Is OpenStack the New Linux? 185
snydeq writes "As the self-proclaimed 'cloud OS for the datacenter,' OpenStack is fast becoming one of the more intriguing movements in open source — complete with lofty ambitions, community in-fighting, and commercial appeal. But questions remain whether this project can reach its potential of becoming the new Linux. 'The allure of OpenStack is clear: Like Linux, OpenStack aims to provide a kernel around which all kinds of software vendors can build businesses. But with OpenStack, we're talking multiple projects to provide agile cloud management of compute, storage, and networking resources across the data center — plus authentication, self-service, resource monitoring, and a slew of other projects. It's hugely ambitious, perhaps the most far-reaching open source project ever, although still at a very early stage. ... Clearly, the sky-high aspirations of OpenStack both fuel its outrageous momentum and incur the risk of overreach and collapse, as it incites all manner of competition. The promise is big, but the success of OpenStack is by no means assured.'"
Done. (Score:5, Funny)
...projects to provide agile cloud management...
Whenever I see "blaw...blaw AGILE blaw...blaw", I stop reading.
Re:Done. (Score:5, Insightful)
Needed webscale and enterprise value there. Agile alone isn't agile enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Whenever I see a question mark in the headline I stop reading.
Re:Done. (Score:5, Interesting)
I always think of Betteridge's Law of Headlines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_Law_of_Headlines [wikipedia.org]
Betteridge's Law of Headlines? (Score:2)
I stopped reading this thread when I saw "blaw .. blaw AGI
Re: (Score:2)
Is Betteridge's Law of Headlines the new Sturgeon's Law?
We fed this into a 1960s computer and it exploded (Score:2, Flamebait)
I always think of Betteridge's Law of Headlines
Headline I'd like to see: "Is Betteridge's Law of Headlines actually correct?"
Re: (Score:2)
It was until now.
Is Betteridge's Law of Headlines true? (Score:2)
I always think of Betteridge's Law of Headlines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_Law_of_Headlines [wikipedia.org]
Is Betteridge's Law of Headlines true? .... though there is only one logically consistent answer.
Only you can decide!
Is Betteridge's Law of Headlines false? (Score:2)
Re:Done. (Score:5, Funny)
I reckon the slashdot editors should just have gone the whole hog, with :
"2013 : The Year of OpenStack on the Desktop?"
Re:Done. (Score:5, Insightful)
I got that with "cloud".
How open can the system be when it runs on someone else's hardware under someone else's control?
OK, maybe potentially big news for cloud service vendors, but I can't the average Linux hobby coder giving this a lot of time or effort
Re:Done. (Score:5, Interesting)
I dunno...
We're already hearing about "local clouds" - essentially building a small-scale cloud for your own large company. So, say, Hewlett-Packard could, instead of renting cloud space, could build a small "cloud" just for themselves.
Once that becomes relatively common, someone will come up with the "personal cloud" - a small home server, that "does" "everything" "the cloud" "does". I actually expect IPv6 may help with this - if you can access "your" cloud from anywhere, what advantage does "the" cloud have?
And then, once that becomes common for nerds and the tech-savvy wealthy, someone will decide to do it in software instead of a dedicated hardware appliance. I expect they shall call it a "desktop cloud".
And then the loop begins AGAIN!
Re: (Score:2)
We're already hearing about "local clouds" - essentially building a small-scale cloud for your own large company.
The difference between mainframes + thin clients and "local clouds" is.... the number of servers?
Re:Done. (Score:4, Insightful)
So at which number of "servers" does it become a cloud?
Up until about 2-3 years ago we had about 50 or so "Hardware" servers at our company. Which we replaced one after the other with two bladecenters with 24 blades in total, in two different buildings plus NAS clusters, running everything on virtual machines. Those are advertised by IBM as "IBM BladeCenter for Cloud", so at least THEY think that already is "the cloud".
I, personally, have come to think that once you run something in a virtual machine, clustered in a way that one hardware box going down has no effect of your "Application" running it is basically "The Cloud". Of course that has been around for decades "The Cloud" is only a new marketing speak that has come up.
