To your point, if you were 1,450 miles away in the middle of Kansas, you'd have a 7.7 millisecond ping time just for speed-of-light latency if you ran redundant fiber from your DC directly to the exchange in Manhattan. Probably add some small amount of time for the network gear on each end of the connection.
You shouldn't have posted this anonymously. I think it's great that you've identified the key friction present in all software development efforts: tossing the product over the wall and assuming the downstream person will fix it. Whether it's a product owner tossing incomplete requirements to a developer, a developer tossing code without unit tests or non-performant code to a tester, a tester not validating whether the code will really run in prod, or an operations person blindly deploying whatever comes down the pipe.
All of these non-communicative behaviors work together to create a sub-optimal user experience (and pissing off the people who benefit from the system you build is a self-defeating practice, since they're the ones that indirectly sign your paycheck).
Magic Markers have no magical properties. 1. You have never given one to a three year old and watched the expression on the face of his mother. Magical.
So the GP suggested a layer of aluminum for just that purpose. Is the heat carrying capacity of aluminum insufficient? What if you had active cooling sucking heat out of the aluminum at the chip's edge?
So what if the launch loop didn't have the turnarounds at each end? What if the two stations were near one of the poles instead of at the equator? You locate at a latitude just far enough away from the pole to make the circumference of a circular loop equal to 4000km. Then, instead of tossing the cable up in a straight line and have to turn it around at the other end, you toss it in the air, and the earth's rotation carries it around to the other station "halfway around the world", where it's launched up again.
Maybe it wouldn't curve just because the earth is turning underneath it? Maybe it would go in a straight line equal to a great circle headed away from the pole?
Seems like there's a middle ground where the designer could provide for a dual path experience. Create levels and challenges that can't be solved using the god-like tools developed in the previous installment. Newbies to the 2nd installment could play through and gain the tools they need along the way. Imports could play through and still be entertained by the challenges and gain new tools.
I think it's limiting to assume that any uber-powerful skill can be applied to solve any kind of problem.
Um. Your first test case has incorrect delimiters -- {} vs (), or maybe everything after the first one is wrong. Maybe we should have done a code review?
In the 1980s everyone used a CLI even on home systems. What do you think has happened since then has caused people to lose so much intelligence?
There hasn't been a massive loss in intelligence, there's been a vast widening of the market that now includes many more folks without any geek cred or desire to do system things. They're just trying to do whatever their application is doing for them.
(In other words, I believe in all things moderation and think zealotry is absurd and I probably shouldn't be confused with an open source zealot or even an advocate.)
Sounds like you're a bit of a moderation zealot...
Are you suggesting that water and electricity are not delivered by monopolies? However, they are very firmly entrenched in the commodity space, and there are vast economies of scale realized through monopoly distribution that offset the frictional costs of regulation.
There are many alternatives for entertainment and communication. Entertainment doesn't just come from the TV. It's a very convenient mode of entertainment, and it's even free if you are willing to limit yourself to what you can pick up with an antenna, but you also have books at the library, public performances of various artworks, and 100,000 other things. You have to sacrifice some convenience because it's not piped in to your living room, but there are alternatives. Likewise with communication. Internet access is not a natural right. It's not even really a monopoly. Those same libraries you can get a book from usually have internet access for communication. Again, at the cost of some convenience, you can eliminate the monetary cost.
Now it just so happens that for many people, the marginal utility of retaining those extra dollars for some other purpose is much much less than the marginal utility of the convenience of home access to communication and entertainment services. I would argue that the current monopolies are doing a very effective job of pricing, since people do shell out month after month after month. They might complain about it, but they won't die if they don't get it, and they're not going to go broke paying for it. I would suggest that if someone would be driven to bankruptcy by an internet or cable bill that they have far more grave economic problems to solve.
This is what you get when you allow a monopoly to provide a critical service like Internet, TV, or telephone.
I find it interesting that you identify these services as critical. Last I checked, none of these were necessary for sustaining life or maintaining a livable environment. I'd put water, sewer and heat down as critical services. Maybe you could stretch it to include telephone service if you considered it a lifeline for emergency situations. I can't really imagine a situation where the lack of television service or internet service would be life threatening or make a dwelling uninhabitable.
Slashdot Mirror
To your point, if you were 1,450 miles away in the middle of Kansas, you'd have a 7.7 millisecond ping time just for speed-of-light latency if you ran redundant fiber from your DC directly to the exchange in Manhattan. Probably add some small amount of time for the network gear on each end of the connection.
I think he was actually saying that many folks are wearing incorrectly sized leiderhosen.
The juxtaposition of these two statements struck me as somewhat incompatible from an actuarial perspective:
... Using my motorcycle it costs me 25 minutes (carpool lane joohoo).
With a 9 month old daughter that I'd like to see grow up, ...
You shouldn't have posted this anonymously. I think it's great that you've identified the key friction present in all software development efforts: tossing the product over the wall and assuming the downstream person will fix it. Whether it's a product owner tossing incomplete requirements to a developer, a developer tossing code without unit tests or non-performant code to a tester, a tester not validating whether the code will really run in prod, or an operations person blindly deploying whatever comes down the pipe.
