4/12    Not soda-related:  Can anyone name services used by the general public
        which have 'five nines' uptime?  That is, unavailable for less than
        5 minutes in any year.  One of our potential clients is requesting this
        level of reliability and it seems extreme to me.  I was wondering who
        actually hits this level.
        \- helo, "the phone system" is the standard place to talk about
           5 9s. i think in many cases it boils down to "how much $ to
           invest in backup power" and maybe being able to cut a service
           over quickly [automatically] in the event of failure or downtime
           for patching etc. i think you are probably right the person you
           are talking to is a dumbass. i dunno if you are in the position
           to do this but you might ask "how many minutes of downtime per
           year is acceptable" ... ask this question in real time [face to
           face or over the phone]. most stupid people dont know. assuming
           the pass that test and realize the difference between 4 and 5 9s
           is 50min, you might ask what 50min of total or partial failure
           is worth [keep in mind if a WEEB site says they do $100k of
           transactions per hour, you really have to measure how much of
           that is gone for good and wont just be executed later or cant
           be buffered somehow in the case of a partial failure]. but you
           are right that at this point you have to start spending serious
           money on things like 24x7 engineering staff who can replace
           failed blades in cisco routers at 3am and such, or can diagnose
           weirg BGP problems on easter sunday ... let alone deliberate
           attacks on the system. i'm not sure what the reliability tagets
           for 911 and ATC are but you might do some research on those. oktnx.
           \_ I thought credit card processors and financial exchanges were
              the standard.  When you refer to the phone system, do you mean
              POTS, or do you include the cellular network?  If it's both,
              then it definitely doesn't have five nines.  What about when I
              call a land line from a land line, and the system cannot
              complete it because of too much traffic?  Does that count as
              down time?  -dans
              \_ I nominate lesser-bloviator: tom@soda, greater-bloviator: dans
                 \_ You're a moron. -dans
                    \_ Right, and name calling in retaliation for random
                       anonymous trolls is the earmark of an intellectual
                       giant.  Isn't it past due for you to pointlessly insult
                       tom or something?
                       \_ I'm sorry, since I lack your intellectual stature
                          and slick post-modern tools for deconstruction I
                          fail to see how the sentence, ``You're a moron,''
                          states or implies that I am a genius.  Perhaps you
                          could clarify for lesser intellects like mine. -dans
                          \_ Oh the irony!  You're fun to play with, dans.
                             \_ Oh, touch my monkey!  Touch it!
                                http://csua.org/u/fke -dans
                                P.S. You don't seem to understand the meaning
                                of the word irony.  Please consult a
                                dictionary, or Dave Eggers' handy guide in ``A
                                Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius.''
                                \_ Actually I understand it quite well, thanks.
                                   \- the std reference on irony is ARISTOTLE
                                      not EGGERS
                                   \_ Your usage suggests otherwise.  How does
                                      your use of the term irony actually
                                      match the definition? -dans
                                      \_ Actually, my usage is bang on.
                                         \_ No.  Really, it's not.  You might
                                            describe my language as sarcasm,
                                            but not irony.  Irony is when the
                                            opposite of what is expected
                                            happens.  Nothing more.  There is
                                            absolutely no way you can
                                            correctly describe my comment as
                                            ironic. -dans
                                            \_ You're wrong.
                                               \_ Eh.  Are you enjoying
                                                  trolling? -dans
                                                  \_ Since it's so easy...not
                                                     really.  I find this whole
                                                     conversation absurd since
                                                     I know what relationship
                                                     I'm referring to and you
                                                     clearly have no clue.
                                                     It if makes you feel smart
                                                     then by all means, keep
                                                     trying...but you'll still
                                                     very wrong.
                                                     be very wrong.
                                                  \- are you enjoying being
                                                     a fool?
                                                     if you look at a roman
                                                     source like quintillian
                                                     if you look at roman
                                                     sources, e.g. quintillian,
                                                     they will commonly
                                                     emphasize the idea of
                                                     opposite meaning but in
                                                     the older greek conception
                                                     [as exemplified by
                                                     socrates "know nothing"
                                                     attitude, or as discussed
                                                     formally in aristotle
                                                     with examples mostly
                                                     from homer and attic drama]
                                                     it often better character-
                                                     ized as "understatement"
                                                     or dissembled meaning
                                                     rather than opposite.
                                                     often defeinition talk
                                                     about a "contrary" meaning
                                                     to what is stated, but
                                                     contary has a different
                                                     sense than opposite.
                                                     1. some what ironically
                                                        \_ Do you mean
                                                           somewhat? -dans
                                                           \_ OOhh!! Face!
                                                              Face!!  You
                                                              got him!!!1!one
                                                     UCB DEAD PROFESSOR and
                                                     MACARTHUR GENIUS was
                                                     one of the main modern
                                                     scholars on IRONY.
                                                     see: http://csua.org/u/fko
                                                     2. the wikipedia entry
                                                     on irony is pretty decent
                                                     and more importantly a lot
                                                     more readable than some
                                                     formal discussions.
                                                     \_ That's nice.  I always
                                                        quote the wikipedia as
                                                        a reliable source on
                                                        scholarly literary
                                                        topics. -dans
                                                        \- you referenced "a
                                                           dict" and dave
                                                           eggers.
                                                           i cited:
                                                           1. quintillian
                                                           2. aristotle
                                                           3. vlastos
                                                           4. wikipedia
                                                           wikip is probably
                                                           the only one
                                                           accessible to you.
                                                           i assume you didnt
                                                           see the Nature
                                                           study comparing
                                                           the EB and Wikip.
                                                           it did pretty well.
                                                           a key to using
                                                           the wikip is to
                                                           know enough about
                                                           the subject to
                                                           be able to tell
                                                           if it is trustworthy
                                                           on factual points.
                                                           keep digging buddy.
        --------------------------------------------------/
        \                                   \_ You're right. -tom ... Now that
         \                                      would be ironic, no? -!tom
          \_ So, in other words, since you clearly have no idea what the hell
             you're talking, you are incapable of judging whether or not the
             wikipedia entry on irony is accurate, and you were just pulling a
             source out of your ass!  Awesome!  Please tell me oh great and
             mighty master of irony, were my previous two sentences ironic; is
             this one? -dans
             \_ So, rather than admit you can't read my mind and are therefore
                probably wrong, you flip out and resort to ad hominem red
                herrings.  I'm beginning to see a pattern in your behavior
                here...  You can have this thread, btw -- I won my bet.   =)
             \_ Little Dan, this is your Mother. Please stop embarassing us.
                \_ Fuck you.  If you had any knowledge of my mother's
                   condition, you'd realize that's in remarkably poor taste.
                   -dans
                   \_ Now that's ironic.  Little Dan, did you cry?
                      \_ No.  Properly speaking, if you wanted to mock me by
                         insinuating that I am a baby, you would call me
                         Danny, but it doesn't really work unless you knew me
                         when I was called that. -dans
                   \_ Why would he?
                   \_ Now that's ironic.
                      \_ I think dans is the self appointed expert irony mind
                         reader guy around here -- let's see what he says,
                         first.
                      \_ she's on the cover of Crack Ho Magazine?
                   \_ yermom
         \_ the motd: delivering idiotic banter with 5 9s reliability

4/12    The Revolt Against Rumsfeld, The officer corps is getting restless:
        http://www.slate.com/id/2139777/?nav=ais