mshook

That's my experience as well in 2 different companies where we went from 2 E15K to 2 E25K because it was "cheaper" than rewriting who knows how much code, for how long and at what cost

At the other one, we jumped from 2 25k to 2 M9000-64 for the same reasons...

Well Concorde showed pre-orders don't mean much... :-D

Fair enough...

My take is it's not even an economic problem. Unless you fly really fast (like Mach 3++), flying east sucks.

Let's assume we have a plane capable of Mach 3+: the SR-71 holds a record for flying from NYC to London in 1h54 and it could do well over Mach 3. Let's assume our plane can do the same in 2 hours.

If you take off from NYC at 10am, you will land at 5pm local time in London. Sure it's a lot faster than a regular flight but you didn't gain as much as flying west bound.

With the same 2 hour flight (because when you fly that high, wind doesn't make such a big difference), you could leave London at 10am and land in NYC at 7am local time, that's so much better.

But that's for a plane doing Mach 3+. Boom is planning to fly slower than Concorde (Mach 1.7 vs Mach 2.02).

Concorde did that in 3 hours FYI.

I'm not sure why you're being downvoted because you're right: they have the technology, they don't have an engine, and this just looks like a civilian version of a fighter jet pretty much (except it has 3 turbojets).

And what people always fail to mention when it comes to supersonic flights is one of the main issue is neither a technological nor an economical one nor a supersonic boom one.

Traveling west bound is great: you leave in the morning and you arrive, local time, before the local time of your origin point. But traveling east bound isn't that great: you still have to leave in the morning and you land in the evening, so the only thing you gained is a shorter flight time but not a full day of work or shopping or what not.

So on regular flights (because Concorde was profitable, at least on the French side, thanks to charter flights), people would fly Concorde to go to NYC and fly back on a red eye...

As someone who worked for and flew on Concorde, I think what they're doing is amazingly cool though and I hope they succeed. But I'm still unsure what the long term plan is...

This is correct, reheat / afterburner was used from Mach 0.9 something to 1.7, after which they'd were off. So yes, Concorde could supercruise.

At this point, probably never it seems...

The issue with (software) raid is you have no idea if what you're copying isn't actually corrupted. If the filesystem isn't checksumed there's no guarantee.

I don't understand the point of the script, it's nothing more than:

  du -h --max-depth=1 "$@" | sort -hr

Pretty much but that's my experience as well, I made the same comment above...

The issue here is with your auditors. I mean if RH tells you a CVE has been fixed with a backport, sure you can challenge that fact but at the same time and with the same standards, it'd mean your auditor would also have to check the actual source of your patched Ubuntu packages to make sure the new versions fixed the security bugs.

The bottom line really is plenty of auditors I've seen don't know how to check for vulnerabilities other than by checking a version... That's it.. Their tools or reporting only know package must have a version greater than x.y.z.