All of these non-communicative behaviors work together to create a sub-optimal user experience (and pissing off the people who benefit from the system you build is a self-defeating practice, since they're the ones that indirectly sign your paycheck).
Wait. Intelligent life evolved here? I haven't seen much evidence of it.
I took a look at their website. Seems like two ex-Gartners striking out on their own to build their own Gartner.
To that end, it certainly casts the alarmist report titles in the class of "generate buzz/subscriptions".
Both of the bios of the principals are fully buzzword compliant, not to mention cromulent.
_I_ can't believe that you can't believe that an anti-social behavior on the intarwebs won't go away...
3. Nor have you ever played Nethack
STOP READING MY MIND!!
*adjusts tinfoil*
Hrmph.
P0N!3s!!!
That was actually the divine presence telling you to go outside and play instead of mouldering away on the computer.
It was either that comment or the ever-trusty: "Sun? What is this 'sun' that you speak of?"
This is totally off topic, but I'm amused by the irony inherent in your signature. It is of the form:
(mangled idiom), (linguisitic joke)
Please try:
For all intents and purposes, ...
Unless, of course, you're asserting that only people that work really hard that use 'whom' are targeted.
... Some if it is also subjective. We all think different. ...
Actually, some of us think differently. Thanks a lot, Apple.
He's actually just a *really* obsessive Katamari player.
So the GP suggested a layer of aluminum for just that purpose. Is the heat carrying capacity of aluminum insufficient? What if you had active cooling sucking heat out of the aluminum at the chip's edge?
So what if the launch loop didn't have the turnarounds at each end? What if the two stations were near one of the poles instead of at the equator? You locate at a latitude just far enough away from the pole to make the circumference of a circular loop equal to 4000km. Then, instead of tossing the cable up in a straight line and have to turn it around at the other end, you toss it in the air, and the earth's rotation carries it around to the other station "halfway around the world", where it's launched up again.
Maybe it wouldn't curve just because the earth is turning underneath it? Maybe it would go in a straight line equal to a great circle headed away from the pole?
Seems like there's a middle ground where the designer could provide for a dual path experience. Create levels and challenges that can't be solved using the god-like tools developed in the previous installment. Newbies to the 2nd installment could play through and gain the tools they need along the way. Imports could play through and still be entertained by the challenges and gain new tools.
I think it's limiting to assume that any uber-powerful skill can be applied to solve any kind of problem.
Um. Your first test case has incorrect delimiters -- {} vs (), or maybe everything after the first one is wrong. Maybe we should have done a code review?
If they form a monastery around the clock it may survive.
There's a book about that idea that I just finished reading. It was both challenging and interesting on many levels.
I was expecting your signature to be something funny about webcams from Logitech.
I've set the over/under at 8 for how many times folks have responded to one of your posts with something semantically equivalent to my comment.
Like maybe this one?
Wait a minute. I think you're trying to start a meme about how to pronounce meme.
I CALL SHENANIGANS!
In the 1980s everyone used a CLI even on home systems. What do you think has happened since then has caused people to lose so much intelligence?
There hasn't been a massive loss in intelligence, there's been a vast widening of the market that now includes many more folks without any geek cred or desire to do system things. They're just trying to do whatever their application is doing for them.
(In other words, I believe in all things moderation and think zealotry is absurd and I probably shouldn't be confused with an open source zealot or even an advocate.)
Sounds like you're a bit of a moderation zealot...
Are you suggesting that water and electricity are not delivered by monopolies? However, they are very firmly entrenched in the commodity space, and there are vast economies of scale realized through monopoly distribution that offset the frictional costs of regulation.
There are many alternatives for entertainment and communication. Entertainment doesn't just come from the TV. It's a very convenient mode of entertainment, and it's even free if you are willing to limit yourself to what you can pick up with an antenna, but you also have books at the library, public performances of various artworks, and 100,000 other things. You have to sacrifice some convenience because it's not piped in to your living room, but there are alternatives. Likewise with communication. Internet access is not a natural right. It's not even really a monopoly. Those same libraries you can get a book from usually have internet access for communication. Again, at the cost of some convenience, you can eliminate the monetary cost.
Now it just so happens that for many people, the marginal utility of retaining those extra dollars for some other purpose is much much less than the marginal utility of the convenience of home access to communication and entertainment services. I would argue that the current monopolies are doing a very effective job of pricing, since people do shell out month after month after month. They might complain about it, but they won't die if they don't get it, and they're not going to go broke paying for it. I would suggest that if someone would be driven to bankruptcy by an internet or cable bill that they have far more grave economic problems to solve.
This is what you get when you allow a monopoly to provide a critical service like Internet, TV, or telephone.
I find it interesting that you identify these services as critical. Last I checked, none of these were necessary for sustaining life or maintaining a livable environment. I'd put water, sewer and heat down as critical services. Maybe you could stretch it to include telephone service if you considered it a lifeline for emergency situations. I can't really imagine a situation where the lack of television service or internet service would be life threatening or make a dwelling uninhabitable.