 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> For the average home user, if your house burns down, you're not going
>> to give a **** about the holiday photos and the copy of Nero you just
>> lost - YOU HAVE NOWHERE TO LIVE!!
>
> Not true. Well, Nero, maybe, but holiday photos and pictures of people
> who are now dead and such are irreplacable. You can always get somewhere
> new to live, or fix the house.
I don't know about you, but if my house burnt down, this would be a
catastrophy. I would be homeless, and financially destitute. The bank
isn't going to let you stop paying the morgage just because your house
burned to the ground. And with no house to sell, it is impossible to buy
a replacement. I'd basically be homeless for the rest of my life. I
wouldn't be able to *afford* a computer! Why would I care about some
holiday photos when I'm going to be spending the rest of my life on the
streets?
(And then there's the "minor detail" that your backup copies will be in
your house, and thus destroyed in the process...)
>> This is a very, very dumb way to do backup. A file-level copy will be
>> drastically faster. (It doesn't involve mirroring all the useless
>> empty sectors.)
>
> Depends how your RAID works. Windows doesn't mirror empty sectors
> because the RAID understands the file system. Linux and hardware mirrors
> empty sectors because you can put any file system on top of the RAID.
Well, as I say, it depends on what you're trying to do.
If you're trying to avoid downtime due to hardware faults, RAID is the
right tool. If you just want to avoid losing a few specific precious
files, a file-level copy seems more appropriate.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> And - sometimes I don't think people get this - you reach Alpha Proxima
>> and radio back to Earth to say "hey, we got here, what next Houstan?"
>>
>> IT WILL TAKE CENTURIES FOR THE MESSAGE TO REACH EARTH! >_<
>
> I wonder how much power you need to transmit with to be heard that far
> away?
>
> I mean isn't the transmitter on Voyager or whatever about to go out of
> range, and that's only just left our own solar system!
I think Voyager uses something like 10 watts or so?
--
Stefan Viljoen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> On the other hand, I wonder how much noise the signal has to be detected
> over?
10^26 Watts of star
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I don't know about you, but if my house burnt down, this would be a
> catastrophy. I would be homeless, and financially destitute. The bank
> isn't going to let you stop paying the morgage just because your house
> burned to the ground. And with no house to sell, it is impossible to buy a
> replacement. I'd basically be homeless for the rest of my life. I wouldn't
> be able to *afford* a computer! Why would I care about some holiday photos
> when I'm going to be spending the rest of my life on the streets?
You ever heard of this thing called insurance? Doesn't the bank demand that
your house is insured against burning down (and various other stuff) before
giving you a mortgage?
Besides, AIUI once you are declared bankrupt you can start again afresh, so
assuming you didn't lose your job just rent somewhere until you can save up
enough deposit to buy a new house.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> On the other hand, I wonder how much noise the signal has to be
>> detected over?
>
> 10^26 Watts of star
At which wavelengths?
I saw designs for digital filter that's supposed to recover a 2 mV
signal burried in a 250 V carrier. (And this was an introductory DSP
book.) This works because the two signals are at completely different
frequencies.
If you look at the emission spectrum of the star and pick a wavelength
where there's little or no emission, it could hypothetically work I guess...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I don't know about you, but if my house burnt down, this would be a
>> catastrophy. I would be homeless, and financially destitute. The bank
>> isn't going to let you stop paying the morgage just because your house
>> burned to the ground. And with no house to sell, it is impossible to
>> buy a replacement. I'd basically be homeless for the rest of my life.
>> I wouldn't be able to *afford* a computer! Why would I care about some
>> holiday photos when I'm going to be spending the rest of my life on
>> the streets?
>
> You ever heard of this thing called insurance?
Sure. But I also know that an insurance company's job is to not pay out
under any circumstances whatsoever. Their entire business model is based
on preventing customers getting the money they're due. The fact that
insurance companies are all doing so well indicates that they must have
got very, very good at this.
> Doesn't the bank demand
> that your house is insured against burning down (and various other
> stuff) before giving you a mortgage?
I have no idea.
> Besides, AIUI once you are declared bankrupt you can start again afresh,
> so assuming you didn't lose your job just rent somewhere until you can
> save up enough deposit to buy a new house.
