I am getting really sick of hearing this lately. DevOps is a development methodology, not an infrastructure operations role. DevOps is definitely not required for every organization (although it's way the hell better than having siloed teams and old-school sysadmins running ops).
Companies that call all Ops folks "DevOps" are usually clueless.
...the blind hate you're spewing is exactly the reason that we have people lined up behind the worst two candidates for president in recent memory (arguable, in the history of the republic).
Sure, but let's be completely open here, lest we fall victim to false equivalence.
Prior to Trump securing the nomination, Hillary Clinton may have been the worst candidate in the history of the Republic. But if every candidate for the next two centuries is worse than Hillary Clinton, they will all still likely be better than Donald Trump.
This is literally a choice between the second most disliked candidate in history and the candidate who makes her look warm and friendly.
WARNING: The video above depicts multiple men yanking an extremely long tool all over the place. Most of the video focuses on the men slowly getting the tool erect.
...The only differences this time are:... - This round of startups isn't going to leave behind goodies like thousands of miles of dark fiber, data centers full of equipment, etc.
I'm not so sure. AWS, GCP, and Azure have all been drastically expanding capacity.
Tons of great software has been written and open sourced.
We now have a ton of tech that makes previously difficult things very easy for a small team of developers to manage. There have to be some benefits in that.
I work on side projects in almost all my spare time because I don't have a programming job and I like programming. No job I have ever applied for has ever been interested in experience I gained on the side, they only want to know what I have done in a corporate setting.
I have asked nearly every candidate I have interviewed this question. And in my last two jobs, personal non-work experience with technology the companies were using featured prominently.
Recruiters don't know how to screen for this, and sometimes hiring managers are just looking for an experienced person to solve an immediate need, but good leads and managers are absolutely looking for passion and personal interests. I try to always have one inexperienced, smart, and passionate individual on my team. They learn a heck of a lot faster than people who "always wanted to try ___, but the company never used it..."
If you can't afford to automate the overhead and risk of not properly updating your SSL certificates, then you should really make that clear to your investors or anyone else who has any stake in the impending failure of your business.
Who is "we"? Russia *IS* a representative democratic republic, Sparky. It's just as much a "democracy" as the US.
Not even the most brainwashed supporter could ever actually believe that. Russia is a democracy in name only. It isn't a constitutional democracy--the constitution says whatever Putin says it does. The US is highly flawed, but nobody is concerned that Obama is going to have Trump killed. Putin won't allow challengers, and we both know it.
It doesn't happen very often, but once in a while, the cashier actually notices and checks!
In addition to the merchant agreements mentioned by AC, I have seen "check ID" cards refused because they did not have valid signatures on the backs of the cards.
Police are careful to control evidence, but that's not because failing to do so automatically excludes it, it's just because it opens an avenue for the defense to question it.
and because the police are generally required to have legally obtained their evidence. I'm sure you know that, but worth stating explicitly. The exclusionary rule is a bitch. Although it also probably would not save Clinton if this made it to trial.
What the left really needs to re-think is the whole voting system, and pushing for eliminating the Electoral College and our current first-past-the-post voting system used in the national elections. The left is supposed to be the side that's all for making changes, so this is really their domain, but they've never pushed for this.
Heck, even the Republicans might be interested in fixing this problem now, since Trump has ruined their plans and split their party.
The left has and is. The Democratic Party, however, does not want to radically change the rules. Changing this would likely destroy both parties.
Unfortunately, changing the electoral system would have a lot of other consequences. Proportional representation under systems like ours shifts a lot of power to the executive branch.
I do happen to believe the US would be better off with PR, as the current system seems to disenfranchise and silence the sane people.
One thing that we know quite well is that changes in solar output is not the cause of present-day warming.
There's more to it that a single measurement of output.
Sure, and GP also left out the incredible precision we can achieve these days... and lots of other supporting evidence. But it sounds like you still agree.
we can't measure solar output very well millions of years ago, or even for that matter hundreds of years ago.
Actually, we can, and it has been done, with as much accuracy as long-term temperature measurements.
Actually, we can't [directly], which is the distinction the GP appeared to be making. We are measuring a proxy, with a lot of very good reasons to believe the proxy is extremely accurate. Deniers are going to point this out and think they caught us in a lie, so let's just be upfront about it.
