Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Mike Elkins <MikeE@*********.COM>
Subject: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:33:15 -0500
>Depends. You can get a kick butt multi-cpu intel based system for what
>$2000 or so. I think the Alpha 500 Mhz is probably in the $5000 range
>(somebody check me on that), and IBM's SP-2's are considerably more
>expensive (Into the 100,000's) depending on how much memory they
>have and when you bought them.
>As far as mainframes go, I have no idea.

Well, you get what you pay for. $2000 gets you a PC. If you try to run
server software on a PC it sort of works, but if you push the load on it
up towards the maximum, it starts getting very flakey.

Essentially there are 3 things that make a server a server, and not all
servers have all three, but that it what to aim for:
1) Reliability. You can expect a server to run 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week, for months or years at a time. Expect to pay at least $10,000 for
a PC with this kind of reliability.
2) Capacity: The ability to add lots and lots of disk space, RAM, CPUs
etc. You can add these to a PC, but expect to hit limits.
3) Speed: The least important of these, in some ways. Similar to
Capacity.

I haven't priced a mainframe lately, but my last company's mainframe
cost $3.5 Mil, and it was a small one.

Here would be my rule of thumb: Base cost: 1-3 users: $8000
4-10 users $15000, 10-50 users $40,000, 50-100 users: $100,000

Excellant Reliability: price x 5
Rock-Solid Reliability: price x 15-25

Security: Green System: price x 1.5
Orange System: price x 6
Red System: price x 15
Black System: GM's call

Add some more money for higher system ratings, too.

All of this is off the top of my head, and IMHO.

Sanity Check: An Orange system for a small research group (25-50
people), mission critical work: $40k*20*6 = $4.8 million. Yup, I can live
with that.

Double-Domed Mike
Message no. 2
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:02:36 -0400
Mike Elkins wrote:
>>Depends. You can get a kick butt multi-cpu intel based system for what
>>$2000 or so. I think the Alpha 500 Mhz is probably in the $5000 range
>>(somebody check me on that), and IBM's SP-2's are considerably more
>>expensive (Into the 100,000's) depending on how much memory they
>>have and when you bought them.
>>As far as mainframes go, I have no idea.
>
>Well, you get what you pay for. $2000 gets you a PC. If you try to run
>server software on a PC it sort of works, but if you push the load on it
>up towards the maximum, it starts getting very flakey.

Sorry, but I think that you're off here - if you push anything too far,
it'll snap. A lot of that depends on the OS used - I'm getting into
sensitive territory here, but some OSes are much more stable than
others and I don't necessarily mean the expensive ones.

>Essentially there are 3 things that make a server a server, and not all
>servers have all three, but that it what to aim for:
>1) Reliability. You can expect a server to run 24 hours a day, 7 days a
>week, for months or years at a time. Expect to pay at least $10,000 for
>a PC with this kind of reliability.

Whoa! If I wanted a fast, SOTA server, I wouldn't expect to pay more
than C$5000! Granted, I wouldn't be paying for support from Compaq
or IBM, but I'd be getting a machine built on standards that I can
get parts for easily and inexpensively.

>2) Capacity: The ability to add lots and lots of disk space, RAM, CPUs
>etc. You can add these to a PC, but expect to hit limits.

A PC's limits nowadays are based more on the size of the case than on
the PC itself - a big tower with a set of 20G SCSI drives and hundreds
of megs of RAM will cover lots... Granted, PCs don't handle TB yet,
but that's far beyond what's required of most servers.

>3) Speed: The least important of these, in some ways. Similar to
>Capacity.

Most servers require IO speed much more than CPU speed.

>I haven't priced a mainframe lately, but my last company's mainframe
>cost $3.5 Mil, and it was a small one.

*Boggle*! What is it used for?

[prices snipped]
These are all pretty arbitrary and are relative to stuff we don't know
about, so I'm not going to comment on them...

>All of this is off the top of my head, and IMHO.
>
>Sanity Check: An Orange system for a small research group (25-50
>people), mission critical work: $40k*20*6 = $4.8 million. Yup, I can live
>with that.

What are they researching? That makes a *huge* difference in cost.
Basically, to get just a little more performance costs a lot more
money.

