(Little plug for Ancestry.com, since I work there: The company doesn't really do genealogical research, it's mainly a place for people to do theirs. Based on work others have done, it can give "hints" for managing your own trees. If your hints have incorrect information, it's really not their fault... kind of like complaining that "Slashdot is low quality, because they don't verify the accuracy of the comments people post.")
At least, I never hear the word used in association with securing data, networks, servers, etc. But maybe the companies I work for are all weird or something?
NASA broke the ground for us, but their day is over. Nobody has gone past near-earth orbit in 40 years. Let's not relegate our space exploration to a risk-averse government bureaucracy, paid for by taxes. Elon has the right idea.
Whenever one party profits by another party being punished, there is a misaligned incentive. This applies to a large number of situations, from speed traps, to the Exxon Valdez disaster of 1989. Ponder for a moment how incentives would line up if, when someone was punished by law, NOBODY benefited. This can be accomplished by the guilty party literally destroying cash. Imagine the accountants showing up in the courtroom, carrying bags of cash that they had just withdrawn (old bills that need to be replaced anyway), and stuffing them into a special-purpose furnace, where everyone can witness the money being destroyed. (And no, giving the money to charity is still wrong, as then charities would have incentive for parties to commit wrongdoing and get caught.)
So my address is "stays.moment.loving". (I don't care if you know where I live, don't freak out.) Which is unfortunately very different than "stay.moment.loving", or "stays.moment.love", or other variations. That's unfortunate. Did they need the extra address space that these conjugations permit? Seems more useful to be able to just translate the root words "stay", "moment", "love" to some other language and have it still work. Conjugations often don't translate well. What if they decreased the resolution to, say, 5m by 5m, could they just go by root words?
Also, you may still need a number, if you live on the 20th floor or something like that.
A few months back, we had completed initial development on a new persistence layer on a demanding application. We'd put it all into PostgreSQL, and were enjoying the easy JSON and other features. It worked great.
So we got it up and running on high-end hardware in our five data centers, then we turned on the pipes for all the writes. But our systems team members were going insane, trying to get High Availability working right. It turns out that there is just no good way to accomplish this in PostgreSQL. It could fail over to the slave if the master stopped responding, but fail-back was basically impossible. It had to do an rsync on the file system level, which was expected to fail. When it failed, the docs said, just do it again. It took almost a full day to run, each time.
And it failed with alarming regularity! When under load, every couple of days the database would just freeze for ten to fifteen minutes, choking on some non-scary query. It would just sit there, stuck. Calls to it would just block, and eventually timeout. When this happened, it would fail over to the slave, and we're days away from getting back to a sane state.
Don't think we didn't do our best to solve this issue. We spent many thousands of dollars on two different highly recommended consulting companies, who specialized in PostgreSQL. They came onsite and looked at everything, and recommended a number of configuration adjustments, but nothing helped.
In desperation, the project now seriously behind schedule, we worked over Christmas, and branched the code to use MySQL as the database, instead of PostgreSQL. Then we set up two parallel systems. Both on identical high-end hardware ($50,000 machines), one for each database, and turned on all the pipes.
The result? MySQL answered its queries in 50% less time than PostgreSQL. Plus we already knew that it did HA quite well, and it never just froze up like PostgreSQL would.
We have since completely obliterated all traces of PostgreSQL from our code base.
Oh sheesh, I didn't expect to come across a Slashdot post that would make me cry. This is embarrassing, I'm at my desk at work!
As a father of six children (ages 4 through 19), I recommend not focusing on your daughters career. If she chooses something different, how will your video messages come across?
If I were in your shoes, recording videos for her life events, I would share similar experiences from my own life, share memories, and try to give advice on making choices that will lead to the best outcomes. For example, when she turns sixteen, I would share a bunch of snippets from my own life as a sixteen-year-old, what it was like, what things I did that were good, and what were mistakes.
Wishing you all the best. Hard to see my stupid screen now. Sheesh.
Public transport is primarily funded by taxes. If a free-market alternative meets the needs of the people, why should we try to keep the government-run program alive? In fact, there's a good argument to shutting public transit down completely. If someone wants to go someplace, why should someone else be forced to subsidize the cost?
I'm against it. That's why I made a petition to end it. If you want more daylight in the evening, you don't need to change everyone's clocks! Just get up earlier, and come home from work or whatever earlier.
In general, women tend to prefer situations involving lots of moving pieces, and the relationships between them, while men are tend towards activities involving a single, tight focus. We're different, we tend to be better at different kinds of things. Programming a computer requires your mind to build a mental model of the logic, and then execute it internally. That's a very good example of a single, tight-focus task, that women often find unpleasant. A woman might enjoy talking about complicated relationships with a friend on the telephone, at the same time that she is watching a television show about complicated relationships. As a man, I would this task to be impossible, and certainly unpleasant.
