Nollij

joined 2 years ago
[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 4 points 5 hours ago

As evidenced by the term "bearded clam"

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 3 points 7 hours ago

Let's not forget possibility number 3, that someone lied to him that we are doing it. How would he ever know?

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 day ago

It probably depends on how personalized the ads are. It should come as no surprise that targeted ads have been a thing as long as ads have existed. Coke ads during family shows, alcohol ads (you'll be cool if you use our product) on MTV, etc.

There are already a number of algorithms to deliver one ad for a product over another, based on likely demographics. Streaming has greatly increased this, since specific demographic details are immediately and directly available when the ad is shown. I won't get the same as on Hulu that you get.

As for generating ads on-the-fly, that seems unlikely. Few ads are fully generated at all, let alone in response to demographics or the specific viewer(s).

There are also risks when deploying ads without vetting. Some of these viewers will be dressed as Nazis, and will happily share the video to everyone.

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 day ago

reassemble

I'm sure that was autocorrect, but it feels awfully portentous.

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 days ago

Even then it can be dangerous. People move around, and people talk. The people burned can show up again later in so many different ways, in both official and unofficial capacities. I currently work near (different teams, same org) several of my former co-workers, purely by coincidence.

It wouldn't be a career-ender if I'd screwed them over in the past, but it does make things easier that they have positive experiences with me.

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 days ago

AKA "The Nixon"

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 days ago

Do you have a source on that? It sounds evil enough for IBM, but logistically too problematic to be worthwhile.

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Not op, but there are many ways to measure nutrition. Similarly, there are many definitions of "healthy".

That said, processed sugar is rarely regarded as healthy or nutritious.

ETA: Related, the makers of Nutella were sued for claiming it was healthy.

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 17 points 2 days ago

Bananas are moderate in sugar (14g per medium banana), dark chocolate is relatively low in sugar (5-30g per 100g, depending). Peanut butter is readily available without any added sugar.

Honestly, these seem to be closer to a "fat bomb" than a sugar bomb. If it were milk/white chocolate and the cheap, sugary PB you would have a point though.

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 days ago

Not OP, and while I agree with your stance on Rogan, it doesn't change the validity of any claims made on the show. The claims are either supported by evidence, or they are not. Many sane and normal people go on shows, like Rogan's, to counter misinformation that's common everywhere.

That said, the obvious follow-up question is where else is the claim made, tested, and documented. And that's where it really falls apart. Most results when searching for his technical claims were just random people discussing this exact clip. Digging past that, all I could find were extremely vague and indirect sources.

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The story I'd heard was not that it's a transcription error, but closer to a pun. Readers would be familiar with the term for a ship's rope, and the minor linguistic shift highlighted the absurdity of such an idea.

Interesting though about translations to other languages. I'll have to dig further on the subject.

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The reason why you can (not especially safely) eat takeout pizza that's been sitting out overnight is because it's usually loaded with salt. Salt is a preservative, and limits growth of the nasties.

 

I'm looking to upgrade some of my internal systems to 10 gigabit, and seeing some patchy/conflicting/outdated info. Does anyone have any experience with local fiber? This would be entirely isolated to within my LAN, to enable faster access to my fileserver.

Current existing hardware:

  • MikroTik CSS326-24G-2S+RM, featuring 2 SFP+ ports capable of 10GbE
  • File server with a consumer-grade desktop PC motherboard. I have multiple options for this one going forward, but all will have at least 1 open PCIe x4+ slot
  • This file server already has an LSI SAS x8 card connected to an external DAS
  • Additional consumer-grade desktop PC, also featuring an open PCIe x4 slot.
  • Physical access to run a fiber cable through the ceiling/walls

My primary goal is to have these connected as fast as possible to each other, while also allowing access to the rest of the LAN. I'm reluctant to use Cat6a (which is what these are currently using) due to reports of excessive heat and instability from the SFP+ modules.

As such, I'm willing to run some fiber cables. Here is my current plan, mostly sourced from FS:

  • 2x Supermicro AOC-STGN-i2S / AOC-STGN-i1S (sourced from eBay)
  • 2x Intel E10GSFPSR Compatible 10GBASE-SR SFP+ 850nm 300m DOM Duplex LC/UPC MMF Optical Transceiver Module (FS P/N: SFP-10GSR-85 for the NIC side)
  • 2x Ubiquiti UF-MM-10G Compatible 10GBASE-SR SFP+ 850nm 300m DOM Duplex LC/UPC MMF Optical Transceiver Module (FS P/N: SFP-10GSR-85, for the switch side)
  • 2x 15m (49ft) Fiber Patch Cable, LC UPC to LC UPC, Duplex, 2 Fibers, Multimode (OM4), Riser (OFNR), 2.0mm, Tight-Buffered, Aqua (FS P/N: OM4LCDX)

I know the cards are x8, but it seems that's only needed to max out both ports. I will only be using one port on each card.

Are fiber keystone jacks/couplers (FS P/N: KJ-OM4LCDX) a bad idea?

Am I missing something completely? Are these even compatible with each other? I chose Ubiquti for the switch SFP+ since Mikrotik doesn't vendor-lock, AFAICT.

Location: US

view more: next ›