lazyslacker

I’ve found that people who worry that they have bad handwriting typically have very good, legible handwriting. This is true with a lot of things actually. If you care about it, chances are you’re above average already. It’s only people who don’t care and thus you don’t hear from at all about it who are truly bad at something.

Everyone who doesn’t own a gas powered car.

There are plenty of people for whom this is not a true statement.

You can still find the mind enriching parts if you look. It’s a neutral communication medium at this point, the barriers to entry just don’t really exist anymore. People use it how they will. Dumb people will use it in dumb ways. 50% of people are dumber than the average person. That’s a lot of people.

In Oracle you’d just set up a user that has limited access and give them those credentials. Creating a few views that pulls in the data they want is a bonus.

Dat gap

I’m ok with it, I’ve got a room in my own house with a surround sound system. I recognize not everyone has this. A mix with a compressed dynamic range should always be an option.

There’s nothing you can do to change what happened in the past but you can treat every new day as a new opportunity to try to self actualize, following whatever path to do that seems best to you.

deleted by creator

Mine runs as a kubernetes app on my truenas scale NAS.

A drunk person not taking the obvious non verbal hints could easily get out of hand if put in such a confrontational situation where it would be hard for them to save face.

It doesn’t just disappear right, it becomes something else. It converts to a more stable isotope. I think.

The calculations necessary to rebuild a failed drive from parity data stored on the other drives means that for the duration of the time that the array is being rebuilt (aka “resilvered”), you’ll have high activity on the other drives. So during that time there’s an increased chance that a drive that was already on the brink of failure is pushed over the edge. If that happens, your data is gone. Like I said it depends on your risk tolerance. You may not feel like it’s worth it in your situation. I personally only run a raidz1. I accept the risk that entails, just as people who use raidz2 accept the increased risk that entails over raidz3. There’s no limit to the amount of redundancy you can add. The level of redundancy that’s needed is a decision that only you/your organization can make.

I’d say it depends on your circumstances and your tolerance to the possibility of data loss. The general answer to the question is that without using some kind of redundancy, either mirrored disks or RAID, the failure of a single disk would mean you lose your data. This is true for each copy of your data that you have.

Off-site backup is the proper answer to your question. All this really depends on your own tolerance or comfort with the possibility of losing data. The rule of thumb is that there should be at least three different copies of your data, each in a different physical location. For each of them, there should be redundancy of some kind implemented to guard against hardware failure. Redundancy is typically achieved by using mirrored drives or by using RAID of some kind. Also, if you’d like to know, using RAID in which you can only lose one disk in the array is not typically considered a sufficient level of protection because of the possibility of a cascading drive failure during replacement of a failed disk. It should be at least two.

My understanding is, with their iterative approach, the fact that the last one spiralled uncontrollably doesn’t mean it was a total waste. They got a lot of good data from that and it will apply to future designs.

This is an example of kenopsia, not a liminal space.

I’ve been taking notes religiously at work for years. So many notes. I have gone through dozens of note pads over the years. I recently switched from paper to Microsoft To Do. Works great for my purposes since I’m on my computer most of the time anyway. No more bulky note pads with disorganized chicken scratch.

As we both know, the 1918 Spanish flu was unusually virulent, and back then we had no vaccines. Comparing to that flu would not give us useful data. It would be misleading. As you know, I meant today’s flu.

How are their symptoms though? Not bad right? By saying COVID is over I mean the more dangerous forms of it from 2020 and 2021 are gone. It’s barely worse than the flu at this point. I’m not saying people aren’t still getting it. It’s just mostly inconsequential.