I agree that server code is moving toward being an API for a client-side presentation layer, but it's hard for me to recommend a specific JS framework at this point if OP wants the thing to stand the test of time. Angular is certainly the flavor of the month, but jquery was the next big thing not too long ago.
I also see some of my clients moving to Jade templates. It's in a bit of a state of flux.
PHP updates due to the combination of "upgrades" and exploits make me VERY happy to no longer be administrating machines.
I've never tried to maintain PHP before, but really, if you used Debian Stable or an Ubuntu LTS, you had trouble with PHP security patches? That surprises me.
Most of the people who know Perl well already have jobs, and aren't looking to change.
Honestly, I think that most people who know Perl also know not to sign up to slog through some unknown Perl codebase. I've seen Perl code that is well-written and easy to understand, and then there's the other 90% of Perl code that looks like Q-bert cursing up a blue streak.
the idea that corporations can have religion is absurd.
Like it or not, nonprofits can already have religious beliefs and opt out of the contraception mandate. So applying the same rules to for profit companies just makes sense. Why should a nonprofit Christian charity be able to hold religious beliefs, yet a for-profit Christian bookstore cannot? That doesn't make any sense.
Ugh, I hate magic builds. You know, the kind that only build on a single developer's workstation using code that's not pushed to the central git server. Unacceptable. The only solution is to insist that all software be buildable on a vanilla machine, but most cowboy devs don't like edicts too much.
The way to fix the cowboys is to give them a gift. A gift that takes away their goddamn high horse. That gift is an automated build tool that automatically builds and deploys their pushed changes to the dev environment. That way, their laziness can override their egos and they accept the tool, but in order to use the tool, they have to spend the extra few minutes scripting their builds properly and an extra few seconds pushing their code.
The effects at my current client have been awesome. No more, "Oh, Bob has to do a build because he's the only one who can do it." Or "only Frank has the latest changes." Or "Oh, the build script is this word doc that might be up to date, but then, it might not be." Or "Oh, the production code isn't quite committed to git yet. It's on Chuck's laptop."
You'll find that loud pipes give you a quadrant behind the bike that's extremely noisy, noisy for a far longer distance than in other directions.
Also, due to the way sound dissipates, I'd argue that having a loud motorcycle does more to impair the motorcycle driver's hearing of his/her surroundings than it does to alert other drivers to the presence of a motorcycle.
I don't really know anything about this particular dustup between the music labels and Google, but I do know one thing: the music labels have a long and storied history of abusing their stranglehold over distribution channels for their own financial benefit. With that shoe currently on the other foot, I wonder if this isn't a bit of butthurtedness on the part of the labels that Google isn't willing to kowtow to them?
Security is always a trade-off. Anyone who gives a shit about whether or not AWS has access to the plaintext will encrypt the data prior to transmitting it to AWS.
The use case where I could see SSE-C being helpful is where a customer has a lot of data to encrypt, and the security requirements are minimal. Rather than the customer using their own CPU resources to perform the encryption/decryption, the customer can offload that work to AWS's servers.
Another potential use case is one where the customer was originally going to rely on S3 permissions to secure the data. However, making a policy configuration mistake is pretty easy, and as another layer of protection, they use SSE-C so that whoever tries to retrieve the data would need to have the keys in order to do anything useful with it.
But, yeah. I wouldn't rely on it for high security needs. Encrypt the data yourself prior to transmitting to AWS if you want to be safer.
If you're using AWS, your data is unencrypted on their end ANYWAY. Or at least, they have to hold the decryption keys in a way that lets them decrypt it, so its irrelevant to encrypt it unless you just enjoy wasting CPU cycles.
Not if you encrypt your data prior to sending it to AWS.
But yes, if you use AWS's encrypt/decrypt service, then they retain the keys by necessity. That buys you having your data encrypted at rest, which may have some value for certain compliance-type use cases, but other than that, it doesn't buy you much.
I think that your comments describe a larger fissure within the Republican party. With respect to social conservatives and libertarian conservatives, there just isn't as much common ground as there needs to be in order to form a political party from both groups.
