Don't waste your precious analogies on Slashdot; they'll only be torn to pieces.
Unless they're car analogies. Then they'll be driven into the ground.
Allow me: this new super cluster discovery is like finding out your car isn't just driving up the ramp of a semi trailer, but that the semi-trailer is on the deck of an air-craft carrier.
You do have to put a fraction of the time you did in 30+ years of learning your way around SYSV systems into actually learning systemd in order to expect the same level of proficiency.
This is BS. "Learning" SYSV configuration takes 15 minutes to explain run levels and that everything is scripts and (usually) symlinks. You could even learn what you need by recursively grepping/etc for a process name and the script it's in is readable to anyone with programming experience. GP pointed out that a config file for systemd is sitting in/lib. WTF?
-Starting up/bin/sh hundreds of times during boot is wasteful and slows boot. Systemd mitigates that by enabling more lightweight service start. However you'd have to care something about boot times, which is rarely even in the mobile category [...]
-Sequential startup of services is silly when many can be started in parallel. Of course now you have to debug a less deterministic boot process to enable such a thing, with the same inscrutable code paths for the sake of a faster boot very few people needed.
Especially in the server world. The OS boot time is a fraction of my server's boot process. Starting out, you've got POST with RAM tests et al. The RAID array spins up and does its dance. Maybe IPMI gets in the mix. The NICs might have their own prompt for configuration changes lasting a few seconds. And sometimes the BIOS decides to give a detailed list of events with a ten second countdown (bypassable with a keystroke). Then some particularly silly BIOSes complain for a few seconds about a lack of keyboard. Finally, the MBR is touched. systemd will never speed up the slowest part of the boot process, so it's useless for that purpose in a server environment.
Newcomers don't mess around with init systems genius. The debate pro/against systemd is something that power users/sysadmins have, not grandma and cousing Louie.
GP didn't say willfully-ignorant. Newcomers come in all shapes and sizes. The ones newly coming to Linux are usually still power users and sysadmins in the other operating systems they're used to. I remember starting out with Linux. It was weird compared to SunOS, but it wasn't as weird as IRIX. Being new back then meant learning a few oddities and moving on. A decade and a half later, Apple's version of Unix is doing annoyingly convoluted stuff with xml and binary config files, and Linux seems to want to follow into the giggle weeds. Nobody wants to keep it simple any more.
"right on top of" is an American English colloquialism meaning "really close by", usually in terms of a pursuit, but sometimes with stationary objects.
He proceeded to introduce himself as "John Connor." I laughed quietly
It's part of the scam. Disarming misdirection. For a while, part of you was favorably disposed toward the scammer and you were thinking about the ridiculous name instead of screaming in your head "This is a SCAM!".
I inserted the "not" because his second part of the statement made it obvious that was his intent. You can't just read one sentence then dismiss the entire paragraph. Typos happen, apparently a lot with him (note the transposed 2 and 3).
(3) Net Neutrality means: Dropping packets (thereby manipulating congestion control and bandwidth negotiation) based on the source or destination of the packet. If you dropped a Wikipedia packet instead of a Facebook packet due to a policy configuration and nothing else (randomly due to too much load), that's a violation of Net Neutrality.
Net Neutrality bears no RESEMBLENCE to what you are describing in your post: it is simply an injunction that customers should get what they are PAYING for - which is unfettered access to the ENTIRE internet. Painting it as anything else is a lie.
The GP phrased it oddly (note that by his description it's clear he missed a "not" before "dropping" in the first sentence), and placed the numbers out of order, but that's exactly what he said: packets should not be dropped due to source or destination. Sometimes packets have to be dropped, but that should be done randomly to allow access to the entire internet for all (truly unfettered being impossible without infinite bandwidth).
Actually, it's about stifling future innovation. I can easily imagine new technology sometime in the near future which requires blazingly high pings. Perhaps a massively distributed neural net kind of thing, done over the internet. But the traffic for this innovation will be limited to the speeds the derps across the street use for their cat videos.... they will not be able to pay for such speed, even if they want to, no matter what the requirements of their innovation require, they will be limited to the speeds your grandmother gets for her gardening forum.