One person giving their own money to another person should never be against the law. The only part of a transaction that can be illegal is the other side of it, the thing purchased for money. For example, when buying a stolen car, it should be illegal for the thief to give you the stolen property, but it should not be illegal for you to give him the cash.
If you play the go (the Asian boardgame), you quickly learn how important it is to "cut and run". The critical skill is to identify, as soon as possible, whether or not something is going to work out. And if not, IMMEDIATELY stop investing resources into that venture, and shift to something that has potential.
Most employers don't care about credentials, they care about capabilities. Demonstrate that, and you're good. Adopt an open-source project, or just choose something that's interesting and potentially useful, and build it. Then, instead of a resume for your new employer to look over, you can direct them to the Java-backed web application pet project you've spent the past six months building (or whatever).
People keep trying to have the government do stuff that they're not allowed to do, such as funding scientific research. "But it's really important! We need to force everyone to pay for it by funding it from taxes." Hasn't anyone read the 10th amendment? The states can take care of that stuff. Keep the limits on the feds!
The issue of lawsuits stems from a separate core problem: People abuse the system to try to get a big chunk of cash.
The solution to this is simple: Nobody can benefit by someone else's punishment.
How? Every case is divided into two parts, compensatory and punitive. Compensatory is taken from the company and given to the idiot who used the ladder upside down, to compensate him for his medical bills and lost income ONLY. But here is the key point: If the judicial process determines that the company must be punished, then a fine is imposed. And the fine is destroyed. As in, bring cash to the courthouse, shred it, and then burn it.
Why? Because nobody must benefit by someone else's punishment. Not charities, not orphans, and certainly not the winner of the lawsuit! We need to remove all incentive to punish people, and only then will society be motivated to help each other instead of hurt each other.
PS: If you disagree with this on the grounds that destroying currency is illegal, you should spend a few moments and see if you can come up with a solution to that problem. It's not hard.
PSS: Think of the psychological impact of employees destroying boxes and boxes of hundred dollar bills, representing the profits of your company. FTW!
Slashdot Mirror
(Little plug for Ancestry.com, since I work there: The company doesn't really do genealogical research, it's mainly a place for people to do theirs. Based on work others have done, it can give "hints" for managing your own trees. If your hints have incorrect information, it's really not their fault... kind of like complaining that "Slashdot is low quality, because they don't verify the accuracy of the comments people post.")
At least, I never hear the word used in association with securing data, networks, servers, etc. But maybe the companies I work for are all weird or something?
https://freedomgeek.quora.com/...
NASA broke the ground for us, but their day is over. Nobody has gone past near-earth orbit in 40 years. Let's not relegate our space exploration to a risk-averse government bureaucracy, paid for by taxes. Elon has the right idea.
Changes in momentum are what cost energy. Having a bunch of pieces of metal constantly reversing direction inside the cylinders seems pretty 1920s.
Weird how the only place you hear the word "cyber" anymore is from our government.
Whenever one party profits by another party being punished, there is a misaligned incentive. This applies to a large number of situations, from speed traps, to the Exxon Valdez disaster of 1989. Ponder for a moment how incentives would line up if, when someone was punished by law, NOBODY benefited. This can be accomplished by the guilty party literally destroying cash. Imagine the accountants showing up in the courtroom, carrying bags of cash that they had just withdrawn (old bills that need to be replaced anyway), and stuffing them into a special-purpose furnace, where everyone can witness the money being destroyed. (And no, giving the money to charity is still wrong, as then charities would have incentive for parties to commit wrongdoing and get caught.)
So my address is "stays.moment.loving". (I don't care if you know where I live, don't freak out.) Which is unfortunately very different than "stay.moment.loving", or "stays.moment.love", or other variations. That's unfortunate. Did they need the extra address space that these conjugations permit? Seems more useful to be able to just translate the root words "stay", "moment", "love" to some other language and have it still work. Conjugations often don't translate well. What if they decreased the resolution to, say, 5m by 5m, could they just go by root words?
Also, you may still need a number, if you live on the 20th floor or something like that.
A few months back, we had completed initial development on a new persistence layer on a demanding application. We'd put it all into PostgreSQL, and were enjoying the easy JSON and other features. It worked great.
So we got it up and running on high-end hardware in our five data centers, then we turned on the pipes for all the writes. But our systems team members were going insane, trying to get High Availability working right. It turns out that there is just no good way to accomplish this in PostgreSQL. It could fail over to the slave if the master stopped responding, but fail-back was basically impossible. It had to do an rsync on the file system level, which was expected to fail. When it failed, the docs said, just do it again. It took almost a full day to run, each time.
And it failed with alarming regularity! When under load, every couple of days the database would just freeze for ten to fifteen minutes, choking on some non-scary query. It would just sit there, stuck. Calls to it would just block, and eventually timeout. When this happened, it would fail over to the slave, and we're days away from getting back to a sane state.
