crikli

Seems like John Grisham got a few basic plot points for A Time to Kill from the Maxwell story.

Good lord, tl,dr. And I'm a dev. Client sure as hell wouldn't read all that. And I know this because at the start of my career I wrote those kind of long-winded explanations before I realized that nobody was reading them.

Brevity is a virtue.

"Dear client, the change itself took very little time but making sure that this change did not have unintended ripple effects took a lot more. We are careful and deliberate when deploying changes to your production application because in this mission critical application, downtime and errors are not acceptable. If you'd like more detail I can provide it during our next regularly scheduled catch-up."

I'm the source because I experienced this firsthand in 2007. I found the article because I needed to validate an almost 12 year old memory. :)

As for the quote you picked out, it's a partial truth.

The partial truth is that sure, the domain was "available to register"...at a multiple of the standard price. I don't remember what the multiple was. And if you wanted to purchase through another registrar you couldn't because NetSol held the domain.

This all resulted in a class action lawsuit: https://techcrunch.com/2008/02/25/network-solutions-icann-su...

That was settled a year later: https://domainnamewire.com/2009/04/29/network-solutions-sett...

Edit: I removed where I said the part about the domain being released after four days was a lie. I remember it being much much longer but at the same time, I don't remember all the details well enough to make a statement of that potency.

NetSol were scammy long before the web.com purchase. Back in 2007/2008 they were "front-running" meaning that if you searched for a domain name and didn't buy immediately, those dickheads would buy the domain and then demand a much higher price to sell it to you. Then when they got called out for it they tried to act all "oh, this is for YOUR benefit."[1] And they blatantly lied about the details of what they were doing.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/01/network-soluti...

> If the solution is flawed even a little bit, people will die. That will give self-driving cars a bad reputation and people will be unwilling to ride in them.

There is lots of debate on every autonomous car story, including this one, about "is as good as humans good enough", but that's a technical threshold. The real blocker (from my view) currently is and will be liability for "negligence."

If I'm driving and fiddling with the radio and as a result blow a light and kill someone, at most you can turn out my shallow pockets in civil court. The automaker has no liability.

But if the _car_ is driving and blows a light and kills someone, then the automaker can and will be sued because they've got deep pockets. I can see the ads now running during the Price is Right. "Hit by a runaway robot car? Jon from Orlando was awarded $3.2 million! Call Richard Cranium Attorney at Law and get yours!"

Agreed, WebOS was the first thing I thought of when I saw this thread. And I agree about the Pre, I loved that thing.

Sure, pre 2016 MPBs anyway! ;)

...that are now in college. Seeing my friend’s kids posting pics in front of the same buildings I took photos in front of in the 90s always causes me to sigh, say something to my wife about how tomorrow I will be 65, and then run my fingers through hair comfortably graying.

Because I monitor my resting heart rate obsessively. :D

At 6800 feet (where I live) my resting HR is 55BPM +/- 3 and falling because I've begun to train hard coming off of a really bad injury + surgery. During recovery where I was unable to exercise it drifted up over the months to 62BPM. As I get back into my best condition it'll fall into the low 50s.

At sea level my resting HR will fall by 5-7 beats for a couple weeks and then drift back to stasis over 6ish weeks my body reduces its red blood cell count and all the other acclimatization stuff. I try to avoid this.

I watch it pretty closely because as nabla9's excellent commentary in this subthread highlights, a persistently elevated resting HR is a sign of overtraining, which being a type A obsessive nutjob I am pretty susceptible to. :)

I've also found that an elevated heart rate that can't be explained by overtraining, for me, is indication that I've got an incoming illness that I don't feel yet, usually a sinus infection.

Edit: expanded explanation

Oh wow, you're way overdue for new shoes. 300-500 miles is the usual rule of thumb[1].

My personal rule of thumb is 500 miles minus moving weight. So in my case I'm 225 lbs, I usually have 10 lbs of water/layers/kit, so 235lbs moving. 500 - 235 = 265 miles max per pair of shoes. I replace sooner because technical terrain trashes the lugs on the soles.

[1] https://www.runnersworld.com/gear/a20806543/running-shoe-que...

