Yeah, I'd agree there. It should be whatever the US equivalent of aggravated assault is. But the charges you could levy bearing in mind he aimed for the head could go as far as attempted murder I guess.
r00ty
joined 2 years ago
Seems quite simple to me. Things like guns, swords, daggers and the like are designed to be weapons. So they're generally going to be assumed to be a weapon any time they're used/brandished.
But literally anything can be used as a weapon. So, in normal use they're not a weapon but if used as a weapon, they become one in that instance.
None of the above!
The thing is, this actually if anything proves the strength of the fediverse. Lemmy.world is not Lemmy and Lemmy is not the fediverse. Just find another instance that has not blocked the community yet and carry on with your day.
Lemmy.world have every right to curate the experience for their users as they see fit and/or feel comfortable carrying the risk for.
Well, yes and no. It depends on whether you call the Linux kernel as what makes Linux the OS or not.
For any operating system there are the kernel components and user space components. The GUI in any operating system is going to be user space.
They also suggest it's a "minimalized" Linux microkernel. I kinda agree with this approach, why re-invent the wheel when you can cherry-pick the parts of the existing Linux kernel to make your foundations. The huge caveat in my mind is, the scheduler of modern OS' is what they were complaining about most. I bet the scheduler is one of the things they took from the Linux kernel.
As for the rest of the project. I don't think there's enough meat in this article to say much, and the very limited free version seems a bit too limited to make a good review of how useful it would be.
I'll wait until I'm told I need to port X aspect of my job to DBOS to see if it became a thing or not. :P
I mean, the running on watts vs volts part was nonsense.
But, did get quite close with the power calculation. Although here in the UK the average car battery seems to be around 60ah. I did see some very expensive large 105ah batteries. But they were definitely the outlier. So if you had a 100ah battery then it would be 1.2kwh with 100% efficiency.
Also, it doesn't mention that you'd need an inverter to make the fridge run from a battery. These also have inefficiencies which would reduce the runtime on the battery.
It'll likely be like most routers I've seen. If hardware offloading is possible it'll have cpu to spare at 1gbps. If it isn't (mostly qos or other packet marking processes), then the cpu will get maxed and thruput drops.
Not sure, this wasn't clear to me from their pricing page. There were 4 stars next to that item but the explanation for that didn't elaborate on bulk retrieve.
I assumed there was some minimum number of operations, or it had to be the entire backup restored to count as bulk.
But isn't that the point? You pay a low fee for inconvenient access to storage in the hope you never need it. If you have a drive failure you'd likely want to restore it all. In which case the bulk restore isn't terrible in pricing and the other option is, losing your data.
I guess the question of whether this is a service for you is how often you expect a NAS (that likely has redundancy) to fail, be stolen, destroyed etc. I would expect it to be less often than once every 5 years. If the price to store 12TB for 5 years and then restore 12TB after 5 years is less than the storage on other providers, then that's a win, right? The bigger thing to consider is whether you're happy to wait for the data to become available. But for a backup of data you want back and can wait for it's probably still good value. Using the 12TB example.
Backblaze, simple cost. $6x12 = $72/month which over a 5-year period would be $4320. Depending on whether upload was fast enough to incur some fees on the number of operations during backup and restore might push that up a bit. But not by any noticeable amount, I think.
For amazon glacier I priced up (I think correctly, their pricing is overly complicated) two modes. Flexible access and deep archive. The latter is probably suitable for a NAS backup. Although of course you can only really add to it, and not easily remove/adjust files. So over time, your total stored would likely exceed the amount you actually want to keep. Some complex "diff" techniques could probably be utilised here to minimise this waste.
Deep archive
12288 put requests @ $0.05 = $614.40
Storage 12288GB per month = $12.17 x 60 = $729.91
12288 get requests @ $0.0004 = $4.92
12288GB retrieval @ $0.0025 / GB x 12288 = $30.72 (if bulk possible)
12288GB retrieval @ $0.02 / GB x 12288 = $245.76 (if bulk not possible)
Total: $1379.95 / $1594.99
Flexible
12288 put requests @ $0.03 = $368.64
Storage 12288GB per month = $44.24 x 60 = $2654.21
12288 get requests @ $0.0004 = $4.92
12288GB retrieval @ $0.01 / GB x 12288 = $122.88
Total: $3150.65
In my mind, if you just want to push large files you're storing on a high capacity NAS somewhere they can be restored on some rainy day sometime in the future, deep archive can work for you. I do wonder though, if they're storing this stuff offline on tape or something similar, how they bring back all your data at once. But, that seems to me to be their problem and not the user's.
Do let me know if I got any of the above wrong. This is just based on the tables on the S3 pricing site.
I would expect it's the sheer number that would be BELOW the ISS. Active tracking or not, there's already plenty of things that influence when you can launch to the ISS. Having to navigate a route through 10,000 satellites between the earth and the ISS is just adding another obstacle they don't need.
The article seems to make clear, they can get this if they clear it with NASA. The implication being NASA believes this will be a problem for them, and if I had to choose who to believe between a company run by Musk, and NASA. I'd choose NASA personally.
Base pay $25,000
Performance related bonus per quarter:
0 issues found: $25,000
1+ issues found: $0
I think there's likely a lot of people still on slower links that benefit for sure.
But as gigabit and better Internet becomes more mainstream, it's certainly less of a problem for those with that.