By way of example, is forbidding same-sex marriage a pro-individual freedom, small-government value? No, it is not. Are Second Amendment rights an Evangelical Christian value? No, they are not. But we libertarians are supposed to clam up about certain freedoms to avoid alienating the evangelicals, and you've got these church groups advocating for gun rights to appease the libertarians. It's starting to come apart at the seams, and has resulted in The Tea Party.
The Tea Party isn't really a bunch of whack jobs like the media says. They're just Republicans who have been over-promised to and under-delivered to for too long. The libertarians are disaffected because the GOP is giving us big government after having promised us small. The Evangelicals are disaffected after having been promised abortion bans, faith-based initiatives, etc. You may not agree that any of the above policy goals are laudable, but you certainly have to admit that we've gotten the opposite of all that since Bush I. Can you blame Republican voters of all stripes for being fed up with the GOP establishment?
This is true. There is nothing new about Danyliw's project other than the 3D printing aspect of it.
That being said, I think it is a super cool project that he's doing, especially for an undergrad. He'll learn a ton from it, and will probably go on to do great things.
They aren't going to bring the price down to $50 until the sensors are $1 each. Considering a quality GPS still costs > $50, as do a set of gyros or a set of accelerometers that are high enough quality to be useful, this is a year or two off still.
I watched the video yesterday and I'm not re-watching it, but did Danyliw's quad even have GPS? Because if not, you can already get a decent Micro Quad for about $50 that's built out of a PCB. Granted, it doesn't have GPS and can't fly autonomously, but it is a standards-compatible and hackable quad at the $50ish price point.
True. The cost of machines could increase, decrease, or remain the same. Also, the minimum wage could increase or remain the same (it doesn't tend to decrease). So that means...
Actually, what does that mean. Did you have a point there? I'm fairly certain that you did not.
Actually, I did not get lucky, unless you count being born with dogged persistence as "lucky".
This is my 4th business, actually. The first three failed miserably. But, I just kept trying because I just can't help myself. 4th time was the charm, but I'm at a stellar 25% success rate. Or, sorry. "luck rate".
What business hires employees they don't need? If you lay people off because the minimum wage is raised, who takes over the work those people did?
Here's a contrived example to illustrate the point.
Let's say that Acme Inc has a low-skill job that can be performed equally well by either by a human or by a machine. Should Acme hire a worker to perform this job, or purchase a machine?
Answer: it depends on which costs more. Let's say that over the expected lifetime of the machine, the costs to operate it (purchase, maintenance, electricity, etc.) nets out to $15 per hour. Let's say that hiring a worker to perform the job costs $14.50 per hour at the current minimum wage of $7.25 per hour (including taxes and benefits and whatnot).
I actually run a business, and for me, I'd much rather hire a worker at $14.50 per hour than buy the machine at $15 per hour because while the machine really would only be able to perform the task that it was designed to perform, a human being is much more versatile and can be trained and can grow with my business.
But now we raise minimum wage to $15 per hour, which is really $30 per hour once you get done with taxes and benefits. As a business owner, this tradeoff looks very different to me. Now the employee costs twice what the machine costs. While I'd generally prefer to have an employee over a machine, in this case, I'd have to buy the machine and not hire the worker. I mean, it's twice the cost if I hire someone. I've got a family to feed. Not happening.
1) I guess it goes down until it can be fixed under warranty (same or next day depending on purchase option). Redundancy is expensive. What happens when your single instance of AWS goes down with an "oops amazon is having problems with a datacenter" message?
If your acceptable downtime is measured in days, then yeah, you should buy your own hardware. For me, if Amazon sends me an email that my instance is running on degraded hardware, I can clone the instance and remap the IP to the new one. Total downtime is a few seconds.
Bringing up a new instance in a different AWS availability zone is always an option, or a different region if an entire region is down (rare).
Also, I do have spiky loads for the project that I'm working on and I shut down the instances when I'm not using them. I know how long my analysis is going to take, and so I launch however many instances that I need to complete the work in an hour, since AWS bills by the hour. There have been times where that's been around 150 instances. I don't have room in house for 150 machines at any price, so there is that.
