The problem is such statements ("I dislike Asians because their food smells") are not racist.
"prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior."
Sounds like textbook racism to me. The fact that there's a tangible reason for the prejudice doesn't make it not racist. If he had just said "I don't like the smell of Asian food" that would be fine, but "I dislike Asian people because their food smells" is racist. This person would hold a negative prejudice toward someone of Asian descent who grew up in some other part of the world and didn't cook Asian food.
t2.medium is $412 per year, plus about a buck per gig of storage, and $0.09 per GB data transfer out up to 10 TB per month (up to 1 GB is free). How does that compare? For apples to apples it should be somewhere with redundant everything since I'm sure Amazon data centers have that. Also, if t2.micro (which isn't even the smallest available) is smaller than anything you would colo, then that is a plus for AWS. That means something that would be run off some developer's desktop machine, or shoehorned onto another server where it doesn't really belong could be put on its own virtual server instead for peanuts. Not to mention that there's a whole category of usage called spot instances that they say are 50-90% cheaper than normal pricing. This is not suitable for something like a web server, but if your usage is suitable for it, could be a really cheap way to get a lot of server.
This account on a shared hosting box sounds a lot like running your process on someone else's server, which I thought is what you wanted to avoid. Or do you not really care about that and your argument is just about price? A lot of people think AWS and the like is a bad idea because of relying on "someone else's computer".
BTW I'm not trying to be a dick, just interested. I worked somewhere with the colo solution but I didn't see anything about the costs. Now I work somewhere that uses AWS, and the biggest difference I can think of offhand is that if something goes really badly wrong, I can reboot a server from a webpage, whereas at my old job someone had to drive to the colo. Also if the colo got taken out by a hurricane or a backhoe or something, we would have been pretty well screwed, whereas now I might be able to get a new server going in a different region fairly quickly. It would probably depend on whether the database backups were available. If we were really serious about DR, we'd have those copied to a storage service run by some other company.
At the low end, if you only need a handful of servers, it's far cheaper to just buy them and colocate them somewhere, and the management overheads are low anyway.
You can get a very small (t2.micro) Linux AWS server with 1GB storage for $106 a year. Is that really more expensive than colocation (let alone far more expensive as you claimed)? Then consider that you can set up an identical server on the opposite coast that costs almost nothing until you need to spin it up for disaster recovery. There are also ways to set up replication and automatic failover though I'm less familiar with that.
Agreed, it depends on how much better the tool is and how often you'll use it. If you make eggs for breakfast every day and you have some tool that makes that easier or better and does nothing else, that seems totally reasonable.
And I love that he made ice cream with a fire extinguisher.
That's a fair point, but in other languages if the issues linger undetected, that means they're not really issues, because they only way it could be an issue is if it's causing a problem for a human.
Is your point that it's better that things break if the whitespace is wrong so that the whitespace is always right? Isn't it better if things don't break if the whitespace is wrong, so that then there is no such thing as wrong whitespace?
Yeah but as mentioned with no hostages it's easier for authorities to deal with the situation. My guess is the pirates will stick to the manned ships where their tactics still work.
True there will be rooms. So what will the pirates do? Usually they take hostages. That won't work. They could maybe stop the ship but then what? These ships might be almost invulnerable to unsophisticated pirates. And maybe very vulnerable to pirates who could reroute the ship.
Well these companies that do ocean shipping as their business seem to disagree with you. It seems unlikely they haven't thought of the issues you mention.
There are definitely people who cannot take vacation without being in contact with work, though I don't know how much of that is them being unwilling to just not answer the phone/email and how much is actual employer expectations. However I was responding to this:
6 extra days of paid time while traveling for work
To me that means the employer pays for the time on the boat as part of the business trip, not a vacation. I don't think many companies would be willing to foot that bill.
The lines are still around, with modern Diesel ships that are every bit as sophisticated as an aircraft carrier.
I don't know about that, a lot of aircraft carriers are nuclear powered. I think that complexity outweighs the hot tubs that are missing from the carriers. And then there are the catapult systems and aircraft elevators. Probably more extensive fire suppression systems, point defense systems, probably a bunch of stuff I don't know about...
If you think working on email and spreadsheets is almost as easy with a phone as a PC, some possibilities spring to mind:
- you have an amazing phone that I need to know more about - you have never done those tasks on a phone - you have never done those tasks on a PC - you have a different definition of "almost" than I do - your PC is broken - you're very bad at using a PC and really really good at using a phone
Is there a canonical answer to what you're supposed to do when you're doing scrum/agile/kanban/something involving sprints and you "get your job done"? In other words, once you finish all the work assigned to you for the current sprint, do you start trolling the bug database (what if you org doesn't have one?), tell the project owner you're out of work, pick something from the backlog that looks appealing, play warcraft, or what?
Maybe you missed the other half of it. People generally are very disapproving of Congress in general, but believe their reps, whoever they are, are doing a good job. Thus most people hate Congress but keep voting the same people into office.
I would argue that allowing NY and CA to effectively dictate presidential outcomes would be very bad for the country as they don't represent same interests.
Who decides which interests should be represented? Shouldn't everyone just get one vote? Why should their votes count less just because they live close together and tend to vote the same way? Do groups of people who live farther apart and tend to vote the same way deserve more representation?
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is such statements ("I dislike Asians because their food smells") are not racist.
"prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior."
Sounds like textbook racism to me. The fact that there's a tangible reason for the prejudice doesn't make it not racist. If he had just said "I don't like the smell of Asian food" that would be fine, but "I dislike Asian people because their food smells" is racist. This person would hold a negative prejudice toward someone of Asian descent who grew up in some other part of the world and didn't cook Asian food.