I don't know precisely how bankrupcy works, but presumably it means I
get to lose all my savings, my pension and my car. (Fortunately, in my
case not having a car isn't going to prevent me getting to work. It
will, however, prevent my mum getting to work, and she earns multiple
times my piffling income.)
Either way, exactly how many decades do you estimate it would take to
save up the astronomical sum required for a deposit?
No matter which way you look at it, a computer is the least of my worries.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> If you look at the emission spectrum of the star and pick a wavelength
> where there's little or no emission, it could hypothetically work I
> guess...
"Little or no" emission from a star is probably many orders of magnitude
bigger than the biggest ever nuclear bomb on Earth though :-)
http://homepages.wmich.edu/~korista/sun-images/solar_specbb.jpg
It may look on there like there is no emission below 100 nm or whatever, but
in proportion there is still an almighty amount of x-ray and gamma emission
from a star. Standing out above this "noise" is going to be hard.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTK3zeFRLO8&feature=related
>
> (Thrust vectoring is the key to this, by the way.)
Thrust vectoring owns the sky! This thing can turn on a dime...Macross
style!
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> I don't know about you, but if my house burnt down, this would be a
> catastrophy.
It's certainly not pleasant, no.
> I would be homeless, and financially destitute. The bank
> isn't going to let you stop paying the morgage just because your house
> burned to the ground.
The bank has no way to force you to pay the mortgage. At least around here.
They'll just take whatever's left.
But that's what insurance is for.
> And with no house to sell, it is impossible to buy a replacement.
You need a better job.
> (And then there's the "minor detail" that your backup copies will be in
> your house, and thus destroyed in the process...)
That's what a fire safe is for. Or a safe-deposit box.
> If you're trying to avoid downtime due to hardware faults, RAID is the
> right tool. If you just want to avoid losing a few specific precious
> files, a file-level copy seems more appropriate.
Sure.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Sure. But I also know that an insurance company's job is to not pay out
> under any circumstances whatsoever.
Some are, some aren't. If your house burns entirely to the ground, it would
be hard to argue that you weren't due all the money the policy was worth.
>> Doesn't the bank demand that your house is insured against burning
>> down (and various other stuff) before giving you a mortgage?
>
> I have no idea.
Certainly in this country.
> I don't know precisely how bankrupcy works, but presumably it means I
> get to lose all my savings, my pension and my car.
Not in this country.
> Either way, exactly how many decades do you estimate it would take to
> save up the astronomical sum required for a deposit?
It took me about 3 or 4 years.
> No matter which way you look at it, a computer is the least of my worries.
True. And of course, you don't have any friends, either, who might be able
to print out pictures for you off your hard drive. ;-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:54:56 -0800, Darren New wrote:
>
>> Try to delete files more than a week old out of /tmp without ever giving
>> anyone the opportunity to delete /etc/passwd, for example.
>
> I think this is exactly what tmpwatch is intended to do.....
Well, yes. I meant "using a shell script". Someone wrote tmpwatch exactly
because getting this sort of thing right is almost impossible to do, with
the number of ways you can put junk into file names that make shell scripts
break. (Indeed, that's the reason GNU had to add the -0 arguments to find et
al.)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> I mean isn't the transmitter on Voyager or whatever about to go out of
> range, and that's only just left our own solar system!
You mean the one that has been running off batteries for 20 years? Yeah, likely.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I would be homeless, and financially destitute. The bank isn't going
>> to let you stop paying the morgage just because your house burned to
>> the ground.
>
> The bank has no way to force you to pay the mortgage. At least around
> here. They'll just take whatever's left.
In other words, everything I own that has some kind of liquidity.
Besides, don't they just throw you in jail indefinitely if you have no
money? These are banks we're talking about here; they *always* get their
money back.
> But that's what insurance is for.
>
>> And with no house to sell, it is impossible to buy a replacement.
>
> You need a better job.
1. This is not news. ;-)
2. House prices appear to start at around £300,000 or so. The very best,
most unobtainable jobs pay £30,000/year. That's a pretty friggin huge gap.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Wait - are we talking about American Football here?
Yes. Soccer players run even more, but that's just speed and endurance and
precision without the strength component.
> There is apparently something wrong with my brain. When I come home from
> a dance class absolutely dripping with sweat and gasping for breath, I
> find myself thinking "yeah, that was a really great evening". It's like
> I *enjoy* hurting myself. o_O
Indeed.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> scott wrote:
>> I mean isn't the transmitter on Voyager or whatever about to go out of
>> range, and that's only just left our own solar system!
