Amazon Web Services expanded its cloud services portfolio Tuesday with the launch of Amazon Glacier, a low-cost archiving option. Befitting its chilly namesake, the new service aims to be the data equivalent of cryogenic storage--that is, it's designed for ...
Amazon isn't pulling any punches as it launches Glacier either. According to the cloud provider, “companies typically overpay for data archiving” due to required upfront payments and their inability to accurately guess what their capacity requirements will be.
"Using Amazon Glacier... unlimited archival storage is available to [AWS customers] with a familiar pay-as-you-go model," Werner Vogels, the company's chief technology officer, wrote in a blog post on Tuesday. "The service redundantly stores data in multiple ...
Amazon Glacier is slated to be a highly reliable service. AWS claims average annual durability of 99.999999999 percent, or 11 nines of availability, which is the same durability as that of its Amazon S3 standard storage. Amazon estimated that a durability of ...
Amazon Glacier, as the new service is known, stores a copy of your data in archived format for less than a penny per gigabyte per month. The only catch is that getting the data back out can take some time since Glacier is primarily intended for backup and ...
On Tuesday, Amazon unveiled a new online storage service known as Glacier. It's called Glacier because it deals in “cold storage” — i.e., the long-term storage of things like medical records or financial documents that you may need to archive for regulatory ...
But what I am finding even more interesting is the twitter traffic. "amazon glacier" is getting a fair amount of tweets per minute.
I think silicon valley as we know it may be coming to an end. In order to create a successful new company, you have to find an idea that (1) has escaped the attention of the major Internet companies, which are better run than ever before; (2) is capable of being launched and proven out for ~$5M, the typical seed plus series A investment; and (3) is protectable from the onslaught of those big companies once they figure out what you're onto. How many ideas like that are left?
You can see the original Facebook post which is public.
David's main point is not that there are a shortage of ideas, but how hard it is create a company.
David O SacksHuman creativity has not changed, and there will always be new ideas and opportunities. But the question is, how many of those opportunities will be captured by startups versus incumbents? It seems like a statistical fact that when you go from virtually no incumbents to multiple well-run incumbents, an increasing percentage of opportunities will be captured by the latter. That's the point I'm making about Silicon Valley -- we may not be running out of ideas, but we might be running out of big new companies.
One of the problems is if your company is in Silicon Valley you are surrounded by your competitors. Staying under the radar, yet proving you have a sound revenue model, and the big guys won't crush you is really really hard. I grew up and spent my first 12 years working for HP and Apple in Cupertino and you learned to keep your mouth shut and not talk shop when you were outside of work.
I do agree with David and I wouldn't build a successful new company in silicon valley. The easiest way to achieve success is not to tell the VC community what the new company is. But, then it is hard to get the $5mil of funding.
A group of Carnegie Melon Researchers published a Siggraph paper on "What makes Paris look like Paris?" When I read this paper and watched the video it reminded me of many of the conversations that some of the top data center people have. Comparing elements of what they see and do with others, discussing what others try and whether it would work in their environment.
Last year a bunch of us went to visit some top financial data center executives and toured their facilities. We could find elements of the power, mechanical and other systems that told us who designed the building and how it compared to their building.
One of the insights from the paper is that the famous landmarks are not what make the look and feel of the city, but the stylistic elements.
6 Conclusion So, what makes Paris look like Paris? We argued that the “look and feel” of a city rests not so much on the few famous landmarks (e.g. the Eiffel Tower), but largely on a set of stylistic elements, the visual minutiae of daily urban life. We proposed a method that can automatically find a subset of such visual elements from a large dataset offered by Google Street View, and demonstrated some promising applications.
Common sense tells us that bad weather makes us blue and therefore less productive at our jobs, but it turns out the opposite is true. As detailed in this executive brief at HBS Working Knowledge, researchers Jooa Julie Lee, Francesca Gino, and Bradley R. Staats found that performance at a mid-sized Japanese bank peaked on the days with the worst weather, as it did in a series of lab experiments they conducted too. Here’s their theory: When the weather’s bad, our minds wander less, and we’re able to focus more because we really can’t do anything else.
Now in data centers, you don't usually get to see the sun that much. There aren't a lot of skylights or windows, so the weather may not affect you. Or the weather may affect you because you know what is like outside.
Some suggestions from their research: Save drudge work for the wettest days and creative endeavors for sun-soaked days. Other ideas include using weather reports to determine the best staff size on a given day and moving service centers to cities with poor (but not entirely depressing) weather. Here’s to you, Seattle.
I don't know about you, but I am so tired of the over exaggeration of green data centers that I don't pay attention to most statements that data centers are green any more. People think they are green simply because they are LEED certified, yet they provide so transparency on what they did to be certified. and whether the main reason they got certified was for marketing purposes. There are quite a few people who have expressed how little the return is for saying their data center is LEED certified.
Low PUEs are an exaggeration as well. When you know who the people are behind the statements, one of the questions I ask myself is this type of person who regularly tells lies or the truths?
NBC has post on an experiment done to see what happens if people tell the the truth for 10 weeks vs. a control group that does their regular life of lying.
We tell one lie, sometimes two, every day, sharing an average of 11 untruths per week. We tell lies to avoid hurt feelings, or we embellish to make a story more interesting.
But whether it’s a white or boldface lie, all these fibs harm our health. Researchers discovered that people who lie less experience better physical and mental health than those who commonly bluff.
Just because people are visible speaking at conferences doesn't mean they are lying less. In fact, the speakers could be lying more than the rest.
“The irony is that now that we have more outlets for disclosure [such as Facebook], it forces us to lie more because now people ask really bold questions,” she says.
Keep in mind that telling the truth doesn't have to be as bad as Jim Carrey's movie Liar Liar.
Telling the truth can be more like this.
Kelly stresses that not lying doesn’t mean sharing harsh truths -- it means telling kind truths or not revealing some information. A kind truth might sound like “I loved how that other dress looked on you,” instead of “you look terrible in this dress.” Participants in the no lie group also avoided exaggerations by changing the subject or not answering questions, politely, of course.
Telling the truth is also better for the soul and your health.
“Good relationships have long been connected to good health,” says Kelly. “The bottom line is this is really about the relationships … being caught in these lies is anxiety [producing] because we don’t want to ruin the relationships.”
あこ@ツイ減ちう(´･ω･`) 
El Pinguino 
ONeil Software 
William Blumberg 
