I'm sorry but at some point we have to drop old legacy connections.
The headphone jack is not a legacy connection. Nor is the escape key, especially if you're a programmer.
The charging port might be considered a legacy connection, if you don't mind spending a USB-C connection on charging. But MagSafe did solve a real problem that is now unsolved again.
"If you're not taking time to experiment and find what will work for your company, then you are destined to fall behind and lose to a startup who will do it faster and cheaper because they don't have the legacy technical debt to deal with."
I, like everyone else, am saying that it's a calculated risk. You're a fool if you don't identify and plan for disruptions, but you're also a fool to bet the company on greenfield technology. Well, if you're not a startup where the whole company is a risky bet anyway.
Lambda is a case in point. Using Lambda is a perfect example of "risky": it requires a complete rewrite and buys you vendor lock-in. Not saying it's bad technology, but you'd need an extremely strong argument to move an existing system over to it.
Sure, but of course that's not the point. The point is to prove it can be done now. If there's already an obvious corridor that doesn't require a lot of expensive land acquisition or tunnelling or something else that would get in the way of actually building the thing, it makes sense.
And yes, the TGV would be cheaper, but enough people travel on this route that it won't make a loss if it works.
Knowing what little I know of the history and politics, a more likely hypothesis is that Angular wants you to stop using AngularJS and has SEO'd itself to encourage you to do this.
If Bing returns more AngularJS results, all that proves is that the Angular developers figure nobody interested in their framework uses Bing.
Remember that even Windows 10 was mostly done on Ballmer's watch, even though it was released on Nadella's watch. After Ballmer, Microsoft couldn't exactly fall much further in everyone's estimation...
I do not understand what you're saying. Here's the thread from my perspective:
GZ: "It's like this bizarre analogy to something real world." D-a-B: "In my experience it's not like that in the real world." Me: "It's not common, but it really does happen."
Real quick now, what's your ideas about social justice?
Short version:
All societies that I'm aware of still have unnecessary institutional and procedural barriers that disproportionately hurt certain sectors of the population. That is, social injustice exists and should be addressed. There are people who are working on this. On the other hand, many (if not most) keyboard warriors who claim to be social justice types seem to be working on anything and everything except substantive reform of that which needs to be reformed. Many (if not most) of those who claim to be "anti-SJW" are using their response to these keyboard warrior types as an excuse to also avoid substantive reform.
Like the vast majority of societal problems that need addressing, the net effect of the intense polarisation of society is to pretty much ensure that nothing ever changes. And those who run the major political parties and cable news channels and pseudo-thinktanks and lobby groups and fundamentalist religions and all other institutions that make money off siege mentality and outrage are laughing all the way to the bank.
Juniors are not purely a burden, the help seniors have the time to improve on poor designs. Or bring fresh ideas to old problems.
In the case of cloud management, this is a very crowded space right now. There are half a dozen incompatible solutions on offer, and a typical junior developer is slightly familiar with at most one of them.
I know this because 20 years ago I was that junior developer.
So you're right, but part of the job of a senior developer is to temper enthusiasm with reality.
For a modest sized company (36 servers if you will recall), cloud management systems are not a competitive advantage, they are a risk to be managed carefully.
It is not incumbent on every organisation to try every new technology that covers everything you do, especially in a space as crowded as cloud management. If you have a solution that works well enough at your scale, you may be better off letting those who can afford it to learn, and then learn from them.
Oh dude, clearly you have never met incels. It's not exactly common but it's also not a strawman. There are even incels of above average looking guys out there who are so brainwashed with severe body dysmorphia that they think they're hideous.
That sounds like a great idea if the amount you'd save on the new tech is likely to be greater than or equal to the cost of experimenting and migrating from whatever is happening now.
Not an AC here. English does not distinguish nouns by gender, and as such, there is nothing which makes a name "male" or "female" apart from convention. And the conventions are in a constant state of change. The guy who wrote the musicals The Music Man and The Unsinkable Molly Brown was named Meredith Wilson. In 1902 when he was born, that name was more unisex, and today it isn't.
As a wise person once wrote:
What's in a name? that which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet.
I've done that in person, but I've never done that in an email (because I can correct it) and I've never done that in IRC (where people are generally known by their nicks). Unless you go to a shitload of conferences, this seems like the sort of mistake that would be hard to make in an open source project.
