I've concluded that neither should be used in a production environment unless you know *exactly* what you're doing
isn't that true for any platform. and, do you really use stuff in production without knowing "exactly" what you are doing?
Mongo is *really* hard to scale well, as you need *lots* of nodes to shard your data across to get good performance out of large data sets (ok small single server stuff is fine).
adding nodes to shard data seems like a straightforward scaling strategy. how does this not scale well? what problems are you having?
Node stuff (which includes express) requires a bunch of backend infrastructure and training devs to write multi-host deployments which can be hard.
how are multi-host deployments exclusive to 'node stuff'? don't you need infrastructure and trained devs for any deployment? what are you comparing?
The real problem is people read "web scale" and believe their mantra about scalability, when the same problems exist with all other platforms, yet on their own they solve none of the problems. The devs I've met that are huge advocates seem to either ignore of not understand these problems.
They're just extra items to add to your tech catalogs which have benefits and drawbacks.... Just don't treat them as the only items!;)
honestly, i find braindead hype as delusional as your reactionary attitude and insubstantial claims.
that's exactly what i mean, yes. the u.s., russia, israel, nato... all of them are. people here seem to find this to be normal, even acceptable. they are actually worried about it not becoming public. like it's okay to kill and burn as long as you can't see it, and you keep the butchers out of harm. just... wow!
Soldiers are supposed to be trained to follow orders and that there are consequences for not following those orders.
it's easier than that: soldiers are not supposed to be carrying out covert operations in foreign countries the aren't officially at war with. just let them tweet, what's the problem?
your bottom line and its apparent definition of "west-backed" is a little flimsy.
what are you smoking? western implication in the orange revolution, the euromaidan and the current civil war has been constant, obvious, even public and is well documented.
You're treading dangerously close to relegating your opinion to the scrap heap with all of the other harebrained conspiracy theories
gosh, sounds terrible. like being expelled from your sect or something...
Six months is nothing to fully implement, test and roll out a fix.
if i got this right, the unauthorized cross-app resource access is a design flaw in the way different apps are allowed to interact. the apps are already out there. there is no fix unless you are willing to fix all affected apps as well, or break them.
this is a very serious issue and apple's silence and inaction is truly astonishing. at least some mitigation patch would be in place, asking the user's permission whenever any such interactions are about to happen.
Yes, blocking encryption might make it easy to catch low hanging fruit, but it will win a battle or two and lose the war. ISIS and Al Qaeda do quite well in communications with just old fashioned courier services.
isis and al qaeda? you're watching way too much television, son.
If cryptography is banned, how can console makers keep selling $300 worth of crap for an eight-hour playing game and make money?
read tfa. this is about some complete morons' desire to make ciphered communication between users transparent to agencies, which is suicidal.
Building systems by monkeys that require even armies of even lower IQ QAs is more expensive than doing it correctly in the first place, with real developers who have done it before, and have supported real products and services.
only if you can trust those developers to be available and loyal. for years. industry has a VERY hard time promoting loyalty, and panics at the sole idea of losing control. hence 'replaceable' professionals are the way to go.
it is also much easier to foster loyalty with a few key people who doesn't know jack shit about much anything (so they'll have a hard time finding an equivalent opportunity) than with a lot of developers who are in high demand in the industry.
The companies who wanted to lower costs didn't get it. Tough.
The rest of you have devalued technology jobs, and have created such a shit show it's hard to know where to start unpicking your poor planning and poor processes whilst we have deliveries in flight.
"Thanks"
don't get mad at me, you're totally right, but that's what it is. and I think it's not that much about cost but about the very nature of modern enterprise: externalize everything you possibly can.
with religion attempting to give people a method to approach those questions.
the problem is no religion (except zen, afaik) provides a method to approach those questions, but random invented answers so you stop asking.
we humans are indeed religious beings, but most human religions are bullshit. keyword: crowd control.
ancient japanese got it right, they were utterly tolerant about religion which was considered a private affair (as it should). this could only be so because their society was already so strictly classed and the authority so indisputable that they didn't need to use religion for that.
yes, they did slaughter some christians at some point. but only after realizing how they were creeping for influence and power. nobody had invited them, after all.
Agnostics are actually worse to be around when attempting to have a religious debate, as the superiority complex which comes with "anything is possible" is utterly infuriating to debate.
believe me, you would have a hard time debating with someone who seriously insists he (and everything around him) was created by a flying spaghetti monster, although you can't prove that's impossible.
