I've heard this a lot - this idea that PostgreSQL has better transactional integrity than MySQL, but most applications don't need it, and so they are fine using MySQL instead.
That's a good reason to not rule out MySQL, but it's not a reason to choose MySQL over PostgreSQL. What exactly are the reasons for choosing MySQL/MariaDB/SkySQL over PostgreSQL? I don't know enough about databases to answer this myself, but every time I read about this question, all I hear is "most people don't need PostgreSQL so therefore they shouldn't use it", without much explanation about why PostgreSQL would be worse in any given situation.
If an armored car had no drawbacks to a normal car, there'd be no reason not to use one for commuting to work. But obviously the drawbacks of armored cars are that they are heavier and use more fuel; what are the drawbacks of using PostgreSQL?
Say what you will about Summly, but Wavii is not just a hodgepodge of existing tech. They spent three years building their own natural language processing technology, and their team probably has a better understanding of machine learning than most of Google's engineers. It's not hard to see why Google would be interested.
Disagree all you wish. We have gave the farm away. All of these people come over here, work for American companies, go home, start companies, and then compete with American companies. It happens all the time.
OK, I disagree. I'd like to see you name a big non-American tech company that was started by a former H-1B holder.
I'm not talking about tiny littles ones that employ a few people; I'm talking about foreign multinational tech companies. These are the only companies that will ever "compete with American companies" like Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Microsoft.
Can't think of any? That's probably because it never happens.
...but less likely to kill pedestrians and cyclists.
A lot of new cars can already drive down a freeway without driver control, with adaptive cruise control and lane keep assist. Congested inner cities provide a lot more situations which are much harder to handle than simply following some the lines and not crashing into the guy in front of you.
If a driverless car was less likely to be involved in an accident, the insurance cost per car would be less what we currently pay. The only difference is that the manufacturers would pay it, instead of the car owners, although this cost would be passed on to the consumer in the end. So this wouldn't be a problem for the automakers.
But in a world where cars can drive themselves, I wonder if there would even be insurance companies anymore. Car makers would have a big enough fleet to self-insure, so they could provide insurance themselves.
It's cool that you're interested in developing to an open standard, but I think it's worth noting that there are two kinds of proprietary platforms.
The first is platforms like Google App Engine or Windows. These platforms lock you in, by forcing you to write your code to a certain API. If you decide you don't want to keep using this platform, it's really hard to move to something else. The bottom layer of the platform forces a lot of implementation details in the upper layers of the system.
Then there are things like EC2 or GCE. EC2 gives you a pretty standard Linux machine (unless you choose another OS) and you run standard Linux applications on it. There isn't much lock-in, and the bottom layer of the stack can more easily be swapped out. There are features of EC2 like auto-scaling that are available to you, but you don't have to modify your application when you move to a different auto-scaling implementation.
It sounds like you're a software guy, and so getting someone else to manager your data center is probably a good idea for your situation. That way, you can focus on the software. You can always move platforms later if you decide Amazon is not doing a good enough job, or if you find a more open platform that is as good.
The commuter car-plane was a bad idea in the first place. If anything it would be the sci fi writers - not the mechanical engineers - who failed.
Also, I don't think it'd be hard to build a home that tracks the sun. There are plenty of revolving restaurants all around the world. But like the flying car, it's just more trouble than it's worth for most buildings.
Imagine how awful it would be if someone were to fly over people's houses, take pictures of their backyards and post them on the internet;)
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 1
If you think about the residual value of "the iconic Mercedes S Class", it sounds great, doesn't it? Mercedes is a great brand, and the S Class is their best luxury sedan!
But here's the thing about luxury cars (and this applies even more to higher end luxury cars, like the S Class): no one buys them used. If you're rich enough to buy an S Class, you buy it new. If you can't afford a new one, you probably can't afford the maintenance costs, and so used ones have to be heavily discounted to make up for this.
A Corolla or a Civic on the other hand, is something that the used car market goes after. These cars have strong resale value because they are cheap to run and maintain.
The S Class has one of the worst resale values of any car. Tesla claiming that their Model S will have the same residual value percentage is at best an admission that the resale value will be terrible. I wouldn't call that "standing behind" a product.
The reason for the lockdown is to ensure that malicious users don’t work out an exploit by monitoring the changes to the source code while it is being implemented to fix the flaw.
So a mirror of the code from 24 hours ago wouldn't have any work-in-progress commits. These commits would give clues as to where the vulnerability is.
It sounds like a really good use case for distributed version control. When this sort of thing happens, developers should be able to temporarily fork the repo and work on security issues in private, while everyone else is still able to access the main repo.