Don't think we didn't do our best to solve this issue. We spent many thousands of dollars on two different highly recommended consulting companies, who specialized in PostgreSQL. They came onsite and looked at everything, and recommended a number of configuration adjustments, but nothing helped.
In desperation, the project now seriously behind schedule, we worked over Christmas, and branched the code to use MySQL as the database, instead of PostgreSQL. Then we set up two parallel systems. Both on identical high-end hardware ($50,000 machines), one for each database, and turned on all the pipes.
The result? MySQL answered its queries in 50% less time than PostgreSQL. Plus we already knew that it did HA quite well, and it never just froze up like PostgreSQL would.
We have since completely obliterated all traces of PostgreSQL from our code base.
Dangit. Now I have to change my password.
Oh sheesh, I didn't expect to come across a Slashdot post that would make me cry. This is embarrassing, I'm at my desk at work!
As a father of six children (ages 4 through 19), I recommend not focusing on your daughters career. If she chooses something different, how will your video messages come across?
If I were in your shoes, recording videos for her life events, I would share similar experiences from my own life, share memories, and try to give advice on making choices that will lead to the best outcomes. For example, when she turns sixteen, I would share a bunch of snippets from my own life as a sixteen-year-old, what it was like, what things I did that were good, and what were mistakes.
Wishing you all the best. Hard to see my stupid screen now. Sheesh.
I love my government. -_-
Public transport is primarily funded by taxes. If a free-market alternative meets the needs of the people, why should we try to keep the government-run program alive? In fact, there's a good argument to shutting public transit down completely. If someone wants to go someplace, why should someone else be forced to subsidize the cost?
... was this one.
Clap. Clap. Clap.
I'm against it. That's why I made a petition to end it. If you want more daylight in the evening, you don't need to change everyone's clocks! Just get up earlier, and come home from work or whatever earlier.
https://petitions.whitehouse.g...
In general, women tend to prefer situations involving lots of moving pieces, and the relationships between them, while men are tend towards activities involving a single, tight focus. We're different, we tend to be better at different kinds of things. Programming a computer requires your mind to build a mental model of the logic, and then execute it internally. That's a very good example of a single, tight-focus task, that women often find unpleasant. A woman might enjoy talking about complicated relationships with a friend on the telephone, at the same time that she is watching a television show about complicated relationships. As a man, I would this task to be impossible, and certainly unpleasant.
One person giving their own money to another person should never be against the law. The only part of a transaction that can be illegal is the other side of it, the thing purchased for money. For example, when buying a stolen car, it should be illegal for the thief to give you the stolen property, but it should not be illegal for you to give him the cash.
If you play the go (the Asian boardgame), you quickly learn how important it is to "cut and run". The critical skill is to identify, as soon as possible, whether or not something is going to work out. And if not, IMMEDIATELY stop investing resources into that venture, and shift to something that has potential.
Most employers don't care about credentials, they care about capabilities. Demonstrate that, and you're good. Adopt an open-source project, or just choose something that's interesting and potentially useful, and build it. Then, instead of a resume for your new employer to look over, you can direct them to the Java-backed web application pet project you've spent the past six months building (or whatever).
People keep trying to have the government do stuff that they're not allowed to do, such as funding scientific research. "But it's really important! We need to force everyone to pay for it by funding it from taxes." Hasn't anyone read the 10th amendment? The states can take care of that stuff. Keep the limits on the feds!
I just wrote a blog post on this subject a day or two ago:
http://freedomgeek.quora.com/S...
Is it legal for me to take a shower? Quick, get the president to sign a law giving me this freedom!
Duh.
So to solve a problem, we need to first admit that it exists, right? How about a petition:
http://wh.gov/lwjn6
It's the taxpayers who have to pay the fine. And how is this fair?
The issue of lawsuits stems from a separate core problem: People abuse the system to try to get a big chunk of cash.
The solution to this is simple: Nobody can benefit by someone else's punishment.
How? Every case is divided into two parts, compensatory and punitive. Compensatory is taken from the company and given to the idiot who used the ladder upside down, to compensate him for his medical bills and lost income ONLY. But here is the key point: If the judicial process determines that the company must be punished, then a fine is imposed. And the fine is destroyed. As in, bring cash to the courthouse, shred it, and then burn it.
Why? Because nobody must benefit by someone else's punishment. Not charities, not orphans, and certainly not the winner of the lawsuit! We need to remove all incentive to punish people, and only then will society be motivated to help each other instead of hurt each other.
PS: If you disagree with this on the grounds that destroying currency is illegal, you should spend a few moments and see if you can come up with a solution to that problem. It's not hard.
PSS: Think of the psychological impact of employees destroying boxes and boxes of hundred dollar bills, representing the profits of your company. FTW!