia, to be honest.

"Chance favors only the prepared mind." - Louis Pasteur

Do you have insurance? That sounds like paranoia. Do you look both ways before crossing the street? Definitely paranoia.

It's not paranoia to simply be prepared for something in the [unlikely] event that it happens. "Paranoia" and "preparedness" are different words for a reason.

I think in this country home invasion isn't even defined as a separate crime because it has happened only a few times since WW2.


Comment: Re:what is a "gun safe"? (Score 1) 646

by pLnCrZy (#40794403) Attached to: How a 3-Year-Old Can Open a Gun Safe

Well that's remarkably narrow-minded.

... because home invaders never target people in "nicer" areas due to the higher level of returns on a break-in?

... because nobody in a "nice" area ever had their home burglarized?

... because feeling safe and protected only applies to people in "non-nice" areas?

I don't live in the ghetto, and I keep loaded firearms in my home. Do I fear someone breaking in? No... but that doesn't mean it can't or won't happen. If it does, I'm prepared.

The most dangerous gun in one's home is the unloaded one. That is, of course, assuming education and not ignorance.

There are new messages.