Will it be the future of tape? They're not even 1/100th the density of disks yet.
> > Prices have been dropping fast and cheap SSDs are finally on the rise. You can now get an 240GB SSD for $100
> and I can buy a 3 TB spinning rust drive for the same price.
Yes, for a cheap, slow spinner with a short warranty.
Try pricing up a 15-20rpm SAS drive and you'll find they're virtually the same price as SSD - result is that over the last 12 months SAS SSD drives have effectively made high speed spinners as dead as The old Quantum Bigfoot.
You're confusing write endurance with storage endurance.
One important spec most people don't look at is how long the content of a SSD will stay intact if the device is put on a shelf and left there a while.
I have high confidence that HDDs will still be readable in 2-3 years. Most SSDs are only waranteed to hold their data for 12 months.
The smaller the SSD cells get, the worse the storage endurance problem is becoming (and smaller cells = slower write speeds too, which brings in a bunch of interesting workarounds such as Samsung's chunk of SLC inside their MLC Evos)
I have hundreds of mechanical drives in service. Only about 1/3 of them give any meaningful warnings - and many of them tell outright fibs about bad sectors. SMART is only useful if makers don't goose it - and most have goosed it to keep returns down.
BTW, Did you notice most HDD warranties are down to 12 months? There's a reason for that.
RAID saves against sudden drive death (most consumers will ignore signals of impending doom). Backups save against everything else.
If you want the best of all worlds, build a FreeNAS - ssd cached spinning media. If you can't use a NAS, then at least use RAID1.
I've been doing that for a decade because HDDS are unreliable and it's saved a lot of work on desktops over the years. (The cost of staff downtime is far higher than that of a single drive. Better that it's down for a short agreed time whilst the bad drive is changed out than they're sitting round twiddling their thumbs while the system is being reimaged and it just happens to be before a critical deadline.)
Every time someone says tape is dead I look at my petabyes of data storage on LTO6. Everytime someone says SSDs will completely replace HDDs I look at the stats for how long they'll last with the power turned off. Every technology has its niche.
Under RIPA, that's not the case. Once they've notified affected people (pupils and parents), THEN they can do what they want, otherwise there are substantial prison terms involved for unlawful intercepts, no matter how well-intentioned.
A 3rd party commentator has offered this:
From "Inspecting e-safety in schools" within
"Indicators of inadequate practice
There is no internet filtering or monitoring."
"Key features of good and outstanding practice..."
Rigorous e-safety policies and procedures are in place...
The e-safety policy should incorporate an Acceptable Usage Policy that is understood and respected by pupils, staff and parents."
"Sample questions for school leadership...
What to look for? e-safety policy is regularly reviewed evidence that these are freely available (poster, handbooks, etc)
[BTW note this: "Pupils in the schools that had ‘managed’ systems had better knowledge and understanding of how to stay safe than those in schools with ‘locked down’ systems. Pupils were more vulnerable overall when schools used locked down systems because they were not given enough opportunities to learn how to assess and manage risk for themselves."]
I'm fairly sure the OP had to sign an AUP. He should doublecheck it.
Many others have commented that in this day and age it's easy to bypass the school system by tethering to your mobile, however many "eilte" UK boarding schools are in areas with rotten coverage and laptops used for schoolwork are often so locked down they can't be used on the home network when on vacation or after leaving the school (I have one such laptop onhand. Although owned by the ex-pupil, even the bios is passworded and the school refuses to divulge the details)
The cable can be lifted, if you think that's 100% of the payload to GEO. By the time you wrap infrastructure around it, plus enough fuel to go from LEO to GEO you're at or over the capacity of existing launchers.
You've also nailed the issue of the seed cable - one is not enough. You'll need enough of them (plus a sfaety margin) in place to be able to lift another seed cable.
Yes, it can be done with existing launchers if you don't mind having dozens of them. The cost benefit and safety sides of things start coming down in favour of something capable of putting 30,000+ tons of _net_ payload into GEO in one go.
In order to keep the centre of mass stationary (otherwise the thing will fall down!), you have to extrude your ribbon down and UP at equal rates.
Effectively you climb UP the ribbon to GEO, then climb DOWN the the ribbon to the whip end for a nice gravity boost.
Dropping a strand and then building up from the ground will simply pull the whole thing down unless balancing force is applied at the other end.
It's doable, but you need an Orion(*) class launcher to get enough material to GEO to build the first one.
(*)The one based on nukes, not the pissant NASA design.
"What's the difference, in the limit, between being cut off the Internet by government fiat vs. being cut off the Internet by providers refusing to participate in the German market? With the first, Germany has recourse by treaty with the foreign governments; with the second, Germany is SOL; it's not like a German court can order a service which has no presence in Germany to serve the German market, rather than just ignoring them as economically not worth the trouble."
There are NO treaties governing the supply of Internet across national boundaries. It's ALL done by private businesses.
That's very unlike phone systems, which are all governed by treaties and intercompany contracts which exist between every source/destinaion pair in the world.
If the backbones decided they didn't want to carry german IP traffic anymore, there's nothing anyone in Germany could do to force them to do so (Not that I can see this ever happening. Someone is always willing to carry traffic, else all the spammers and gangs would have been off the net years ago)
I get 80/20 VDSL2 for $50/month and average 2-3Tb/month, but I'm not in the USA.
I can also call anywhere in the USA/Canada/EU/australia/NZ/Japan for as long as I like for an extra $1.40 on my monthly bill. That's on top of $10 for my voice service.
The Bells have concentrated everything they have into being allowed to provide LD service, whilst the rest of the world has been making LD charges irrelevant. They won't notice that the mobile companies have cannibalised big chunks of their business until it's too late.
Of course they should have their own firewalls. They need protection from the local network for starters.
When it comes to network protection: Belt, braces, safety pin, bit of twine. No single item should ever be your sole point of failure.
Facebook messenger is a hog. Removing it from my android phone reduced battry consumption by 50%
Simple: I use whatsapp but haven't paid a thing. I don't know anyone else who has either. The first year/18 months is/was free.
Itr's likely that it will stay that way, with Facebook switching to an ad-supported model.
China's support for the Norks is minor compared to russian support. The state was setup by Stalin in the first place.
you block 'em and direct access to a page explaining why, along with a request to complain to the provider's helpdesk.
Those abusive users tend to find out very quickly that they're not anonymous.
It works. One ISP who got blocked from a popular service due to abusive users ended up taking 9000 complaints per hour, sustained for a couple of weeks before they gave in. Other ISPs started responding in far less time once a willingness to shut them out was demonstrated.
Which is why phones are ideal candidates for MobileIP deployment