I think it misses the point of DevOps. My reading of DevOps is not that developers do operations. It is that operations applies development style processes to their job and works closely if not within the development organizations to make sure the application is designed for operational ease from the beginning. A DevOps specialists will be operations focused with a high degree of skill in the scripting to automate deployment and configuration. They will use version control in order to version the deployment and configurations with the application. That way when a version of the application is deployed to a development environment, testing, or production the exact same software not just for the application but the deployment and configuration is used. The goal is so that when things go wrong it is not due to some untraceable human error, but a fixable automation error.
And, DevOps doesn't mean operations goes away. I think it let's operations focus on delivering a stable platform for applications. i.e. servers, disks, networks, OS, and perhaps the software repository that DevOps can use to configure the platform and deploy applications. In infrastructure as a service cloud situations, servers, disks, networks, and OS become a DevOps responsibility, also.
As far as a DevOps role, I think this falls into the same mistake I get into in my company when trying to explain the concept of Agile team members and feature teams. Just because everyone on an Agile team should be able to take on any task to deliver the software doesn't mean you don't have specialists in Dev, Test, and Analysis. It also doesn't mean that you assign tasks stupidly to those least capable. Most of the time people will be working in their specialty, but they have secondary skills that allow them to take on other types of tasks when over flow occurs in those tasks. A DevOps specialist is focused on the deployment and configuration process and they primarily get that kind of work, but can help with other types of tasks when necessary. Similarly, just because teams are capable of working on any part of the application doesn't mean they don't specialize or that you assign work to teams outside their specialty willy nilly. But, if it looks like there is a long term need for another team in some application area, it is possible to have a team move to that specialty and ramp up their capability there with the help of the existing specialists. It might make sense to have a DevOps specialized team with multiple specialties (SA, DBA, scripting, support) represented in that team, but with flexibility to handle work in other areas, but perhaps at a lower capability that a team specialized in that area.
I think more physicists need to work on the physics of "nothing". I don't think we really understand "nothing". In addition there are different kinds of "nothing".
We have the "nothing" of empty space-time where particle and energy pop in and out of existence. What happens when there is a lot of nothing? 1 atom per cubic meter, per cubic kilometer over millions of light years?
Even then there is still space-time. What happens when there "nothing" means no matter, no energy, and no space-time?
Or, what happens when the universe expands to the extent that the visible universe contains no matter, and the CMB has cooled to a hundred negative powers of 10 or more. Does space-time lose meaning?
The impression I get from current physics is that "nothing" is unstable. Has anyone studied "nothing" sufficiently to show that there is not some effect proportional to the amount of "nothing". Of course, how do you even talk about a quantity of "nothing"? But, what if the more "nothing" there is, the greater the so called quantum fluctuations, such that something is inevitable.
Use a reusable pod and fill it with the coffee of your choice. Ground yourself or pre-ground. It takes a little more time. And, there are some tricks. Like since the water flows fairly quickly through small cup a fine grind is a good idea.
Some rare, but possible causes if it has anything to do with the car.
FOD... (Foreign Object Debris) - shorting power to ground anywhere. Doesn't take much especially on a circuit board somewhere, rapidly heats up and melts solder creating and even bigger short and more heat until fire.
Dendrite formation - Very rare and probably requires more than 4 months to happen, but certain components on a high density BGA array the solder can form tendrils towards other solder balls. As the dendrites get close to each other they will short and break kind of like a fuse, but eventually it can become big enough to hold and sustain current generating enough heat to start the solder balls melting driving more current and heat until fire.
And, the argument being made by Microsoft and Apple is that patents on rounded corner or bouncing when you slide for a page, or any number of other non-SEP patents should cost more than the patents for the standard and that when a patent is contributed to a standard under FRAND terms that holder loses there ability to enforce that patent via injunction when others choose not to even negotiate a royalty rate. The end result is no patents being contributed to standards, and ending the standard process entirely because the standards can't avoid patents.
Basically, Microsoft and Apple are killing the goose that lays the golden eggs because without standards the whole ecosystem on which their non-essential patents gain their value goes away.