James Ojaste
Message no. 3
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:58:57 -0500
<SNIP>
>
> Well, you get what you pay for. $2000 gets you a PC. If you try to run
> server software on a PC it sort of works, but if you push the load on it
> up towards the maximum, it starts getting very flakey.
>
> Essentially there are 3 things that make a server a server, and not all
> servers have all three, but that it what to aim for:
> 1) Reliability. You can expect a server to run 24 hours a day, 7 days a
> week, for months or years at a time. Expect to pay at least $10,000 for
> a PC with this kind of reliability.
> 2) Capacity: The ability to add lots and lots of disk space, RAM, CPUs
> etc. You can add these to a PC, but expect to hit limits.
> 3) Speed: The least important of these, in some ways. Similar to
> Capacity.
>
> I haven't priced a mainframe lately, but my last company's mainframe
> cost $3.5 Mil, and it was a small one.
>
> Here would be my rule of thumb: Base cost: 1-3 users: $8000
> 4-10 users $15000, 10-50 users $40,000, 50-100 users: $100,000
>
> Excellant Reliability: price x 5
> Rock-Solid Reliability: price x 15-25
>
> Security: Green System: price x 1.5
> Orange System: price x 6
> Red System: price x 15
> Black System: GM's call
>
> Add some more money for higher system ratings, too.
>
> All of this is off the top of my head, and IMHO.
>
> Sanity Check: An Orange system for a small research group (25-50
> people), mission critical work: $40k*20*6 = $4.8 million. Yup, I can live
> with that.
>
I'll work with you on that. Although there are liable to be far more
smaller networks, vs mainframes. (The universities seem to be moving
away from mainframes and more towards clustering technology, at least FSU
is). The other key word there is mission-critical. If you can't live without
it being down for any length of time, it cost big bucks. If you can live
with the a few hours or days, you cost is much lower.
Of course the good stuff is always on the expensive toys. :)
(And actually depending on what your doing, I would rank speed higher,
people hate slow anything these days)



--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The universe doesn't have laws, it has habits. And habits can be broken.
Message no. 4
From: Craig J Wilhelm Jr <craigjwjr@*********.NET>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:53:27 -0400
Ojaste,James [NCR] wrote:
> A PC's limits nowadays are based more on the size of the case than on
> the PC itself - a big tower with a set of 20G SCSI drives and hundreds
> of megs of RAM will cover lots... Granted, PCs don't handle TB yet,
> but that's far beyond what's required of most servers.

I dunno about most, but let's take something as complex as a modern
(1990's) car for example. From conception to production, the total data
produced ranges between 20-40 terabytes.
In the 2050's, with people working on things like cyberdecks,
cyberware, Banshees and other insanely complex things, the data
handeling requirements are goint to push the limits of human
comprehension. And how many exapulses of RAM does it take to run an AI
on your server?

--
Craig "Knee Deep in the Blood of Swine" Wilhelm
Inside every living human being, there's a dead one waiting to come out.
UIN: 1864690
-------------BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------
v3.12
GAT/$ d- s+:+ a- C+++ U--- P+ L- E-- W++ N++
o K- w+ O> !M-- !V PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t--- 5+++
X-- R++ tv b++ DI-- D+(Q2++) G++ e++ h* r y++**
--------------END GEEK CODE BLOCK--------------
Message no. 5
From: Alfredo B Alves <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:53:37 -0500
On Tue, 26 May 1998 15:33:15 -0500 Mike Elkins <MikeE@*********.COM>
writes:
>>Depends. You can get a kick butt multi-cpu intel based system for what
>>$2000 or so. I think the Alpha 500 Mhz is probably in the $5000 range
>>(somebody check me on that), and IBM's SP-2's are considerably more
>>expensive (Into the 100,000's) depending on how much memory they
>>have and when you bought them.
>>As far as mainframes go, I have no idea.
>
>Well, you get what you pay for. $2000 gets you a PC. If you try to run
>server software on a PC it sort of works, but if you push the load on it
>up towards the maximum, it starts getting very flakey.

Well, If a keyboard sized computers can handle the strain of decking what
can a PC sized server do?

>Essentially there are 3 things that make a server a server, and not all
>servers have all three, but that it what to aim for:
>1) Reliability. You can expect a server to run 24 hours a day, 7 days a
>week, for months or years at a time. Expect to pay at least $10,000 for
>a PC with this kind of reliability.
>2) Capacity: The ability to add lots and lots of disk space, RAM, CPUs
>etc. You can add these to a PC, but expect to hit limits.
>3) Speed: The least important of these, in some ways. Similar to
Capacity.
>
>I haven't priced a mainframe lately, but my last company's mainframe
>cost $3.5 Mil, and it was a small one.

Yeah, a mainframe will give you the best server performance, but a server
doesn't HAVE to be a mainframe and I wish that VR 2.0 took that into
account.