Re:Done. (Score:5, Interesting)
I think "Cloud" is less about physical architecture and more about feature set. When I think "Cloud" I think dynamic, quickly reconfigurable, essentially "limitless". Where I work we're moving away from a traditional model where applications are installed on their own dedicated servers with dedicated DB and FS storage to a Cloud model where VMs can be dynamically allocated in seconds, cloned from images and ready to roll. Storage is via EC2 style no-sql object storage and doesn't need to be pre-provisioned. For a small shop this probably doesn't sound very exciting but when you're in an environment with tens of thousands of machines and are used to multi-week wait times for approval, purchasing and install of new hardware it's a pretty big shift.
So it's not the redundancy, or even use of VMs that's interesting, it's the pooling of resources - having compute & storage be essentially utilities you can take as little or as much of as you need. Places like Google have been doing this for a long time, but it's only recently becoming mainstream in other orgs.
Re: (Score:2)
I think "cloud" has to do more with the separation of managing the physical aspect of things from managing the software. Think about it: What does IT involve? It invovles both managing the physical aspect of things -- monitoring disks as they wear out, sorting out physical places to put servers, power and cooling, plugging in cables, configuring network switches and KVMs / serial consoles, &c &c. It also involves managing the software aspect -- installing operating systems, configuring servers, u
Re: (Score:2)
The difference between mainframes + thin clients and "local clouds" is.... the number of servers?
I don't think this has to do with the number of servers. Typically, a mainframe would be bought from a big vendor (let's say IBM), would have a proprietary API (if there's an API at all), and would run on that vendor's hardware. A "local cloud" would run on commodity hardware (eg: any cheap PC...).
Re: (Score:2)
Personal cloud? Oh, you mean owncloud.org
Re: (Score:3)
I prefer the Freedom Box [freedomboxfoundation.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
At first I tried calling 'cloud computing' time-share 2.0. The name never caught on with the younger developers, but got some laughs from the guys who were a bit older than I am, and a raised eye-brow or two. (I'm in my mid 30's, but my parents worked around the computers in the glory days of room sized main frames).
Cloud computing can be useful. We're using a CDN to serve up the relatively static HTML/JS/CSS client and "cloud computing" for the web services layer to handle traffic spikes. On major eve
Re: (Score:2)
How open can the system be when it runs on someone else's hardware under someone else's control?
You sound just like the old greybeards
"Why on earth would you ever want to use Unix?! I mean it's not even your computer under your control!"
Just as one can install any flavor and distro of unix on their own hardware at home or work, so too can it be done with "cloud" management software.
I have three systems running in my basement all running as virtualization hosts. Each and every one of those is owned by me, and is run by me.
The only thing missing to make it a "cloud" is the management software, which a
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Done. (Score:4, Interesting)
I thought the same but have been doing some digging of late. I've only really looked at depth into AWS so far, and yes, it can be as simple as sticking a LAMP stack in the "cloud". BUT if you need to scale that up, there's some rather neat stuff for load balancing and auto-scaling, basically being able to build a service/system that could handle the slashdot effect without needing the long term hardware commitments. And its rather easy to do. Add into it the ability to distribute your content across multiple cache servers to speed up access and you have the ability to put together global infrastructure at a fraction of the cost of a data centre deployment.
Now as to the long-term costs, I actually view that as much as a matter of good management of that infrastructure - demand not as expected then cut back on resources used or if there's constant demand then reserve (pay up front for) that capacity and cut costs. While it might not be right for every project cloud based services have enough advantages and make sufficient economic sense that it is fool-hardy to ignore them any longer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: your sig:
Dark Matter is the Phlogiston of Contemporary Cosmology
Does that mean that quantum field theory is the luminiferous aether of modern particle physics?
Re: (Score:2)
It will start with spellcheck...
Re: (Score:2)
Spellcheck your username first! :-P
Re: (Score:2)
No !
yup (Score:2, Funny)
I've HURD this before.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Somehow I just GNU there would be a smarmy AC cracking puns.
Meta-engineering (Score:5, Insightful)
As a general rule, the only way to build something large and complex that works is to grow it from something small and simple that works.
Re:Meta-engineering (Score:5, Insightful)
As a general rule, the only way to build something large and complex that works is to grow it from something small and simple that works.