If inflation and returns on saved money are consistent then it will have little impact on savings rate. But, in general it is a good idea to try to stabilize the value of the currency, although demand pull inflation needs to be separated from commodity shock inflation since their causes and the actions taken to mitigate are likely different. Demand pull inflation as a result of there being more financial assets (currency) chasing a relatively fixed amount of real goods is mitigated by draining currency via narrowing the deficit of the currency issuing government by raising taxes and/or decreasing spending. And, the reverse when deflation threatens due to recession.
Some of this is automatic, and already exists. On the revenue side, income tax receipts increase as more people have jobs and income tax receipts increase, if incomes increase enough, a progressive income tax causes the deficit to narrow even more. On the spending side, unemployment insurance, food stamps, and other safety net spending will tend to decrease, narrowing the deficit further. In an economic down turn when deflation threatens these act in the opposite direction. I would prefer additional more powerful automatic stabilizers, but these are a few examples of controls on demand pull inflation/deflation.
I don't know enough on the commodity side to say how that should be handled, but hoarding of useful commodities via ETFs backed by actual warehoused commodities held off the market should be banned.
Tax rent seeking revenue progressively, tax profit for sales of goods and services like today.
Rent seeking - Interest, dividends, trading profits, licensing fees (RMS would like that one), political contributions,...
Allow for a certain amount of rent seeking revenue can be treated as regular revenue and subject to expense deduction. Becoming TBTF is actually a rent seeking behavior, so setting making the rate progressive is an act of taxing rent seeking.
Of note, Adam Smith proposed that taxes on rents are desirable.
Basically, revenue from the sale of goods and services work the way they do today with only profits being taxed. Interest income, dividend income, trading gains, etc... get taxed for businesses just like everyone else on a revenue basis.
Some times it just takes a different set of eyes. You get buried in the code and things that are not quite right do not jump out at you because you understand it and know it so intimately that you develop blind spots. A fresh set of eyes no matter experience will see things that you simply accept because it does not trigger your "that does not look right" alarms.
I absolutely agree. I wrote a large portions of some code alone that now several other people are advancing and maintaining. There are some good things and some not so good things in there. Some of the worst were caused by attempts to be overly clever.
The more interesting step to me would be 1920x2160 panels for 1080P passive 3D. Right now passive 3D polarizes alternate lines so at 1080P it is more like 1920x540 per eye. Which probably is perceived by the brain like 1920x700 or something like that. If no one makes a 1920x2160 panel I presume it could be done with a 4K panel.
Yes, seriously. Then, instead of worrying about f-ing numbers in a computer, we might worry about how to actually put people to work building real things under the real limits on government spending (inflation and available productive capacity) and not use fake self imposed imaginary limits.
But, if you subdivide across multiple countries, states, and cities where the lead in gasoline was phased out at different times and the 22 year correlation remains consistent, it becomes highly unlikely that you will find something(s) else that can account for the change.
And, as you said it is statistical because clearly every child exposed to lead during those time periods did not become a criminal. Some just suffered from losing a few IQ points (or whatever intelligence measure you care to use). But, you take a large group of people that have all the other risks for becoming criminals and add lead on top of that and you get a significant rise in crime.
Depending on the farm American tilapia are also raised on shit. At least the fish farm on Dirty Jobs was raising tilapia in the same ponds where they raised bass in order to help clean the pond for the next round of bass. They then sell the tilapia. So, some of that farmed American tilapia is raised on bass shit.
That is what I did with my Summers and I was a CS major. I don't know how good it looked on my resume when I was looking for a job, this was late 90s, so there were plenty of jobs. But, dealing with children and parents of those children shows people skills.
So, my suggestion would be to "Be Creative" don't go looking for programming jobs, look for things that demonstrate your abilities outside of programming. Volunteer opportunities, but choose something that is interesting to you. Tutor summer school kids or something like that. Teaching demonstrates the ability to communicate. I am sure there are lots of other great ideas.
Well, I was thinking that NASA could use the ISS as a transfer station. But, airports are generally government owned or quasi-government owned and private companies rely on them for their missions (aka Airlines flying passengers to their destination.) So, there is precedence.