>Here would be my rule of thumb: Base cost: 1-3 users: $8000
>4-10 users $15000, 10-50 users $40,000, 50-100 users: $100,000
>
>Excellant Reliability: price x 5
>Rock-Solid Reliability: price x 15-25

The problem here is that the normal VR rules don't take into account
reliability and system load (AFAIK) so unless the you want to introduce
new rules (or associate rating values with the above "stats") the price
is going to have to be based on rating (and security value, which the VR
price doesn't take into account ...)

However, I think that an abstract load "background stat" (ie mainly there
for reference, and only comes into play in special circumstances) might
be a good idea. Say on a scale of 1 to whatever, a 1 would be a PC based
/ sized server and the upper limit would mainframes with (practically)
infinite numbers of users. Then a base price might be
((rating*load)^2)*1000.

>Security: Green System: price x 1.5
>Orange System: price x 6
>Red System: price x 15
>Black System: GM's call

by Black do you mean UV systems? If they're even "purchasable", I'd say
x100 or more. (due to rarity, and SOTA as well as relitave costs [ie the
first pentium was overpriced when it was first available for purchase])

>Add some more money for higher system ratings, too.
>
>All of this is off the top of my head, and IMHO.
>
>Sanity Check: An Orange system for a small research group (25-50
>people), mission critical work: $40k*20*6 = $4.8 million. Yup, I can
live
>with that.
>
>Double-Domed Mike

my turn for a sanity check :)
say load is on a scale of 1 to 10, then
An Orange system, Rating 8, Load 5 (25-50 people ain't much, so an even
lower Load would be appropriate):
( ((8*5)^2)*1000 )*6 = 9.6 mil

Now for some other examples:
Telecomm grid (Blue Sys, Load 10, Rating 6):
( ((6*10)^2)*1000 )*1 = 3.6 mil

Dinky Server(TM) (Blue Sys, Rating 4, Load 1):
( ((4*1)^2)*1000 )*1 = 16 k

The Good Stuff (Red Sys, Rating 11, Load 10):
( ((11*10)^2)*1000 )*15 = 181.5 mil (no wonder the corps get pissed if
you crash their servers :)

Well, this price system was pretty arbritrary but tell me what ya think
none-the-less, okay? :)

D.Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, and RuPixel)

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 6
From: Craig J Wilhelm Jr <craigjwjr@*********.NET>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:55:30 -0400
Mike Elkins wrote:
[snip reasonable pricing system]

> Sanity Check: An Orange system for a small research group (25-50
> people), mission critical work: $40k*20*6 = $4.8 million. Yup, I can live
> with that.

Me too, thanks! But then again, where am I going to use this in game?
--
Craig "Knee Deep in the Blood of Swine" Wilhelm
Inside every living human being, there's a dead one waiting to come out.
UIN: 1864690
-------------BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------
v3.12
GAT/$ d- s+:+ a- C+++ U--- P+ L- E-- W++ N++
o K- w+ O> !M-- !V PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t--- 5+++
X-- R++ tv b++ DI-- D+(Q2++) G++ e++ h* r y++**
--------------END GEEK CODE BLOCK--------------
Message no. 7
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 17:08:56 -0400
At 04:02 PM 5/26/98 -0400, you wrote:

>>I haven't priced a mainframe lately, but my last company's mainframe
>>cost $3.5 Mil, and it was a small one.
>
>*Boggle*! What is it used for?

Note the difference in terms; he said *mainframe* while you said server.

You're probably right for a common server, but he's definitely right for a
mainframe machine.

It really all depends on what you intend to do with that machine. If it's
just a mail server, a P166 running NT 4.0 can service a 100 people no
problem at all. My dad does that at his work. Says running the mail
utilizes about 3-4%$ of the processor resources.

But if you want your server to handle the firewall, the entire corporate
database, all the mail, *EVERYTHING* then you need something bigger, like a
mainframe.

So make sure you are talking about the same thing here. That should solve
half your problems with this discussion.

Erik J.


"What was that popping sound?"