As a general rule, something simple that works will grow into something large and complex that doesn't work, and no one can figure why.
Re: (Score:2)
That feature is going in Version 3.0 which is based on V1.89b and the V2.X branch is being discarded.
It had to have a bunch more SWedges installed to support all the additional functionality correctly without spazzing out.
Which is why... (Score:3)
As a general rule, the only way to build something large and complex that works is to grow it from something small and simple that works.
Which is why the Saturn V booster used in the Apollo 11 mission to the moon was built out of Legos.
-- Terry
Re: (Score:2)
It was a reaction to incrementalism (Score:3)
I strongly disagree that it's a general rule.
I find that a lot of people I would not ordinarily view as idiots have this absurd idea ingrained in their psyche that it's possible to incrementally get from thing ABC to thing XYZ. Mostly I have to believe that these people have never had to reverse engineer anything.
One of the places this happens most often is in Open Source software, where people have drank the Eric Raymond kool aid about "The Cathedral and the Bazaar". Sometimes you need to build a cathedr
Wait, what? (Score:5, Insightful)
OpenStack is a Linux distribution organized for deploying a compute cloud. Linux is the new Linux?
Re:Wait, what? (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words "We have a new distro, how can we get some free advertising..."
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it's even a Linux distribution because the install guides for the different types of OpenStack nodes start with instructions for Ubuntu, Debian, CentOS, Fedora, RHEL.
http://wiki.openstack.org/InstallInstructions/Nova [openstack.org] (Compute node)
http://wiki.openstack.org/InstallInstructions/Swift [openstack.org] (Storage node)
http://wiki.openstack.org/InstallInstructions/Glance [openstack.org] (Image server)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Wait, what? (Score:5, Interesting)
OpenStack is a Linux distribution organized for deploying a compute cloud. Linux is the new Linux?
No it's not. It's a virtualization management platform with appropriate interfaces for clients that you can deploy on pretty much any Linux server.
Re:Wait, what? (Score:5, Informative)
OpenStack isn't a distro. It's a collection of utilities for virtualizing and managing compute and storage resources to build clouds. Putting Apache, PHP, and MySQL onto a linux box doesn't make the LAMP stack "Linux" any more than putting OpenStack services (Nova, swift, etc) onto a Linux distro makes OpenStack Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As i was reading this, i was thinking the same thing. Besides, you have to have a client to get there...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
OpenStack is a virtualization and object storage infrastructure and management system. It is not an operating system or a Linux distribution. It's an application. Rackspace is a major sponsor of the project, and eats their own dog food. Nova is the VM side, and supports (to varying degrees) pretty much every hypervisor. Swift is the object store that Rackspace Cloud Files is based on.
This should not be compared to kernels, Linux or anything of the sort. "...a major threat to VMware, Citrix and Parallel
Re: (Score:3)
Rackspace is a major sponsor of the project, and eats their own dog food.
That's only right for Swift, not for Nova. Rackspace has yet to do the switch, because they don't have good enough guys to do the packaging on Debian stable, which is their target. I believe that by this time, they must have more or less stopped the effort, and will be waiting Wheezy (just a guess here based on previous packages I saw).
Nova is the VM side, and supports (to varying degrees) pretty much every hypervisor.
That's "pretty much" what they want to let you believe. The reality is harsher than this. For real, Nova supports KVM and XCP (Xen Cloud Platform). The later pushed me to wor
Noise without content (Score:4, Interesting)
It sounds very exciting until you look at the code. Then you realise that the quality in the project is entirely in the marketing, and there's nothing of worth code-wise at all.
Re: (Score:2)
In may ways, it's the opposite of Linux. Linux was started by a lone programmer who had *something that worked*. That something attracted other people to work on it, and eventually became the massive development project it is today. But from then until now it has worked on the "benevolent dictator" model, where a single person has
More clound BS? Not again. (Score:4, Insightful)
And something that does everything, no less. In general, this means it does nothing well. Big egos are just the hallmark of failure. Lets see whether anybody even remembers this in 20 years. Personally, I doubt it.