Reusable spacecraft in space. The problem with every interplanetary mission plan is that it is a one time plan, or always involves launching the entire spacecraft form Earth every time. Why launch an interplanetary spacecraft to LEO multiple times? Launch it once and after that just launch fuel, supplies, and people. Maybe the a new lander or parts of a lander will need to be launched each time. Since, Ion engines are useful once in space fuel needs would be greatly reduced. A spacecraft that never lands should suffer very little wear and tear, so quit trying to build a single spacecraft to handle all phases of the travel plan. In addition, a reusable spacecraft that never lands can probably be built bigger and more comfortable than one that needs to survive re-entry.
1) Build one spacecraft that launches stuff to LEO. 2) Assemble an interplanetary craft in LEO along with a lander. 3) Launch supplies and crew to LEO. (could be multiple launches) 4) Transfer crew to interplanetary craft. 5) Set interplanetary craft on transfer orbit. 6) Land lander. 7) Do Stuff. 8) Launch lander to interplentary craft. 9) Return interplanetary craft to LEO. 10) Transfer people to LEO landing craft. 11) Repeat from step 3
This is one of the reasons I find any plan to de-orbit the ISS is stupid and wasteful. Even if there is no other science to be had, why waste a perfectly good transfer station for interplanetary travel? It would also probably be a good place to perform vehicle assembly since the interplanetary craft might makes sense to launch in multiple pieces or, if in a single launch, partially disassembled, so it does not have to be designed to survive launch stresses in a fully assembled state.
That is where the Agile angst I am seeing in the comments seems off. People over Process does not mean you don't have process or that having process excludes people. It means that the people are more important than the process. A change board is a pretty good process, but it is useless without the right people.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it misses the point of DevOps. My reading of DevOps is not that developers do operations. It is that operations applies development style processes to their job and works closely if not within the development organizations to make sure the application is designed for operational ease from the beginning. A DevOps specialists will be operations focused with a high degree of skill in the scripting to automate deployment and configuration. They will use version control in order to version the deployment and configurations with the application. That way when a version of the application is deployed to a development environment, testing, or production the exact same software not just for the application but the deployment and configuration is used. The goal is so that when things go wrong it is not due to some untraceable human error, but a fixable automation error.
And, DevOps doesn't mean operations goes away. I think it let's operations focus on delivering a stable platform for applications. i.e. servers, disks, networks, OS, and perhaps the software repository that DevOps can use to configure the platform and deploy applications. In infrastructure as a service cloud situations, servers, disks, networks, and OS become a DevOps responsibility, also.
As far as a DevOps role, I think this falls into the same mistake I get into in my company when trying to explain the concept of Agile team members and feature teams. Just because everyone on an Agile team should be able to take on any task to deliver the software doesn't mean you don't have specialists in Dev, Test, and Analysis. It also doesn't mean that you assign tasks stupidly to those least capable. Most of the time people will be working in their specialty, but they have secondary skills that allow them to take on other types of tasks when over flow occurs in those tasks. A DevOps specialist is focused on the deployment and configuration process and they primarily get that kind of work, but can help with other types of tasks when necessary. Similarly, just because teams are capable of working on any part of the application doesn't mean they don't specialize or that you assign work to teams outside their specialty willy nilly. But, if it looks like there is a long term need for another team in some application area, it is possible to have a team move to that specialty and ramp up their capability there with the help of the existing specialists. It might make sense to have a DevOps specialized team with multiple specialties (SA, DBA, scripting, support) represented in that team, but with flexibility to handle work in other areas, but perhaps at a lower capability that a team specialized in that area.
I think more physicists need to work on the physics of "nothing". I don't think we really understand "nothing". In addition there are different kinds of "nothing".
We have the "nothing" of empty space-time where particle and energy pop in and out of existence. What happens when there is a lot of nothing? 1 atom per cubic meter, per cubic kilometer over millions of light years?
Even then there is still space-time. What happens when there "nothing" means no matter, no energy, and no space-time?