Truckers should assume that they will be obsolete within 10 years. A truck that doesn't need a human driver can be utilized 24/7 since the driver wouldn't need to sleep.
I really don’t get what that crap above is about, but doing it in my head I just took off 300 and added 2.
Uhh, ok. But how many algorithms do you really want to teach an 8-year-old? Because your shortcut only worked because I chose the number 298. What if I had chosen 167, instead?
8-year-old: Ok, a wombat told me that I take off something and then add something so I take off.. 200, I guess? And I get 226, And then, I add... 33? Or is it 43? And, oh fuck it. Math is hard. When is recess?
You are using a contrived example to "prove" your point by taking a trivial problem and taking the most absurd route possible to solve it. The "Common Core" method (which, by the way, is the method that most people will use intuitively) is used to reduce the complexity of nontrivial problems, not to make a mockery of the trivial ones.
By way of example, what's 426 - 298? Well... 298 + 2 = 300 300 + 100 = 400 400 + 26 = 426
And now... drumroll please... 100 + 26 + 2 = 128.
And you and I both know that if you had faced this problem in the real world that this is exactly how you would have solved it. You probably wouldn't have drawn a box or any such nonsense, but you would have reduced it to manageable chunks like that because that's the sensible way to solve it.
Sorry to have rained on your common core bashing session.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree that server code is moving toward being an API for a client-side presentation layer, but it's hard for me to recommend a specific JS framework at this point if OP wants the thing to stand the test of time. Angular is certainly the flavor of the month, but jquery was the next big thing not too long ago.
I also see some of my clients moving to Jade templates. It's in a bit of a state of flux.
I have not seen an applet at any of my clients in over a decade. Server side java, however, is very common.
PHP updates due to the combination of "upgrades" and exploits make me VERY happy to no longer be administrating machines.
I've never tried to maintain PHP before, but really, if you used Debian Stable or an Ubuntu LTS, you had trouble with PHP security patches? That surprises me.
Sounds like you need a better test suite.
Most of the people who know Perl well already have jobs, and aren't looking to change.
Honestly, I think that most people who know Perl also know not to sign up to slog through some unknown Perl codebase. I've seen Perl code that is well-written and easy to understand, and then there's the other 90% of Perl code that looks like Q-bert cursing up a blue streak.
I've long-since removed Perl from my resume.
the idea that corporations can have religion is absurd.
Like it or not, nonprofits can already have religious beliefs and opt out of the contraception mandate. So applying the same rules to for profit companies just makes sense. Why should a nonprofit Christian charity be able to hold religious beliefs, yet a for-profit Christian bookstore cannot? That doesn't make any sense.
Ugh, I hate magic builds. You know, the kind that only build on a single developer's workstation using code that's not pushed to the central git server. Unacceptable. The only solution is to insist that all software be buildable on a vanilla machine, but most cowboy devs don't like edicts too much.
The way to fix the cowboys is to give them a gift. A gift that takes away their goddamn high horse. That gift is an automated build tool that automatically builds and deploys their pushed changes to the dev environment. That way, their laziness can override their egos and they accept the tool, but in order to use the tool, they have to spend the extra few minutes scripting their builds properly and an extra few seconds pushing their code.
The effects at my current client have been awesome. No more, "Oh, Bob has to do a build because he's the only one who can do it." Or "only Frank has the latest changes." Or "Oh, the build script is this word doc that might be up to date, but then, it might not be." Or "Oh, the production code isn't quite committed to git yet. It's on Chuck's laptop."
Yuck.
It's dangerous both to the rider and everyone around them.
It seems to work in most of the rest of the world.
120 decibel roar
80 dB is the legal limit.
Riding a 120 dB bike would be painfully loud for the rider.
You'll find that loud pipes give you a quadrant behind the bike that's extremely noisy, noisy for a far longer distance than in other directions.
Also, due to the way sound dissipates, I'd argue that having a loud motorcycle does more to impair the motorcycle driver's hearing of his/her surroundings than it does to alert other drivers to the presence of a motorcycle.
