avemg

This article is by the Reply All team.

Not for nothing, but Vso (stall speed with full flaps) in the CIrrus SR22 is still 59 knots (68mph/109kmh) and remember airframes don't have the same crash safety features that automobiles do. It's a lot slower than an airliner's would be but you're not exactly gently touching down.

Why only sort of? What could be easier than than a time reference that's constant across the planet, doesn't observe daylight savings, has no leap years (but rare leap seconds, iirc), and can be trivially converted to a local time if necessary? I guess never having to convert to local times because there's no such thing in the world as time zones would be easier, but at the cost of all of the practical everyday uses of local times.

> But it would make programmers and things that deal with logical time much easier.

But as the article points out, programmers and others who want to work with time without the hassles of timezones already have such a system (UTC).

But WHY? You're just describing what happens when a medium takes off.

Why are all of these pros suddenly starting their own? Why is it becoming mainstream now instead of in 2004? Certainly there are some trailblazers in there that through luck or foresight were doing it early, but a lot are doing it because they've seen that the audience is there and it won't be a waste of time.

I agree with the article because it fits my personal experience. I bought a car a year ago with a Bluetooth enabled sound system and almost immediately starting devouring podcasts because of how easy it was.

This article was written by Roberto Saviano.

I don't know about that. It's certainly becoming a trite way to describe your product.

MLB playoffs are a crapshoot. You can construct a team that consistently performs well over the 162 game regular season but once you reach the postseason it often comes down to luck and which teams are hot at the right time. Billy Beane has been very unlucky there.

Jane Doe gets married and changes her name Jane Smith. She no longer wishes to log into your system as janedoe and would prefer to login as janesmith. Certainly one could make the argument that you should just tell her that the name can't be changed and she'll have to just live with it. Depending on your business, that may or not be acceptable.

Yea this was a silly article. The ultra wealthy have a lot of extra capital in which to gamble on some unorthodox, high risk, high return investments. I seriously doubt any of the examples given make up a significant portion of anyone's investment portfolio.

Thanks for the reply. We have a similar architecture where I work so this is interesting to me. A couple more questions if you don't mind:

- Do you use any tools for orchestrating the rollout of those schema changes or do you just have some homegrown scripts?

- Do you separate your schema versioning and deployment process from your application versioning and deployment process?

- How do you handle cases where backwards-compatibility is not possible? For example, a new application feature that depends on a brand new table.

How do you manage schema changes with release deployments across across all of the databases that are meant to be standard?

The obvious response to that is to suggest that these people are looking just hard enough (wink,wink) to keep their benefits but not actually get hired by anyone and once you take away the free ride they'll start making an honest effort to find work.

I don't agree with that, but I find it hard to refute when it comes up. Are there any good, fact-based arguments that prove this idea to be false?