Or, what happens when the universe expands to the extent that the visible universe contains no matter, and the CMB has cooled to a hundred negative powers of 10 or more. Does space-time lose meaning?
The impression I get from current physics is that "nothing" is unstable. Has anyone studied "nothing" sufficiently to show that there is not some effect proportional to the amount of "nothing". Of course, how do you even talk about a quantity of "nothing"? But, what if the more "nothing" there is, the greater the so called quantum fluctuations, such that something is inevitable.
Hilariously expensive?
I guess the Keurig one at $10 might be, but there are several for $5 or less. In just 100 uses you are talking a nickel or less without the waste.
Use a reusable pod and fill it with the coffee of your choice. Ground yourself or pre-ground. It takes a little more time. And, there are some tricks. Like since the water flows fairly quickly through small cup a fine grind is a good idea.
Some rare, but possible causes if it has anything to do with the car.
FOD... (Foreign Object Debris) - shorting power to ground anywhere. Doesn't take much especially on a circuit board somewhere, rapidly heats up and melts solder creating and even bigger short and more heat until fire.
Dendrite formation - Very rare and probably requires more than 4 months to happen, but certain components on a high density BGA array the solder can form tendrils towards other solder balls. As the dendrites get close to each other they will short and break kind of like a fuse, but eventually it can become big enough to hold and sustain current generating enough heat to start the solder balls melting driving more current and heat until fire.
At this point it means "been on slashdot so long I'm starting to get out of touch with the cool stuff if it ain't on slashdot"..
Crap! I wish I had some mod points for this sentence alone.
Agreed.
People have forgotten a source of heat that is pretty close to the fuel tank in modern gasoline cars.
The catalytic converter.
End of message.
And, the argument being made by Microsoft and Apple is that patents on rounded corner or bouncing when you slide for a page, or any number of other non-SEP patents should cost more than the patents for the standard and that when a patent is contributed to a standard under FRAND terms that holder loses there ability to enforce that patent via injunction when others choose not to even negotiate a royalty rate. The end result is no patents being contributed to standards, and ending the standard process entirely because the standards can't avoid patents.
Basically, Microsoft and Apple are killing the goose that lays the golden eggs because without standards the whole ecosystem on which their non-essential patents gain their value goes away.
If inflation and returns on saved money are consistent then it will have little impact on savings rate. But, in general it is a good idea to try to stabilize the value of the currency, although demand pull inflation needs to be separated from commodity shock inflation since their causes and the actions taken to mitigate are likely different. Demand pull inflation as a result of there being more financial assets (currency) chasing a relatively fixed amount of real goods is mitigated by draining currency via narrowing the deficit of the currency issuing government by raising taxes and/or decreasing spending. And, the reverse when deflation threatens due to recession.
Some of this is automatic, and already exists. On the revenue side, income tax receipts increase as more people have jobs and income tax receipts increase, if incomes increase enough, a progressive income tax causes the deficit to narrow even more. On the spending side, unemployment insurance, food stamps, and other safety net spending will tend to decrease, narrowing the deficit further. In an economic down turn when deflation threatens these act in the opposite direction. I would prefer additional more powerful automatic stabilizers, but these are a few examples of controls on demand pull inflation/deflation.
I don't know enough on the commodity side to say how that should be handled, but hoarding of useful commodities via ETFs backed by actual warehoused commodities held off the market should be banned.
Tax rent seeking revenue progressively, tax profit for sales of goods and services like today.
Rent seeking - Interest, dividends, trading profits, licensing fees (RMS would like that one), political contributions, ...
Allow for a certain amount of rent seeking revenue can be treated as regular revenue and subject to expense deduction. Becoming TBTF is actually a rent seeking behavior, so setting making the rate progressive is an act of taxing rent seeking.
Of note, Adam Smith proposed that taxes on rents are desirable.
Basically, revenue from the sale of goods and services work the way they do today with only profits being taxed. Interest income, dividend income, trading gains, etc... get taxed for businesses just like everyone else on a revenue basis.
Some times it just takes a different set of eyes. You get buried in the code and things that are not quite right do not jump out at you because you understand it and know it so intimately that you develop blind spots. A fresh set of eyes no matter experience will see things that you simply accept because it does not trigger your "that does not look right" alarms.