From the abstract:
A variety of observational proxies reflecting different aspects of solar activity show similar features regarding periodic variability, trends and periods of very low solar activity (so-called grand minima) which seem to be positively correlated with the emitted energy from the Sun
No, you really don't get it. The more they can rile up their base with this sort of bullshit, the less people pay attention to the graft and corruption -- and even if they do notice, the less likely they are to care.
Exactly. But what's interesting is that the exact same thing is happening on the Democratic side too. Hillary's supporters don't care about all her blatant corruption. The difference is that I can't quite figure out how the Dems have riled up their base to ignore this stuff the way the Reps have with all this anti-gay BS.
AC already answered this but: point towards the Republicans and label more progressive candidates as "unelectable".
I'd prefer an honest politician, like Warren or Sanders. I'll swallow most of my values and vote for Hillary because she's the lesser of two evils by an order of magnitude. Just like I'd take G W Bush over Hitler.
First, I'll say if you think SRE is new you haven't read the book or been around this part of the industry that long.
He addresses DevOps in the book. SRE and its concepts have been around longer. "DevOps" has a larger scope, but effectively the same approach to the problem SRE tries to solve.
Both terms are widely abused in the industry, in the public, and quite obviously on Slashdot. I can understand the confusion. So let's look at the job titles and terms' usage in industry:
As far as job titles go, my own experience in the Bay Area/Silicon Valley is that "SREs" can be divided into two camps: legit SREs at Google and rebadged System Administrators in lesser engineering organizations. Getting an SRE position at Google isn't easy, candidates really need a thorough understanding at every level. SREs elsewhere tend to be limited to basic Bash scripting.
Most DevOps (but not all) tend to be software engineers or release engineers first, with varying levels of ops or sysadmin experience.
Most in the DevOps movement never thought there should be a DevOps job title, and would mostly agree with the SRE principles practiced by Google... so I don't think they'd be too upset about "DevOps being replaced by SRE"
Myth. In general, they resist over-exuberant use of law as a tool to change society. SOMETIMES that's a bad thing, but more often than not, restraint and patience pay off. We have too many laws, so many that most arn't even enforced these days, and the impetus to make a new law is because of some media-manufactured crisis, is it so bad to be 'conservative' on this?
Republicans like to cultivate this image, but it doesn't seem accurate to me. Popular modern Republican ideas involve using law to:
- ban flag burning
- carefully monitor Muslims
- disproportionately restrict Muslim immigration (prevent social change)
- sponsor and support a specific view of Christianity (advocate a specific social change)
- drug test welfare recipients (advocate a specific, imaginary social change)
- imprison drug users for lengthy periods
- grant corporations full human rights (advocate a specific social change)
- oppose environmental restrictions or energy efficiency standards
- (until very recently) criminalize homosexuality in the military
Isn't it more accurate to say that Republicans are willing to use the law to mold society into their rose-colored memories of the 1950s and prevent any other social change?
Because this appears to be a story of "I bought through Amazon, had an issue with a vendor, and never contacted Amazon...
Oh, for heaven's sake. Of course I contacted Amazon. I did the return through them. Did you imagine that I was going to just keep the stolen phone and not get my money back? I told them what was going on. And their response? Nothing.
How can I know what Amazon calls that unless I told them about it? Stop being insulting.
I'm not trying to be insulting, I just didn't see any of that information in your post... and was very confused about why you were blaming Amazon.
My personal experience has been pretty good customer service from Amazon, but I never dealt with returns to any third party sellers.
How long will Comcast be willing to suffer the terrible ratings that Amazon customers will inevitably give to Xfinity signup? Hundreds of thousands of one star ratings and incendiary customer complaints?
Why would they care? You don't think Amazon will do anything, do you?
I just bought a new, unlocked cell phone through Amazon, and the first vendor sent me a refurb, test unit phone that still had the manufacturer usage collection software installed on it -- and it could not be turned off because it was a test unit belonging to the manufacturer.
The vendor told me to send the phone back to them at their address. At my expense. Without telling Amazon. And hope I got my money back.
I'd call that fraud. Amazon calls that "ho hum".
I presume there is more to the story than you are sharing? Because this appears to be a story of "I bought through Amazon, had an issue with a vendor, and never contacted Amazon... so Amazon sucks".
Given that almost every single adult in the country drives, well, the cost of driving is spread over the people using it. Now, there are the deliberately ignorant, but most of us understand that property taxes pay for schools and roads, state income tax pays for roads and schools, and that federal taxes pay for 400 types of welfare, defense contractors, and interstate highways.
I can't tell which side of this argument you are on.