"I win because I don't need to assert anything".
if you want to assert bullshit like "a woman spontaneously conceived the son of god" then that's your problem, pal. and i've no problem at all with the crap you may believe, as long as you don't want me to behave according to your beliefs. be rational, or forget about being taken seriously.
Joeseph musta been one seriously gullible idiot...
every novel has one. the earliest record in jesus' life which is historically accepted is that he was baptized, some few years before death. everything before that is just gospell, brought up almost a century after the facts to give the emerging new cult some proper mythical background. regardless of what the usual meaning of 'virgin' was at the time, the gospells actually meant 'conceived without bang' because that's the dogma they explicitly established, that he was the son of god blablabla. yes, people was gullible at the time... oh, wait!
didn't you watch brian's life, you blasphemous clod??
you don get it. of course there are bugs. the aim is not a defect free system, but to avoid a total catastrophe in a system built and maintained by waves of replaceable monkeys. it's already remarkable that it works at all, but yes, this is the industry average. shrug.
this is also necessary condition for 'theft' in about any legal code. this condition is not met in this case, and unless you can prove it is, your discourse just doesn't stand.
if you're betting on 'loss of rightful revenue', it's a skewed and controversial concept. the problem here is the term 'rightful' which is a nebulose trying to coerce 'their right to sell' into 'my obligation to buy'. needless to say, i don't buy it. but even then, assuming some imaginary context where that 'rightful revenue' really existed... you can't 'deprive' someone of something they never had. so without deprivation it can't possibly be theft, and i'm not a thief. you should be really able to grasp this simple and fundamental fact.
call it something else. take your pick, i don't care. but calling it theft is irrational or dishonest or both.
sigh... since you insist in totally ignoring the accepted meaning of 'theft' i assume you are not interested in any rational discussion whatsoever. as for me, i'm not interested in watching you writing 'thief' in a loop, in bold caps and with exclamation marks, as if you were having a mental breakdown. you have made your point. have a cookie. take care.
can you help me find the right word (not phrase) for a person who uses the product of someone else's work without the producer's permission?
i have no need to define such a person because i see nothing special or particularly defining in that act, so please suit yourself. my point, however, is that equating this with 'theft' or 'piracy' can't possibly be attributed to lack of knowledge of the language, but very much with deliberate misrepresentation and intoxication. not saying you are the source, though, it's very widespread bullshit and my impression is that you just swallowed it without critical thinking. i hereby just invite you to deeper reflection. how would YOU call such a person?
Full Definition of THEFT 1a : the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it
so since i'm not depriving anyone of anything, not even 'loss of rightful revenue" because there never was any to begin with, what i do can harldy be theft, no matter how much you want to put it in bold letters and... well, twist the meaning of words to misrepresent it. catch the irony, troll.
As you can understand from my comments, i dislike piracy. And because i agree with you that switching to free software is an option, with many benefits (even if i don't dislike proprietary software), i dislike piracy even more.
and i dislike the bullshit in equating use of software without a license to piracy. so what? do you have something interesting to say about the topic or not?
i don't. but that's just because i don't give a crap about windows and its licenses. i have non-genuine w7 to run games, i would't personally use it for anything else, nor do i want it, so why should i pay any license? and no doubt i will have a non-genuine w-whatever as soon as games ask for it. that's a deal between game developers and microsoft, they should sort that out themselves or else let me choose. i don't think the game developer has any issue with my windows being non-genuine, so why should i? you calling me a pirate because of this only makes you look funny. you know, 'pirates', those guys used to barbecue your guts after pulling them out of you after raping you. you ip zealots really should get a grip already.
because they are in every big protest, and have been identified many times. because you can spot them wearing headphones and talking to center command. because they have been captured on video throwing stones and inciting riots. because they are routinely identified and exposed by the crowd, and told to get the fuck out of the demonstration, which they promptly do, although not a single one of them has been harmed up to this date in these situations (on one instance however they got scared and had to be rescued by anti-riots, although anybody had touched a single hair of them, just shouts). because the fact is 99% of people in these demonstrations is peaceful and has actually very good reasons to be there.
to add to this, there is a brand new political force in spain ("podemos", literally "we can") that is expected to overturn both traditional (right/lefty right bipartisanship) pro-stablishment parties. this is an absolute novelty. this new political party does have some "left" ideology although it declares itself neutral (go figure). it's supposedly a grassroots party made up of simple citizen, and there is a very real chance they get to power. main program points are emergency mitigation of social impact of the financial crisis, fighting corruption and reconstruction of presently greatly diminished democracy.