Re:More clound BS? Not again. (Score:5, Funny)
Big egos are just the hallmark of failure.
-- Sent from my iPhone
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
Big egos are just the hallmark of failure.
Eh? I'm pretty sure most successful people have huge egos. Steve Jobs, Donald Trump, Hurd the turd... I could make a long and pointless list pretty easily. I think that big egos are generally the result of success.
Re: (Score:2)
A big enough failure guarantees your place in history.
You remember the Ford Pinto? The Hindenburg? The Titanic?
Do you at least remember the Alamo?
Failures, every one of them, but remembered!
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if people were saying the same thing 21 years ago when Linus Torvalds released his OS.
(I'm not implying that I think OpenStack will be successful, just that your point doesn't sound so strong to me.)
Ego doesn't mean what you think it does (Score:2)
Question in the title (Score:2)
Do you mind if I grab your wallet? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
what problem does OpenStack address? (Score:4, Insightful)
Is there some deficiency in Linux and the various BSDs that OpenStack is intended to remedy?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Is there some deficiency in Linux and the various BSDs that OpenStack is intended to remedy?
Yes: Not enough free advertising on Slashdot.
Re:what problem does OpenStack address? (Score:5, Informative)
Its not intended to be a replacement for an OS. If you read the article its basic a set of software to allow you to roll you own cloud solution. Basically Amazon EC2 in a box. You'd still need to install OSs on the virtual machines.
No no its no the new Linux, the Title is misleading.
wait a sec... it's a linux distro with some python (Score:2)
I was misled by the summary. This isn't a whole new OS from the ground up - it's a Linux distro with some python code included.
Is a Linux distro with some python the new Linux? Umm... yeah... how about no.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't believe it's a Linux distribution because it's intended to be installed on Fedora, RHEL, Debian, Ubuntu, etc.
http://wiki.openstack.org/InstallInstructions/Nova [openstack.org]
Re: (Score:2)
It's meant to be syllogistic.
As in:
Linux:Operating Systems::OpenStack:Cloud
At this point, though, OpenStack is still pre-1.0, perhaps equivalent to Linux circa 1993. Whether it can polish up and continue to deliver what is needed is yet to be seen.
The impetus behind cloud right now means that this will be a lot more high profile than Linux was in 1993. There's all sorts of politics (eg Why Citrix Left Openstack [forbes.com]) at play, and no one has an OpenStack cloud of any significant size running. OpenStack has been t
Re: (Score:2)
I work for a .au university on an openstack cloud service providing compute infrastructure as a service for researchers. we currently have about 2000 cores on 84 compute nodes (plus swift storage and volume storage and nova-api and database and so on) and about 700 users (and anyone with a login at any australian university can have a login with a small allocation of cores/memory/cpu-time, with larger allocations on request), with another 2000 cores ready to go as soon as the regions/zones/cells (or whatev
Re: (Score:3)
OpenStack runs on Linux.
No just marketing BS (Score:2)
We have a stupid research group that is always chasing after the latest trend. "The cloud" is their new shit and they want OpenStack bad. They don't know why they want it, they just do. Of course when our Linux guy sets it up for them, they can't use it because they have no idea how. They don't like the idea of just using VMWare for some reason. It isn't cool enough to them.
Re: (Score:2)
Saying that VMWare is the only solution me
Re: (Score:2)
Should have guessed that comment would attract an OSS zealot. No VMWare isn't the only solution, however it is an easy one to implement, and it is one we have free licenses for (for research and education) and it is one that we the tech people are trained on, since it runs the back end for our department. VMWare gets shit done, that's why they can charge what they do. It is a hell of a good platform. Would do precisely what the research group wants.
However they want OpenStack. They can't say why, they can't
Re: (Score:3)
Though I think AppScale is the way forward. I've looked at this who scaleable PaaS, node image thing for a while now, and here's where I'm at: What these things should do is what AppScale is doing. Offering a homogeneous node that has the potential to fulfill any or all rolls of a horizontally scalable webservice stack. Like a stem cell. It affords you encapsulation to the server level. Usually a virtual server. This is harder than it sounds, and more important than you may think.
