Want to really get the dirt? Bug your bosses phone. That's how it works in the real world.
Considering "bugging your bosses phone" is one of those red flags that indicate that maybe it's time for a long vacation or for a major change in your career path.
Other red flags: - asking a trusted coworker to setup parental control on your work laptop so you can't use it to watch porn in the bathroom - knowing how many heartbeats it takes to do the elevator ride up to your floor - opening multiple sock puppet Facebooks to see if the cute girl in HR would ignore friend requests from strangers like she ignored yours - knowing the cleaners schedule so you can sift through people's trash cans after business hours without being caught
The guy hacked A UNIX NETWORK! I heard those networks are hardcore, some even use the vi protocol to load balance the kernel across multiple NFS loopbacks. It's basically POSIX grade security with layers upon layers of nmaps.
What I really don't get in this write-up is the insinuation that a focus on (purely) functional programming is a "recent trend".
There is a new area where functional programming does shine, and it's large scale analytics. Sometimes when you think about solving a specific problem, you can go about it in a few different ways, but almost every time if your solution later needs to be parallelized (i.e. running on a Hadoop cluster) the functional programming way will be easier to adapt.
For instance, let's imagine a situation where you have a small e-commerce website and the marketing team wants to know what are the most common sequences of pages visited by users. You could write a quick & dirty python script that parses the logs and creates a hash of every possible sequence, then you could use that to "rank" sequences by time, browser, location, etc. Or you can play the fancy card and use something like Petri nets in a map-reduce-ish kind of way. Both approaches work.
But then your small website becomes a big success, and grows and grows and grows, and one day your script runs out of steam. So you figure, let's run that bitch on a big Hadoop cluster. Well guess what, a script that is map-reduce friendly will be a lot easier to adapt for that.
I'm not saying every single situation warrants for this kind of thinking. But that qualifies as a kind of problem that is fairly new for mainstream programmers.
Azure runs Linux VMs clueless one (and Windows, I know.)
Ok maybe it'd be best for you to dial down a bit the "clueless" thing, you're not even doing it right.
When it comes to Azure, whether a company pays $0.25 per hour to run a Linux or Windows server, the money goes to the same place. I honestly don't know why someone would choose Windows Server but it's apparently a thing since Windows Server licensing went up 46% last year. A fair chunk of that is coming from AWS customers.
This may sound strange, but people who I've always considered "conservatives"/"Republicans"/"right-wingers" have started to express some of the most positive and hopeful sentiments. They're pulling together and have hope for a better future. [... ]
Again, this may also sound strange, but people who I'd describe as "progressives"/"Democrats"/"left-wingers" have really been expressing some of the most negative, and sometimes even hateful, sentiments.
The problem is calibration of what is truly "right". By using the word as an insult that applies to anyone who doesn't agree with their view, leftists have (on purpose) confused everyone, painting the world in black & white so they can better hide their own extremists views.
You wouldn't like "real" right-wingers if they were in your entourage. Think: teabaggers, Wesboro Baptist church, obnoxious pro-life protesters. You can't argue with them any more than you can argue with alleged "antifascists". Both sides of the fences think they know better than you and want to make the rules.
Basically the line has shifted 2/3 of the way to the left, and people who shit bricks on social media are just trying to fit in. They're not posting their thoughts, they're posting what they think they should be thinking based on what the media convey. Just tune them out on social media, odds are that in real life they're still gonna have some part of their personality intact and if you make a politically incorrect joke they'll laugh (as long as there's no audience).
Last month I paid 10 cents. S3 is stupidly cheap for storing documents and source code backups, since that takes up very little space.
ARE YOU MADE OF MONEY? You could have paid 1 cent if you had used Glacier instead. As long as you don't plan to be on a hurry to restore your backup, because I'm pretty sure Glacier restore is a team of interns who take the bus to go off-site and fetch backup tapes. That's how slow it is. But at 1/10 of the price of S3 which is already dirt cheap, it's to be expected.
We are a school that used to run exchange - we've run every version from 5.5 to 2010. It worked well for us and academic licensing is pretty cheap.
However....backup, anti-virus, spam filtering, and a DR solution drives up the cost very quickly.
Google apps was a very easy decision since schools get unlimited storage for free. Google also gives academic accounts the same SLA that businesses get - pretty nice.
Running Microsoft Exchange is cheap - running it properly isn't.
So basically you no longer have backup or DR. Read the fine print or call a Google rep, and you'll realize it. They will tell you outright that even with Google Apps (or G Suite) you need your own backup/DR, all they have is a lightweight recycle bin where deleted stuff lives for like 2 weeks. And you can't restore more than a handful of accounts at once.