But more to the point, even the most socjussy of socjus people can generally tell the difference between a genuine mistake (especially if it's followed by an apology) and deliberate baiting. You probably can too.
Fair point, but I'm pretty sure this isn't the case at Google. It's one of those Mike Robbins "bring your whole self to work" places, and Google has even hosted political candidates. And certainly to the extent that he was discussing Google's corporate training and corporate culture, that's very much protected under most sane labour laws.
I've mentioned this elsewhere, but I think this bears repeating. Reading the NLRB's decision, and also reading between the lines of Pichai's memo, the consensus seems to be that Damore's comments about politics and Google's corporate culture were absolutely 100% protected free speech. It's really only the pseudoscientific stereotyping that got him into trouble.
By way of analogy, say that someone "supported" their argument about Google's corporate culture by claiming that women are less suited to engineering for reasons of phrenology. Perhaps this hypothetical individual pulled out a bunch of papers about measurable skull differences between men and women to make their point, even though the papers did not support phrenology and their authors (like all good modern scientists) thought phrenology was bunk.
I honestly don't know the limits of first amendment jurisprudence. Hell, I'm not American. It seems to me that political beliefs must be protected in a democracy, and beliefs about corporate culture and procedures must be protected under labour laws, but especially in a company that crucially depends on its research competence, espousing the kind of pseudoscience that causes a hostile work environment feels like it's on the other side of a line to me, at least as far as employment goes.
"Tell the truth" is not a synonym for "blurt every little half-baked thought that enters your head".
There are some opinions I hold that I don't tell my mother because I'm pretty sure I've missed some crucial detail and this would make me look like an idiot. One of the most important lessons, possibly the most important lesson, in all of critical thinking is to be your own harshest critic.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry but at some point we have to drop old legacy connections.
The headphone jack is not a legacy connection. Nor is the escape key, especially if you're a programmer.
The charging port might be considered a legacy connection, if you don't mind spending a USB-C connection on charging. But MagSafe did solve a real problem that is now unsolved again.
DC should rewatch the 1960s show and play the Arkham games and realise that what people really want is Batman beating the crap out of people.
I, like everyone else, am saying that it's a calculated risk. You're a fool if you don't identify and plan for disruptions, but you're also a fool to bet the company on greenfield technology. Well, if you're not a startup where the whole company is a risky bet anyway.
Lambda is a case in point. Using Lambda is a perfect example of "risky": it requires a complete rewrite and buys you vendor lock-in. Not saying it's bad technology, but you'd need an extremely strong argument to move an existing system over to it.
Sure, but of course that's not the point. The point is to prove it can be done now. If there's already an obvious corridor that doesn't require a lot of expensive land acquisition or tunnelling or something else that would get in the way of actually building the thing, it makes sense.
And yes, the TGV would be cheaper, but enough people travel on this route that it won't make a loss if it works.
I don't have 30 minutes to spend watching that video, but I'm going to assume that it didn't answer the question about how I did.
You asked me for my opinion "real quick now" and I gave it, and it's essentially "a plague o' both your houses". Real quick now, why did you ask?
Knowing what little I know of the history and politics, a more likely hypothesis is that Angular wants you to stop using AngularJS and has SEO'd itself to encourage you to do this.
If Bing returns more AngularJS results, all that proves is that the Angular developers figure nobody interested in their framework uses Bing.
I interpreted it as a backhanded compliment.
Remember that even Windows 10 was mostly done on Ballmer's watch, even though it was released on Nadella's watch. After Ballmer, Microsoft couldn't exactly fall much further in everyone's estimation...
And on the other hand, here's a real conversation that I was privileged to observe:
Alice: "How did people navigate before Google Maps?"
Bob: "Uh... maps?"
Alice: "No, I mean before Google Maps."
There's something to be said for successfully claiming a generic word. Like "Windows".
I do not understand what you're saying. Here's the thread from my perspective:
GZ: "It's like this bizarre analogy to something real world."
D-a-B: "In my experience it's not like that in the real world."
Me: "It's not common, but it really does happen."
Real quick now, what's your ideas about social justice?
Short version:
All societies that I'm aware of still have unnecessary institutional and procedural barriers that disproportionately hurt certain sectors of the population. That is, social injustice exists and should be addressed. There are people who are working on this. On the other hand, many (if not most) keyboard warriors who claim to be social justice types seem to be working on anything and everything except substantive reform of that which needs to be reformed. Many (if not most) of those who claim to be "anti-SJW" are using their response to these keyboard warrior types as an excuse to also avoid substantive reform.