>
> You mean the one that has been running off batteries for 20 years? Yeah,
> likely.
What, no solar power?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> There is apparently something wrong with my brain. When I come home
>> from a dance class absolutely dripping with sweat and gasping for
>> breath, I find myself thinking "yeah, that was a really great
>> evening". It's like I *enjoy* hurting myself. o_O
>
> Indeed.
But, dude... that doesn't even MAKE SENSE! >_<
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> In fairness, when was the last time you tried copying a file that
>>>> somebody else was still using? Not so easy, is it?
>>> Trivial on Linux.
>> As long as you don't care about correctness. ;-)
>
> Depends a lot on a lot of different factors. Since you're backing up an
> inode, the inode is going to be generally valid (unless it's a special
> file of some sort), but whether it's the version that's being modified in
> memory on some computer somewhere over a network or not depends on when
> the user last saved the file.
No. I'm saying if the file is open, and you're trying to back it up while
it's changing, you're going to have problems with consistency. The file
system might be OK, but whatever you stat() from the inode might be wrong by
the time you're actually copying the data. Or if someone renames X to Y, you
might wind up backing up neither.
"tar: file changed as we read it"
And backing up a SQL database file while SQL is working with it? Not a good
idea. Such a bad idea that SQL servers tend to have alternate mechanisms to
make it work. :-)
Of course, backing up *any* open file is going to be problematic, unless
everyone uses transactions in their file system (and I don't mean just
journaling, but real SQL-like transactions with multiple changes and commits
and rollbacks and such).
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>>> In fairness, when was the last time you tried copying a file that
>>> somebody else was still using? Not so easy, is it?
>>
>> Uh, yeah, it is, actually. Want my scripts to do it?
>
> Heh. I too have written scripts to do backup. It seems like all you have
> to do is copy a bunch of files, but it's never quite that simple in
> reality. You have to deal with files that are locked, files getting
> moved around or deleted while you're trying to copy them, file security,
> alternate data streams, not upsetting programs working on those files
> just because you want to back them up, and so on.
Correct. And it's not that hard. Want my scripts to do it?
> If you want to be able
> to do stuff like back up or restore an individual Exchange mailbox, good
> luck doing that with scripting.
Well, it would be file-level backups. I don't know how Exchange stores its
mailboxes.
> If you want to back up over a network,
> now you have connection issues, authentication issues, people turning
> the target PC off while you're accessing it...
Yep. Scripts take care of that. Now, of course, if they turn off the PC
halfway thru and don't turn it back on for hours, you have the choice of
bailing on the backup or waiting for hours, but there isn't much one can do
about that.
The tools are there to do this. They're not that hard to understand.
Of course, if you're still 8 years back in your OS technology, it's likely
harder than it is on a modern OS.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:36:03 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> scott wrote:
>>> I mean isn't the transmitter on Voyager or whatever about to go out of
>>> range, and that's only just left our own solar system!
>> You mean the one that has been running off batteries for 20 years?
>> Yeah, likely.
>
> What, no solar power?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Outersolarsystem-probes-4407b.svg
At that distance, solar panels would just be dead weight.
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>>> I would be homeless, and financially destitute. The bank isn't going
>>> to let you stop paying the morgage just because your house burned to
>>> the ground.
>>
>> The bank has no way to force you to pay the mortgage. At least around
>> here. They'll just take whatever's left.
>
> In other words, everything I own that has some kind of liquidity.
No. The house you mortgaged. Read your mortgage. It'll likely tell you wh
at
you mortgaged.
Loan - the money you borrowed.
Note - the promise to pay it back.
Mortgage - what happens if you don't.
> Besides, don't they just throw you in jail indefinitely if you have no
> money? These are banks we're talking about here; they *always* get thei
r
> money back.
Uh, I'm pretty sure that was gone by the Victorian era.
> 2. House prices appear to start at around £300,000 or so. The very
best,
> most unobtainable jobs pay £30,000/year. That's a pretty friggin h
uge gap.
You need a better job.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> What, no solar power?
How much solar power do you think it gets from outside the solar system?