That's what I thought too. So I was surprised to read this:
Intergate.Manhattan has only one tenant so far, the New York Genome Center, a compute and storage platform for 12 leading medical institutions to tackle the big data challenges that will bring the benefits of genomics to patient care.
Not sure how these guys are going to benefit from the low latency that comes with being physically close to Wall St.
There was no contractual obligation in play. What responsibility does Google have to spend time and money on infrastructure on products that are used by the minority of people?
There's no contractual obligation for users to put on a happy face either. The fact is that it's kinda annoying when a service that you've come to rely on gets shut down.
Google doesn't have a responsibility to provide free services to everyone but it is in their interest to build trust amongst their user base. Otherwise no one is going to invest any time into things like Google Keep.
keeping things in sync between many devices could be done with a floppy disk as early as 1982
If you went back in time by 15 years, and suggested on Slashdot that keeping data in sync using a sneakernet was a better option than using the Internet, you would've been laughed at. I mean, that's what networks are for, and only knucklegrinders and noobs copy files around on physical media. But now, we don't call it a a "network" anymore, we call it the "cloud", and so therefore it's stupid?
I know that the term "cloud" is overused and silly, but networks are a great piece of technology and remote storage often makes more sense than local storage. Especially for applications like this.
Also, if you're concerned about data mining, Evernote don't do any data mining (or at least, that's what they claim in their TOS). Just because a service is on the cloud, doesn't mean that they are necessarily mining your data.
Right...because the first thing a promising young graduate is going to want to do after getting their offer from Google is to reject it, file for bankruptcy and ruin their future.
I think you've failed to understand an important aspect of the business model. They will weed out anyone who might possibly do what you're suggesting.
Because, despite things like Unity, Canonical actually does a lot of good work to fix up a lot of little problems in Debian. It's simply easier for Trisquel and others to rip out Unity than it is to fix up sid.
I'm surprised that people here are so against this. Despite the stereotype of programmers working alone in a dark basement, software development is a collaborative activity.
Yes it's good to get into "the zone" and distractions can break that. But this is more than offset by being able to get other people together to design something on a whiteboard, or have someone more familiar with the code help debug something with you. I can't count the number of times when I've spent ages searching for a bug, and had a colleague come over and spot it almost immediately. The same thing has happened the other way around on countless occasions.
I'm from Australia, have lived in Japan, and am now living in the US. I think the US is a great country to live in (especially if you're a software engineer) but one of the things that I find strange is that the downtown areas of cities are so desolate, particularly at night. In every other country I've been to, the "downtown" area is the beating heart of the city - it's the center of business, culture and nightlife. It's a desirable place to be and you have to pay more money to live in or near it.
But in the US, urban environments are for some reason associated with crime, homelessness, the smell of urine and human misery, and so most "normal" (middle-class) people avoid the area. People don't want to live there, let alone be in the area outside of business hours. I find it bizarre that inner city neighborhoods are considered to be bad areas - in Japan and Australia, inner city neighborhoods are the most expensive ones because they're so convenient to live in.
Since most of the normal people (i.e. people who wouldn't urinate in a train) have moved out into the suburbs, American cities are usually left with a decaying urban core and endlessly sprawling suburbs. Public transport requires a certain level of density before it is worthwhile, and most US cities don't meet that level of density. That's the reason why public transport doesn't work here. In the few cities where there is a good level of density (e.g. New York City) there is a good public transport system. But New York is not a typical American city...
Australian cities have sprawling suburbs too, but the urban cores are not full of homeless people and does not smell of urine! The dole bludgers are usually living somewhere in the outer suburbs where land is more affordable.
I really like these maps, which shows red and blue states (and counties), but resize them by their population. The normal map shows that most American soil is red, but the modified map shows that most American people are blue (only just barely).
So you're saying that he should either love it or leave it? That's kind of a false dichotomy. Maybe he thinks that California is the best state there is, but despite this it still has some massive problems. That's pretty much how I feel about California.
Do you always get offended when people try to improve their governments?
I think it's possible to accept that 1) there are damned good historical reasons and 2) that those historical reasons no longer apply and the system should change. Your post has brings some interesting historical facts, but history only explain problems; it doesn't justify them.
I don't think that Lexus is a scam on the same level as Vertu. Bad value? Maybe. But Lexus vehicles are always at least as good as their Toyota counterparts.
Who cares if an Integra is the same car as an RSX? They're both great cars I'd be perfectly happy with either. The point is that the RSX is not worse than the Integra. The same cannot be said about a Vertu and an iPhone - the "luxury" Vertu is an inferior product.
Slashdot Mirror
I've heard this a lot - this idea that PostgreSQL has better transactional integrity than MySQL, but most applications don't need it, and so they are fine using MySQL instead.