however, being myself very skeptical about this new party, the real danger to fear if they get to power isn't what they could do, but the predictable reaction of the right (plus probably part of the left) which i expect to be specially ruthless and might even end in a coup d'état or even a bloodbath. spain is essentially a deeply corrupt oligarchy and they will not allow to be displaced so easily. has happened before (see spanish civil war).
this poster above must be the equivalent of a teabagger. just to put his bullshit in context.
the spanish "left" has been a minority since franco. there is no real viable "left" alternative as much as there isn't any in the us, where calling democrats "left" would be a big stretch (that would be in spain the official workers party, for which "socialism" is just a funny part of the name, and just equally corrupt as the right.)
the part about protests is just outright lie. while there's little positive to say about the official spanish "left" (which actually isn't) there is nothing more socially hostile, disrupting and ruthless than the spanish "right" in opposition, on every level. they control the media, the judiciary and most big businesses and know all too well how to use that to good advantage. on the streets, spain has still a very signifficant share of far right extremists, and they are tightly entrenched with the police. most violent actions from these extreme right groups go largely ignored, if not directly supported by the police. anticapitalist or mere social protests, however, are dealt with switly and harshly, with people having got hefty fines or even jail time just for being randomly picked up at or near protests. this recent gag law is just pushing to a extreme what has been an already dire situation for people's rights for years, as has been extensively reported by world oprganizations abroad already. yes, it seems bad things are about to happen, and they know it. i'm guessing they even want them to happen...
Social networks don't turn people in to narcissistic pricks, it feeds on the fact that most people already are.
narcissism is to a great extent a consequence of our failed social education impregnated with sick individualism, from which social networks are part of so yes, they do. if not the root cause, still a great amplifier.
at least it has some utility, since they expose themselves in public: if you are looking for a decent coder you can safely filter out prima donnas like this and spare you some headache.
Slashdot Mirror
Having used Mongo and Node at "scale"
interesting. care to elaborate?
I've concluded that neither should be used in a production environment unless you know *exactly* what you're doing
isn't that true for any platform. and, do you really use stuff in production without knowing "exactly" what you are doing?
Mongo is *really* hard to scale well, as you need *lots* of nodes to shard your data across to get good performance out of large data sets (ok small single server stuff is fine).
adding nodes to shard data seems like a straightforward scaling strategy. how does this not scale well? what problems are you having?
Node stuff (which includes express) requires a bunch of backend infrastructure and training devs to write multi-host deployments which can be hard.
how are multi-host deployments exclusive to 'node stuff'? don't you need infrastructure and trained devs for any deployment? what are you comparing?
The real problem is people read "web scale" and believe their mantra about scalability, when the same problems exist with all other platforms, yet on their own they solve none of the problems. The devs I've met that are huge advocates seem to either ignore of not understand these problems.
They're just extra items to add to your tech catalogs which have benefits and drawbacks.... Just don't treat them as the only items! ;)
honestly, i find braindead hype as delusional as your reactionary attitude and insubstantial claims.
that's exactly what i mean, yes. the u.s., russia, israel, nato ... all of them are. people here seem to find this to be normal, even acceptable. they are actually worried about it not becoming public. like it's okay to kill and burn as long as you can't see it, and you keep the butchers out of harm. just ... wow!
Soldiers are supposed to be trained to follow orders and that there are consequences for not following those orders.
it's easier than that: soldiers are not supposed to be carrying out covert operations in foreign countries the aren't officially at war with. just let them tweet, what's the problem?
your bottom line and its apparent definition of "west-backed" is a little flimsy.
what are you smoking? western implication in the orange revolution, the euromaidan and the current civil war has been constant, obvious, even public and is well documented.
You're treading dangerously close to relegating your opinion to the scrap heap with all of the other harebrained conspiracy theories
gosh, sounds terrible. like being expelled from your sect or something ...
Six months is nothing to fully implement, test and roll out a fix.
if i got this right, the unauthorized cross-app resource access is a design flaw in the way different apps are allowed to interact. the apps are already out there. there is no fix unless you are willing to fix all affected apps as well, or break them.
this is a very serious issue and apple's silence and inaction is truly astonishing. at least some mitigation patch would be in place, asking the user's permission whenever any such interactions are about to happen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
i almost peed in my pants with "the whole system is backed by the security and reliability of microsoft cloud".
oh, well, it's just about a popularity contest for a sock puppet, i guess propietary closed software and hardware will do ...
