Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment welcome to 250 years ago (Score 1) 625

The trend for the last 250 years has been for machines to do more and more menial labor. That process creates jobs like web developer, auto mechanic, and cable TV tech. Most of us work in jobs that didn't exist 100 years ago. Machines now do the jobs like "seamstress" and "cotton picker", humans do "biomedical engineer". I'm glad. I'd rather do software engineering than pick cotton.

Comment your first example is true (Score 1) 166

I had a 1 GHz CPU around 10 years ago. Right now I'm using a 1.2 GHz. Before that, CPU speeds would double every few years.

Okay, I cheated because my current 1.2 GHz fits in my pocket. I do have two machines with five year old CPUs that run 3-3.5 GHz, the same speed as a new machine five years later. So there ARE some real physical limits. That's why phones are dual core and servers have eight cores - because they couldn't make faster processors they had to join together more processors running at the same old speed.

Comment for now, SSD is no faster for large files, though (Score 1) 166

For that multimedia you speak of, a rotating drive will be about as fast. A 10K rpm platter drive makes a lot more sense for video, which is sequential access.

When SSDs get faster for sequential access, then I'll be interested in larger. I don't see any need for many TBs of tiny files, and SSD is only impressive with small files. Very large databases are about the only use case I can think of for large SSDs, and maybe media laptops. Even with 40TB of data, I only want a 128GB PCIe SSD for caching.

Comment Re:BARRIER!? (Score 1) 166

> Not everyone has that, many live paycheck-to-paycheck,

And most who make good money live close to paycheck-to-paycheck or worse, in debt, meaning they've spent the paycheck before they get it. How many people have a loan, a debt, on a $30,000 car. They could have bought that in cash by starting with a $1,500 car, saving up for a $3,000 car, then a $6,000 car, etc. That would cost them a lot LESS than paying interest to a finance company.

Congrats to you for not putting a down payment on a $50,000 car like many people would do.

Comment I don't think Verizon's backbone runs on wifi $80K (Score 1) 111

> Oh, ok. So they're suing for a network topology that can be created by using wireless routers.

They are suing a few of the largest backbone providers - AT&T, Comcast, Qwest, Level3, Comcast.
I'm pretty sure those networks aren't wifi based. In fact, the Cisco product mentioned in the CRS-1 routing platform. The CRS-1 is $80,000 each.

http://www.infinity-micro.com/cisco-crs-1-series-8slot-carrier-routing-system-single-1495.html

Comment ps, the court ruled the CAN'T sue for using Cisco (Score 1) 111

PS the appeals court ruled that plaintiff is not allowed to change their mind later and say either that the Cisco devices infringe or that using the devices infringes. Plaintiff has claimed that it's only infringing if they are connected in a certain infringing topology and the ruling is that they have to stick to that.

Comment no, it's not Cisco specific, and not all Cisco use (Score 1) 111

They are emphatically NOT "suing people for using Cisco devices", as evidenced by the fact that some defendants use other brands to do the same thing.

Whether or not their patent is any good I don't know, but it's not Cisco specific and they aren't claiming all Cisco users are infringing.

Their claim is more along the lines of "I'm suing you for building a bomb that blew up my car." They do not claim that using a tool is bad. They claim that doing X (with any tool) is bad.

Let's understand what their claim is before we decide if it's valid or bogus.

Comment gears are prior art for spaceships? (Score 2) 111

The same can be said for any device. Gears and levers were invented before spaceships. Spaceships are a configuration of gears and levers. Therefore no-one can invent a new type of space vehicle?

If you do something NEW with gears and levers, that's a new invention. If you do something new with wheels and suction cups, that's a new invention. If you do something new with silicon and copper, that's a new invention.
,
Many patents have been issued for software and other things that do not do anything new. Those patents should not have issued because patents are for new inventions. Many overly broad patents have been issued and shouldn't have because they are overly broad. If you confuse those issues with what material the invention is made of, somebody is tricking you into not thinking things through.

Comment a hammer can be used for murder (Score 0) 111

A hammer can be used for murder. Therefore, according to your reasoning manufacturers of hammers are liable for murder?

That's precisely analogous to your assertion that: routers can be used to build an infringing network, therefore router manufacturers are liable for infringement.

Perhaps you will say hammers are designed to build things, and that is somehow different. Okay then:
Hammers can be used to build bombs. Therefore, hammer makers are responsible for bombings.

Sorry, your reasoning just doesn't work.

Comment hence the evidence Napster intentionally designed (Score 1) 111

That's why the Napster emails showing that they intentionally designed features for the purpose of infringement and promoted it for infringement were so important. Cross referencing the Billboard Top 40 shows that it's made specifically for infringing. You don't see Dropbox using banners promoting "find hit music" for that reason.

The law distinguishes between a generic tool that _could_ be used unlawfully versus a business model based on facilitating and promoting unlawful conduct. Whether or not you LIKE that particular unlawful conduct is a matter of opinion, but the logical distinction is quite clear and well-founded.

Comment judges said Cisco products don't infringe (Score 4, Informative) 111

The multiple levels of judges have agreed Cisco's gear does not infringe. It can be used to infringe, or used in ways that don't infringe.

According to the rulings, suing Cisco would be like suing Xerox for copyright infringement. Just because a copy machine CAN be used by an infringer doesn'tmake Xerox liable.

I do wonder if Cisco products are DESIGNED to be used in the way that plaintiff claims is infringement. Cisco seems to be suggesting that.

Comment some models of HD are bad, brand irrelevant (Score 1) 552

FYI, in a study Google did of thousands of drives, they found that while certain models of drive were good and some bad, all manufactures had similar failure rates. Western Digital makes some good models and some bad ones, as do all of the other manufacturers .

That said, I run 40 drives at a time. In my environment, at least, HGST (formerly Hitachi) has had the best track record for me.

Slashdot Top Deals

We don't know who it was that discovered water, but we're pretty sure that it wasn't a fish. -- Marshall McLuhan

Working...