That's a good reason to not rule out MySQL, but it's not a reason to choose MySQL over PostgreSQL. What exactly are the reasons for choosing
MySQL/MariaDB/SkySQL over PostgreSQL? I don't know enough about databases to answer this myself, but every time I read about this question, all I hear is "most people don't need PostgreSQL so therefore they shouldn't use it", without much explanation about why PostgreSQL would be worse in any given situation.
If an armored car had no drawbacks to a normal car, there'd be no reason not to use one for commuting to work. But obviously the drawbacks of armored cars are that they are heavier and use more fuel; what are the drawbacks of using PostgreSQL?
Say what you will about Summly, but Wavii is not just a hodgepodge of existing tech. They spent three years building their own natural language processing technology, and their team probably has a better understanding of machine learning than most of Google's engineers. It's not hard to see why Google would be interested.
Disagree all you wish. We have gave the farm away. All of these people come over here, work for American companies, go home, start companies, and then compete with American companies. It happens all the time.
OK, I disagree. I'd like to see you name a big non-American tech company that was started by a former H-1B holder.
I'm not talking about tiny littles ones that employ a few people; I'm talking about foreign multinational tech companies. These are the only companies that will ever "compete with American companies" like Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Microsoft.
Can't think of any? That's probably because it never happens.
...but less likely to kill pedestrians and cyclists.
A lot of new cars can already drive down a freeway without driver control, with adaptive cruise control and lane keep assist. Congested inner cities provide a lot more situations which are much harder to handle than simply following some the lines and not crashing into the guy in front of you.
If a driverless car was less likely to be involved in an accident, the insurance cost per car would be less what we currently pay. The only difference is that the manufacturers would pay it, instead of the car owners, although this cost would be passed on to the consumer in the end. So this wouldn't be a problem for the automakers.
But in a world where cars can drive themselves, I wonder if there would even be insurance companies anymore. Car makers would have a big enough fleet to self-insure, so they could provide insurance themselves.
It's cool that you're interested in developing to an open standard, but I think it's worth noting that there are two kinds of proprietary platforms.
The first is platforms like Google App Engine or Windows. These platforms lock you in, by forcing you to write your code to a certain API. If you decide you don't want to keep using this platform, it's really hard to move to something else. The bottom layer of the platform forces a lot of implementation details in the upper layers of the system.
Then there are things like EC2 or GCE. EC2 gives you a pretty standard Linux machine (unless you choose another OS) and you run standard Linux applications on it. There isn't much lock-in, and the bottom layer of the stack can more easily be swapped out. There are features of EC2 like auto-scaling that are available to you, but you don't have to modify your application when you move to a different auto-scaling implementation.
It sounds like you're a software guy, and so getting someone else to manager your data center is probably a good idea for your situation. That way, you can focus on the software. You can always move platforms later if you decide Amazon is not doing a good enough job, or if you find a more open platform that is as good.
Big (bigger than a watch - not necessarily something ridiculous like 6.3 inches) screens are useful for things like maps and ebooks.
Also, some people actually buy sports cars because they're fun to drive.
The commuter car-plane was a bad idea in the first place. If anything it would be the sci fi writers - not the mechanical engineers - who failed.
Also, I don't think it'd be hard to build a home that tracks the sun. There are plenty of revolving restaurants all around the world. But like the flying car, it's just more trouble than it's worth for most buildings.
Imagine how awful it would be if someone were to fly over people's houses, take pictures of their backyards and post them on the internet ;)
If you think about the residual value of "the iconic Mercedes S Class", it sounds great, doesn't it? Mercedes is a great brand, and the S Class is their best luxury sedan!
But here's the thing about luxury cars (and this applies even more to higher end luxury cars, like the S Class): no one buys them used. If you're rich enough to buy an S Class, you buy it new. If you can't afford a new one, you probably can't afford the maintenance costs, and so used ones have to be heavily discounted to make up for this.
A Corolla or a Civic on the other hand, is something that the used car market goes after. These cars have strong resale value because they are cheap to run and maintain.
The S Class has one of the worst resale values of any car. Tesla claiming that their Model S will have the same residual value percentage is at best an admission that the resale value will be terrible. I wouldn't call that "standing behind" a product.
From the article:
The reason for the lockdown is to ensure that malicious users don’t work out an exploit by monitoring the changes to the source code while it is being implemented to fix the flaw.
So a mirror of the code from 24 hours ago wouldn't have any work-in-progress commits. These commits would give clues as to where the vulnerability is.
It sounds like a really good use case for distributed version control. When this sort of thing happens, developers should be able to temporarily fork the repo and work on security issues in private, while everyone else is still able to access the main repo.
