it turns out... it's blu-ray.
So Sony has this format called Optical Disc Archive, right? It's a high-density storage cartridge, but it turns out it works by cheating.
it turns out... it's blu-ray.
They've been launching new updates every couple years, with the latest version being the ODC5500R (launched in 2019), which is a 5.5tb write-once cartridge.
This is a medium designed for things like tape robots
They call it "PetaSite", because if you go to the biggest variety, you can fit 2.9 petabytes in a rack.
I mean, if you build a backblaze pod (6.0), that's 60 drives in a 4U chassis.
with 8tb drives you fit 4.8PB per rack, and you can buy 16tb drives today... that's a 9.6PB rack
having 600 spinning drives + 10 servers + cooling running 24/7 is not going to be cheap on the electricity.
It's like how the SEC used to require broker-dealer records be recorded on WORM discs
They can be like "hey, just buy this thing, and you've got PETABYTES worth of data storage that you can trust wasn't changed"
You're not having some person who has the job to burn the DVD-Rs and make sure they're put away in the right places and such.
So less than a terabyte! that's not much, really...
A thousand CD-ROMs? that's more storage than God would ever need.
the only time humans have to deal with them is when they load in more discs or pull discs out to shove them in offline storage (well, offliner)
A lot of people are like "wait, those are real?" because they think I just mocked up some giant cardboard fake discs or something.
So Sony got a bunch of storage in one cartridge by building a special drive that pulls out one of 13 blu-ray discs, right?
Sony developed blu-ray, so it only makes sense
1. I don't have a drive, and this is because they're very expensive. I'd like to have one, if only to take it apart and see how it works.
The mechanism for loading the individual disc has to be neat
Like, I've opened them in the first hour of a 2 day conference and spent the rest of the time trying and failing to put them back together
once by me, when I first got it
once by my wife, when she wanted to show someone at the exhibit...
Fun fact: as soon as it showed up on screen I started going "oh god don't open it don't open it don't open it don't FUCK!"
I was right.
you put the cartridge in, and the top half stays there.
the bottom half is lowered down to clear it from the top half, then there's a servo that pokes the individual disc out into the drive.
More from foone
I don't know why twitter is refusing to insert a card for this one. In any case, It's the @LockPickingLwyr, and it's a floppy-drive-lock.
so I've been meaning to do a video or thread on these sorts of locks myself. I have several, of different designs.
generally they're all designed vaguely like this one: it's a plastic insert that goes into the floppy drive, then it has some bit that rotates with the key to hold itself inside.
and they pretty much universally use super-cheap low-security tubular locks like this. You can probably pick most of them with a ballpoint pen
The funny thing about making the 8-bit-guy into a meme about "repairing" computers with powertools is that the obvious heightening joke would, like, the "8 rounds guy", who fixes computers with firearms
but that would also be him, given that he's also a big gun enthusiast.
so it's inherently hard to satirize the repairing-computers-with-dremels guy, since they're also the guns-guy.
you'd have to go up to like a mythbusters level of overkill.
"this hard drive from 1986 won't spin up. We tried freezing it, tapping it with a rubber hammer, and opening the case to lower the friction... there's only one option left: GET OUT THE C4 EXPLOSIVES!"
but I rebooted it and heard a KTHUNK and a really loud spin-up noise and holy shit, the hard drive works!
and it still has files on it. the newest date is January 1994.
It's a 21mb hard drive, with ~37k of bad sectors.
This fucker is never going to spin up again, so I better go find some serial cables and copy shit off now.
The backlight is fucked so I'm shining a flashlight on it.
without it, it looks like this.
ending #2 is some very thin credits
ending #3 is reportedly the "true ending", at least on the European release. The Japanese version has 35 endings.
This one is... more serious? a little?
The other 32 endings are translated here, by
functionally all the japanese endings work like this. you get CONGRATULATIONS and then CATS says something to you.
usually something silly, or possibly the debug menu cheat code
also yesterday: elon musk leaves twitter "for a while" and jeff bezos steps down
COINCIDENCE? I THINK NOT!
elon's gotta be off twitter for a while because they don't have wifi on the SunCrasher 9000, and bezos keeps stealing his phone anyway
elon thought he wouldn't need it because of starlink but THE SATELLITES ARE IN LOW EARTH ORBIT, MUSK, AND YOU'RE HEADED TOWARDS THE SUN
bill gates is the only one who still has internet access because he remembered to set up a long enough ethernet cable
(although tim cook joked that was just because his WinPhone doesn't have wifi support anyway)
zuckerberg asked if bill gates would let him use the network connection for a while and while billy g was fine with it, it turns out none of the other billionaires brought phones with built in ethernet ports
finally, the win95 phone comes up top!
