Lost in Space is an American science fiction streaming television series following the adventures of a family of space colonists whose ship veers off course. The series is a reimagining of the 1965 series of the same name, inspired by the 1812 novel The Swiss Family Robinson and the 1962 Gold Key comic book Space Family Robinson, created by Del Connell and artist Dan Spiegle.
In 2046, two years after an impact event that threatens the survival of humanity, the Robinson family is selected for the 24th mission of the Resolute (24th Colonist Group), an interstellar spacecraft carrying selected families and civilians to colonize the Alpha Centauri planetary system.
Before they reach their destination, an alien robot breaches the Resolute's hull. Forced to evacuate the mothership in numerous short-range Jupiter spacecraft, scores of colonists, among them the Robinsons, crash on a nearby habitable planet. There they must contend with a strange environment and battle their own personal demons as they search for a way back to the Resolute.[1]
The review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reported a 68% approval rating based on 75 reviews, for the first season, with an average rating of 6.43/10. The website's critics consensus reads: "Lost in Space's production values are ambitious enough to attract sci-fi adventure fans, while the story's large heart adds an emotional anchor to all the deep space derring-do."[30] Metacritic, which uses a weighted average, assigned a normalized score of 58 out of 100 based on 27 critics for the first season, indicating "mixed or average reviews".[31]
Dylan Roth of Polygon gave the third season a mostly positive review, calling it an "exciting, delightful, and self-contained space adventure that stands in contrast against the ever more complex universes of its contemporaries." Roth criticized the character of Dr. Smith however, and the overall writing of the show's antagonists.[36] Renaldo Matadeen of CBR criticized the show's handling of Dr. Smith's narrative arc.[37]
Most galaxies are clumped together in groups or clusters. A neighboring galaxy is never far away. But this galaxy, known as NGC 6503, has found itself in a lonely position, at the edge of a strangely empty patch of space called the Local Void.
I've just purchased a 4TB Western Digital Red hard disk for my Media Server. I want to understand why I've ended up losing so much space by formatting it as ext4 and then mounting it. I understand some will be lost for the drives own files but what I have lost seems a bit much.
For sure the accepted answer provided by Rich is the main reason for the observed difference between the specs of the manufacturer and what df shows. However, there are some factors that cause you to really have less space than what would appear from the capacity of the disk.
Part is due to the overhead of ext4 file systems. These systems are very reliable and robust. The structures of the file system need considerable space. You can read about the technical details here (with thanks to user Matt).
Another reason is the "reserved space" taken, which is a fixed percentage of the total drive capacity. Typically, that fixed percentage is way to high for large drives and especially for data drives. Linux systems reserve typically 5% of new partitions for the root user and system services. The idea here is even when you run out of disk space, the root user should still be able to log in and system services should still run. This cannot happen if there is no space left on the root partition.
would reduce the reserved space to 1% on a partition /dev/sdb1 (substitute your own partition here). For a data drive, you probably could set this to zero. However, to prevent too much data fragmentation to build up, an ext4 volume should never be fully filled, so besides to keeping under the maximum storage, you can also leave some reserved space, which also contributes to the remaining free space needed to avoid fragmentation.
Late, but I ran some tests and can confirm that both rich's and vanadium's responses together seem to account for the "700GB (sic.) of space" that the user had 'lost' on their disk. Specifically, the difference between the .4TB of space that seems to have been lost is really the result of df -h rendering its output in TiB, not TB. However, the additional .2TiB of lost (this time for real) space seems to be accounted for by the filesystem.
That is to say, it seems that the ext4 filesystem accounted for 10GiB smaller disk Size vis-a-vis an xfs filesystem, as well as an additional 30GiB less Available disk space. The 30GiB in lost availability is 5 percent of the 590GiB disk, which is consistent with the ext4 filesystem's Reserved Blocks percentages. _blocks. I would hazard a guess that the 10GiB in lost apparent disk size has something to do with space wasted as a result of ext4's Bytes-per-inode ratio -per-inode_ratio
The movie doesn't bother with such details. After a space battlethat is the predictable curtain-raiser, and a quick explanation of why and howthe Robinson family is setting off for a planet called Alpha Prime, the filmtakes place mostly onboard their saucer-shaped ship, and involves many morespace battles, showdowns, struggles, attacks, hyperspace journeys, andexploding planets. In between, the characters plow through creaky dialogue andexhausted relationship problems.