I'm not even sure there are solar panels on Voyager at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Voyager.jpg
I don't see any. There's a big lump of something radioactive that keeps a
thermojunction warm.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>>> There is apparently something wrong with my brain. When I come home
>>> from a dance class absolutely dripping with sweat and gasping for
>>> breath, I find myself thinking "yeah, that was a really great
>>> evening". It's like I *enjoy* hurting myself. o_O
>>
>> Indeed.
>
> But, dude... that doesn't even MAKE SENSE! >_<
Yes it does. You're not hurting yourself. You're just exercising.
Think about what it would mean to your evolution if every time you ran away
real hard or chased something so hard it made you sweat, you said "Wow, that
sucks, I'm gonna try to avoid that in the future."
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Think about what it would mean to your evolution if every time you ran
> away real hard or chased something so hard it made you sweat, you said
> "Wow, that sucks, I'm gonna try to avoid that in the future."
Damn. I think my brain just imploded due to the Liar Paradox. o_O
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Heh. I too have written scripts to do backup. It seems like all you
>> have to do is copy a bunch of files, but it's never quite that simple
>> in reality. You have to deal with files that are locked, files getting
>> moved around or deleted while you're trying to copy them, file
>> security, alternate data streams, not upsetting programs working on
>> those files just because you want to back them up, and so on.
>
> Correct. And it's not that hard. Want my scripts to do it?
Right. Because there's a million and one gatchas to watch out for, and
you've somehow covered them all with just a simple shell script.
>> If you want to be able to do stuff like back up or restore an
>> individual Exchange mailbox, good luck doing that with scripting.
>
> Well, it would be file-level backups. I don't know how Exchange stores
> its mailboxes.
In a giant database file. (It wouldn't surprise me if it's a JET
database...)
> The tools are there to do this. They're not that hard to understand.
Sure. It's called professional backup software. And it costs lots of
money. Because they can...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> The bank has no way to force you to pay the mortgage. At least around
>>> here. They'll just take whatever's left.
>>
>> In other words, everything I own that has some kind of liquidity.
>
> No. The house you mortgaged. Read your mortgage. It'll likely tell you
> what you mortgaged.
Uhuh. And if the house doesn't even exist any more...?
>> Besides, don't they just throw you in jail indefinitely if you have no
>> money? These are banks we're talking about here; they *always* get
>> their money back.
>
> Uh, I'm pretty sure that was gone by the Victorian era.
That's news to me.
>> 2. House prices appear to start at around £300,000 or so. The very
>> best, most unobtainable jobs pay £30,000/year. That's a pretty friggin
>> huge gap.
>
> You need a better job.
Which part of "I know" are you not getting? ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible schrieb:
> There is apparently something wrong with my brain. When I come home from
> a dance class absolutely dripping with sweat and gasping for breath, I
> find myself thinking "yeah, that was a really great evening". It's like
> I *enjoy* hurting myself. o_O
You're on endorphines, that's all.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> No. The house you mortgaged. Read your mortgage. It'll likely tell you
>> what you mortgaged.
>
> Uhuh. And if the house doesn't even exist any more...?
\O/
Seriously, some places have "no-recourse mortgages", some don't. You'd have
to read up on the laws where you bought the house. A no-recourse loan means
they only get back the house, not anything else, and then you're out of debt.
Plus, the land is still of value. Probably moreso than the house was.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Right. Because there's a million and one gatchas to watch out for, and
> you've somehow covered them all with just a simple shell script.
It's really not all that hard. :-) The tools are there. If you don't want
them, then fine, but it's based off of someone who wanted to back up several
hundred desktop machines that had never been backed up onto a couple of
central servers over the course of a couple of weeks, so, yeah, it handles a
lot.
Look at robocopy, for example, and you'll see it'll mirror an entire
directory tree including junctions and auditing properties and everything
else, including network failures, it'll run and watch for some number of
changes and redo the backup when it gets there, etc.
Then look at vshadow and see how it'll take a snapshot of a running drive
and expose it under a different letter.
Of course it can fail. It's not going to fail silently without you knowing it.
> In a giant database file. (It wouldn't surprise me if it's a JET
> database...)
That would be messy, but I'm guessing that vshadow tells exchange and/or jet
to flush their changes so at least you get a consistent and correct file in
the backup. (That's the sort of thing that I was saying UNIX doesn't make
trivial, even tho you can copy open files.)