"A paradigm shifting without a clutch."
Message no. 8
From: Justin Bell <justin@******.NET>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:45:48 -0500
At 05:08 PM 5/26/98 -0400, Erik Jameson wrote:
# At 04:02 PM 5/26/98 -0400, you wrote:
#
# >>I haven't priced a mainframe lately, but my last company's mainframe
# >>cost $3.5 Mil, and it was a small one.
# >
# >*Boggle*! What is it used for?
#
# Note the difference in terms; he said *mainframe* while you said server.
#
# You're probably right for a common server, but he's definitely right for a
# mainframe machine.
#
# It really all depends on what you intend to do with that machine. If it's
# just a mail server, a P166 running NT 4.0 can service a 100 people no
# problem at all. My dad does that at his work. Says running the mail
# utilizes about 3-4%$ of the processor resources.
#
# But if you want your server to handle the firewall, the entire corporate
# database, all the mail, *EVERYTHING* then you need something bigger, like a
# mainframe.

actually, a fairly inexpensive Sparc 2000 can handle EVERYTHING for a
decent sized company, firewall and all.

--
/- justin@****.mcp.com -------------------- justin@******.net -\
|Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. |
|Simon & Schuster | Attention span is quickening. |
|Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. |
\------------ http://www.mcp.com/people/justin/ ---------------/
Message no. 9
From: AlSeyMer <AdSM@******.BE>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 23:42:59 +0200
Craig J Wilhelm Jr wrote:
>
> Mike Elkins wrote:
> [snip reasonable pricing system]
>
> > Sanity Check: An Orange system for a small research group (25-50
> > people), mission critical work: $40k*20*6 = $4.8 million. Yup, I can live
> > with that.
>
> Me too, thanks! But then again, where am I going to use this in game?

I would find this kind of information extremely handy, for mundane
things like "What kind of server X inc. can afford?", or "How much worth
of precious corporate property had they wasted this run?"

Besides pricing servers, another good question would be pricing
softwares. I assume that those pretty Killers don(t come for nothing,
and this should also be accounted for in the total system value.

AlSeyMer
Message no. 10
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 19:41:21 -0300
Mike Elkins escreveu:
>
(snip mainframe building rules)

> Sanity Check: An Orange system for a small research group (25-50
> people), mission critical work: $40k*20*6 = $4.8 million. Yup, I can live
> with that.
>
> Double-Domed Mike


Good system! Better than the official thing (5M¥ per Security Rating
point... and those
systems always have at least 6 points.. ugh.). The official might fit
for UV (black) systems,
but not for the more normal stuff...

Bira
Message no. 11
From: Phil Levis <pal@**.BROWN.EDU>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 03:38:26 -0400
On Tue, 26 May 1998, Mike Elkins wrote:

> Here would be my rule of thumb: Base cost: 1-3 users: $8000
> 4-10 users $15000, 10-50 users $40,000, 50-100 users: $100,000
>
> Excellant Reliability: price x 5
> Rock-Solid Reliability: price x 15-25
>
> Security: Green System: price x 1.5
> Orange System: price x 6
> Red System: price x 15
> Black System: GM's call
>
> Add some more money for higher system ratings, too.

I'd personally lower the multipliers for excellent and rock-sold
reliability, and raise the base costs. <shrug>

These prices seem pretty reasonable to me, not as a 'mainframe' per se,
but as the cost of a *host*. So, some orange host for 40 users costs =Y=
1.25 mill, and it's pretty reliable. In that cost are, a la Matrix 1.0,
SANs, SPUs, a CPU, all that sort of jazz; it's a distributed system with
five or six physical boxes all linked up. By Matrix 2.0, it's an orange
sculpted host.

Phil
Message no. 12
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 09:33:40 -0500
>
> At 04:02 PM 5/26/98 -0400, you wrote:
>
> >>I haven't priced a mainframe lately, but my last company's mainframe
> >>cost $3.5 Mil, and it was a small one.
> >
> >*Boggle*! What is it used for?
>
> Note the difference in terms; he said *mainframe* while you said server.
>
> You're probably right for a common server, but he's definitely right for a
> mainframe machine.
>
> It really all depends on what you intend to do with that machine. If it's
> just a mail server, a P166 running NT 4.0 can service a 100 people no
> problem at all. My dad does that at his work. Says running the mail
> utilizes about 3-4%$ of the processor resources.
>
> But if you want your server to handle the firewall, the entire corporate
> database, all the mail, *EVERYTHING* then you need something bigger, like a
> mainframe.
>
> So make sure you are talking about the same thing here. That should solve
> half your problems with this discussion.
>
I'll toss in here a few thoughts. I've seen mention of the
requirments for a single mainframe, etc.
First putting all your eggs in one basket is always bad (I don't
care how reliable the machine is). Distributed computing seems
to be used more commonly (a web and mail server, one dns server, etc).
Second, one machine doesn't have to be the "ultimate" box. If trends
continue, clustering the resources of many machines seems likely
to be much more common. (And if one fails, far less stress).
Ex: In the Denver-DataHaven section of the sourcebook, it mentions
the Nexus doesn't have one huge mainframe, but several smaller but
still very beefier boxes.
Anyway....one with the show. :)
(Since know one in my group wants to play deckers, I don't have to
worry about this stuff often. :))