If your RHR is elevated at high camp that's to be expected as that's part of the physiological response to reduced partial pressure of oxygen.

If your RHR is still elevated after your return to sea level...huh.

I live at 6800 feet now but like you used to live at low elevation. I'd come out, hike up Pikes Peak (6700 feet start, 14100 foot finish) and then come back down to sleep at 6000ish feet. RHR would be up maybe 10-15BPM until I went home to sea level, then it went back down to normal literally on the drive home.

So the response you're seeing, I mean what do I know I'm not a researcher, doctor or expert but I will say that seems odd.

Check out this 40 minute podcast on altitude physiology. Super dense with really actionable information on the body's responses: https://www.scienceofultra.com/podcasts/29

> When training for mountaineering, I sometimes climb 5000+ feet in a day. Days like that tend to elevate my resting heart rate for up to a week afterwords.

I'm curious, what is your living elevation? When you climb 5000+ feet in a day are you traveling to a higher elevation? And if so, after the movement are you staying at that higher elevation?

I am not a doctor. But I ascend a minimum of 20K feet per month via the steepest trails I can find. This usually includes a movement of up to 7500 feet of gain in a few hours. I've never seen my resting HR affected and do not recall having seeing that happen to anyone doing the same work unless they lived at lower elevation and were visiting.

If you're coming to an elevation much higher than your living elevation, doing a movement, and then staying at a higher elevation, then your elevated RHR is most likely due to the body's response to the reduced partial pressure of oxygen.

But if you're doing a move and returning to your "home" elevation and your RHR stays up...again I'm not a doctor in any way but I'd really encourage you to talk to one.

> I will go to a runner store to have them pick my next shoes.

Do this now if you can afford it. Try to find one of the smaller stores that really focuses on runners and is staffed by avid runners. A good store will have a treadmill and cameras to be able to look at your stride and make recommendations on both your stride pattern as well as your shoes. It was a running store that helped me find the Saucony shoes that have helped my ankle issues go away. :)

You could maybe also be dealing with an imbalance of strength between your hamstring and quadriceps. When runners have joint issues this can be the culprit or at least a key contributor. Adding in a couple sessions a week of weight training that include movements like deadlifts, good mornings, and back squats can strengthen the posterior chain (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posterior_chain) and address those imbalances.

> I have some pain on top of my ankles

I had this very issue and changing my shoes resolved it. I had transitioned from off-road running over hilly trails, to very aggressive ascents followed by steep an often technical descents. The Brooks Cascadias that were awesome for the hilly trails weren't working for the steep techy stuff. Moving into Saucony Peregrino Isos that have a stiffer upper and much burlier tread solved the issue almost immediately.

No idea what kind of mileage you're covering or terrain you're running, but footwear can be a real maker/breaker as the mileage gets longer and the terrain gets gnarlier.

NYT recycling the work of the original source with nothing new to add.

HN thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19532185

Original source: https://www.thedailybeast.com/jeff-bezos-investigation-finds...

rak00n the numbers are just a rule of thumb I give people when they ask "when should I replace _shoes_". _Boots_ are a different story as the construction of a hiking boot is usually so much more robust than a trail runner. I truly have no idea what mileage a hiking boot can sustain.

Yes! Solid point, and a great example of why there aren't RoTs for rivers. It can be a really complex problem. You can't go barefoot. Do you have camp shoes, will they work for the crossing? If you use your main shoes did you make a bad choice (my opinion) and pick Goretex? Do you have dry socks for the other side? Will the environment even allow drying? Is your pack waterproof? Will it float? If you used a contractor bag does it have holes, because if you've been in for more than a few day guess what, it does! In the shitty trail mishap lottery nothing is worse than soaked sleeping bag. And what do you wear during the crossing? If you won't strip to your skivvies what's your drying plan?

Bridges are really great, is my point.

Huh? Someone below asked for a TLDW.

TLDW version:

1) Didn't get familiar with hiking / camping on broken / rough terrain.

2) Didn't plan on how to deal with hypothermia inducing temperatures.

3) Didn't replace shoes quickly enough

4) Not taking black bears seriously enough.

