If the airline really doesn't care about the quality of water, then there might be other things in the water beside bacteria. Boiling will not remove chemical contaminants.
I actually wish I could round up every computer in my home, stick them in a 19-inch rack, and put that rack someplace where I can't hear it. That would be my "data center". It will be fed with a fat power cable and a nice fiber uplink, and it might even run some "AI" from time to time.
What about a single beefcake server that runs dumb terminals throughout your house with a lightweight shim between each device and server. Sexy monitors just sitting there quiet AF. Mega room for coffee cups and niknaks across the desk. Ports for days. This is my dream. I'd keep it by my feet so I could pet it and say good job.
I run my workstation PC with a dedicated GPU in a rack in the shed. I use Sunshine on the workstation and Moonlight on the client to access it. I can game like that, use blender for modelling, anything that needs more juice than my old laptop. It feels local. Even over WiFi I quite often forget I am on a remote machine. Moonlight runs on pretty much anything and everything too.
SMTP clients are designed to try again with exponential backoff. If the final attempt fails and your email gets bounced, now that's an error. Until then, it's just a delay, business as usual.
Yes, mix-and-match is the way to go, depending on what kind of skills are available in your team. I wouldn't touch a mail server with a 10-foot pole, but I'll happily self-manage certain daemons that I'm comfortable with.
Just be careful not to accept more complexity just because it is available, which is what the AWS evangelists often try to sell. After all, we should always make an informed decision when adding a new dependency, whether in code or in infrastructure.
Of course AWS are trying to sell you everything. It’s still on you and your team to understand your product and infrastructure and decide what makes sense for you.
I think French (and by extension, many Western) and Japanese people just emphasize different aspects of the restaurant experience.
Order a sirloin steak anywhere in the Western hemisphere, and you know almost nothing about what it will look and taste like, other than the fact that it will contain a piece of beef sirloin. The chef might have his own secret sauce, or garnish the steak with unusual herbs, which can change the flavor completely. Those are the some of the surprises that you're looking for, but most of them can be visually identified. They'll be ruined if you can see in advance exactly what kind of herbs will be used.
In Japanese cuisine, many dishes are based on either raw or minimally modified ingredients. White rice is white rice. Poached shrimp is just poached shrimp. You already know what a slice of tuna or fried tofu looks like. The dish as a whole just looks like the sum of its ingredients. Heck, if you can read Japanese, it looks exactly as its name says! No surprises there at all. Instead, you find delightful surprises elsewhere: the freshness of the fish and vegetables, the richness of the broth, the way in which disparate flavors balance one another in your mouth as you take a bite. These surprises will not be ruined by knowing what the dish looks like in advance. Because you're not looking for an original recipe here. You're looking for the most perfect execution of a known recipe.
Of course it's a gross simplification, but this might help explain the different reaction between East and West.
That's certainly a take. If the menu says sirloin steak and doesn't mention any sauces, and I order a medium rare sirloin steak without mentioning any sauces, then I rather expect to get exactly what I think I'm ordering, a medium rare sirloin steak. Maybe a bit of a herby garnish wouldn't be a terrible surprise, although if it changed the flavour completely then it really ought to say about it on the menu.
It seems to me like steak is maybe one of the dishes where what you're saying is least true. I know a great deal about what it will look and taste like.
Faster M.2 drives are great, but you know what would be even greater? More M.2 drives.
I wish it was possible to put several M.2 drives in a system and RAID them all up, like you can with SATA drives on any above-average motherboard. Even a single lane of PCIe 5.0 would be more than enough for each of those drives, because each drive won't need to work as hard. Less overheating, more redundancy, and cheaper than getting a small number of super fast high capacity drives. Alas, most mobos only seem to hand out lanes in multiples of 4.
Maybe one day we'll have so many PCIe lanes that we can hand them out like candy to a dozen storage devices and have some left to power a decent GPU. Still, it feels wasteful.
> Alas, most mobos only seem to hand out lanes in multiples of 4.
AFAIK, the cpu lanes can't be broken up beyond x4; it's a limitation of the pci-e root complex. The Promontory 21 chipset that is mainstream for AM5 does two more x4 and four choose sata or pci-e x1. I don't think you can bifurcate those x4s, but you might be able to aggregate two or four of the x1s. And you can daisy chain a second Prom21 chipset to net one more x4 and another 4 x1.
Of course, it's pretty typical for a motherboard to use some of those lanes for onboard network and what nots. Nobody sells a bare minimum board with an x16 slot, two cpu based x4 slots, two chipset x4 slots, and four chipset x1 slots and no onboard perhipherals, only the USB from the cpu and chipset. Or if they do, it's not sold in US stores anyway.
If pci-e switches weren't so expensive, you might see boards with more slots behind a switch (which the chipsets kind of are, but...)
The M.2 form factor isn't that conducive to having lots of them, since they're on the board and need large connectors and physical standoffs. They're also a pain in the ass to install because they lie flat, close to the board, so you're likely to have to remove a bunch of shit to get to them. This is why I've never cared about and mostly hated every "tool-less" M.2 latching mechanism cooked up by the motherboard manufacturers: I already have a screwdriver because I needed to remove my GPU and my ethernet card and the stupid motherboard "armor" to even get at the damn slots.
SATA was a cabling nightmare, sure, but cables let you relocate bulk somewhere else in the case, so you can bunch all the connectors up on the board.
Frankly, given that most advertised M.2 speeds are not sustained or even hit most of the time, I could deal with some slower speeds due to cable length if it meant I could mount my SSDs anywhere but underneath my triple slot GPU.
Including ones that have controllers, if your motherboard doesn't have enough lanes or it doesn't support bifurcation. I have a Rocket 7608A, which gives you 8 M.2 slots in a PCIe 5.0 x16 card: https://www.highpoint-tech.com/nvme-raid-aic/gen5/rocket-760...
The people who produce dinosaur illustrations don't seem to have as much of a problem with adding all sorts of details (extravagant plumage, wacky colors/patterns, starry eyes and acrobatic postures) that are neither directly supported nor contradicted by available evidence.
They only started adding feathers after they found evidence of them being feathered, though.
Plus there's zero direct evidence for their colours so there's no option but to use guesswork in these cases.
And a lot of dinosaur reconstructions may be more for edutainment value rather than reflecting a scholarly best-guess. There's no uniform methodology across all these disciplines.
> Plus there's zero direct evidence for their colours
This is no longer true! Starting with Sinosauropteryx in 2010, paleontologists have identified what they believe to be fossilized melanin-containing organelles. These organelles, called melanosomes, have different shapes depending on which color they produce, and those shapes are preserved well enough to be visible under an electron microscope.
Amazing, thanks for pointing it out. In the meantime, there's been some rejigging of the classification so it's this related genus where they've found the melanosomes
Isn't a rather good deal of color from feathers a result of "structural color", rather than pigmentation? I'd be curious if fossilized feathers could ever, in theory, preserve enough microscopic detail to guess at that.
> then we jump forward to Bernini and the total lack of paint, which makes it even more likely that there were competing philosophies around statuary
Most Greek and Roman statues had lost their paint long before the Renaissance. Early modern artists held up those paintless statues as the ideal form, which is why nobody from Michaelangelo to Bernini even tried to paint their sculptures. Instead, Bernini learned how to make marble itself interact with light to look alive. For centuries afterward, the purity of raw marble became the one true ideology. Diversity in this area collapsed, and took a long time to recover.
Even today, most people who are used to Western classical art will probably agree that marble statues look better without paint. We've been conditioned for generations to believe so. The ugly reproductions of painted statues aren't helping, either.
reply