>> The tools are there to do this. They're not that hard to understand.
>
> Sure. It's called professional backup software. And it costs lots of
> money. Because they can..
If you're going disk-to-disk, it doesn't cost all that much.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Plus, the land is still of value. Probably moreso than the house was.
Mmm, that's true...
Heh. The other day I saw a burned out house for sale, actually, IIRC
they wanted £190,000 for it. And it's a gutted shell... (but, I presume,
with planning permission).
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Right. Because there's a million and one gatchas to watch out for, and
>> you've somehow covered them all with just a simple shell script.
>
> It's really not all that hard. :-) The tools are there. If you don't
> want them, then fine, but it's based off of someone who wanted to back
> up several hundred desktop machines that had never been backed up onto a
> couple of central servers over the course of a couple of weeks, so,
> yeah, it handles a lot.
>
> Look at robocopy, for example, and you'll see it'll mirror an entire
> directory tree including junctions and auditing properties and
> everything else, including network failures, it'll run and watch for
> some number of changes and redo the backup when it gets there, etc.
>
> Then look at vshadow and see how it'll take a snapshot of a running
> drive and expose it under a different letter.
>
> Of course it can fail. It's not going to fail silently without you
> knowing it.
Oddly enough, I *have* looked at robocopy. I couldn't get it to work
reliably enough.
I wrote a DOS script using xcopy to try to back up some PCs over the
network. That wasn't reliable enough. So then I switched to using
robocopy. That *still* wasn't reliable enough. So then I wrote a Tcl
script to do it. Still had problems. Moved to Haskell. Mostly worked,
but still occasional problems.
The backup scan ran as an AT job. Every now and then, there would be a
network glitch or somebody would turn off the PC or something, and the
script would hang with the network drive still mapped. Next day, the
script bombs out because the drive is still mapped. Of course, it's
mapped under the system account which runs AT jobs, you the only way to
unmap it is to run an AT job to unmap it. That's once you kill the hung
Tcl instance using Task Manager.
And don't even get me started on how absurdly difficult it is to write
DOS scripts that handle failure properly...
The next stage of course would be to run a component on the remote
machine to do the scan for modified files locally, and compress the data
before sending it over the network... but I never got to that part
because we have *real* backup software now. Backup software that works
reliably.
>> In a giant database file. (It wouldn't surprise me if it's a JET
>> database...)
>
> That would be messy, but I'm guessing that vshadow tells exchange and/or
> jet to flush their changes so at least you get a consistent and correct
> file in the backup. (That's the sort of thing that I was saying UNIX
> doesn't make trivial, even tho you can copy open files.)
Using the BackupExec agent for Exchange, backing up or restoring
mailboxes or even individual emails is no harder than backing up a
regular file. Try doing that with a DOS script...
(Then again, they charge you enough ****ing money for that thing!)
>>> The tools are there to do this. They're not that hard to understand.
>>
>> Sure. It's called professional backup software. And it costs lots of
>> money. Because they can..
>
> If you're going disk-to-disk, it doesn't cost all that much.
Possibly. I haven't investigated it much.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stefan Viljoen schrieb:
> Isn't this the way it is going? According to what I read on strategypage.com
> recently, F-16s, F-15s and F-18 are wearing out and are not being replaced.
> Additionally, much funding is being "saved" by decommissioning many
> (hundreds, apparently) of these aircraft early as well, in order to spend
> money maintaining the F-22 and F-35?
I'd guess that the number of F-35 to be bought will /not/ be as low as
for the F-22. And it will not be anywhere as expensive.
>> (A) Besides being able to carry BVR AIM-120 AMRAAMs, the F-22 is
>> designed to bear much cheaper AIM-9 Sidewinders into battle.
>
> Of which there'll be how many? As far as I know the AIM-9X is not in
> production anymore, and funding is being cut for buying it - again to be
> able to afford "enough" AIM-120's and to feed the budgetary monster that
> the F-22 has become.
Let's see... Wikipedia speaks of some 3.000 or 3.600 AIM-9X already in
the arsenals (figures vary between language versions of the article),
and some total of >10k to be purchased in total by American armed forces.