You're unlikely to lose emails (although it can happen) but if there's a rogue element in your organization that goes around and deletes stuff, you're fucked. You have to buy a 3rd party product if you want something serious.
The Office365 equivalent of Google Apps has backup and DR options. They're not free but they're a lot better than not having one.
I think you're the clueless one if you don\t know that there's no money in consumer software. The big bucks are in the enterprise. Why do you think even Github, Docker and others have paid enterprise versions? Because someone has to pay the bills, and it's not you and your twitters.
As for "Internet Servers", for the public facing stuff Microsoft is basically printing money with Azure, and for the enterprise it depends on the size, the crown goes to either IBM, Oracle or Microsoft.
So look at the stuff that you can see around yourself, the things you bought at the store, the things you ordered online, the things your mom gave you, and pretty much all of it at one point or another was a number in an Excel spreadsheet. That's what "the world runs on Microsoft" means.
Also - putting all your docs online is a risk - it means that M$ can read all your documents and get access to all your business strategies.
Really? You think Microsoft cares about business strategies stored in your Word documents? They make $20 billions in profit every year. What strategy are they going to steal from someone's $10/month cloud account.
And supposing that it wasn't encrypted, how would that work exactly, since there's millions of documents? They would use Bing to find documents that have the words "profit" or "secret" in them? Or rent Watson from IBM to AI it?
Unlike Google they're not even mining FREE email accounts for ads. I suspect that part of it is because they don't know how to, but still.
Actually I've used it for a Master's dissertation and am currently using it for long university essays.
So the guy is right, you haven't used it much. One can write a Master's (or Slave's) dissertation in Notepad or vi. Or even in a writers app like Focuswriter (which I really like). The woman who wrote Fifty Shades of Grey did most of it on her Blackberry and I bet it's longer than your long university essays.
But when you have to write countless documents with repetitive patterns or need more advanced features like linked content or indexes or mail merge, forget about LibreOffice or OpenOffice, they're like the Walmart version of MS-Office.
I agree with everything you say except the "work with my hands" part. I think it's one of those things that gets old real quick, like quitting a corporate career to open a cupcake shop.
It can be damaging for the soul to deal with hard-linked Excel worksheets or orphaned.gdoc files for too long, but I don't know if you would have really enjoyed operating a forklift or a backhoe for the last 25 years.
Here's my take on this: if one is not already doing a lot of manual labor outside of business hours, one is not going to be thrilled if it becomes a full time job.
No it's not. It's ok to avoid MS-Office if you don't want the lock-in and the constant scheming, but LibreOffice is not better. It's not even close.
Microsoft is terrible at a lot of things, but Office is excellent. Word, Excel, PowerPoint; they're all good products that are second to none. The online version though is awful, especially Outlook. For that Google has better products. Which is kind of funny since Microsoft is trying to push people to the cloud.
Of the $2.8B loss, a bit over $2.6B went to drivers.
Now that's funny... they had to pay their drivers and "apparently took a loss doing so." I wonder if they'll ever figure out where to source those funds from...
Customers pay 41% of the actual price on each ride. Someone has to pay the difference. That's where the $2.6B loss comes from.
Uber has an app, a lot of users, huge debts and no profit in sight. They're not like Amazon, they're more like twitter.
You can buy toilet paper, books and flat screen TV on Amazon. That's a huge barrier to entry for the competition. On the other hand, writing an app that includes gps and credit card payments is something pretty much anyone can achieve. If there was money in that business, there would be competition.
According to analysis by Horan, Uber passengers are only paying 41 per cent of the actual cost of a trip, with Uber using subsidies to undercut rivals and potentially achieve a monopoly.
When people are worried about changes in "many layers of the stack", it's usually a good time to re-architect the system and build microservices. Basically, you get the entire stack in every microservice and you stop worrying about ripple effects; you upgrade or troubleshoot things at a much smaller scale.
Isn't this one of the problems caused by modularization, not solved by it? Basically if everything was in the same VCS it'd be a huge change set doing some database changes, some business rule changes, some desktop GUI changes, some Android GUI changes, some iPhone GUI changes etc. but the moment you start breaking it up you have to start tracking that this change of functionality requires changes in five different projects and unless everything makes it into the next release it won't work. The more you've divided into microservices, the more places you need to change. Each service will be less complex but the interaction between the services would get more complex because you need to pass things around from service to service.
If it' a small team with limited features, maybe. But on more complex systems this is just impossible. For instance if the product has multiple concurrent releases (ex: legacy, LTS, canary) and multiple dev and QA teams working on different features with different timelines, you can't have everything in a big bucket. There's going to be breaking changes daily.