That's what I thought too. So I was surprised to read this:
Intergate.Manhattan has only one tenant so far, the New York Genome Center, a compute and storage platform for 12 leading medical institutions to tackle the big data challenges that will bring the benefits of genomics to patient care.
Not sure how these guys are going to benefit from the low latency that comes with being physically close to Wall St.
There was no contractual obligation in play. What responsibility does Google have to spend time and money on infrastructure on products that are used by the minority of people?
There's no contractual obligation for users to put on a happy face either. The fact is that it's kinda annoying when a service that you've come to rely on gets shut down.
Google doesn't have a responsibility to provide free services to everyone but it is in their interest to build trust amongst their user base. Otherwise no one is going to invest any time into things like Google Keep.
What's the duty of your job? Does it include making dumb comments on Slashdot, or is that just something you do in your spare time?
keeping things in sync between many devices could be done with a floppy disk as early as 1982
If you went back in time by 15 years, and suggested on Slashdot that keeping data in sync using a sneakernet was a better option than using the Internet, you would've been laughed at. I mean, that's what networks are for, and only knucklegrinders and noobs copy files around on physical media. But now, we don't call it a a "network" anymore, we call it the "cloud", and so therefore it's stupid?
I know that the term "cloud" is overused and silly, but networks are a great piece of technology and remote storage often makes more sense than local storage. Especially for applications like this.
Also, if you're concerned about data mining, Evernote don't do any data mining (or at least, that's what they claim in their TOS). Just because a service is on the cloud, doesn't mean that they are necessarily mining your data.
Right...because the first thing a promising young graduate is going to want to do after getting their offer from Google is to reject it, file for bankruptcy and ruin their future.
I think you've failed to understand an important aspect of the business model. They will weed out anyone who might possibly do what you're suggesting.
Because, despite things like Unity, Canonical actually does a lot of good work to fix up a lot of little problems in Debian. It's simply easier for Trisquel and others to rip out Unity than it is to fix up sid.
That's like, many monitors full of discussion!
http://xkcd.com/385/
And also, both Yahoo and Google employees dress like slobs.
I'm surprised that people here are so against this. Despite the stereotype of programmers working alone in a dark basement, software development is a collaborative activity.
Yes it's good to get into "the zone" and distractions can break that. But this is more than offset by being able to get other people together to design something on a whiteboard, or have someone more familiar with the code help debug something with you. I can't count the number of times when I've spent ages searching for a bug, and had a colleague come over and spot it almost immediately. The same thing has happened the other way around on countless occasions.
I'm from Australia, have lived in Japan, and am now living in the US. I think the US is a great country to live in (especially if you're a software engineer) but one of the things that I find strange is that the downtown areas of cities are so desolate, particularly at night. In every other country I've been to, the "downtown" area is the beating heart of the city - it's the center of business, culture and nightlife. It's a desirable place to be and you have to pay more money to live in or near it.
But in the US, urban environments are for some reason associated with crime, homelessness, the smell of urine and human misery, and so most "normal" (middle-class) people avoid the area. People don't want to live there, let alone be in the area outside of business hours. I find it bizarre that inner city neighborhoods are considered to be bad areas - in Japan and Australia, inner city neighborhoods are the most expensive ones because they're so convenient to live in.
Since most of the normal people (i.e. people who wouldn't urinate in a train) have moved out into the suburbs, American cities are usually left with a decaying urban core and endlessly sprawling suburbs. Public transport requires a certain level of density before it is worthwhile, and most US cities don't meet that level of density. That's the reason why public transport doesn't work here. In the few cities where there is a good level of density (e.g. New York City) there is a good public transport system. But New York is not a typical American city...
Australian cities have sprawling suburbs too, but the urban cores are not full of homeless people and does not smell of urine! The dole bludgers are usually living somewhere in the outer suburbs where land is more affordable.
I really like these maps, which shows red and blue states (and counties), but resize them by their population. The normal map shows that most American soil is red, but the modified map shows that most American people are blue (only just barely).
So you're saying that he should either love it or leave it? That's kind of a false dichotomy. Maybe he thinks that California is the best state there is, but despite this it still has some massive problems. That's pretty much how I feel about California.
Do you always get offended when people try to improve their governments?
I think it's possible to accept that 1) there are damned good historical reasons and 2) that those historical reasons no longer apply and the system should change. Your post has brings some interesting historical facts, but history only explain problems; it doesn't justify them.
I don't think that Lexus is a scam on the same level as Vertu. Bad value? Maybe. But Lexus vehicles are always at least as good as their Toyota counterparts.
Who cares if an Integra is the same car as an RSX? They're both great cars I'd be perfectly happy with either. The point is that the RSX is not worse than the Integra. The same cannot be said about a Vertu and an iPhone - the "luxury" Vertu is an inferior product.