The idea people aren't doing 'proper science' on this is a spectacular level of oblivious. There's nothing in here that I haven't at some point had a discussion about with my sleep doc in the last 20 years (well, not specifically a didgeridoo, but circular breathing and other types of breath exercises, including 'straw breathing'). Yes, some people do loose weight when they get their apnea under control, among other health benefits. That also is not new, and it's not some sort of miracle insight that noone has considered.
The author can do whatever they want. But if all you want to support is x86-64, ARM64 and maybe some version of RISC-V, don't crow about how 'extremely' portable you are. At best, you don't know.
Yes, my grasp of english is adequate to understand these words. I just think it's a huge stretch of hubris to claim something is 'portable', especially to claim it's "ultra" portable, if you've not done the actual work to port it or only ported it once. For example, people have learned an awful lot about real world memory alignment issues by actually porting something to SPARC. The author is guessing at best.
But yeah...for some people "meh, close enough" is good enough.
AI will produce an infinite supply of high-quality euphemisms, making our existing drone...er...associates more productive and allowing us to eliminate the now redundant Department of Pleasantries and returning 4 headcount to our shareholders.
MX records publish an SMTP server for a domain and a 'priority'. You can have multiple MX records and (theoretically[1]) you try the one with the lowest priority, and if it doesn't respond, try the next lowest, etc. Or (theoretically[1]) if you have 2 MX records with the same priority, you can load balance between them.
Only the last generation or 2 of the highest end VAXen had any significant hot swap (VAX 9000/400 and later, which sold very poorly). The vast majority of VAX machines didn't. Even hot-swapping DSSI disks was at best iffy.
When someone whose been there talks about VAX 'high availability', they're usually talking about VAX/VMS clustering. Very cool and generally effective approach to the problem. That was one big issue with the end-game VAXen: clustering a couple of 6-figure mid-range machine was often considered a better solution than all-in on one 7- to 8-figure VAX 'mainframe'.
often require a service contract that includes a permanent on site tech.
I don't recall that being common with DEC service contracts. Most of the sites I know of that had dedicated DEC techs were either very large installs or had...other...drivers (e.g. tech had to have a TS clearance to work on the machines).
Executing hardware hot-swap typically means telling the system that a component is going down. Then the system moves those resources to the other component to gracefully allow you to remove it without a restart.
Like it's not a case where you just yank out a CPU as you like as though it were a spindle in a RAID-6 array. Especially if there's only one CPU. The state machine can't maintain state if the only component that tracks and maintains state goes missing.
They are a pension fund; they literally had/have US$125 billion dollars under management. What exactly is being stretched here? I can't for the life of me think of something that qualifies more for being a 125b company than actually having 125b in assets.
Having assets under management doesn't mean you have that money. You don't own it, you are just taking care of it for somebody. When describing a company as an $X billion company, conventionally this is referring to the market cap. You could use it to describe other things they possess if you wanted to, but assets they manage will never be something they possess.
Language is a communication tool. If you misuse language you will be badly understood. The solution is to use the correct word for what you mean, not to accuse others of sophistry.
Companies are described by revenue. UniSuper made $110 million recently. It deceptive to use the assets managed as the size since it makes it look like a much larger company. NVIDIA has revenue of $130 billion. $125 billion revenue would make it the largest company in Australia by a good amount.
That's fair, but if I'm a fund that can literally write a check the size of my endowment, why is that not a demonstration of my value? That's not finance 101, but you get to it later on.
They have 125b they can literally write a check against and allocate any way they want as long as it delivers an adequate return and doesn't piss off the shareholders. Other than sophistry, what's the difference?
Cloud Providers don't suspend entire accounts for no reason.
Oh...my. Just starting out in the industry, are we? Those of us who have been here for a while know reality is very different than newbie hopes and dreams. Once you've been burned for the n+1 time, that optimism will fade.
I don't think anyone seriously believes 'labor' in the abstract is going away (well...I'm sure some people do, but not the people at the core of "use our AI product it'll be awesome trust us..."). The issue (IMHO) is that it will be "the labor opportunities left to you will suck way, way more than the ones that have been obsoleted/eliminated".
This is exactly the concern folks I talk with have. With all of the force reductions in the last few years attributed (real or not its how they're marketed) to AI gains, It's hard not to see that as a trend.
It's the "who writes history" thing. There's a deeply entrenched faction in every country who creates and protects these 'national myths'. Nelson never made a mistake, Wellington never made a mistake, Churchill never made a mistake. Except, they did (Gallipoli, anyone?).
Not 'large Perl codebases', but I know an awful lot of 'small Perl codebases', relatively speaking, doing the sort of sysadmin stuff Perl was designed to do. It's still a great scripting language, and there's a lot of folks who didn't get the memo that cool kids don't use Perl any more.
reply