But if you use a microservice architecture, you're dealing with tiny building blocks; all you need is a good CI strategy and decent deployment automation and you can support pretty much any combination.
Doesn't the entire discussion of microservices just completely regurgitate overall software design discussions that have taken place since the 60s? Isn't call latency essentially the only difference?
Not if you do it right. There's essentially 2 differences with microservices vs (SOA/RPC/etc).
1) the full stack comes with the service, so it's self-contained 2) the services are designed to match the business domain
For instance, in the good old days of SOA, a core team would often align the service catalog with the backend systems (ex: ERP, MRP, HRM etc) cramming in all kinds of business logic, then the edge developers would compose more services using those building blocks. With microservices, the catalog is aligned with business activies (ex: make a sale, hire a new employee, etc.) and each service corresponds to the most granular tasks possible. This is not just semantics; if you have worked with SOA and find yourself working with microservices you'll see the difference right away.
What's cool with microservices is that unlike SOA (which is process-heavy and requires a core team that knows everything) you can pretty much let the SME build services around their narrower expertise; if you do it right, using an API gateway for instance to handle authentication and throttling, it's a lot easier to maintain. Each team becomes responsible for "their" API.
And btw microservices don't have to use a network. You coud have just a bunch of dockers running on the same host and talking to each other via unix sockets and it's still considered microservices. It's very common with technologies that are socket-friendly (ex: php-fpm).
Slashdot Mirror
Want to really get the dirt? Bug your bosses phone. That's how it works in the real world.
Considering "bugging your bosses phone" is one of those red flags that indicate that maybe it's time for a long vacation or for a major change in your career path.
Other red flags:
- asking a trusted coworker to setup parental control on your work laptop so you can't use it to watch porn in the bathroom
- knowing how many heartbeats it takes to do the elevator ride up to your floor
- opening multiple sock puppet Facebooks to see if the cute girl in HR would ignore friend requests from strangers like she ignored yours
- knowing the cleaners schedule so you can sift through people's trash cans after business hours without being caught
The guy hacked A UNIX NETWORK! I heard those networks are hardcore, some even use the vi protocol to load balance the kernel across multiple NFS loopbacks. It's basically POSIX grade security with layers upon layers of nmaps.
Asking whether you like functional programming is like asking whether you like phillips head screwdrivers.
I do not. Give me JIS screwdrivers any day.
If you like JIS, you like Phillips. If you like Phillips, you may not like JIS. It's like rectangles and squares.
there is no "Only [one reasonable] Way" to approach a program/problem, at least not one of any reasonable complexity.
One day maybe you will think differently. After all, "what is appropriate for the Master is not appropriate for the novice."
What I really don't get in this write-up is the insinuation that a focus on (purely) functional programming is a "recent trend".
There is a new area where functional programming does shine, and it's large scale analytics. Sometimes when you think about solving a specific problem, you can go about it in a few different ways, but almost every time if your solution later needs to be parallelized (i.e. running on a Hadoop cluster) the functional programming way will be easier to adapt.
For instance, let's imagine a situation where you have a small e-commerce website and the marketing team wants to know what are the most common sequences of pages visited by users. You could write a quick & dirty python script that parses the logs and creates a hash of every possible sequence, then you could use that to "rank" sequences by time, browser, location, etc. Or you can play the fancy card and use something like Petri nets in a map-reduce-ish kind of way. Both approaches work.
But then your small website becomes a big success, and grows and grows and grows, and one day your script runs out of steam. So you figure, let's run that bitch on a big Hadoop cluster. Well guess what, a script that is map-reduce friendly will be a lot easier to adapt for that.
I'm not saying every single situation warrants for this kind of thinking. But that qualifies as a kind of problem that is fairly new for mainstream programmers.
Azure runs Linux VMs clueless one (and Windows, I know.)
Ok maybe it'd be best for you to dial down a bit the "clueless" thing, you're not even doing it right.
When it comes to Azure, whether a company pays $0.25 per hour to run a Linux or Windows server, the money goes to the same place. I honestly don't know why someone would choose Windows Server but it's apparently a thing since Windows Server licensing went up 46% last year. A fair chunk of that is coming from AWS customers.
Nobody called it "hate" when Jimmy Carter forbid immigration from Iran. It's "hate" now just because it comes from Trump.