More from Tech
For technical founders it is irrationally, obscenely hard to reverse years of programming (ba dum bum) that sales is a value-destroying activity. Sales is CLEARLY a value-creating activity, contingent on you have a value-creating product.
The world will not drop what they are doing to adopt your work. This is particularly true in B2B, where simply building a better mousetrap won't overcome the activation energy required to get people with additional non-mice problems to prioritize changing mousetraps today.
This is very non-obvious for founders because founders are not often people who *want* to be sold to. We often come from a background where trying out tools is a bit of a fun hobby. We like looking at all the options, making charts, and ripping out partially complete tests.
"This week I unsuccessfully trialed four software options for automating that thing that has been killing us. Our actual production process remains the same as last week. Don't worry; this was a great use of time." is not a thing you want to write in a progress report to manager.
Fun going down this list and thinking: "Hmm, plausible at a well-run modern software shop", "Hmm, possible, but requires implausible tradeoffs", "Literally disallowed by languages", and "If you were to attempt doing that our test suite wouldn't let you merge."
I think we as an industry celebrate (not quite the right word) failure too much and don't celebrate success nearly enough. There is no DailyWTF for competent execution, word of which generally stays pretty local to the source while incompetence passes into legend.
Alrighty let me try to thread the needle on being the change I want to see in the world while not giving away anything that will get me in trouble:
Ruby has wonderful developer ergonomics. Typed languages are easier for machines to guarantee the correctness of. We built a type checker for Ruby (and I believe it is slated for OSS release sometime).
Twitter: ok sure, we've changed the stars to hearts for likes
Users: no no, zero Nazis please
Twitter: yep we're getting rid of Vine
Users: nah hey, what about the Nazis
Twitter: ok ok fine, no more likes
Really though, if you had to ask any average user what were the main things leading to a bad "quality of debate" on this bad website, the tiny little heart symbols would not exactly be at the top of most people's lists
🧵 A thread.
There's a lot of talk in the open source community about the cost of forking.
- "Forking is best avoided."
- "Forking is a last resort option."
- "Forking is like a nuclear weapons. It's a defensive threat."
Forking is seen as impractical and extremely expensive.
And that's a Really Good Thing(tm).
It's a forcing function for figuring out solutions that are broadly acceptable across the community.
The thing is, the cost of forking is mostly a function of three things:
1⃣ the size of the community that you can bring along with you,
2⃣ whether you need to rename your fork (who owns the trademark), and
3⃣ how much infrastructure you need to rebuild.
Energy system models love NETs, particularly for very rapid mitigation scenarios like 1.5C (where the alternative is zero global emissions by 2040)! More problematically, they also like tons of NETs in 2C scenarios where NETs are less essential. https://t.co/M3ACyD4cv7 2/10
There is a lot of confusion about carbon budgets and how quickly emissions need to fall to zero to meet various warming targets. To cut through some of this morass, we can use some very simple emission pathways to explore what various targets would entail. 1/11 pic.twitter.com/Kriedtf0Ec— Zeke Hausfather (@hausfath) September 24, 2020
In model world the math is simple: very rapid mitigation is expensive today, particularly once you get outside the power sector, and technological advancement may make later NETs cheaper than near-term mitigation after a point. 3/10
This is, of course, problematic if the aim is to ensure that particular targets (such as well-below 2C) are met; betting that a "backstop" technology that does not exist today at any meaningful scale will save the day is a hell of a moral hazard. 4/10
Many models go completely overboard with CCS, seeing a future resurgence of coal and a large part of global primary energy occurring with carbon capture. For example, here is what the MESSAGE SSP2-1.9 scenario shows: 5/10
You May Also Like
You might remember my 3 prior threads on how
TESLA. TREATS. ITS. CUSTOMERS. LIKE. TRASH.
Here's the 4th installment.
@tomkeinan @jonsey_lisa @jwmooc @tchanpoker @bryanthediamond @EconomicManBlog
$TSLA $TSLAQ 1/22
Welcome to Greta's 4th edition of #Tesla customers getting used and abused. Because that's the Elon Musk way.
@coffeebreakls @KocgibiHarun @omaragha @JayGhahari
$TSLA $TSLAQ 2/22
"The best service is no service." - Elon Musk a.k.a. #SpaceKaren
@briansaziz @FarSha998899 @thinktankfour @Billoday1
#Tesla $TSLA $TSLAQ 3/22
These #Tesla customers represent just the very tip of the iceberg. They are ones who have Twitter, have decided to complain about their #TeslaServiceIssues publicly, and were found by yours truly.