They refused to agree to the revised terms which are unnegotiable, which indies are claiming to be unfavorable.
I don't really know anything about this particular dustup between the music labels and Google, but I do know one thing: the music labels have a long and storied history of abusing their stranglehold over distribution channels for their own financial benefit. With that shoe currently on the other foot, I wonder if this isn't a bit of butthurtedness on the part of the labels that Google isn't willing to kowtow to them?
Paintball gun. Non-damaging to the drone, preserves privacy. Simples.
The drone in the article can fly about 1000 ft above ground level. Hope you're a good shot!
Security is always a trade-off. Anyone who gives a shit about whether or not AWS has access to the plaintext will encrypt the data prior to transmitting it to AWS.
The use case where I could see SSE-C being helpful is where a customer has a lot of data to encrypt, and the security requirements are minimal. Rather than the customer using their own CPU resources to perform the encryption/decryption, the customer can offload that work to AWS's servers.
Another potential use case is one where the customer was originally going to rely on S3 permissions to secure the data. However, making a policy configuration mistake is pretty easy, and as another layer of protection, they use SSE-C so that whoever tries to retrieve the data would need to have the keys in order to do anything useful with it.
But, yeah. I wouldn't rely on it for high security needs. Encrypt the data yourself prior to transmitting to AWS if you want to be safer.
If you're using AWS, your data is unencrypted on their end ANYWAY. Or at least, they have to hold the decryption keys in a way that lets them decrypt it, so its irrelevant to encrypt it unless you just enjoy wasting CPU cycles.
Not if you encrypt your data prior to sending it to AWS.
But yes, if you use AWS's encrypt/decrypt service, then they retain the keys by necessity. That buys you having your data encrypted at rest, which may have some value for certain compliance-type use cases, but other than that, it doesn't buy you much.
I think that your comments describe a larger fissure within the Republican party. With respect to social conservatives and libertarian conservatives, there just isn't as much common ground as there needs to be in order to form a political party from both groups.
By way of example, is forbidding same-sex marriage a pro-individual freedom, small-government value? No, it is not. Are Second Amendment rights an Evangelical Christian value? No, they are not. But we libertarians are supposed to clam up about certain freedoms to avoid alienating the evangelicals, and you've got these church groups advocating for gun rights to appease the libertarians. It's starting to come apart at the seams, and has resulted in The Tea Party.
The Tea Party isn't really a bunch of whack jobs like the media says. They're just Republicans who have been over-promised to and under-delivered to for too long. The libertarians are disaffected because the GOP is giving us big government after having promised us small. The Evangelicals are disaffected after having been promised abortion bans, faith-based initiatives, etc. You may not agree that any of the above policy goals are laudable, but you certainly have to admit that we've gotten the opposite of all that since Bush I. Can you blame Republican voters of all stripes for being fed up with the GOP establishment?
This is true. There is nothing new about Danyliw's project other than the 3D printing aspect of it.
That being said, I think it is a super cool project that he's doing, especially for an undergrad. He'll learn a ton from it, and will probably go on to do great things.
They aren't going to bring the price down to $50 until the sensors are $1 each. Considering a quality GPS still costs > $50, as do a set of gyros or a set of accelerometers that are high enough quality to be useful, this is a year or two off still.
I watched the video yesterday and I'm not re-watching it, but did Danyliw's quad even have GPS? Because if not, you can already get a decent Micro Quad for about $50 that's built out of a PCB. Granted, it doesn't have GPS and can't fly autonomously, but it is a standards-compatible and hackable quad at the $50ish price point.
You're assuming machine costs remains at $15/hr.
True. The cost of machines could increase, decrease, or remain the same. Also, the minimum wage could increase or remain the same (it doesn't tend to decrease). So that means...
Actually, what does that mean. Did you have a point there? I'm fairly certain that you did not.
lets be real, you just got lucky
Actually, I did not get lucky, unless you count being born with dogged persistence as "lucky".
This is my 4th business, actually. The first three failed miserably. But, I just kept trying because I just can't help myself. 4th time was the charm, but I'm at a stellar 25% success rate. Or, sorry. "luck rate".
