If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#241
|
|||
|
|||
photonic x86 CPU design
Evgenij Barsukov wrote:
KR Williams wrote: Security is one of the technical problems that have to be resolved (one along many others). But we are not discussing here _how_ to make it happen, but rather _should we_ make it happen. However, you clearly don't believe in property rights. The communist has spoken. Property rights should apply to consumables. To something that disapears if being used, and therefore society benefits from its _concervation_. so, my house isnt a consumable, therefor in your view it should be donated? you want to "I say, donating unused resources for comunity purposes should be mandated by law for everybody" ? Thats a contradiction in terms. You sound like a left wing communist liberal. I suppose the law you want so much wont apply to you? Eric However, knowledge is non-consumable. Society benefits from its _usage_, whereas non-users are lazy *******s who do harm to society. So _use of knowledge_ has to be encouraged, and non-use punished. Intellectual property and copyright concepts, that has been created in the 18th century and has since many times artificialy modified and expanded to non-suitable areas, do not follow above concept. They punish use of knowledge by requiring those who use it to pay, and encourage non-use (e.g. anti-social behaviour) by allowing non-users to withold payment. So as oweral result we encourage anti-social behaviour. This is absurd and has to end. Of cause the creation of knowledge has to be encouraged monetary, which so far have been implemented using above scheme, which is as I have shown is absurd. So this encouragement has to be done differently. The overal result should be that both users and non-users of knowledge have to pay equaly, which punishes the anti-social non-users (they get nothing which should make them think about using more knowledge) and encourages the society friendly users of knowledge because they get something for their money. So far advertizement sponsored content creation is one good example how this can work, because obviously everybody are paying for advertizement inderectly through the price of goods, but only users of sponsored content (e.g. knowledge) are benefiting. But advertizement sponsoring has limits. The concept should extend wider, to involve other types of tax money, while parallely eliminating the concept of intellectual property and replacing it with concept of "society payment for content creation". Communists incorrectly extended the rejection of property rights to consumables. Consumbles have to be protected because giving them for free encourages anti-social wastful behaviour. Regards, Evgenij |
#242
|
|||
|
|||
photonic x86 CPU design
Eric wrote:
Bill Davidsen wrote: Rob Stow wrote: Nate Edel wrote: In comp.sys.intel Bill Davidsen wrote: I would guess reusable media would need to be ~$100/TB, use once no more than $25-35/TB so you can sell it into the home/SB environments. Blank DVDs aren't practical for backing up a whole terabyte, but they're down to about ~$100/TB in bulk ($40-50 per 100 disks/~450gb). In the home and SOHO markets, however, DVD is a very common backup media - when backups are done at all. A large part of it is due to the fact that in such places there is no one to do backups except ordinary users - many of whom are quite comfortable with burning a DVD, yet intimidated all to hell by tape drives. Forget about the fact that tape backup has been around since JC and the boys went out for pizza - to non-techies they are new and intimidating gadgets. Don't forget that tape backup is expensive, that tapes are not used for anything else while DVD is used on many systems for data transfer, the individual media are cheap, and the cost of a 2nd drive is minimal. Having a 2nd tape drive (or a reasonable size) is very expensive, not having a 2nd tape drive means you don't have a backup if the 1st one fails. I've seend that twice in 30 years, and both times the manager's career took a major hit for not having a backup drive. There's no help in sight, DL DVDs are too expensive (thanks to DRM for that), and 25-30GB Blueray or HD-DVD blanks are also unlikely to be affordable. Any tape format large enough to be useful is expensive, both drive and media. You can put a TB of disk in for $1k, but you can't do a decent backup system for that. What the world needs is a cheap four bay external usb drive case, put in four big drives as RAID-5, take a backup and put it in the safe. Don't know of any. Anyway, DVD is used instead of tape because you have it anyway, tape has no other use but backup in most cases. usb is way too slow for that, not mention that the design of usb is one of the worst kluges in history. external SATA would be a much faster and better option, probably cheaper too. Eric e-SATA is definitely better: faster with not nearly so much CPU attention needed. However, it is just as definitely not cheaper. USB also has the advantage of being p'n'p even for non-techies, whereas e-SATA will require someone to install a PCI card, install a SATA drive into the external drive caddy, and install the SATA drivers for the PCI card. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NetBurst, Bangalore and automated design | Leif Sterner | Intel | 0 | May 5th 04 05:58 PM |
Analog Design Manager in India, Bangalore | abdul | General Hardware | 1 | December 14th 03 01:09 AM |
Recommend Book on Basic Video Card Design? | Jeff Walther | General | 29 | December 9th 03 04:32 AM |