Said it before, say it again: Vote Left. Vote for the most left leaning candidate you can get your hands on. Bernie. Trump.
This Trump bullshit is getting so old. Trump is not on the side of the people. You think he has a history of treating his employees well? Building valuable businesses that provide stable employment and grow the economy? He doesn't. Trump is more likely to put darkies in labor camps and paint the White House gold. Trump stirs populist anger, but he is not a leftist. Hitler stirred populist anger too.
Bernie is the only candidate who has been consistent on this. Hillary will continue some limited welfare to prevent workers from starving, maybe even improve a thing or two while she makes other things worse. But yes, she is better than any GOP candidate. Every single one of them thinks workers should be sacrificed.
He's said little. But he's supposedly the man who isn't beholden to big biz or special interests. Peole see him as the guy who can say eff you to the system.
Aside from racism, I just don't get why those people wouldn't support Sanders over Trump
Snowden knew that the same thing awaited him if he blew the whistle in this manner so he felt his only option was the flee the country while exposing what happened.
You make it sound like Snowden was just minding his own business at the NSA when he stumbled across actions that violated his conscience, ultimately compelling him to go public.
That is a lie. Snowden took the job with the intention of finding and exposing these documents. He was never even read into the programs... he abused the access his position afforded him to illegally access materials about every program he could, then he gave all the information to a reporter and said "expose the illegal stuff".
Back when I was metamodding, I never worried about distinctions that didn't make a difference. If somebody gave a post a +1 Informative that didn't tell me anything new, I wouldn't say that it was a bad moderation if I found the post insightful or interesting; an upmod is an upmod. And, of course, the same went for downmods. However, if a post was given -1 Flamebait and nobody had responded to it (or at least, nobody took the bait) I'd give it a downcheck on general principles.
So YOU'RE the one who disagreed with my Flamebait mod for a post with no replies that said something like "Fuck you asshole!"...
Slashdot Mirror
I am getting really sick of hearing this lately. DevOps is a development methodology, not an infrastructure operations role. DevOps is definitely not required for every organization (although it's way the hell better than having siloed teams and old-school sysadmins running ops).
Companies that call all Ops folks "DevOps" are usually clueless.
...the blind hate you're spewing is exactly the reason that we have people lined up behind the worst two candidates for president in recent memory (arguable, in the history of the republic).
Sure, but let's be completely open here, lest we fall victim to false equivalence.
Prior to Trump securing the nomination, Hillary Clinton may have been the worst candidate in the history of the Republic. But if every candidate for the next two centuries is worse than Hillary Clinton, they will all still likely be better than Donald Trump.
This is literally a choice between the second most disliked candidate in history and the candidate who makes her look warm and friendly.
I'm not agreeing with GP, buuuut...
...That's as stupid as painting Putin as a communist.
To be fair, Putin was a member of the party for 20 years.
“I was not, as you know, a party member by necessity,” [Putin] said. “I liked Communist and socialist ideas very much and I like them still.”
...Who's next? Bill Gates? Warren Buffet?
Buffet came first as a communist. I remember Republicans shouting that over the last 8 years.
WARNING: The video above depicts multiple men yanking an extremely long tool all over the place. Most of the video focuses on the men slowly getting the tool erect.
If someone sells you a bridge and you pay for it, when you find out it's a scam you don't actually GET the bridge.
Right, but you also aren't given a bill for the actual construction costs of the bridge. And you're allowed to try to get your money back.
...The only differences this time are: ...
- This round of startups isn't going to leave behind goodies like thousands of miles of dark fiber, data centers full of equipment, etc.
I'm not so sure. AWS, GCP, and Azure have all been drastically expanding capacity.
Tons of great software has been written and open sourced.
We now have a ton of tech that makes previously difficult things very easy for a small team of developers to manage. There have to be some benefits in that.
I work on side projects in almost all my spare time because I don't have a programming job and I like programming. No job I have ever applied for has ever been interested in experience I gained on the side, they only want to know what I have done in a corporate setting.
I have asked nearly every candidate I have interviewed this question. And in my last two jobs, personal non-work experience with technology the companies were using featured prominently.
Recruiters don't know how to screen for this, and sometimes hiring managers are just looking for an experienced person to solve an immediate need, but good leads and managers are absolutely looking for passion and personal interests. I try to always have one inexperienced, smart, and passionate individual on my team. They learn a heck of a lot faster than people who "always wanted to try ___, but the company never used it..."
