Skip to content

This new 40TB hard drive from Seagate is just the beginning—50TB is coming fast!

Technology
232 129 2.0k
  • 18 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    blackfeathr@lemmy.worldB
    Someone should ban this shill/bot.
  • 1k Stimmen
    148 Beiträge
    284 Aufrufe
    R
    My guess is that he's not running his companies in South Africa because they would have to be 30% Black owned if that were the case.
  • 117 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    58 Aufrufe
    M
    I keep getting propaganda from the terrorist staye of israel
  • Delivering BlogOnLemmy worldwide in record speeds

    Technology technology
    3
    28 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    48 Aufrufe
    kernelle@0d.gsK
    Nice to hear! I'm glad you enjoyed it.
  • No JS, No CSS, No HTML: online "clubs" celebrate plainer websites

    Technology technology
    205
    2
    772 Stimmen
    205 Beiträge
    7k Aufrufe
    R
    Gemini is just a web replacement protocol. With basic things we remember from olden days Web, but with everything non-essential removed, for a client to be doable in a couple of days. I have my own Gemini viewer, LOL. This for me seems a completely different application from torrents. I was dreaming for a thing similar to torrent trackers for aggregating storage and computation and indexing and search, with search and aggregation and other services' responses being structured and standardized, and cryptographic identities, and some kind of market services to sell and buy storage and computation in unified and pooled, but transparent way (scripted by buyer\seller), similar to MMORPG markets, with the representation (what is a siloed service in modern web) being on the client native application, and those services allowing to build any kind of client-server huge system on them, that being global. But that's more of a global Facebook\Usenet\whatever, a killer of platforms. Their infrastructure is internal, while their representation is public on the Internet. I want to make infrastructure public on the Internet, and representation client-side, sharing it for many kinds of applications. Adding another layer to the OSI model, so to say, between transport and application layer. For this application: I think you could have some kind of Kademlia-based p2p with groups voluntarily joined (involving very huge groups) where nodes store replicas of partitions of group common data based on their pseudo-random identifiers and/or some kind of ring built from those identifiers, to balance storage and resilience. If a group has a creator, then you can have replication factor propagated signed by them, and membership too signed by them. But if having a creator (even with cryptographically delegated decisions) and propagating changes by them is not ok, then maybe just using whole data hash, or it's bittorrent-like info tree hash, as namespace with peers freely joining it can do. Then it may be better to partition not by parts of the whole piece, but by info tree? I guess making it exactly bittorrent-like is not a good idea, rather some kind of block tree, like for a filesystem, and a separate piece of information to lookup which file is in which blocks. If we are doing directory structure. Then, with freely joining it, there's no need in any owners or replication factors, I guess just pseudorandom distribution of hashes will do, and each node storing first partitions closest to its hash. Now thinking about it, such a system would be not that different from bittorrent and can even be interoperable with it. There's the issue of updates, yes, hence I've started with groups having hierarchy of creators, who can make or accept those updates. Having that and the ability to gradually store one group's data to another group, it should be possible to do forks of a certain state. But that line of thought makes reusing bittorrent only possible for part of the system. The whole database is guaranteed to be more than a normal HDD (1 TB? I dunno). Absolutely guaranteed, no doubt at all. 1 TB (for example) would be someone's collection of favorite stuff, and not too rich one.
  • 616 Stimmen
    254 Beiträge
    7k Aufrufe
    N
    That’s a very emphatic restatement of your initial claim. I can’t help but notice that, for all the fancy formatting, that wall of text doesn’t contain a single line which actually defines the difference between “learning” and “statistical optimization”. It just repeats the claim that they are different without supporting that claim in any way. Nothing in there, precludes the alternative hypothesis; that human learning is entirely (or almost entirely) an emergent property of “statistical optimization”. Without some definition of what the difference would be we can’t even theorize a test
  • 105 Stimmen
    173 Beiträge
    2k Aufrufe
    smartmanapps@programming.devS
    the proper way is to group it as 1+(-2)+3 No it isn't. you can do it in any order You can do it in any order anyway left to right 1-2+3=-1+3=2 addition first 1+3-2=4-2=2 subtraction first -2+1+3=-1+3=2 right to left 3-2+1=1+1=2 What I meant with ““rule”” is the meme questions pray on people not understanding/remembering what the actual rules are And you showed that you were one of them. Every answer you got other than 4 was wrong, because you didn't understand the rules. spoiler alert: doing it in different orders never means add brackets to it. Addition first for 10-1+1 is 10+1-1, not 10-(1+1). See previous textbook example why “left to right” conventions exist They exist because people like you make mistakes when you try to do it in a different order. Either learn how the rules work or stop spreading disinformation. Well, you should stop spreading disinformation regardless.
  • Trump Taps Palantir to Compile Data on Americans

    Technology technology
    35
    1
    205 Stimmen
    35 Beiträge
    416 Aufrufe
    A
    What fantasy are you larping here