Our HR and Insurance Broker does a seminar each year at renewal. This year our costs rose the least in recent years, less than inflation in fact. They then showed us how our healthcare now covers MORE than it did in previous years, because of the Affordable Coverage Act - covering all preventative care at no (out of pocket) cost.

I've been looking for a valid reference for this statement for a while. I've had a couple people tell me this and simply insist with no valid reasoning.

I understand that ZFS can't send a cache flush to a slice, but if I'm using a SSD with a supercap (say Intel 320) I have never heard any valid argument or reference. I have a LOT to gain from not allowing ZFS to 'use' the whole disk; My 300GB SSD can write something in the neighborhood of 600-800TB if I hand the whole thing to ZFS before I run out the media wear indicator. The same disk vastly under-provisioned (giving ZFS a 15GB slice) my media wear indicator will last about 4.2PB (yes, 4200TB). Under my VMware all-sync NFS load this drive might last me 6 months if I give the whole thing to ZFS where I should get years slicing it. On top of this, the drive performs approximately twice as fast vastly under-provisioned.

Can you give me a valid reasoning I shouldn't do this... or maybe some references?

My EE friend has pulled chips from "bad" (IE non-functional) thumb drives to test this scenario and connected them to a controller he built to read them. Obviously the sample size is not all that great, but so far 100% of the chips contain no useful data upon "dying" (in fact zero readable data).

I disagree. A failed solid state drive typically means 100% data loss, no recovery possible. A failed spinner can often be 'revived', albeit quite expensive if you let it go too long or have too major of a failure - there is quite literal 'physical' data to be retrieved.

For good measure, I talked to a Gamerunner employee to see if maybe you had used a unit at "IHRSA". They have never been to the IHRSA or Microsoft's health club. So unless you used it at Wireds NEXT fest in Chicago or at CES2006, then you most certianly have no ground to stand on making your claims. I am sorry that you have such a jaded view on this type of product that you would bad-mouth a product that you have yet to use, but I will stand by my claim that in most cases I would prefer (especially while moving my body at all) gamerunners controller to aim more than a mouse. It is as smooth as the nicest mice I have ever had the grace of using, has some sort of onboard processing allowing it to move the mouse rapidly when turned one direction and gain immediate percision when moved back near center, and has a 'safety' of sorts to ensure you dont accidentally look up/down excessively while aiming. All of this makes it quite amazing for aim, quite possibly more accurate than most mice. I used it on all sorts of terrain in Farcry and only early on had any issue navagating difficult areas. Once I was on it for a short time I was able to go on even the most difficult terrain and buildings without 'plummeting off'. As I said, going from run in-game to stopped dead nearly as fast as I could have removed my finger from "W". You are not running full speed to get around in the game (unless you want to), typically it is a fast pased walk to get around full speed in game.