However, the F-22 currently doesn't even support the AIM-9X yet, and
instead is supposed to use the AIM-9M, which I guess is available in
stock at even larger numbers already. Not to speak of the other members
of the AIM-9 family, which I'd suppose the F-22 could fire as well if
needs be.
> That's damn impressive! No, I didn't know that. That could come in very
> useful in a low and slow situation. Though I wonder what the price is in
> fuel consumption? High-alpha maneuvers like that probably need a lot of
> thrust to be applied to keep from stalling?
Probably so, yes. But when was the last time the U.S. of A. bothered
about fuel consumption in their armed forces?
> True, but that is a mark against the F-22 in my book. I was thinking when I
> said that of the situation where US ground forces are under attack from the
> air, and need to be protected against MiG strikes. So, the USAF sends the
> F-22. It -has- to go low and slow to get at the MiGs, assuming it is out of
> missiles. Sure, it can outclimb and outrun the MIGs, but it has no choice
> now - it has to tangle with them on their terms, low and slow, to protect
> US ground forces. Wouldn't that obviate its enormous speed and rate of
> climb? (Though the slow maneuver you pointed me to above would obviously
> help I readily agree.)
>
> Also, that is if they have decommissioned all those F-16s and F-15s by that
> time, of course - which seems to be the way they are going.
... and purchase F-35 instead, which by the way seems to be a totally
different beast, and shouldn't be mistaken for a smaller copy of the
F-22 concept.
The F-22 is designed mainly as an air superiority fighter, the concept
being to suppress any enemy air activity way before they can be a PITA
to ground forces. Recent conflicts have shown that the US will not even
think about sending in troops before this air superiority has in fact
been achieved.
Also, a MiG may be an adversary to reckon with in a dogfight (I have no
idea whether that is anywhere close to true), but with F-22s out of
reach of their guns but close enough to make a run any moment, a MiG
pilot probably couldn't really afford to attack grund targets. I guess
he'd be eating 20mm Vulcan rounds any moment.
Plus, it's also a question of what you consider the primary threat: The
world hasn't seen any all-out war between superpowers for >60 years, and
with the presence of nuclear weapons such a war would be unthinkable
anyway. Local conflicts have been commonplace however, and the USA seem
to have made it a habit of entering such conflicts every 10 years or so
ever since WW2. For such scenarios, the AA arsenals should be more than
sufficient, and it may also be more efficient to have a small fleet of
highly superior aircraft with a survivability of virtually 100% per
mission, rather than a large fleet of lower-class planes with a
survivability of only 90%. Not only for the sake of material costs, but
even more so for the sake of morale at home.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> The backup scan ran as an AT job.
I'm assuming you mean it ran at the server to pull files, rather than at the
client to push files. Might be better to switch that around.
> Every now and then, there would be a
> network glitch or somebody would turn off the PC or something, and the
> script would hang with the network drive still mapped.
Why are you mapping a drive to a letter at all? Just use UNC names.
And robocopy can be told to stop copying after some number of failures. You
can even tell it to resume copying halfway thru a large file if the copy
failed in the middle.
> script bombs out because the drive is still mapped.
Unmap it before trying to remap it, of course.
> mapped under the system account which runs AT jobs,
Why? Tell AT to run it as a different user.
> And don't even get me started on how absurdly difficult it is to write
> DOS scripts that handle failure properly...
That's what robocopy is for.
> Using the BackupExec agent for Exchange, backing up or restoring
> mailboxes or even individual emails is no harder than backing up a
> regular file. Try doing that with a DOS script...
Well, sure. If you have a program that understands the file format, backing
up part of the file works. No surprise there.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible schrieb:
> And - sometimes I don't think people get this - you reach Alpha Proxima
> and radio back to Earth to say "hey, we got here, what next Houstan?"
>
> IT WILL TAKE CENTURIES FOR THE MESSAGE TO REACH EARTH! >_<
Not really. You'll get an answer in just about 8.44 years.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> The backup scan ran as an AT job.
>
> I'm assuming you mean it ran at the server to pull files, rather than at
> the client to push files. Might be better to switch that around.
Yeah, that would mean that all the directory scanning would be local
rather than remote. Probably a lot faster that way.
>> Every now and then, there would be a network glitch or somebody would
>> turn off the PC or something, and the script would hang with the
>> network drive still mapped.
>
> Why are you mapping a drive to a letter at all?