That is, its serv
Surprisingly hyped platform (Score:3, Interesting)
There must have been a lot of development going on in the OpenStack camp during the past year. Last time I checked many features that were already available in other open source cloud platform products were work-in-progress and setting up and configuring a functional private cloud was cumbersome at best. I wonder how they have managed to gain such publicity and backing over more mature competitors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
OpenStack is the new Linux (Score:3)
Just like Linux has been the new DOS.
No way to compare pears and beans.
Re: (Score:3)
... and, most important thing, OpenStack [wikipedia.org] is NEITHER an operating system, NOR a kernel.
And Linux has not been the new television!
No (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Does this mean... (Score:2)
...we will hear every year for the next 20 how this year is the year of OpenStack on the desktop?
Re: (Score:2)
"the New Linux" is an analogy (you literal dorks) (Score:4, Interesting)
"the New Linux" is an analogy (you literal dorks). From the FAQ http://openstack.org/projects/openstack-faq/ [openstack.org]
What does it mean for the cloud ecosystem?
This is not yet code that comes with certification from operating system or hardware vendors. Instead it's aimed at providers, institutions, and enterprises with highly technical operations teams that have the capabilities and needs to turn physical hardware into large-scale cloud deployments.
Still, wide adoption of an open-source, open-standards cloud should be huge for everyone. It means customers won't have to fear lock-in and technology companies can participate in a growing market that spans cloud providers.
A great analogy comes from the early days of the Internet: the transition away from fractured, proprietary flavors of UNIX toward open-source Linux. An open cloud stands to provide the same benefits for large-scale cloud computing that the Linux standard provided inside the server.
Re: (Score:2)
"The most far-reaching"? (Score:2)
Considering that a full Debian system (binaries for one platform) comes on eight DVDs, I think this project, whatever it might be, has a long way to go before it can really claim to be the "most far-reaching open source project." More mainstream, perhaps, but far less ambitious.
LXC (Score:2)
The only important thing about OpenStack is that it supports implementation of managed, dynamically allocated and partitioned clusters (what "cloud" really is) with LXC, a non-virtualization host partitioning technology.
Re: (Score:2)
Most far-reaching open source project ever? (Score:2)
A suite of tools to manage a data center being the "most far-reaching open source project ever"? Seriously?
What a joke.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Any time the word "cloud' is used, a real tech wants to punch you in the face. "The cloud" is a title so we don't have explain how the internet works to moronic Mr.CEO and pals.
Amen, brother. It's really getting annoying to me lately.
Re:Oh please. (Score:4, Informative)
There's a term used called "cloudwashing" that covers inappropriate use of the term cloud, but cloud technology is real and every company in tech is pouring money into this transition.
Anyone who has worked in IT in large enterprise has seen the benefits of virtualization in action; there's an enormous amount of capex and opex savings, and VMware basically dominates the market. There's a reason 99%+ of the Fortune 500 have an ELA with them.
The same principles behind that revolution are now reaching into the public space, and looking to blend the private IT compute farms with public cloud resources as well; plus more apps being deployed as SaaS, and more apps being developed on PaaS stacks; all the technology of big data (eg, Mongo), messaging (eg RabbitMQ), and so on just form a virtuous circle with this trend. Apps become more able to run in generic clouds without requiring very specific hardware control, and thus IaaS clouds become more attractive.
If you're in system, network, storage, or security administration, or IT of any sort, and you're not learning about this, you're basically a COBOL programmer waiting to be put out to farm.
Re:Oh please. (Score:4, Insightful)
There's a term used called "cloudwashing" that covers inappropriate use of the term cloud, but cloud technology is real and every company in tech is pouring money into this transition.
Anyone who has worked in IT in large enterprise has seen the benefits of virtualization in action; there's an enormous amount of capex and opex savings, and VMware basically dominates the market. There's a reason 99%+ of the Fortune 500 have an ELA with them.
The same principles behind that revolution are now reaching into the public space, and looking to blend the private IT compute farms with public cloud resources as well; plus more apps being deployed as SaaS, and more apps being developed on PaaS stacks; all the technology of big data (eg, Mongo), messaging (eg RabbitMQ), and so on just form a virtuous circle with this trend. Apps become more able to run in generic clouds without requiring very specific hardware control, and thus IaaS clouds become more attractive.
