Same as big data centers siphoned up all the SSDs before their prices became reasonable for consumers, same with HDDs, or RAM every generation. They’ll be high before they’ll be reasonable, and then they’ll be cheap once their next generation comes along.
Yeah, started in the late 70s (1978) with the StorageTek STC 4305, which was 45MB in a large cabinet, cost $400,000, and was from what I can find the first SSD. From there up until the 2000s they served as expensive but crucial networking infrastructure, when in the early-mid 2000s the industry moved from RAM to NAND, and the price-per-GB of NAND became reasonable enough to enter the consumer space as a proper form of storage drive, and not just for USB sticks or memory cards.
For comparison, here is the rough trajectory of price:
1978: $9.1 million/GB
1985: $920,000/GB
1990: $50,000/GB
1995: $1,000/GB [0]
2005: $100/GB
2006 is when the first commercial SSDs hit market in laptops, and by 2010 they were ~$3/GB, which brought them to wide adoption.
[0]: 2000 was a stagnant year, prices stayed the same from my research between ‘95 and the new millennium before dropping in 2005.
Well the effects of radiation were still poorly understood, but also there wasn't that much radioactive material left over in any concentration. And the gamma ray blast would appear superficially like normal burns from being near a firebomb until atleast a few days later.
Contrary to Fallout lore, most nuclear bombs dont leave much concentrated radioactive material unless it was done on purpose. You either need a shittier and smaller explosion with the same material, or you need a ground burst which reduces the effective blast area.
The US was on ground zero in under 2 weeks in Japan and couldn't detect anything over the background in radioactive isotopes.
« And the gamma ray blast would appear superficially like normal burns from being near a firebomb until atleast a few days later. »
Would it? How so?
First, the notion of “normal burns from being near a firebomb” is inadequate. There are various types of firebombs. The ones “generously” employed by Uncle Sam against the Japanese (primarily civilians, and later idem against the Koreans and the Vietnamese) are napalm bombs. The way they work is that burning napalm is blasted about in lumps and sticks to anything it hits, including clothes and human skin. The injuries caused by napalm lumps are special. They're called keloids.
Figure 9.3 on page 171 of Palmer's book (free PDF available, link in 49938615, which is among the comments on this topic) shows keloid burns in Hiroshima bombing victims. These have been interpreted as “flash burns”. However, this defies common sense. First, they show characteristically strong locality, irregular shapes, sharply defined edges, and look exactly like napalm burns. Second, how would you explain a hypothetical “flash” (of whatever nature) from a distance more than a couple inches away to produce such conspicuously localized injuries? (And even from ten inches away you'd need strong directionality.) The forensics flatly contradict and preclude such a “flash” interpretation.
Palmer, who is an MD, found that not much can be found about napalm in the medical literature, which curiously contrasts with its very wide-spread application against humans by the U.S. Air Force (p.140, referred to on p.175 and p.241):
As of this writing (in 2019), a simple search for “napalm” on
PubMed retrieves 29 articles, of which only 7 (seven) are written
in English, and none of these provides much useful detail.
>Now you don't need to understand the details of connecting to Stripe or Auth0 or setting up a Kubernetes cluster.
Ehhh, if you're smart you want to at the very least gloss over the details, and look at the code being generated by whatever model you're using for this solution.
reply