You realize that net neutrality is exactly what ensures your special traffic for your neural net doesn't get stifled, right? People are complaining because certain high bandwidth protocols are currently being slowed in favor of YouTube cat videos and your grandmother's gardening forum. In fact, some high bandwidth video protocols or sites are being slowed in favor of video protocols or sites for a service a parent or related company provides. Doesn't matter how much you're willing to pay. When the internet starts to become silos, it will all be for high bandwidth cat videos produced by the internet companies themselves, and your neural net traffic might be blocked completely. The cable companies are trying to turn the internet into cable or satellite, where you have to buy service with certain companies to get certain channels; ie not the internet anymore, but discreet intranets that each show different cat videos.
Then girls think, "maybe I don't belong because I don't love them like the boys do."
And they'd be right. Why do they belong at a company passionate about technology if they aren't passionate about technology?
If people only did what they were passionate about, civilization would collapse. If these girls would be good at CS, they shouldn't give up just because of some lack of self-confidence ("I'm not passionate, so I'll fail").
FTFA (w/emphasis mine): When a South Carolina student was given an assignment by his teacher to create a Facebook-type status report telling something interesting about himself
Huh. Then he was following the rules of the assignment. Facebook statuses are mostly fiction, and some are fantasy.
Slashdot Mirror
A pecion is a person with bulging pectoral muscles.
The kind of pecion Ren Höek always wanted to be?
Anyone who could relate to the characters in Coach would have thought it was a drama, despite the laugh track.
Don't waste your precious analogies on Slashdot; they'll only be torn to pieces.
Unless they're car analogies. Then they'll be driven into the ground.
Allow me: this new super cluster discovery is like finding out your car isn't just driving up the ramp of a semi trailer, but that the semi-trailer is on the deck of an air-craft carrier.
Pretty sure GP meant "lawfully infringe". Execution and murder are essentially the same but for legal trappings.
And you thought Culture 19 was brutal!
You do have to put a fraction of the time you did in 30+ years of learning your way around SYSV systems into actually learning systemd in order to expect the same level of proficiency.
This is BS. "Learning" SYSV configuration takes 15 minutes to explain run levels and that everything is scripts and (usually) symlinks. You could even learn what you need by recursively grepping /etc for a process name and the script it's in is readable to anyone with programming experience. GP pointed out that a config file for systemd is sitting in /lib. WTF?
-Starting up /bin/sh hundreds of times during boot is wasteful and slows boot. Systemd mitigates that by enabling more lightweight service start. However you'd have to care something about boot times, which is rarely even in the mobile category [...]
-Sequential startup of services is silly when many can be started in parallel. Of course now you have to debug a less deterministic boot process to enable such a thing, with the same inscrutable code paths for the sake of a faster boot very few people needed.
Especially in the server world. The OS boot time is a fraction of my server's boot process. Starting out, you've got POST with RAM tests et al. The RAID array spins up and does its dance. Maybe IPMI gets in the mix. The NICs might have their own prompt for configuration changes lasting a few seconds. And sometimes the BIOS decides to give a detailed list of events with a ten second countdown (bypassable with a keystroke). Then some particularly silly BIOSes complain for a few seconds about a lack of keyboard. Finally, the MBR is touched. systemd will never speed up the slowest part of the boot process, so it's useless for that purpose in a server environment.
Newcomers don't mess around with init systems genius. The debate pro/against systemd is something that power users/sysadmins have, not grandma and cousing Louie.
GP didn't say willfully-ignorant. Newcomers come in all shapes and sizes. The ones newly coming to Linux are usually still power users and sysadmins in the other operating systems they're used to. I remember starting out with Linux. It was weird compared to SunOS, but it wasn't as weird as IRIX. Being new back then meant learning a few oddities and moving on. A decade and a half later, Apple's version of Unix is doing annoyingly convoluted stuff with xml and binary config files, and Linux seems to want to follow into the giggle weeds. Nobody wants to keep it simple any more.