This may sound strange, but people who I've always considered "conservatives"/"Republicans"/"right-wingers" have started to express some of the most positive and hopeful sentiments. They're pulling together and have hope for a better future. [... ]
Again, this may also sound strange, but people who I'd describe as "progressives"/"Democrats"/"left-wingers" have really been expressing some of the most negative, and sometimes even hateful, sentiments.
The problem is calibration of what is truly "right". By using the word as an insult that applies to anyone who doesn't agree with their view, leftists have (on purpose) confused everyone, painting the world in black & white so they can better hide their own extremists views.
You wouldn't like "real" right-wingers if they were in your entourage. Think: teabaggers, Wesboro Baptist church, obnoxious pro-life protesters. You can't argue with them any more than you can argue with alleged "antifascists". Both sides of the fences think they know better than you and want to make the rules.
Basically the line has shifted 2/3 of the way to the left, and people who shit bricks on social media are just trying to fit in. They're not posting their thoughts, they're posting what they think they should be thinking based on what the media convey. Just tune them out on social media, odds are that in real life they're still gonna have some part of their personality intact and if you make a politically incorrect joke they'll laugh (as long as there's no audience).
Last month I paid 10 cents. S3 is stupidly cheap for storing documents and source code backups, since that takes up very little space.
ARE YOU MADE OF MONEY? You could have paid 1 cent if you had used Glacier instead. As long as you don't plan to be on a hurry to restore your backup, because I'm pretty sure Glacier restore is a team of interns who take the bus to go off-site and fetch backup tapes. That's how slow it is. But at 1/10 of the price of S3 which is already dirt cheap, it's to be expected.
We are a school that used to run exchange - we've run every version from 5.5 to 2010. It worked well for us and academic licensing is pretty cheap.
However....backup, anti-virus, spam filtering, and a DR solution drives up the cost very quickly.
Google apps was a very easy decision since schools get unlimited storage for free. Google also gives academic accounts the same SLA that businesses get - pretty nice.
Running Microsoft Exchange is cheap - running it properly isn't.
So basically you no longer have backup or DR. Read the fine print or call a Google rep, and you'll realize it. They will tell you outright that even with Google Apps (or G Suite) you need your own backup/DR, all they have is a lightweight recycle bin where deleted stuff lives for like 2 weeks. And you can't restore more than a handful of accounts at once.
You're unlikely to lose emails (although it can happen) but if there's a rogue element in your organization that goes around and deletes stuff, you're fucked. You have to buy a 3rd party product if you want something serious.
The Office365 equivalent of Google Apps has backup and DR options. They're not free but they're a lot better than not having one.
I think you're the clueless one if you don\t know that there's no money in consumer software. The big bucks are in the enterprise. Why do you think even Github, Docker and others have paid enterprise versions? Because someone has to pay the bills, and it's not you and your twitters.
As for "Internet Servers", for the public facing stuff Microsoft is basically printing money with Azure, and for the enterprise it depends on the size, the crown goes to either IBM, Oracle or Microsoft.
So look at the stuff that you can see around yourself, the things you bought at the store, the things you ordered online, the things your mom gave you, and pretty much all of it at one point or another was a number in an Excel spreadsheet. That's what "the world runs on Microsoft" means.
Also - putting all your docs online is a risk - it means that M$ can read all your documents and get access to all your business strategies.
Really? You think Microsoft cares about business strategies stored in your Word documents? They make $20 billions in profit every year. What strategy are they going to steal from someone's $10/month cloud account.
And supposing that it wasn't encrypted, how would that work exactly, since there's millions of documents? They would use Bing to find documents that have the words "profit" or "secret" in them? Or rent Watson from IBM to AI it?
Unlike Google they're not even mining FREE email accounts for ads. I suspect that part of it is because they don't know how to, but still.
Actually I've used it for a Master's dissertation and am currently using it for long university essays.
So the guy is right, you haven't used it much. One can write a Master's (or Slave's) dissertation in Notepad or vi. Or even in a writers app like Focuswriter (which I really like). The woman who wrote Fifty Shades of Grey did most of it on her Blackberry and I bet it's longer than your long university essays.
But when you have to write countless documents with repetitive patterns or need more advanced features like linked content or indexes or mail merge, forget about LibreOffice or OpenOffice, they're like the Walmart version of MS-Office.
I agree with everything you say except the "work with my hands" part. I think it's one of those things that gets old real quick, like quitting a corporate career to open a cupcake shop.
It can be damaging for the soul to deal with hard-linked Excel worksheets or orphaned .gdoc files for too long, but I don't know if you would have really enjoyed operating a forklift or a backhoe for the last 25 years.
Here's my take on this: if one is not already doing a lot of manual labor outside of business hours, one is not going to be thrilled if it becomes a full time job.