Because that's the only way to specify the logon credentials for the
remote system. (Obviously, the server's local system account doesn't
have permission to access files on a remote system.)
>> mapped under the system account which runs AT jobs,
>
> Why? Tell AT to run it as a different user.
There are other AT jobs running, of course...
>> And don't even get me started on how absurdly difficult it is to write
>> DOS scripts that handle failure properly...
>
> That's what robocopy is for.
Not sure how you figure that out, but hey.
Robocopy can't copy a file, it says "I can't copy this file" and exits.
Now the script has to do something about this.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott schrieb:
> I wonder how much power you need to transmit with to be heard that far
> away?
>
> I mean isn't the transmitter on Voyager or whatever about to go out of
> range, and that's only just left our own solar system!
Well, the mission was /designed/ to cover the solar system only, so the
transmission system was laid out to fit the bill at the lowest weight
possible.
It wasn't even designed to last that long, and only technological
advancements in receiver technology have made it possible to keep
contact over so many decades.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott schrieb:
>> If you look at the emission spectrum of the star and pick a wavelength
>> where there's little or no emission, it could hypothetically work I
>> guess...
>
> "Little or no" emission from a star is probably many orders of magnitude
> bigger than the biggest ever nuclear bomb on Earth though :-)
>
> http://homepages.wmich.edu/~korista/sun-images/solar_specbb.jpg
>
> It may look on there like there is no emission below 100 nm or whatever,
> but in proportion there is still an almighty amount of x-ray and gamma
> emission from a star. Standing out above this "noise" is going to be hard.
Note that the emission of a star is a constant signal to a good degree,
which probably helps.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:21:17 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Well, it would be file-level backups. I don't know how Exchange stores
>> its mailboxes.
>
> In a giant database file. (It wouldn't surprise me if it's a JET
> database...)
I believe this is correct; I'd heard at one point that AD was based on
JET and also derived from Exchange (most directory services are at some
point derived from technology in mail systems - Novell's eDir product
uses the same database engine that GroupWise does, and GW has used
versions of that going back to WordPerfect Office).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 08:44:02 -0800, Darren New wrote:
> No. I'm saying if the file is open, and you're trying to back it up
> while it's changing, you're going to have problems with consistency.
OIC, yeah, that's true. It's a pretty small window of opportunity in
most cases, but yes, that circumstance could happen.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:59:33 +0000, Invisible wrote:
> The bank
> isn't going to let you stop paying the morgage just because your house
> burned to the ground.
That's what insurance is for.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:35:20 +0000, Invisible wrote:
> 2. House prices appear to start at around £300,000 or so. The very best,
> most unobtainable jobs pay £30,000/year. That's a pretty friggin huge
> gap.
Mortgages tend to be amortized over a 15 or 30 year period, at least over
here. Ours is about $1500/month.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:19:51 +0000, Invisible wrote:
> Sure. But I also know that an insurance company's job is to not pay out
> under any circumstances whatsoever. Their entire business model is based
> on preventing customers getting the money they're due. The fact that
> insurance companies are all doing so well indicates that they must have
> got very, very good at this.
That doesn't mean that they never pay out, though. In cases of
catastropic events, they're required by law to pay out.
If they never paid out, then people wouldn't buy insurance.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:36:38 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>>> There is apparently something wrong with my brain. When I come home
>>> from a dance class absolutely dripping with sweat and gasping for
>>> breath, I find myself thinking "yeah, that was a really great
>>> evening". It's like I *enjoy* hurting myself. o_O
>>
>> Indeed.
>
> But, dude... that doesn't even MAKE SENSE! >_<
Sure it does - a good workout causes adrenaline to start flowing, and
adrenaline produces a euphoric effect.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Sure. But I also know that an insurance company's job is to not pay out
>> under any circumstances whatsoever. Their entire business model is based
>> on preventing customers getting the money they're due. The fact that
>> insurance companies are all doing so well indicates that they must have
>> got very, very good at this.
>
> That doesn't mean that they never pay out, though. In cases of
> catastropic events, they're required by law to pay out.
Sure, they're legally obliged to pay out. But if you've just lost your
house and you are now penniless... what are you going to do? Sue them?
Oh, wait, you have no money. :-P
> If they never paid out, then people wouldn't buy insurance.