"right on top of" is an American English colloquialism meaning "really close by", usually in terms of a pursuit, but sometimes with stationary objects.
This is what I was saving my mod points for. Too bad they expired.
I'll use a "server" distro on my laptop before I'll ever use systemd.
I know what ed is. I've used ed. But my point still stands. bearded_yak was dereferencing a variable with percent signs. That's DOS, 100%
You use an MS DOS inspired shell on a Unix box?
Bail! Bail!
"b. Wait a period of time before you request so you do not have to cancel on the same driver if you get them again
Which clearly implies the uber contractor is expected to have canceled on the Lyft driver at least once.
A phone bot wouldn't work very well, but you could hire a call center. Maybe even the same call center.
He proceeded to introduce himself as "John Connor." I laughed quietly
It's part of the scam. Disarming misdirection. For a while, part of you was favorably disposed toward the scammer and you were thinking about the ridiculous name instead of screaming in your head "This is a SCAM!".
I inserted the "not" because his second part of the statement made it obvious that was his intent. You can't just read one sentence then dismiss the entire paragraph. Typos happen, apparently a lot with him (note the transposed 2 and 3).
I've always looked young for my age; now I know why. Yes, my brain does use more glucose than most people's, ladies.
(3) Net Neutrality means: Dropping packets (thereby manipulating congestion control and bandwidth negotiation) based on the source or destination of the packet. If you dropped a Wikipedia packet instead of a Facebook packet due to a policy configuration and nothing else (randomly due to too much load), that's a violation of Net Neutrality.
Net Neutrality bears no RESEMBLENCE to what you are describing in your post: it is simply an injunction that customers should get what they are PAYING for - which is unfettered access to the ENTIRE internet. Painting it as anything else is a lie.
The GP phrased it oddly (note that by his description it's clear he missed a "not" before "dropping" in the first sentence), and placed the numbers out of order, but that's exactly what he said: packets should not be dropped due to source or destination. Sometimes packets have to be dropped, but that should be done randomly to allow access to the entire internet for all (truly unfettered being impossible without infinite bandwidth).
Actually, it's about stifling future innovation. I can easily imagine new technology sometime in the near future which requires blazingly high pings. Perhaps a massively distributed neural net kind of thing, done over the internet. But the traffic for this innovation will be limited to the speeds the derps across the street use for their cat videos.... they will not be able to pay for such speed, even if they want to, no matter what the requirements of their innovation require, they will be limited to the speeds your grandmother gets for her gardening forum.
You realize that net neutrality is exactly what ensures your special traffic for your neural net doesn't get stifled, right? People are complaining because certain high bandwidth protocols are currently being slowed in favor of YouTube cat videos and your grandmother's gardening forum. In fact, some high bandwidth video protocols or sites are being slowed in favor of video protocols or sites for a service a parent or related company provides. Doesn't matter how much you're willing to pay. When the internet starts to become silos, it will all be for high bandwidth cat videos produced by the internet companies themselves, and your neural net traffic might be blocked completely. The cable companies are trying to turn the internet into cable or satellite, where you have to buy service with certain companies to get certain channels; ie not the internet anymore, but discreet intranets that each show different cat videos.
ICyREACH. I predict it will have a chilling effect on free speech, etc
Then girls think, "maybe I don't belong because I don't love them like the boys do."
And they'd be right. Why do they belong at a company passionate about technology if they aren't passionate about technology?
If people only did what they were passionate about, civilization would collapse. If these girls would be good at CS, they shouldn't give up just because of some lack of self-confidence ("I'm not passionate, so I'll fail").
Locusts can taste pretty good if prepared correctly.
FTFA (w/emphasis mine): When a South Carolina student was given an assignment by his teacher to create a Facebook-type status report telling something interesting about himself
Huh. Then he was following the rules of the assignment. Facebook statuses are mostly fiction, and some are fantasy.