Yes, blocking encryption might make it easy to catch low hanging fruit, but it will win a battle or two and lose the war. ISIS and Al Qaeda do quite well in communications with just old fashioned courier services.
isis and al qaeda? you're watching way too much television, son.
If cryptography is banned, how can console makers keep selling $300 worth of crap for an eight-hour playing game and make money?
read tfa. this is about some complete morons' desire to make ciphered communication between users transparent to agencies, which is suicidal.
Building systems by monkeys that require even armies of even lower IQ QAs is more expensive than doing it correctly in the first place, with real developers who have done it before, and have supported real products and services.
only if you can trust those developers to be available and loyal. for years. industry has a VERY hard time promoting loyalty, and panics at the sole idea of losing control. hence 'replaceable' professionals are the way to go.
it is also much easier to foster loyalty with a few key people who doesn't know jack shit about much anything (so they'll have a hard time finding an equivalent opportunity) than with a lot of developers who are in high demand in the industry.
The companies who wanted to lower costs didn't get it. Tough.
The rest of you have devalued technology jobs, and have created such a shit show it's hard to know where to start unpicking your poor planning and poor processes whilst we have deliveries in flight.
"Thanks"
don't get mad at me, you're totally right, but that's what it is. and I think it's not that much about cost but about the very nature of modern enterprise: externalize everything you possibly can.
with religion attempting to give people a method to approach those questions.
the problem is no religion (except zen, afaik) provides a method to approach those questions, but random invented answers so you stop asking.
we humans are indeed religious beings, but most human religions are bullshit. keyword: crowd control.
ancient japanese got it right, they were utterly tolerant about religion which was considered a private affair (as it should). this could only be so because their society was already so strictly classed and the authority so indisputable that they didn't need to use religion for that.
yes, they did slaughter some christians at some point. but only after realizing how they were creeping for influence and power. nobody had invited them, after all.
Agnostics are actually worse to be around when attempting to have a religious debate, as the superiority complex which comes with "anything is possible" is utterly infuriating to debate.
believe me, you would have a hard time debating with someone who seriously insists he (and everything around him) was created by a flying spaghetti monster, although you can't prove that's impossible.
"I win because I don't need to assert anything".
if you want to assert bullshit like "a woman spontaneously conceived the son of god" then that's your problem, pal. and i've no problem at all with the crap you may believe, as long as you don't want me to behave according to your beliefs. be rational, or forget about being taken seriously.
Joeseph musta been one seriously gullible idiot...
every novel has one. the earliest record in jesus' life which is historically accepted is that he was baptized, some few years before death. everything before that is just gospell, brought up almost a century after the facts to give the emerging new cult some proper mythical background. regardless of what the usual meaning of 'virgin' was at the time, the gospells actually meant 'conceived without bang' because that's the dogma they explicitly established, that he was the son of god blablabla. yes, people was gullible at the time ... oh, wait!
didn't you watch brian's life, you blasphemous clod??
you don get it. of course there are bugs. the aim is not a defect free system, but to avoid a total catastrophe in a system built and maintained by waves of replaceable monkeys. it's already remarkable that it works at all, but yes, this is the industry average. shrug.
with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it
this is also necessary condition for 'theft' in about any legal code. this condition is not met in this case, and unless you can prove it is, your discourse just doesn't stand.
if you're betting on 'loss of rightful revenue', it's a skewed and controversial concept. the problem here is the term 'rightful' which is a nebulose trying to coerce 'their right to sell' into 'my obligation to buy'. needless to say, i don't buy it. but even then, assuming some imaginary context where that 'rightful revenue' really existed ... you can't 'deprive' someone of something they never had. so without deprivation it can't possibly be theft, and i'm not a thief. you should be really able to grasp this simple and fundamental fact.
call it something else. take your pick, i don't care. but calling it theft is irrational or dishonest or both.
sigh ... since you insist in totally ignoring the accepted meaning of 'theft' i assume you are not interested in any rational discussion whatsoever. as for me, i'm not interested in watching you writing 'thief' in a loop, in bold caps and with exclamation marks, as if you were having a mental breakdown. you have made your point. have a cookie. take care.
can you help me find the right word (not phrase) for a person who uses the product of someone else's work without the producer's permission?
i have no need to define such a person because i see nothing special or particularly defining in that act, so please suit yourself. my point, however, is that equating this with 'theft' or 'piracy' can't possibly be attributed to lack of knowledge of the language, but very much with deliberate misrepresentation and intoxication. not saying you are the source, though, it's very widespread bullshit and my impression is that you just swallowed it without critical thinking. i hereby just invite you to deeper reflection. how would YOU call such a person?
words have meaning, meaning is important. you even spout that proudly on your own sig.