If you're in system, network, storage, or security administration, or IT of any sort, and you're not learning about this, you're basically a COBOL programmer waiting to be put out to farm.
Funny, we just hired two COBOL programmers at $80K each to maintain some legacy mainframe systems. When cloud technology can permit hard core data entry, say for insurance records or the like, then I'll worry. But until then, throughput is more important than an app being able to run from wherever in the cloud. Besides, in my line of business. We don't run apps. We run programs that process millions of secure transactions. We have data entry clerks that key documents and data that can't be captured electronically.
You would probably say that we have our own private cloud. I would say that we have our own methods to allow secure access to our internal systems. By the way, I would predict that there will be COBOL programmers still programming even after cloud computing has been replaced with the next marketing hyped phrase.
Re:Oh please. (Score:4, Insightful)
This reminds me of a guy I knew in ~1994, who was griping that all his experience was in COBOL, and after getting laid off from making $75k/year, he couldn't find another job. At the time, I was in college, and so I wasn't really familiar with the idea of keeping your skills updated...
So I don't know that I would recommend cloud for you; there are reasons to use it, and reasons not to use it. As the technology and ops experience matures, it will be easier to adopt - basically like any tech. But for almost everyone, there are real benefits. Both capex and opex; and some people are using cloud in a way that their capex savings is ~0 (or negative) but their opex savings is huge. (See: Netflix running their entire infrastructure with 3 admins) Program ~= App. I file my expenses through an Oracle app, that runs in a cloud, that automatically fetches corporate card transactions from Visa, and lets me roll them into an expense report.
I'm one of the authors of Securing the Virtual Environment [amazon.com], and my co-author is a QSA, and one of the points of writing the book was to talk about the fact that cloud *can* be secure and can be compliant. (Although in the case of a public cloud, obviously compliance requires underlying compliance by your provider, as well as your own processes) Of course, there are a bunch of risks, too - but there are, for example, cloud services that have passed HIPAA and FISMA audits.
In short, cloud is more than just a buzzword; it's an evolution in the technology that powers IT. I'd say it's more evolution than revolution, but it is more than a buzzword.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting. I'm only starting looking into cloud based systems and it strikes me that security is going to be THE big hurdle in making a valid business case and the fact that security seems to be based around policy compliance seems to be a chink in the armour (not that any connected service needs any more than already exist it appears). Looking at the Amazon description for your book though it seems I may be misinformed, I'll have to check it out :)
Re: (Score:2)
I did not mean to imply that the "cloud" is not important, or at least won't be. I was really commenting on the COBOL side of things. However, with the exception of the monetizing of consumer products, such as Netflix that you mention. Aren't most cloud applications really just an extension of the client server model that we were all using in the 90s (your expense account example for instance). Of course, back then, they were all running on TCP/IP on internal networks or across T-1 lines where as now th
Re: (Score:2)
So, the general attributes of cloud for IaaS, offhand, are:
- Elasticity; you can provision and deprovision it dynamically and rapidly, and you pay only for what you use (and granular billing to go with it)
- Redundancy "under the hood"; your specific instance may fail, but a cloud service should heal without intervention from a tenant, beyond doing things required by their instance(s) restarting
- Multi-tenancy - meaning many unrelated entities can safely share the same hardware with a separation of concerns
-
Re: (Score:2)
We look forward to reading your book.
So you CAN'T define the cloud, then? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
OpenStack is the answer to CPanel or Plesk, nothing more.
They have absolutely nothing to share. If you are saying this because of the Horizon dashboard, then you are mistaking. IaaS has all to do with API, using it like you would with a web interface is stupid, in this case, you need VPSes, not cloud computing.
So where you might only need one highly-tuned VM, you need instead 10 poorly tuned VM's to get the same performance. This allows Amazon and other Cloud providers to charge you by the hour at 10 times the amount.
Exactly for what reason you would spend some time to highly-tune a VM not in the cloud, while you would when it is in a IaaS? It doesn't make sense. In both situations, you can skip the tuning if you are lazy and have enough money to buy computing power. Al