Interesting, thanks.
t2.medium is $412 per year, plus about a buck per gig of storage, and $0.09 per GB data transfer out up to 10 TB per month (up to 1 GB is free). How does that compare? For apples to apples it should be somewhere with redundant everything since I'm sure Amazon data centers have that. Also, if t2.micro (which isn't even the smallest available) is smaller than anything you would colo, then that is a plus for AWS. That means something that would be run off some developer's desktop machine, or shoehorned onto another server where it doesn't really belong could be put on its own virtual server instead for peanuts. Not to mention that there's a whole category of usage called spot instances that they say are 50-90% cheaper than normal pricing. This is not suitable for something like a web server, but if your usage is suitable for it, could be a really cheap way to get a lot of server.
This account on a shared hosting box sounds a lot like running your process on someone else's server, which I thought is what you wanted to avoid. Or do you not really care about that and your argument is just about price? A lot of people think AWS and the like is a bad idea because of relying on "someone else's computer".
BTW I'm not trying to be a dick, just interested. I worked somewhere with the colo solution but I didn't see anything about the costs. Now I work somewhere that uses AWS, and the biggest difference I can think of offhand is that if something goes really badly wrong, I can reboot a server from a webpage, whereas at my old job someone had to drive to the colo. Also if the colo got taken out by a hurricane or a backhoe or something, we would have been pretty well screwed, whereas now I might be able to get a new server going in a different region fairly quickly. It would probably depend on whether the database backups were available. If we were really serious about DR, we'd have those copied to a storage service run by some other company.
At the low end, if you only need a handful of servers, it's far cheaper to just buy them and colocate them somewhere, and the management overheads are low anyway.
You can get a very small (t2.micro) Linux AWS server with 1GB storage for $106 a year. Is that really more expensive than colocation (let alone far more expensive as you claimed)? Then consider that you can set up an identical server on the opposite coast that costs almost nothing until you need to spin it up for disaster recovery. There are also ways to set up replication and automatic failover though I'm less familiar with that.
Agreed, it depends on how much better the tool is and how often you'll use it. If you make eggs for breakfast every day and you have some tool that makes that easier or better and does nothing else, that seems totally reasonable.
And I love that he made ice cream with a fire extinguisher.
By that standard, all malware is zero click.
What false premise?
That's a fair point, but in other languages if the issues linger undetected, that means they're not really issues, because they only way it could be an issue is if it's causing a problem for a human.
Is your point that it's better that things break if the whitespace is wrong so that the whitespace is always right? Isn't it better if things don't break if the whitespace is wrong, so that then there is no such thing as wrong whitespace?
This seems painfully obvious to state but there's a big difference between whitespace and those other things you mentioned: you can't see whitespace.
How many of those conventions are about something that you cannot normally see and screw up the code if done incorrectly?
His rule is only one single task item allowed in the kitchen: the fire extinguisher.
Yeah but as mentioned with no hostages it's easier for authorities to deal with the situation. My guess is the pirates will stick to the manned ships where their tactics still work.
True there will be rooms. So what will the pirates do? Usually they take hostages. That won't work. They could maybe stop the ship but then what? These ships might be almost invulnerable to unsophisticated pirates. And maybe very vulnerable to pirates who could reroute the ship.
Well these companies that do ocean shipping as their business seem to disagree with you. It seems unlikely they haven't thought of the issues you mention.
Will there even be anything to break into?
There are definitely people who cannot take vacation without being in contact with work, though I don't know how much of that is them being unwilling to just not answer the phone/email and how much is actual employer expectations. However I was responding to this:
6 extra days of paid time while traveling for work
To me that means the employer pays for the time on the boat as part of the business trip, not a vacation. I don't think many companies would be willing to foot that bill.
The lines are still around, with modern Diesel ships that are every bit as sophisticated as an aircraft carrier.
I don't know about that, a lot of aircraft carriers are nuclear powered. I think that complexity outweighs the hot tubs that are missing from the carriers. And then there are the catapult systems and aircraft elevators. Probably more extensive fire suppression systems, point defense systems, probably a bunch of stuff I don't know about...
He explicitly mentioned that: "For most people, and obviously all business travellers, 7 days at sea is a deal breaker."
Also sounds like something most employers are not going to agree to.
If you think working on email and spreadsheets is almost as easy with a phone as a PC, some possibilities spring to mind:
- you have an amazing phone that I need to know more about
- you have never done those tasks on a phone
- you have never done those tasks on a PC
- you have a different definition of "almost" than I do
- your PC is broken
- you're very bad at using a PC and really really good at using a phone
Is there a canonical answer to what you're supposed to do when you're doing scrum/agile/kanban/something involving sprints and you "get your job done"? In other words, once you finish all the work assigned to you for the current sprint, do you start trolling the bug database (what if you org doesn't have one?), tell the project owner you're out of work, pick something from the backlog that looks appealing, play warcraft, or what?
Maybe you missed the other half of it. People generally are very disapproving of Congress in general, but believe their reps, whoever they are, are doing a good job. Thus most people hate Congress but keep voting the same people into office.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/162...
I would argue that allowing NY and CA to effectively dictate presidential outcomes would be very bad for the country as they don't represent same interests.
Who decides which interests should be represented? Shouldn't everyone just get one vote? Why should their votes count less just because they live close together and tend to vote the same way? Do groups of people who live farther apart and tend to vote the same way deserve more representation?
Why should people in California and New York have their votes count less than other peoples'?