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Full Definition of THEFT
1a : the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it
so since i'm not depriving anyone of anything, not even 'loss of rightful revenue" because there never was any to begin with, what i do can harldy be theft, no matter how much you want to put it in bold letters and ... well, twist the meaning of words to misrepresent it. catch the irony, troll.
As you can understand from my comments, i dislike piracy. And because i agree with you that switching to free software is an option, with many benefits (even if i don't dislike proprietary software), i dislike piracy even more.
and i dislike the bullshit in equating use of software without a license to piracy. so what? do you have something interesting to say about the topic or not?
i don't. but that's just because i don't give a crap about windows and its licenses. i have non-genuine w7 to run games, i would't personally use it for anything else, nor do i want it, so why should i pay any license? and no doubt i will have a non-genuine w-whatever as soon as games ask for it. that's a deal between game developers and microsoft, they should sort that out themselves or else let me choose. i don't think the game developer has any issue with my windows being non-genuine, so why should i? you calling me a pirate because of this only makes you look funny. you know, 'pirates', those guys used to barbecue your guts after pulling them out of you after raping you. you ip zealots really should get a grip already.
you need to save the new setting and reboot.
yet another victim of the cloud. tragic.
You fundamentally fail to understand intellectually property rights
i do understand intellectual property rights, that's how i know intellectual property is fundamentally wrong.
you, however, seem to fail to understand how the media industry works.
because they are in every big protest, and have been identified many times. because you can spot them wearing headphones and talking to center command. because they have been captured on video throwing stones and inciting riots. because they are routinely identified and exposed by the crowd, and told to get the fuck out of the demonstration, which they promptly do, although not a single one of them has been harmed up to this date in these situations (on one instance however they got scared and had to be rescued by anti-riots, although anybody had touched a single hair of them, just shouts). because the fact is 99% of people in these demonstrations is peaceful and has actually very good reasons to be there.
Posting again as anon. I meant to write that they are not planted policeman like people think but extreme leftists mixed with radical muslims.
is that the reason why they are wearing "police" armbands in the picture? idiot.
to add to this, there is a brand new political force in spain ("podemos", literally "we can") that is expected to overturn both traditional (right/lefty right bipartisanship) pro-stablishment parties. this is an absolute novelty. this new political party does have some "left" ideology although it declares itself neutral (go figure). it's supposedly a grassroots party made up of simple citizen, and there is a very real chance they get to power. main program points are emergency mitigation of social impact of the financial crisis, fighting corruption and reconstruction of presently greatly diminished democracy.
however, being myself very skeptical about this new party, the real danger to fear if they get to power isn't what they could do, but the predictable reaction of the right (plus probably part of the left) which i expect to be specially ruthless and might even end in a coup d'état or even a bloodbath. spain is essentially a deeply corrupt oligarchy and they will not allow to be displaced so easily. has happened before (see spanish civil war).
this poster above must be the equivalent of a teabagger. just to put his bullshit in context.
the spanish "left" has been a minority since franco. there is no real viable "left" alternative as much as there isn't any in the us, where calling democrats "left" would be a big stretch (that would be in spain the official workers party, for which "socialism" is just a funny part of the name, and just equally corrupt as the right.)
the part about protests is just outright lie. while there's little positive to say about the official spanish "left" (which actually isn't) there is nothing more socially hostile, disrupting and ruthless than the spanish "right" in opposition, on every level. they control the media, the judiciary and most big businesses and know all too well how to use that to good advantage. on the streets, spain has still a very signifficant share of far right extremists, and they are tightly entrenched with the police. most violent actions from these extreme right groups go largely ignored, if not directly supported by the police. anticapitalist or mere social protests, however, are dealt with switly and harshly, with people having got hefty fines or even jail time just for being randomly picked up at or near protests. this recent gag law is just pushing to a extreme what has been an already dire situation for people's rights for years, as has been extensively reported by world oprganizations abroad already. yes, it seems bad things are about to happen, and they know it. i'm guessing they even want them to happen ...
Social networks don't turn people in to narcissistic pricks, it feeds on the fact that most people already are.
narcissism is to a great extent a consequence of our failed social education impregnated with sick individualism, from which social networks are part of so yes, they do. if not the root cause, still a great amplifier.
at least it has some utility, since they expose themselves in public: if you are looking for a decent coder you can safely filter out prima donnas like this and spare you some headache.