Use LibreOffice. It's better
No it's not. It's ok to avoid MS-Office if you don't want the lock-in and the constant scheming, but LibreOffice is not better. It's not even close.
Microsoft is terrible at a lot of things, but Office is excellent. Word, Excel, PowerPoint; they're all good products that are second to none. The online version though is awful, especially Outlook. For that Google has better products. Which is kind of funny since Microsoft is trying to push people to the cloud.
Seriously the iphone3gs was the perfect iphone in the hand.
Yes, Donald; we're all very impressed that your hands are so big you can easily "palm" a golf ball...
What is this fixation with his hands? Do liberals have a thing for fisting, or are you just unable to find something relevant to complain about?
(Before any apple fanatics have an aneurism, I have an iPhone myself.)
Fatwah avoided.
Samsung phones are quaint, but they can hardly be considered a rival
True. Nowadays, iPhone rivals are Blackberry and Windows Phones.
Why would you buy an iPhone in the first place? Nostalgia?
Of the $2.8B loss, a bit over $2.6B went to drivers.
Now that's funny... they had to pay their drivers and "apparently took a loss doing so." I wonder if they'll ever figure out where to source those funds from...
Customers pay 41% of the actual price on each ride. Someone has to pay the difference. That's where the $2.6B loss comes from.
It worked for Amazon. It might work for Uber too.
Uber has an app, a lot of users, huge debts and no profit in sight. They're not like Amazon, they're more like twitter.
You can buy toilet paper, books and flat screen TV on Amazon. That's a huge barrier to entry for the competition. On the other hand, writing an app that includes gps and credit card payments is something pretty much anyone can achieve. If there was money in that business, there would be competition.
It was on wired a while ago:
According to analysis by Horan, Uber passengers are only paying 41 per cent of the actual cost of a trip, with Uber using subsidies to undercut rivals and potentially achieve a monopoly.
http://www.wired.co.uk/article...
You can also check on bloomberg, they discussed financials with Uber.
I'm the grandchild of a very fucking high-level veteran (Lt. Colonel) who fought everything from WWII to Korea and Vietnam.
I see. That totally makes you a valid spokeperson for the military in general.
When people are worried about changes in "many layers of the stack", it's usually a good time to re-architect the system and build microservices. Basically, you get the entire stack in every microservice and you stop worrying about ripple effects; you upgrade or troubleshoot things at a much smaller scale.
Isn't this one of the problems caused by modularization, not solved by it? Basically if everything was in the same VCS it'd be a huge change set doing some database changes, some business rule changes, some desktop GUI changes, some Android GUI changes, some iPhone GUI changes etc. but the moment you start breaking it up you have to start tracking that this change of functionality requires changes in five different projects and unless everything makes it into the next release it won't work. The more you've divided into microservices, the more places you need to change. Each service will be less complex but the interaction between the services would get more complex because you need to pass things around from service to service.
If it' a small team with limited features, maybe. But on more complex systems this is just impossible. For instance if the product has multiple concurrent releases (ex: legacy, LTS, canary) and multiple dev and QA teams working on different features with different timelines, you can't have everything in a big bucket. There's going to be breaking changes daily.
But if you use a microservice architecture, you're dealing with tiny building blocks; all you need is a good CI strategy and decent deployment automation and you can support pretty much any combination.
Doesn't the entire discussion of microservices just completely regurgitate overall software design discussions that have taken place since the 60s? Isn't call latency essentially the only difference?
Not if you do it right. There's essentially 2 differences with microservices vs (SOA/RPC/etc).
1) the full stack comes with the service, so it's self-contained
2) the services are designed to match the business domain
For instance, in the good old days of SOA, a core team would often align the service catalog with the backend systems (ex: ERP, MRP, HRM etc) cramming in all kinds of business logic, then the edge developers would compose more services using those building blocks. With microservices, the catalog is aligned with business activies (ex: make a sale, hire a new employee, etc.) and each service corresponds to the most granular tasks possible. This is not just semantics; if you have worked with SOA and find yourself working with microservices you'll see the difference right away.
What's cool with microservices is that unlike SOA (which is process-heavy and requires a core team that knows everything) you can pretty much let the SME build services around their narrower expertise; if you do it right, using an API gateway for instance to handle authentication and throttling, it's a lot easier to maintain. Each team becomes responsible for "their" API.
And btw microservices don't have to use a network. You coud have just a bunch of dockers running on the same host and talking to each other via unix sockets and it's still considered microservices. It's very common with technologies that are socket-friendly (ex: php-fpm).