I absolutely agree. I wrote a large portions of some code alone that now several other people are advancing and maintaining. There are some good things and some not so good things in there. Some of the worst were caused by attempts to be overly clever.
The more interesting step to me would be 1920x2160 panels for 1080P passive 3D. Right now passive 3D polarizes alternate lines so at 1080P it is more like 1920x540 per eye. Which probably is perceived by the brain like 1920x700 or something like that. If no one makes a 1920x2160 panel I presume it could be done with a 4K panel.
I would have to go back through the article, but I believe that in terms of aggression lead has a bigger impact on men than women.
Yes, seriously. Then, instead of worrying about f-ing numbers in a computer, we might worry about how to actually put people to work building real things under the real limits on government spending (inflation and available productive capacity) and not use fake self imposed imaginary limits.
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/p/modern-monetary-theory-primer.html
But, if you subdivide across multiple countries, states, and cities where the lead in gasoline was phased out at different times and the 22 year correlation remains consistent, it becomes highly unlikely that you will find something(s) else that can account for the change.
And, as you said it is statistical because clearly every child exposed to lead during those time periods did not become a criminal. Some just suffered from losing a few IQ points (or whatever intelligence measure you care to use). But, you take a large group of people that have all the other risks for becoming criminals and add lead on top of that and you get a significant rise in crime.
Depending on the farm American tilapia are also raised on shit. At least the fish farm on Dirty Jobs was raising tilapia in the same ponds where they raised bass in order to help clean the pond for the next round of bass. They then sell the tilapia. So, some of that farmed American tilapia is raised on bass shit.
SAVE THE THRESHERS!!!
That is what I did with my Summers and I was a CS major. I don't know how good it looked on my resume when I was looking for a job, this was late 90s, so there were plenty of jobs. But, dealing with children and parents of those children shows people skills.
So, my suggestion would be to "Be Creative" don't go looking for programming jobs, look for things that demonstrate your abilities outside of programming. Volunteer opportunities, but choose something that is interesting to you. Tutor summer school kids or something like that. Teaching demonstrates the ability to communicate. I am sure there are lots of other great ideas.
Well, I was thinking that NASA could use the ISS as a transfer station. But, airports are generally government owned or quasi-government owned and private companies rely on them for their missions (aka Airlines flying passengers to their destination.) So, there is precedence.
Reusable spacecraft in space. The problem with every interplanetary mission plan is that it is a one time plan, or always involves launching the entire spacecraft form Earth every time. Why launch an interplanetary spacecraft to LEO multiple times? Launch it once and after that just launch fuel, supplies, and people. Maybe the a new lander or parts of a lander will need to be launched each time. Since, Ion engines are useful once in space fuel needs would be greatly reduced. A spacecraft that never lands should suffer very little wear and tear, so quit trying to build a single spacecraft to handle all phases of the travel plan. In addition, a reusable spacecraft that never lands can probably be built bigger and more comfortable than one that needs to survive re-entry.
1) Build one spacecraft that launches stuff to LEO.
2) Assemble an interplanetary craft in LEO along with a lander.
3) Launch supplies and crew to LEO. (could be multiple launches)
4) Transfer crew to interplanetary craft.
5) Set interplanetary craft on transfer orbit.
6) Land lander.
7) Do Stuff.
8) Launch lander to interplentary craft.
9) Return interplanetary craft to LEO.
10) Transfer people to LEO landing craft.
11) Repeat from step 3
This is one of the reasons I find any plan to de-orbit the ISS is stupid and wasteful. Even if there is no other science to be had, why waste a perfectly good transfer station for interplanetary travel? It would also probably be a good place to perform vehicle assembly since the interplanetary craft might makes sense to launch in multiple pieces or, if in a single launch, partially disassembled, so it does not have to be designed to survive launch stresses in a fully assembled state.
That is where the Agile angst I am seeing in the comments seems off. People over Process does not mean you don't have process or that having process excludes people. It means that the people are more important than the process. A change board is a pretty good process, but it is useless without the right people.