Thank you for missing the point.
These people can all be replaced in whole or in part by automation. That's the point. Do we really need a human being to pour coffee?
No, we don't.
There are those of us that see this as a good thing. 1 job down, 130-something million to go.
I'm sorry, but did I read you correctly? That you see unemployment among the lowest-skilled and most vulnerable in society as a good thing?
If so, then I should like to hear your reasoning.
What business hires employees they don't need? If you lay people off because the minimum wage is raised, who takes over the work those people did?
Here's a contrived example to illustrate the point.
Let's say that Acme Inc has a low-skill job that can be performed equally well by either by a human or by a machine. Should Acme hire a worker to perform this job, or purchase a machine?
Answer: it depends on which costs more. Let's say that over the expected lifetime of the machine, the costs to operate it (purchase, maintenance, electricity, etc.) nets out to $15 per hour. Let's say that hiring a worker to perform the job costs $14.50 per hour at the current minimum wage of $7.25 per hour (including taxes and benefits and whatnot).
I actually run a business, and for me, I'd much rather hire a worker at $14.50 per hour than buy the machine at $15 per hour because while the machine really would only be able to perform the task that it was designed to perform, a human being is much more versatile and can be trained and can grow with my business.
But now we raise minimum wage to $15 per hour, which is really $30 per hour once you get done with taxes and benefits. As a business owner, this tradeoff looks very different to me. Now the employee costs twice what the machine costs. While I'd generally prefer to have an employee over a machine, in this case, I'd have to buy the machine and not hire the worker. I mean, it's twice the cost if I hire someone. I've got a family to feed. Not happening.
1) I guess it goes down until it can be fixed under warranty (same or next day depending on purchase option). Redundancy is expensive. What happens when your single instance of AWS goes down with an "oops amazon is having problems with a datacenter" message?
If your acceptable downtime is measured in days, then yeah, you should buy your own hardware. For me, if Amazon sends me an email that my instance is running on degraded hardware, I can clone the instance and remap the IP to the new one. Total downtime is a few seconds.
Bringing up a new instance in a different AWS availability zone is always an option, or a different region if an entire region is down (rare).
Also, I do have spiky loads for the project that I'm working on and I shut down the instances when I'm not using them. I know how long my analysis is going to take, and so I launch however many instances that I need to complete the work in an hour, since AWS bills by the hour. There have been times where that's been around 150 instances. I don't have room in house for 150 machines at any price, so there is that.
Truckers should assume that they will be obsolete within 10 years. A truck that doesn't need a human driver can be utilized 24/7 since the driver wouldn't need to sleep.
I really don’t get what that crap above is about, but doing it in my head I just took off 300 and added 2.
Uhh, ok. But how many algorithms do you really want to teach an 8-year-old? Because your shortcut only worked because I chose the number 298. What if I had chosen 167, instead?
8-year-old: Ok, a wombat told me that I take off something and then add something so I take off.. 200, I guess? And I get 226, And then, I add... 33? Or is it 43? And, oh fuck it. Math is hard. When is recess?
Common core method:
426 - 167 = ?
167 + 3 = 170
170 + 30 = 200
200 + 200 = 400
400 + 26 = 426
200 + 30 + 26 + 3 = 259
Remember, you're teaching an 8-year-old, not an engineering grad who's worked with numbers for 18 years and "just has a feel for it".
You are using a contrived example to "prove" your point by taking a trivial problem and taking the most absurd route possible to solve it. The "Common Core" method (which, by the way, is the method that most people will use intuitively) is used to reduce the complexity of nontrivial problems, not to make a mockery of the trivial ones.
By way of example, what's 426 - 298? Well...
298 + 2 = 300
300 + 100 = 400
400 + 26 = 426
And now... drumroll please... 100 + 26 + 2 = 128.
And you and I both know that if you had faced this problem in the real world that this is exactly how you would have solved it. You probably wouldn't have drawn a box or any such nonsense, but you would have reduced it to manageable chunks like that because that's the sensible way to solve it.
Sorry to have rained on your common core bashing session.