A quote from the MS site explaining the engine: "As light travels incredibly fast – 5 nanoseconds per meter – each iteration within the AIM computer is significantly faster and consumes less electricity than running the same algorithm on a digital computer. "

Light travels a meter in 3 nanoseconds in vacuum, so this is poorly worded at best. However signal speed through copper is 2/3c, or roughly 5 ns to go a meter. So this number is kind of whatever?

Is there some way to interpret this as an important or novel achievement? Or is it just the wrong explanation as to why this machine is fast at what it does?

https://www.microsoft.com/en-u...

Yep, ChatGPT is an English Major.

Impossible sausage is amazing. I like it better than a number of traditional sausages. Beyond stuff kinda meh, though I like their brats okay. In general the two don’t compare.

How does a company years away from making its first commercial plane claim to deliver anything? Maybe their tests are going well, but thatâ(TM)s still just a prototype.

It takes a programmer to understand how impressive an elegant solution is. Instead, try and convey the joy you found in hitting upon that solution, and the satisfaction of implementing it.

Forget trying to impress people. Elon Musk isn't impressive because of what he says, he's impressive because he makes giant visions happen.

Happy New Year to you, glad the writing is going. I've been practicing guitar and bass and math. Though I am building out a spiffy server for a friends company.

I'm glad they're hiding UIDs. I think they might also want to assign random names. :P Okay, maybe that's going a bit far. Have you perused the Stack Exchange sites, like Stack Overflow? I find the reputation system pretty compelling. You get points for posting answers which people find helpful, and for interesting comments, and you can vote up answers and questions you find interesting. You can spend those points on hard questions which no one is answering, or on down voting answers you think are particularly bad.

I haven't thought about it deeply, but it seems like the incentives are good:

Points for useful answers
Less points for useful comments
Trading points for hard work
costs for insisting something sucks.

They also have a mechanism for declaring questions to be poor for a variety or reasons. If you have a high enough reputation, you can edit the question to make it clearer. Or you can vote to close it as being too broad, or off topic for the site.

It's pretty cool. There can be problems, but the ones I've seen are pretty high level, such as the problem that the English Usage site is named badly, and gets a lot of ESL people asking basic questions. (Frankly, I think it's a kind of boring site, and I suspect the ESL "mistakes" inflated the traffic, making the powers-that-be decide it was worth bringing out of beta.)

As another long time reader, I agree with Mr. Maynard. People do care. I hope those in power see that.

At the same time, I was reading this on an iPhone, and a classic mistake was made: I agreed I wanted to see the "mobile site", and got redirected away from Maynard's journal entry, despite having been directed there from an email message.

I want the editors and developers to get it right, and this is a part. Please think deeply about priorities and vision. Don't just react, but act to make a site which will meet to real need. Slashdot can be important. It depends on the passion allowed to happen.

When I was having problems with my desktop, the Genius kept me pretty well informed, and was very friendly, and completed a full day diagnostic for free.

That said, I've heard a variety of stories.

I'd agree that this is an example of poor communications, and poor service, and I would certainly recommend complaining about it to people up the chain. It sounds like this store is less well managed than others.

Nailed it.

With servers being generally virtual these days, and the underlying physical hardware a highly replaceable substrate, there's no reason for an enterprise to have serves which do more than one thing. If a server does only one thing, it ought to be named for that one thing.

mailserver-eastcoast.example.com

Where is that machine? Somewhere in the blade cage. If I yank the blade, it'll appear in a few seconds on another blade. Where is the data? On the giant fiber RAID, which is replicated in the west coast office, and two secret locations.

Compute is a cloud, storage is a cloud, services come from that cloud, the clouds made of physical devices in as many locations as make sense.

The old physical network topology is finally just the nerves and pumps, and no longer the focus.

The focus is the data. The data is what we produce to make value, to drive the business process. Servers aren't special anymore, they're like hammers. You don't name hammers, typically. But you might have more than w=one, and you definitely want to know two things: where is it, and what is it for.

If someone wants to steal something, and you are trying to prevent it, short of a body cavity search everyday, you've already lost the game. You can steal a code base and drawings for virtually any product by simply copying it onto a USB flash drive, and walking out. Often your cell phone will suffice.

If you are trying to prevent viruses and stuff, the same techniques apply for company owned laptops versus employee owned. If they can take it home, it can get infected. You might ameliorate things by having a forced virus checker installation, but a voluntary one will generally work just as well.

In the end, the only thing you are can't do is take the machine away, but this is such a rare event that it's almost not worth considering.