Plenty of ex-cons get a second chance in the construction industry, for example. There are places that will hire ex-cons, but not many because they have chosen to demonstrate that they are toxic humans and only a fool or someone who can absorb what some of them will rip off will hire them.
We may WANT someone ELSE to hire an ex-com but unless it were a victimless crime such as (some) drug crimes I certainly wouldn't risk it. I can get solid workers who are motivated and have a good track record, so why risk when I don't have to?
You like 'em, hire 'em and have a blast.
So why lie them flat and try to force air front to back when it wants to rise?
A) You don't want 10% of the servers at the bottom getting ice build-up, while 20% at the top are about to burst into flames... Feeding the output from one server to the input of another is a bad idea.
B) It would be a horribly inefficient use of space to have your server taking up 0.5 meters vertically, and sprawling out across the floor.
C) Convection is horrendously weak. A little fan blowing horizontally probably provides 1,000 times as much pressure. And with low-pressure, and low volume, you need much larger cavities to cool well enough.
D) We already DO use convection... Cold air is piped through the floor, and hot air is removed from intakes in the ceiling.
This is a loaded question. If someone were to answer "yes", it would open them up to (intended) ridicule.
OK - that was beyond my conception. Intel lives within 3 miles of me and I consider them, by their tax breaks, taxes paid, and all other factors, to be giving back as least as much as it takes from our state, New Mexico.
Ridicule away - but seriously, I was shooting more for an even analytical response than as flame-bait, and would have been just as satisfied with a yes answer, or if nothing else, some compelling information that I was missing.
I did NOT know if the OP was a Washington resident in first place (so I asked that), and did not know if my factors had been considered (so I asked that next), and if he was a resident, and if he had considered those options, what the answer would be to: is Microsoft a good corporate neighbor?
Unlike you, I think questions are often just questions.
I didn't say that Microsoft was responsible for everything - and I'm not going to defend against things inferred that I did not imply.
Financial models are non-trivial, but in the end, an economy is simple.
My question was honest - kindly quote it in its full context:
You live in Washington, have considered these factors, and still believe that Microsoft is a good corporate neighbor?
If you want to attack me, why not attack me for the ignorance I was guilty of - that Washington residents don't pay state income taxes - THAT was the (erroneous) basis of my question, and that's what the OP has held me accountable for.
Had I known that, I *still* might have asked a similar question. Or - I might not. Personally, I don't know what I might have done in the past.
When it is not necessary to make a decision, it is necessary not to make a decision.