A good low (basically zero) risk way to start is to flash an image of say Ubuntu onto a flash drive. They’re usually bootable. So you can boot into Linux right off the flash drive.
This obvious takes a performance hit compared to actually installing it, but it’ll let you confirm that it actually works on your hardware.
Apparently when Satya Nadella took over, Steve Ballmer told him “don’t screw up”. In terms of stock price and profits, he absolutely hasn’t. In terms of producing products that consumers might actually want to pay for, he has failed completely and Microsoft has never been in a worse position. But those two things are completely disconnected now so it’s fine.
Why have windows calculator when you can have windows calculator with AI guess what you want to calculate, get it wrong, spy on you, and use that spying to serve you targetted ads all at the same time? #innovation
You really don’t see the risk of having no data centers you actually control as an organization?
This really depends on what you think you’re getting from having your own DC. Is it reliability? Flexibility? Control? What are your objectives?
There’s some argument to be made to have some locally hosted stuff for some flexibility and control. And in some niche cases the pricing of public offerings doesn’t make sense.
But as I said, if you’re building your own data center for increased reliability then 1) you’re necessarily assuming the premise that you’re going to be better at managing DCs than Google, Microsoft and AWS which I think in reality would be hard to prove let alone do, and 2) is hard to justify considering you can distribute workloads across multiple data centers already (as proven by the Netflix example) so that your reliability isn’t limited by any one vendor.
You’re kind of proving (part of) my point?
How? Their reliability would exist without that. There’s nothing inherent to their own data center that makes their setup that much better. Having a distributed system across multiple cloud service providers means your actual chance of downtime (here I mean inverse of uptime) is their individual chances of uptime multiplied by each other. In other words, they all have to go down for your service to fail. The catch is you have to use only commodity IaaS and PaaS, nothing proprietary to one CSP.
For smaller companies especially, in terms of pure reliability, there’s no reason to think that they would be better at running a high availability data center than Microsoft or AWS or Google.
Parallel distributed architectures give you the advantages of using public cloud (not having to physically manage your own data center) without the disadvantages (dependence on any one cloud vendor), while also potentially increasing your reliability beyond the reliability of any one of your cloud vendors . That is why Netflix is so rock solid.
If we want a truly robust system, yeah, we kinda do. This sort of event is only one of the issues with allowing a single entity to control pretty much everything.
What I’m advocating for is the opposite of “allowing one entity to control everything”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_engineering#Chaos_Monkey
Read about it dude. Netflix has a large presence in all major cloud providers (and they have their own data centers), but has a service whose uptime is NOT dependent on any one of those hosting environments. The proof is the pudding - Netflix service did not go down in the recent AWS outage, nor in the last one.
All of that can be achieved WITHOUT completely abandoning public cloud services and having to completely host all of the hardware for their services.
We don’t have to. It is entirely possible to engineer applications and services in a way that they’re not dependent on any one cloud service, while also using cloud services for IaaS. Netflix famously does this, and sure enough Netflix experience no service interruptions during this latest outage despite having a large AWS presence.
I mean the hilarious thing about the movie is that the guy in the left was also supposed to be super elite or whatever and be the final boss for Arnold. Arnold circa 1982 vs a guy who looks like he drinks a 6 pack of beer every day. The most lopsided boss fight in a movie.
But nah, they’ll just shove AI into everything blow the equivalent of Wikipedia’s annual budget in a week on just electricity to shove unwanted AI slop into people’s faces.
You’re off my several order of magnitude unfortunately. Tech giants are spending the equivalent of the entire fucking Apollo program on various AI investments every year at this point.
They don’t “spend millions” against leftists lol. They just ignore them entirely with the understanding that you guys have the rhetorical skills of chimps throwing feces. Most people disagree with you. You can spin whatever conspiracy theories you want to cope with that, but that is reality.
I mean this thread is about tech that was perfect from it’s inception to the point where it didn’t or barely improved. Nothing could be further from the truth, transistor tech has had literally trillions of dollars and millions of smart people’s careers poured into it, and semiconductor IC manufacturing is now the most complicated single activity that our species does.
Those losers have won enough to have political relevance, which you do not. You are literally not relevant enough to even lose to the orange turd.
It’s more than that dude. Antifa is the perfect boogeyman for the right because it’s left wing, but also not an organization. Who is the leader of antifa? Where are they based? Who do you have to kill to eliminate antifa leadership? How does someone become a member of antifa? These questions have no answers because antifa is not an organization.
Those are also questions that the right wing media machine works hard to get their audience to never ask. That way, by demonizing antifa, they can use force against anyone because anyone they don’t like can be declared antifa, because no one can disprove their membership, because “antifa membership” literally isn’t a thing.
It’s carte blanche to do whatever they want.
It’s honestly just another symptom of Fox News brain rot. Their audience is trained not to ask any relevant questions. It was always going to end badly.
Books were among the first things to be pirated and are still among the easiest because the amount of data is so small. People we’re doing that on dial up Internet.
Just dig up an old laptop and setup the full *arr stack with jellyfin. Takes some work up front but after that it’s basically painless.
The limit is when people stop rewarding this behaviour by giving them money. So yeah no sign of hitting it.
Chinese government sanctioned groups can and will still access the broader internet.
They imagine themselves as the Titans from the Dune universe.
Is any of our current AI tech even making significant strides towards achieving this? I really don’t think the current crop or billionaires will live to see this being viable even if they live another 100 years.
You have to get increasingly creative to get grant funding in this environment.
The project is real, but it’s a mismanaged catastrophe.
It’s basically what happens when you have a project with overly understanding financiers, an overly ambitious creative head, and absolutely no concern whatsoever for avoiding scope creep.
Kind of amazing really. I can imagine in centuries past an architect becoming the personal favourite of a king so he just keeps making the palace he’s tasked to build more and more extravagant since the king keeps giving him more money endlessly.
You have plenty in politics. Special interests (mainly but not exclusively the rich) have seen to it that the American electorate would never make any of them president. Billionaires don’t buy news and media outlets because they love honest journalism.