Kesty

Isn't one of the main reasons to move logic into the database is so that you have a dedicated DBA handling everything in the best way possible ?

I'm just guessing here but this to me seems a bit too micro optimization.

Great when you are a huge company with massive number of data and operations where every ms counts, but in most cases there are bigger and more important things to optimize before saving some round trips from the db.

This seems suspiciously like a marketing presentation for VoltDB more than debunking myth about SQL.

Tl;Dr; SQL is too slow ? No, VoltDB is Fast !

Monetization is not great, but I think the biggest culprit in this case is a mix of competition, ad agencies and classic greed.

The number of impressions is limited and declining (moving from the desktop where you can put 15 ads on each page to the mobile where you have max 1 or 2 ads per page) and companies are fighting for the attention of the user while content providers try to squeeze as many adspaces they can in their pages to incrase/stabilize the declining CPM (cost per thousand impression), so they ask their ad agencies to create more inventive and engaging (attention grapping/annoying) banners.

When they ask website to do their new and improved format, they usually get a no in response. Then they shove more money at the problem until some website can't say no anymore and accept the new format.

Once someone else has accepted the others can't keep saying no or the company will only do banners with the competition that actually accept the new format, so everyone does.

All new invasive formats usually start with clear and strict rules: only one each day, for a max of two per week. And we can show the ad to each users a maximum of twice a day.

But this "rules" become progressively less strict as more and more companies want to purchase the new format that has a much higher cost and some ad manager will come to you faking sadness (while actually counting his cut behind his back) and say the magic words: "I don't like it either but it's how we paid your salaries and it's too much money to pass up."

And this is how banner "standards" are born.

And that's one of the main reason for Apple to say no to that.

There is no way that a backdoor like this could not be exploited by someone else if they found out the way to do it.

The other one is that there is no way the government can guarantee Apple to only use in the "right" cases after they have access to it.

Since a lot of updates will require for you to stop or the service anyhow, adding a reboot at the end before bringing everything back up it's not that bad of an idea.

That works for most taxes on consumer products since it's fixed and not based on income.

If two people have the same exact habit it will cost them the same amount. If I have a higher income than you I'm actually paying less relative of my income than I would with a normal tax.

This is true even not considering the social aspect of it. Some of this taxes are on addictive things like drugs (tobacco, alchool) and gambling (lottery). And one social influence of addictive behaviour is poverty.

That's what we usually do in C#.

Required parameters as positional, and optional as named.

doSomething(req_param_1_value, req_param_2_value, optional_param_1 : value, optional_param2: value);

You can always report an homicide as a suicide.

You will have an increase suicide rate, but it won't effect the criminal rate.

Reserving CPU for itself will make all third party app run slower. And third party apps are a huge selling point (look at Windows Phone), you don't want to be behind your competition because you want a smoother experience on your stock applications.

Also there is feature creep, the longer the system goes on the more feature, security checks, fixed, etc... your basic system does and that will exponentially increase the weigth of your system, requiring you to serve more and more, and making everything else slower.

I 100% agree. That's my main issue too.

Most of the games taht works on this kind of model are usually simply not very good. And seeing that at the beginning, for me it's a very big red flag that will say. Don't waste your time on this.

This is because they don't need that many people to make money, and they will always get at least someone, so the better business model is quantity over quality.

48'000 was what we voted last year when we wanted to put a minimum wage (taht we don't have right now) and right now 90% of workers earn more than that.

They belive what the party tell them to vote.

You seems to forget that starting a business requires a capital much higher than buying a lottery ticket.

While the odds are much better, the capital I need to risk/invest is much higher.

The problem is that, while the seconds odds are better, you need skill, time, effort, luck and, in most cases, you will have to spend more money than in a lottery (be either for investments, or studies).

The lottery odds, while a lot smaller, requires you only to invest a couple of bucks each week and to remember to check if you won.

Also there is not a formula that you can follow that will guaranteed you to become a millionaire from work/enterpreneurship and investments, while the formula for lottery winner it's quite easy. Buy a ticket.

>But the whole thing happened in just a few seconds

The problem here is that the hist first reaction was take out the gun and shoot him. It shouldn't be his first choice.