If you can't afford to automate the overhead and risk of not properly updating your SSL certificates, then you should really make that clear to your investors or anyone else who has any stake in the impending failure of your business.
Who is "we"? Russia *IS* a representative democratic republic, Sparky. It's just as much a "democracy" as the US.
Not even the most brainwashed supporter could ever actually believe that. Russia is a democracy in name only. It isn't a constitutional democracy--the constitution says whatever Putin says it does. The US is highly flawed, but nobody is concerned that Obama is going to have Trump killed. Putin won't allow challengers, and we both know it.
The backs of my cards are signed "see photo ID."
It doesn't happen very often, but once in a while, the cashier actually notices and checks!
In addition to the merchant agreements mentioned by AC, I have seen "check ID" cards refused because they did not have valid signatures on the backs of the cards.
Police are careful to control evidence, but that's not because failing to do so automatically excludes it, it's just because it opens an avenue for the defense to question it.
and because the police are generally required to have legally obtained their evidence. I'm sure you know that, but worth stating explicitly. The exclusionary rule is a bitch. Although it also probably would not save Clinton if this made it to trial.
What the left really needs to re-think is the whole voting system, and pushing for eliminating the Electoral College and our current first-past-the-post voting system used in the national elections. The left is supposed to be the side that's all for making changes, so this is really their domain, but they've never pushed for this.
Heck, even the Republicans might be interested in fixing this problem now, since Trump has ruined their plans and split their party.
The left has and is. The Democratic Party, however, does not want to radically change the rules. Changing this would likely destroy both parties.
Unfortunately, changing the electoral system would have a lot of other consequences. Proportional representation under systems like ours shifts a lot of power to the executive branch.
I do happen to believe the US would be better off with PR, as the current system seems to disenfranchise and silence the sane people.
One thing that we know quite well is that changes in solar output is not the cause of present-day warming.
There's more to it that a single measurement of output.
Sure, and GP also left out the incredible precision we can achieve these days... and lots of other supporting evidence. But it sounds like you still agree.
we can't measure solar output very well millions of years ago, or even for that matter hundreds of years ago.
Actually, we can, and it has been done, with as much accuracy as long-term temperature measurements.
Actually, we can't [directly], which is the distinction the GP appeared to be making. We are measuring a proxy, with a lot of very good reasons to believe the proxy is extremely accurate. Deniers are going to point this out and think they caught us in a lie, so let's just be upfront about it.
From the abstract:
A variety of observational proxies reflecting different aspects of
solar activity show similar features regarding periodic variability, trends and periods of very low solar
activity (so-called grand minima) which seem to be positively correlated with the emitted energy from
the Sun
No, you really don't get it. The more they can rile up their base with this sort of bullshit, the less people pay attention to the graft and corruption -- and even if they do notice, the less likely they are to care.
Exactly. But what's interesting is that the exact same thing is happening on the Democratic side too. Hillary's supporters don't care about all her blatant corruption. The difference is that I can't quite figure out how the Dems have riled up their base to ignore this stuff the way the Reps have with all this anti-gay BS.
AC already answered this but: point towards the Republicans and label more progressive candidates as "unelectable".
I'd prefer an honest politician, like Warren or Sanders. I'll swallow most of my values and vote for Hillary because she's the lesser of two evils by an order of magnitude. Just like I'd take G W Bush over Hitler.
First, I'll say if you think SRE is new you haven't read the book or been around this part of the industry that long.
He addresses DevOps in the book. SRE and its concepts have been around longer. "DevOps" has a larger scope, but effectively the same approach to the problem SRE tries to solve.
Both terms are widely abused in the industry, in the public, and quite obviously on Slashdot. I can understand the confusion. So let's look at the job titles and terms' usage in industry:
As far as job titles go, my own experience in the Bay Area/Silicon Valley is that "SREs" can be divided into two camps: legit SREs at Google and rebadged System Administrators in lesser engineering organizations. Getting an SRE position at Google isn't easy, candidates really need a thorough understanding at every level. SREs elsewhere tend to be limited to basic Bash scripting.
Most DevOps (but not all) tend to be software engineers or release engineers first, with varying levels of ops or sysadmin experience.
Most in the DevOps movement never thought there should be a DevOps job title, and would mostly agree with the SRE principles practiced by Google... so I don't think they'd be too upset about "DevOps being replaced by SRE"
Which is exactly, what a robot should be doing... Robots are to obey — not second-guess the owners' actions.
