buff-a

I've never heard this "tip" from anyone. Ever. Any links or references to these "supposedly authoritative sources"?

I'm finding it hard to take this article seriously when it says:

"When you press the home button, iOS will tell the app to quit. In almost all cases, it quits..."

Then, a few paragraphs later:

"When you press the home button, the app moves from Active to Background. Most apps usually then go from Background to Suspended in a matter of seconds."

Wait, I thought you said it gets told to quit?

According to this [1], an app has to specifically request to be killed when the home button is pressed. "When the value of this key is YES, the application is terminated and purged from memory instead of moved to the background. If this key is not present, or is set to NO, the application moves to the background as usual."

The information in the article about states is useful, but why open with factually incorrect information?

[1] http://developer.apple.com/library/IOs/#documentation/Genera...

Hadoop is in C++? Those five files in the C++ directory?

I've met lots of people who code Java, Ruby, etc and advocate those.

I've met very few people who've shipped one product using C++ and another using Java/whatever - but those who have? They advocate using C++ sparingly if it all.

Bottom line: if you goal is to have beautiful classical music in the background for your party, then you could hire Joshua Bell, you could spend years trying to become Joshua Bell, or you could buy a fucking iPod and move on to the next problem.

That level of awesome builds the product (show don't tell) and then sells it for $180m.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112dI2...:

(a) Definition- For purposes of this section, a foreign Internet site or portion thereof is a `foreign infringing site' if--

(1) the Internet site or portion thereof is a U.S.-directed site and is used by users in the United States;

(2) the owner or operator of such Internet site is committing or facilitating the commission of criminal violations punishable under section 2318, 2319, 2319A, 2319B, or 2320, or chapter 90, of title 18, United States Code; and

(3) the Internet site would, by reason of acts described in paragraph (1), be subject to seizure in the United States in an action brought by the Attorney General if such site were a domestic Internet site.

News content from Fox perpetuating lies that cause soldiers and civilians to die: front page in search results.

Google has demonstrated with the photo that its willing to act as a censor. Now that we've agreed that censorship is ok, can we now talk about what we would like to censor?

>make install.

oh.

You seem to be assuming three things:

1. Industry does not know how to destroy a politician.

2. (And therefore) All politicians who have had their career destroyed (or marginalized) had it done fairly and as a natural consequence of their actions. Not because of Industry involvement.

3. Politicians are not also Industry players.

I believe you are wrong on all three counts.

1. If you are using a hardware raid solution, then RAID1, and only if one of the drives can be pulled out and used by a standard SATA controller to get the data off. Controllers that munge the MBR just go in the trash.

2. Otherwise software raid1 or raid10.

Raid5 and Raid6 IMHO are more trouble than they are worth. Now, true, I'm not spending $6k on drives, so maybe at that quantity, Raid6 makes more sense. But there I would argue that the money you save on drives, you throw away as soon as it goes tits up. I've tried Raid5 with promise and areca cards and the performance was not as good as software raid10. Plus, on several occasions the transfer to the hot-spare failed and brought the array down. The data was there, but it required operator assistance (me). Until it went down, it was staggeringly slow.

If you really want to make sure that the array is available, use Raid1 with three or more drives. They are just so cheap. I was responsible for a windows server at a start-up a long while ago, and Raid5 sucked ass. Bonus: one day two drives failed. Tape restore is slow. Oh yeah: Don't just buy four drives and slap them in. Quite often a whole batch of drives will be bad. Buy drives from different manufacturers and beware that the sizes will be every so slightly different, so make your partitions smaller than the smallest.

However, all of this is irrelevant if you really want a lot of storage. For that it seems that a distributed, redundant file system would be best. If you want, you should be able to pull a drive or two out of every server, or all the drives out of a few servers, and still have all your data.

If I needed this much space in a start-up I'd totally do it myself - it would be a good use of my time. No, my concern with this setup is that it looks (to me) to be a "w00t I got $6000 so lets build a 733t boxen!" It looks cool and fragile, instead of boring and robust.

UPDATE: To be fair, I'm not hammering those drives continuously. How much does that change the equation? Even if it goes from 45 minutes every two years to 45 minutes per day, you'd still be net positive. Basically, you can't prevent drive failures. But if you can keep the failures restricted to the ones that just require popping in a new drive, then your "operator time" is minimal. Its when you lose an array that you're in trouble. Again: Do not use one big box!

Other people never do, do they? It explains everything. You need look no further.

Note the absence of "copy" rights.

Joey,

I find your ideas completely at odds with the First and the Fourth Amendments.

In particular, the Fourth Amendment was adopted because under British rule, when the authorities were given the power to seize property and documents without first having to prove probably cause, those authorities abused the system. As predicted 200 years ago, we give UMG the authority to interfere with our business without a warrant, and this is exactly what happens: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3364808

It is a foundation of our nation that only the government can order your property and documents seized and only on sworn testimony or affidavit.

I would prefer to find a way that copyright holders can make money doing what they do, since I am one. But if I have to lose copy "rights" because they cannot be protected without shitting on the Declaration of Independence, or the First and Fourth Amendments, then I'll chose to let it go.

So if you would like to name your organization "The FBI" and require that all actions first acquire sworn testimony before a judge or an affidavit, and that false testimony will result in jail time for perjury, then we might have something to talk about.

Unless you are a nutter like me, in which case you hand-roll everything in assembly.

Aptitude and interest goes a long way.

Basically your answer is like the classic "I could have got a 5.0, but I partied", which is a statement that says a number of things. 1. "I think all the kids who got 5.0 are boring and don't party" (untrue). 2. "I am not capable of getting a 5.0 and partying" (probably true).

That the person would even make the statement says something about their general level of intelligence. Hence when you say "If I had but known, I would have been in the top 100", you are saying "I had no idea that a hugely publicized course at a renowned university might lead to job opportunities". This lack of intelligence seems to contradict your first statement. Or it could be that you are not in the habit of thinking about such things. I hope you are either a kid, or an incredibly wealthy trust-fund baby living in isolation. Usually, however, I hear such remarks from people who are not smart enough to realize they are not smart enough, or they are quitters, or they are victims.

[1] http://www.slickedit.com/products/slickedit-for-mac

This is basic fucking customer development 101. Apparently, your Tech Execs think the answer is:

1) Buy everyone a beer and a taco.

2) Offer less salary because our product is Awesome!

Note: cost of switching for us: Move 1500 miles. Miss friends. Make new friends. Break rent contracts. Find rent contracts. And if we, in fact, do not like your product, we have to switch back again. I don't like AT&T much, but you're asking me to break my contract with them, and sign a contract with you to pay more for the same service because it'll be better quality. And if I don't like it, I'll incur the same costs going back to AT&T.

If this is how you "bright tech folks" in Austin do customer development, well...

Here's your argument: Maybe the OP doesn't want to live there but a lot of people do.

Apparently, 25 Central Texas tech executives think you are wrong.

So since we (well, everyone it appears but you) are talking about finding people who have not chosen to live in Texas, perhaps those companies might need to persuade people to move.

You'd have to pay me EXTRA to work in Austin, frankly.

In such a situation, it is in fact entirely rational to develop a lightweight, low cost UI that a non-technical person can commit to, i.e. sign a contract. The developer can then go off and implement it with a very clear legal case if the client then chooses not to pay because "its not what we wanted".

Its not what I do, and I know that many here take a more involved approach to their clients, but its undeniable that it is a successful business model, and in some cases I believe it can produce some result where otherwise there might be none. Equally I'm sure it produces results that are ultimately not used, but where the company still gets paid.

[1] http://clientsfromhell.net/