--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The universe doesn't have laws, it has habits. And habits can be broken.
Message no. 13
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 09:39:20 -0500
>
> At 05:08 PM 5/26/98 -0400, Erik Jameson wrote:
> # At 04:02 PM 5/26/98 -0400, you wrote:
> #
> # >>I haven't priced a mainframe lately, but my last company's mainframe
> # >>cost $3.5 Mil, and it was a small one.
> # >
> # >*Boggle*! What is it used for?
> #
> # Note the difference in terms; he said *mainframe* while you said server.
> #
> # You're probably right for a common server, but he's definitely right for a
> # mainframe machine.
> #
> # It really all depends on what you intend to do with that machine. If it's
> # just a mail server, a P166 running NT 4.0 can service a 100 people no
> # problem at all. My dad does that at his work. Says running the mail
> # utilizes about 3-4%$ of the processor resources.
> #
> # But if you want your server to handle the firewall, the entire corporate
> # database, all the mail, *EVERYTHING* then you need something bigger, like a
> # mainframe.
>
> actually, a fairly inexpensive Sparc 2000 can handle EVERYTHING for a
> decent sized company, firewall and all.
>
And if someone hacks that one machine, your SOL. :) (It will also have
a more likely chance of failure, since it does everything.)
The other problem is of course, researchers. They need their own
dedicated systems, since often one researchers experiments will take
monthes to complete on one system with 20+ gig of drive space, and a gig
of RAM. Now translate this into shadowrun....

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The universe doesn't have laws, it has habits. And habits can be broken.
Message no. 14
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 09:59:12 -0400
Erik Jameson wrote:
>>>I haven't priced a mainframe lately, but my last company's mainframe
>>>cost $3.5 Mil, and it was a small one.
>>
>>*Boggle*! What is it used for?
>
>Note the difference in terms; he said *mainframe* while you said server.

Well, given that the subject is "Server prices", and that a mainframe
is a server...

>You're probably right for a common server, but he's definitely right for a
>mainframe machine.

There's a difference between the average corp server and a machine used
for theoretical physics research...

>It really all depends on what you intend to do with that machine. If it's
>just a mail server, a P166 running NT 4.0 can service a 100 people no
>problem at all. My dad does that at his work. Says running the mail
>utilizes about 3-4%$ of the processor resources.

Well, most of that is probably just the OS - a P166 should be able to
handle 10k mail users without too much difficulty.

>But if you want your server to handle the firewall, the entire corporate
>database, all the mail, *EVERYTHING* then you need something bigger, like a
>mainframe.

Well, if you're insane enough to put your corp db on the same machine
as the firewall, you deserve what you get. Most people put the firewall
on a separate machine entirely, the email on another, the db on one or
more machines (depending on how critical the db is)...

>So make sure you are talking about the same thing here. That should solve
>half your problems with this discussion.

I don't think so. What's that P166 cost nowadays? $1000? Canadian!
So for $1M, you could get a cluster of 1000 of them. Now you're well
and truly into the realm of the supercomputer - far beyond what any
corp would need for general usage.

James Ojaste
Message no. 15
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies)
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 10:03:54 -0400
Craig J Wilhelm Jr wrote:
>> A PC's limits nowadays are based more on the size of the case than on
>> the PC itself - a big tower with a set of 20G SCSI drives and hundreds
>> of megs of RAM will cover lots... Granted, PCs don't handle TB yet,
>> but that's far beyond what's required of most servers.
>
> I dunno about most, but let's take something as complex as a modern
>(1990's) car for example. From conception to production, the total data
>produced ranges between 20-40 terabytes.

How much of that data is ever used at once? Standard PCs can handle
well, let's say a SCSI system with 7 20G drives = 140G with, say, 512M
RAM. Not to be sneezed at. Then you decide to cluster them, add more
SCSI devices etc. Distributed computing tends to be much cheaper than
monolithic...

> In the 2050's, with people working on things like cyberdecks,
>cyberware, Banshees and other insanely complex things, the data
>handeling requirements are goint to push the limits of human
>comprehension. And how many exapulses of RAM does it take to run an AI
>on your server?

Pulses are ridiculous. Don't make me say it again. FASA might well
decide that you can get AI ratings at 1MP per.

James Ojaste

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Server Prices (was Re: Hacking Security Tallies), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!