In this case it's hard to argue that a person randomly hitting people with an hammer on their heads didn't deserve it, but it's more a bad trending that can only domore harm than good

Most of those people though simply can't go back to the trenches coding because their time become too valuable.

Some of them actually miss it. In most Bill Gates interviews he alaways remember his days hard at coding as the most fun.

There has been more than one study showing that people who pirates content are ususally the group that spend most on content.

This is for the simple reason that people that pirates stuff are the one that are interested enough for the content.

So study show that people that use piracy are also the same people that buy the legal content. Why ? For many reasons, it might be easier to pirate than getting it in legal ways, it might not be available legally yet, or it might, obviosuly, cost more than they are willing to spend.

There are people that only pirate stuff and don't pay for anything, sure there are, but most pirates are just interested people that for one reason or the other can't get the same thing legally (money is only one of the reasons).

And that also is one of my biggest problem with the argument against piracy. They treat each pirated copy of something like a missed sale, and that's just stupid.

If my budget for movies is 100$, i'll spend that 100$. After that, if I want more content, my option are pirate the other stuff or simply not consuming it. Not increasing my budget.

I don't have one research to show you, because there has been more than one, so I'll leave you this link: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=pirates+spend+more

The fact that they call catastrophic people that are not able to use their iphone speaks about sensationalism.

If this lead to a way to grab information from the phoen that would be more damaging, than a simply a denial of use in a delimited area.

And still the solution for centering a dynamic sized div is still using table-cell.

When "The Bad" list start with the single word Javascript, it loses a lot of credibility for any unbiased judgment.

It might works also for spirits where the more they age the more the value goes up.

Not really.

14 place ETHZ (Switzerland) https://www.ethz.ch/en/studies/financial/tuition-fees.html $600 at semester = $1,200 (1 school year)

15 place John Hopkins(USA) http://www.collegecalc.org/colleges/maryland/johns-hopkins-u... $45,470 (1 school year)

Obviously it's US against Switzerland, it's completely different and very hard to compare. But bigger fees doesn't really means better university.

I've found "It worked yesterday", it's all of the same vriant.

My personal favourite is "Everything worked fine in the dev environment"

It's stupid, I know, but there are less step to do it even from microsoft.com

The trick is not to go to the SQL server page but goinf directly on the download Center. From microsoft.com you to Download->Download Center and then search for sql server 2014 express.

There you will find the one click download if you can guess what version you actually want.

Yeah, that does not improve the process that much.

Still better than "You wouldn't steal a car" :)

If what you are looking for is not available, too hard to use, of a bad quality and/or cost too much you will turn to an alternative that is free, fast, easy to use even if is illegal. If you perceive that what are you doing is not actively harming anyone.

It's like if you are running around town looking for a parking spot. You find a place where you could park your car, it's not bothering anyone and doesn't block anyone and anything else it just isn't marked.

If you have a cheap real parking near, you probably wouldn't park in the unmarked spot. But if the first legal alternative is 5 miles away, a private parking charging you 10 bucks every hour, a maximum 5 minutes parking then you probably stop in the unmarked spot.

It's legal ? No. It's actively bothering anyone other than the policeman writing you the ticket if he finds out ? No. You hope that they won't find out, and won't write you a ticket ? of course you do.

A lot of people saw the potential but in 2007 there still were worries. Apple whould have been crazy not to let people develop app for the device but it wasn't possible until july 2008. Also many programmers were worried on how who apple would run their store as soon as they annunced it on march 2008 soon.

And I would say that at least until iOS4 (2010) the jailbroken version was still better than what apple was doing.

Until the 2008 (3G) here wasn't an app store. If you didn't saw what was possible in a jailbreaked version and belive that Apple will fix some of the biggest problem it actually was a fairly expensive toy.

As much as people like to bash everyone who said in 2007 that the iPhone was nothing more than an expensive toy has to remember that the iPhone didn't have an application store (other than the jailbreak version) until July 2008.

And without the app store it was a great pice of engineering but if you didn't saw a jailbreaked version it was a big phone (for the time) where you can play music, watch videos and go to a completely non mobile friendly web with a crappy browser. Add to that how expensive it was compared to other phones how low the battery lasted and how fragile it was you can see why not everyone was that impressed.

It's too easy to say 7 years later, look at this fool he was wrong.