Maybe I'm just bitter. I paid £900 for a moped. When it was stolen, they
gave me £25. Later I paid $1,200 for a car. When it was crashed, they
gave me £75. I mean, seriously, it was *so* worth paying £700 per year
in insurance premiums for that.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> 2. House prices appear to start at around £300,000 or so. The very best,
>> most unobtainable jobs pay £30,000/year. That's a pretty friggin huge
>> gap.
>
> Mortgages tend to be amortized over a 15 or 30 year period, at least over
> here. Ours is about $1500/month.
£300,000 divided by 30 years = £10,000 per year. So, a third of the
highest income available. And that's neglecting the fact that they
presumably charge you 80% APR or so on the loan...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> adrenaline produces a euphoric effect.
Since when?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:05:45 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> adrenaline produces a euphoric effect.
>
> Since when?
Always.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrenaline_Rush
That's what you're experiencing, and it's common for people who do really
intense working out.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:04:13 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> 2. House prices appear to start at around £300,000 or so. The very
>>> best, most unobtainable jobs pay £30,000/year. That's a pretty friggin
>>> huge gap.
>>
>> Mortgages tend to be amortized over a 15 or 30 year period, at least
>> over here. Ours is about $1500/month.
>
> £300,000 divided by 30 years = £10,000 per year. So, a third of the
> highest income available. And that's neglecting the fact that they
> presumably charge you 80% APR or so on the loan...
80% is illegal pretty much everywhere. Try more like 5%-7% for the
average.
And 30K is not the "highest income available" - I know plenty of people
who make more than that.
Clearly it's not an impossible feat as there are millions of homeowners
in the UK, right?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Maybe I'm just bitter. I paid £900 for a moped. When it was stolen, they
> gave me £25. Later I paid $1,200 for a car. When it was crashed, they
> gave me £75. I mean, seriously, it was *so* worth paying £700 per year
> in insurance premiums for that.
>
What would have happened if you had been involved in an accident and you
had been liable for costs of over £100000?
--
Best Regards,
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:02:28 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> Sure. But I also know that an insurance company's job is to not pay
>>> out under any circumstances whatsoever. Their entire business model is
>>> based on preventing customers getting the money they're due. The fact
>>> that insurance companies are all doing so well indicates that they
>>> must have got very, very good at this.
>>
>> That doesn't mean that they never pay out, though. In cases of
>> catastropic events, they're required by law to pay out.
>
> Sure, they're legally obliged to pay out. But if you've just lost your
> house and you are now penniless... what are you going to do? Sue them?
> Oh, wait, you have no money. :-P
If they don't pay out, you take it (in the US) to the district attorney
and let the state prosecute it.
>> If they never paid out, then people wouldn't buy insurance.
>
> Maybe I'm just bitter. I paid £900 for a moped. When it was stolen, they
> gave me £25. Later I paid $1,200 for a car. When it was crashed, they
> gave me £75. I mean, seriously, it was *so* worth paying £700 per year
> in insurance premiums for that.
It seems that you didn't have very good coverage. I can see that that
kind of payout would make you bitter about it; the reality for most
people is generally different - though it sometimes does take time,
energy, and work to get them to pay out at an appropriate level.
I live not far from a very large fault line, and we're late for "the big
one" (earthquake) by about 20 years. Earthquake insurance is a required
part of our policy, and if it does hit, the company will take care of
things for us.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Sure, they're legally obliged to pay out. But if you've just lost your
>> house and you are now penniless... what are you going to do? Sue them?
>> Oh, wait, you have no money. :-P
>
> If they don't pay out, you take it (in the US) to the district attorney
> and let the state prosecute it.
I have no idea if that works in the UK.
>>> If they never paid out, then people wouldn't buy insurance.
>> Maybe I'm just bitter. I paid £900 for a moped. When it was stolen, they
>> gave me £25. Later I paid $1,200 for a car. When it was crashed, they
>> gave me £75. I mean, seriously, it was *so* worth paying £700 per year
>> in insurance premiums for that.
>
> It seems that you didn't have very good coverage.
Apparently.
> I live not far from a very large fault line, and we're late for "the big
> one" (earthquake) by about 20 years. Earthquake insurance is a required
> part of our policy, and if it does hit, the company will take care of
> things for us.
...unless the company gets liquidated. ;-) (What? How many banks have
been liquidated recently?)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