There needs to be a hypergate at both ends, of course, becauseotherwise there's no telling where a hyperdrive will land you--as the Robinsonssoon find out. Also onboard are the professor's wife Maureen (Mimi Rogers),their scientist daughter Judy Robinson (Heather Graham), their younger daughterPenny (Lacey Chabert), and their son Will (Jack Johnson), who is the brains ofthe outfit. The ship is piloted by ace space cadet Don West (Matt LeBlanc), andincludes an intelligent robot who will help with the tasks at the other hand.
Don West has a brainstorm: They'll use the hyperdrive to zapright through the sun! This strategy of course lands them in a galaxy far, faraway, with a sky filled with unfamiliar stars. And then the movie ticks off aseries of crises, of which I can enumerate a rebellious robot, an explodingplanet, mechanical space spiders, a distracting romance, and family issues oftrust and authority.
How i achieved the look:
1)set black and whitepoints (contrast).
2)Lift Blacks for that typical filmic look.
3)Adding reds to the shadows and remove them from the highlights. (I masked out the spaceshuttle to keep it white)
look-dev.jpg1152309 74.5 KB
For the Sapling defender i did something similar but instead of the red channel with the blue channel.
It is the second time (since a long time ago) i try on my computer to create a small partition, using the default windows 10 disk management tool. First step is to shrink my C drive, and windows asks me how much i want to shrink it: i put the bare minimum, i.e. 1 MB only. Again, as the first time i tried it long ago, after the process the disk management only shows the original C partition, with 1 MB less of space available, but there is no trace of the new small partition it should have been created. I also ran Partition Magic in order to recover lost partitions, but it did not find anything. I really do not know why this happens, and how to get back my lost space.Thank you for your help!
edit:As answerers said, that unallocated space was to small to even show up. I then proceeded to shrink my C: drive again, this time by 548 MB, and now i finally see again those 2 "lost" MB in the unallocated section. Cool, but when i try to extend my C: volume back to what it was at the beginning, the maximum amount allowed it 548 MB, not 550. It seems like i cannot touch those 2 MB, even if they are actually showing up now. Pic: dropbox.com/s/sm4qrgpos1vcg0d/Senzanome.png?dl=0
This space is not lost, since it is well-indicated in Disk Management whendoing right-click of "Disk 0" followed by Properties, as the Volumes tab reports"Unallocated space" as being 3 MB (which is one more than it should be).
My own experience is the same: My system disk was originally fully allocatedto the maximum size given by Disk Management, yet "Unallocated space" is reportedas 2 MB.Unlike you, I don't have the least idea where on the disk is this unallocated space,but I would guess it is to be found at the end of the disk.
I remark that this idiosyncrasy of Disk Management is good to know.It means that when resizing partitions, one runs the risk of losing a fewMBs of space here and there (which is not much, considering the sizeof modern disks).
You could report this problem to Microsoft via the Feedback Hub, in the (small)hope of getting an explanation. I don't think that this space can beretrieved without re-partitioning the entire disk, which is not worth itfor only 3 MB.
There is no lost partition, because shrinking a partition does not automatically create a new one. You get some unallocated space and it's up to you to partition it further, e.g. by selecting "Create new simple volume" in Disk Management.
There are several issues here. Resizing a partition does not create a new partition. All you accomplished was reducicg the size of the existing partition by 1 MB. Any free space would be unallocated space after that partition. When a drive has unallocated space, you can select it to create a new volume. However, 1 MB is not enough space to create a new volume. It would appear that the minimum space to create a new volume appears to be 8 MB. The only reference I could find to the minimum size of a NTFS volume was quite old, so that might not be accurate anymore. That being said, you should try reducing the existing volume by more, then you should see unallocated space after.
I am using TikZ-UML to illustrate some concepts in a scientific paper. It does the job pretty well, but I have some space problems (as in all scientific papers, there is page limit). I already managed to shrink my figures by position in the concept properly, but there is a lot of lost space within the objects.
dd2b598166