Never thought I'd find an opponent to the First Law of Robotics on Slashdot!
Myth. In general, they resist over-exuberant use of law as a tool to change society. SOMETIMES that's a bad thing, but more often than not, restraint and patience pay off. We have too many laws, so many that most arn't even enforced these days, and the impetus to make a new law is because of some media-manufactured crisis, is it so bad to be 'conservative' on this?
Republicans like to cultivate this image, but it doesn't seem accurate to me. Popular modern Republican ideas involve using law to:
Isn't it more accurate to say that Republicans are willing to use the law to mold society into their rose-colored memories of the 1950s and prevent any other social change?
Because this appears to be a story of "I bought through Amazon, had an issue with a vendor, and never contacted Amazon...
Oh, for heaven's sake. Of course I contacted Amazon. I did the return through them. Did you imagine that I was going to just keep the stolen phone and not get my money back? I told them what was going on. And their response? Nothing.
How can I know what Amazon calls that unless I told them about it? Stop being insulting.
I'm not trying to be insulting, I just didn't see any of that information in your post... and was very confused about why you were blaming Amazon.
My personal experience has been pretty good customer service from Amazon, but I never dealt with returns to any third party sellers.
How long will Comcast be willing to suffer the terrible ratings that Amazon customers will inevitably give to Xfinity signup? Hundreds of thousands of one star ratings and incendiary customer complaints?
Why would they care? You don't think Amazon will do anything, do you?
I just bought a new, unlocked cell phone through Amazon, and the first vendor sent me a refurb, test unit phone that still had the manufacturer usage collection software installed on it -- and it could not be turned off because it was a test unit belonging to the manufacturer.
The vendor told me to send the phone back to them at their address. At my expense. Without telling Amazon. And hope I got my money back.
I'd call that fraud. Amazon calls that "ho hum".
I presume there is more to the story than you are sharing? Because this appears to be a story of "I bought through Amazon, had an issue with a vendor, and never contacted Amazon... so Amazon sucks".
Given that almost every single adult in the country drives, well, the cost of driving is spread over the people using it. Now, there are the deliberately ignorant, but most of us understand that property taxes pay for schools and roads, state income tax pays for roads and schools, and that federal taxes pay for 400 types of welfare, defense contractors, and interstate highways.
I can't tell which side of this argument you are on.
Said it before, say it again: Vote Left. Vote for the most left leaning candidate you can get your hands on. Bernie. Trump.
This Trump bullshit is getting so old. Trump is not on the side of the people. You think he has a history of treating his employees well? Building valuable businesses that provide stable employment and grow the economy? He doesn't. Trump is more likely to put darkies in labor camps and paint the White House gold. Trump stirs populist anger, but he is not a leftist. Hitler stirred populist anger too.
Bernie is the only candidate who has been consistent on this. Hillary will continue some limited welfare to prevent workers from starving, maybe even improve a thing or two while she makes other things worse. But yes, she is better than any GOP candidate. Every single one of them thinks workers should be sacrificed.
He's said little. But he's supposedly the man who isn't beholden to big biz or special interests. Peole see him as the guy who can say eff you to the system.
Aside from racism, I just don't get why those people wouldn't support Sanders over Trump
Snowden knew that the same thing awaited him if he blew the whistle in this manner so he felt his only option was the flee the country while exposing what happened.
You make it sound like Snowden was just minding his own business at the NSA when he stumbled across actions that violated his conscience, ultimately compelling him to go public.
That is a lie. Snowden took the job with the intention of finding and exposing these documents. He was never even read into the programs... he abused the access his position afforded him to illegally access materials about every program he could, then he gave all the information to a reporter and said "expose the illegal stuff".
Or an informal 100 MPH limit on I-5 down the central valley of California. As long as you have CA plates of course. Texans should not attempt.
Well-earned retaliation. I knew one sheriff in Texas who would literally follow California plates and wait to give them a ticket for something.
Back when I was metamodding, I never worried about distinctions that didn't make a difference. If somebody gave a post a +1 Informative that didn't tell me anything new, I wouldn't say that it was a bad moderation if I found the post insightful or interesting; an upmod is an upmod. And, of course, the same went for downmods. However, if a post was given -1 Flamebait and nobody had responded to it (or at least, nobody took the bait) I'd give it a downcheck on general principles.
So YOU'RE the one who disagreed with my Flamebait mod for a post with no replies that said something like "Fuck you asshole!" ...