Like the vast majority of societal problems that need addressing, the net effect of the intense polarisation of society is to pretty much ensure that nothing ever changes. And those who run the major political parties and cable news channels and pseudo-thinktanks and lobby groups and fundamentalist religions and all other institutions that make money off siege mentality and outrage are laughing all the way to the bank.
How did I do?
Schools teach theory and basic skills, but software development is ultimately an apprenticeship.
Juniors are not purely a burden, the help seniors have the time to improve on poor designs. Or bring fresh ideas to old problems.
In the case of cloud management, this is a very crowded space right now. There are half a dozen incompatible solutions on offer, and a typical junior developer is slightly familiar with at most one of them.
I know this because 20 years ago I was that junior developer.
So you're right, but part of the job of a senior developer is to temper enthusiasm with reality.
Remember, unlike that startup, you already have customers and cashflow.
For a modest sized company (36 servers if you will recall), cloud management systems are not a competitive advantage, they are a risk to be managed carefully.
It is not incumbent on every organisation to try every new technology that covers everything you do, especially in a space as crowded as cloud management. If you have a solution that works well enough at your scale, you may be better off letting those who can afford it to learn, and then learn from them.
Oh dude, clearly you have never met incels. It's not exactly common but it's also not a strawman. There are even incels of above average looking guys out there who are so brainwashed with severe body dysmorphia that they think they're hideous.
That sounds like a great idea if the amount you'd save on the new tech is likely to be greater than or equal to the cost of experimenting and migrating from whatever is happening now.
Sometimes I wonder if anyone actually read the bloody thing. All of these things people are talking about like virtual hugs are examples, not "rules".
And of course the reason why they are there is for the same reason that we have stupid safety warnings on things: human idiocy knows no limits.
Fools are the reason why we can't have nice things.
I'll bite. Why not?
Not an AC here. English does not distinguish nouns by gender, and as such, there is nothing which makes a name "male" or "female" apart from convention. And the conventions are in a constant state of change. The guy who wrote the musicals The Music Man and The Unsinkable Molly Brown was named Meredith Wilson. In 1902 when he was born, that name was more unisex, and today it isn't.
As a wise person once wrote:
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.
I've done that in person, but I've never done that in an email (because I can correct it) and I've never done that in IRC (where people are generally known by their nicks). Unless you go to a shitload of conferences, this seems like the sort of mistake that would be hard to make in an open source project.
But more to the point, even the most socjussy of socjus people can generally tell the difference between a genuine mistake (especially if it's followed by an apology) and deliberate baiting. You probably can too.
Oh yeah, and that's the bottom line here. There are so many ways he could have kept himself on a firm legal footing, and he did very little of it.
Fair point, but I'm pretty sure this isn't the case at Google. It's one of those Mike Robbins "bring your whole self to work" places, and Google has even hosted political candidates. And certainly to the extent that he was discussing Google's corporate training and corporate culture, that's very much protected under most sane labour laws.
I've mentioned this elsewhere, but I think this bears repeating. Reading the NLRB's decision, and also reading between the lines of Pichai's memo, the consensus seems to be that Damore's comments about politics and Google's corporate culture were absolutely 100% protected free speech. It's really only the pseudoscientific stereotyping that got him into trouble.
By way of analogy, say that someone "supported" their argument about Google's corporate culture by claiming that women are less suited to engineering for reasons of phrenology. Perhaps this hypothetical individual pulled out a bunch of papers about measurable skull differences between men and women to make their point, even though the papers did not support phrenology and their authors (like all good modern scientists) thought phrenology was bunk.
I honestly don't know the limits of first amendment jurisprudence. Hell, I'm not American. It seems to me that political beliefs must be protected in a democracy, and beliefs about corporate culture and procedures must be protected under labour laws, but especially in a company that crucially depends on its research competence, espousing the kind of pseudoscience that causes a hostile work environment feels like it's on the other side of a line to me, at least as far as employment goes.
"Tell the truth" is not a synonym for "blurt every little half-baked thought that enters your head".
There are some opinions I hold that I don't tell my mother because I'm pretty sure I've missed some crucial detail and this would make me look like an idiot. One of the most important lessons, possibly the most important lesson, in all of critical thinking is to be your own harshest critic.
Quite.