@yanismydj @hajelatweets @AlanHeldman @francislongo5 $TSLA $TSLAQ 4/22
Dear #Tesla customers: In California, if your vehicle has been out of service for >30 days total, it's a lemon. You can get punitive damages and attorney's fees. Don't sit around and take Elon's abuse. @13arm13arm @cecimar12 @richardson_skip @shootinglee $TSLA $TSLAQ 5/22
With this, let's get motivated with some curated readings & posts by fellow #24hrstartup participants & indie makers. Check them out below!
✍️ Andrew Parrish wrote - "Why I'm Participating in the 24 Hour Startup Challenge".
@makersup's takeaway - Makers love possibilities, the joy of building. Any aspiring maker should experience the end of lurking on forums & reading @wip's to-dos.
👩💻 @anthilemoon created a list of @women_make_ members participating in the #24hrstartup challenge. Do let her know if she missed anyone!
More at: https://t.co/zYKVZEq8aq
Creating a list of @women_make_ members participating in the #24hrstartup challenge this weekend \u2013 please let me know if I missed anyone! \U0001f469\u200d\U0001f4bb #womenmake pic.twitter.com/Kh7O7fKv7h— \U0001d400\U0001d427\U0001d427\U0001d41e-\U0001d40b\U0001d41a\U0001d42e\U0001d42b\U0001d41e \U0001d40b\U0001d41e \U0001d402\U0001d42e\U0001d427\U0001d41f\U0001d41f (@anthilemoon) November 14, 2018
😺 We can't forget one of the key platforms in shipping indie, can we, @ProductHunt?
Check out @ProductHunt's guide to launching at: https://t.co/VB6WgGx6sa.
In addition, it would be wise to prepare for the launch. Fine tune your assets and post at
🚢 Well, we definitely can't leave out the man behind all of this, @thepatwalls!
Launching isn't easy, but know what you'll be facing even before coding. Check out @thepatwalls' "words of shipping" at:
The paper is a good example of lots of elements of good experimental design. They validate their metric by showing lots of variants give consistent results. They tune hyperparamters separately for each condition, check that optimum isn't at the endpoints, and measure sensitivity.
They have separate experiments where the hold fixed # iterations and # epochs, which (as they explain) measure very different things. They avoid confounds, such as batch norm's artificial dependence between batch size and regularization strength.
When the experiments are done carefully enough, the results are remarkably consistent between different datasets and architectures. Qualitatively, MNIST behaves just like ImageNet.
Importantly, they don't find any evidence for a "sharp/flat optima" effect whereby better optimization leads to worse final results. They have a good discussion of experimental artifacts/confounds in past papers where such effects were reported.
At first, I resisted believing this because it is illogical and dumb and frankly, doesn't reflect well on the human race of which I am a member (and thus have long been hopeful that it is more of a distinction than it actually turns out to be.)
But if you actually are interested in facts you begin to notice how little most people care for them. Sometimes it is because they are heard to learn and bullshit is so much more widely and easily available. Sometimes it is because facts make them uncomfortable about themselves.
Sometimes it is because just one tiny fact will upset a whole worldview that has grown as comfortable as an overstuffed chair. (Settling into such worldviews is a lot like settling into chairs like that because the longer you're there and the deeper you sink...
...the harder it is to hoist yourself up and out of your fat-assed intellectual laziness.) But I actually think the reason people have such an appetite for bullshit goes deeper, goes to an aspect of ourselves we just can't accept.
If you are compromising too much, there is a chance that you are getting manipulated.
Why are you the one that's always compromising?
How come the other person always gets their way?
Be more curious.
If something seems off, stick up for yourself.
'Wait, you sure I am being manipulated?'
I have no clue, that is only something that you can decide for yourself.
'Dang is there anything I need to look out for?'
But let me give you a few things to look out for.
I see manipulation as skillfully controlling someone's behavior for egotistical or unethical purposes.
'How come people don't leave when it's happening to them?'
Because most people have 0 clue that they are being manipulated.
1. Guilt Trip
You ever made a mistake around someone, only for them to hold it over your head?
The will always bring up the mistake when you 2 are not seeing eye to eye.
These people will use that mistake as leverage to get what they want from you in the future.
2. The Rationalizer
This person will commit the worst acts & find a way to rationalize it.
Example: cheaters when they get caught.
They have every excuse in the book for why they did it.
Heck, they are so good at rationalizing, they will make it seem like your fault.