5) Careless / casual with river crossings

She doesn't give great rules of thumb on each point. Here are some based on my experience:

1) Go out with your pack at night and practice moving quickly up and down some stairs. If it rains, even better.

2) Have a layer (usually a wind/rain shell) at the top of your pack. When you stop that layer automatically goes on. When you start walking again that layer goes back in the pack.

3) Replace your shoes when mileage equals 500 - your loaded weight (bodyweight + pack). Do not risk your foot health for a hundred bucks.

4) No RoTs. Bears aren't inherently hostile (usually) but they're not inherently friendly either. Self-education required.

5) No RoTs here, water crossing are dangerous. If you are going to cross you have to have a plan for what happens if you lose your pack or get swept downstream. The force of water can be shocking.

EDIT: If you plan to do any kind of movement over long distance _please_ invest in the book "Fixing Your Feet". Foot problems end more adventures than anything else. Foot care and foot health is the primary predictor IMO of how successful and how non-miserable a movement will be. https://www.amazon.com/Fixing-Your-Feet-Prevention-Treatment...

Ditto. I've been using a GR1 for seven years now. It's been through multiple GORUCK events as well as countless flights and road trips. When it gets dirty or starts to show sweat stains if I've been training with it a quick trip to the car wash and it's clean again. Without question one of the most versatile and resilient items that I own.

I too have no affiliation with the maker.

Edit: I literally have a closet full of mission-specific packs. Ice climbing, backcountry skiing, multiday hiking, rock climbing, speed ascents, etc. The GR1 isn't suited to any of those things. But it's ideal as a multi-purpose EDC that will literally not wear out in a human's lifetime.

Presenting this communication pattern as an effective "one size fits all" method is a pretty bad idea.

You have to "know your audience." This means you need to know your employees, bosses, or colleagues as people and work to understand what motivates them. This is challenging, risky, and requires an opening of the mind to not just understand different psychologies but to accept them as viable alternatives to your own.

NVC communication will be very effective for some and thoroughly ineffective for others, and if you know your audience you'll know which is which.

I'm an example of the latter: I absolutely despise the NVC communication pattern because very few people actually speak like this and when they do so it's an obvious deviation from their status quo. It feels fake because it is, and it feels fake because I know the pattern. It's like when I get "feel/felt/found"[1] from a salesperson...I know what they're doing and it's not going to work.

[1] http://www.tomhopkins.com/blog/presentation/the-feel-felt-fo...

These are nice tactical questions but they overlook the prime strategy in any comp negotiation: demonstration of value.

Eg what demonstrable value are you, the person asking for money, bringing to the table? What problems are you solving? Why are you worth what you're asking for? What things have you accomplished, issues you headed off, etc that I might not know about. Etc.

Don’t miss his Flickr, particularly the landing gear. https://www.flickr.com/photos/lucaiaconistewart/albums/72157...

That degree of focus is extraordinary. I think of myself as meticulous and detailed but this is several levels beyond.

I'd pay given the right structure. Eg I'd pay fifty cents to a buck for a given article. But monthly recurring payments to several different publishers? Hard pass.

"it's clear nobody gives a hoot"

Bingo. Back in the day the person I reached on that first phone call really did give a shit _and_ they had the skillset combined with the authority to find and implement solves.

At the end of our working with them whether the person I spoke with cared or not wasn't the issue any more: it had taken 30 minutes plus to get to them and it was a very junior person who didn't have the skills or authority to run an ls -la from the bash prompt.

I'm still pretty bitter, obviously! My company ate a lot of costs moving clients away from RS. And in many cases we had to rebuild our credibility a bit after the company we glowingly recommended started failing to hold up their end.

Digital Ocean for stuff that absolutely has to have its own sandbox. Support is slow and ticket only but it's cheap enough you can build out a cluster to mitigate outages.

Pantheon for most Drupal sites. Amazing service. Should have made the move years ago.

Platform.sh for some Drupal sites and for various NodeJS projects.

Various CDNs for asset serving.

Almost everything is available now "as-a-service". The case where a custom server that you manage via SSH is the best solution is now the minority.

Man...it sucks because they used to be so great.

I could make a call and be instantly connected to a Linux tech that was often a better sysadmin than anyone we had on staff, which was why we really encouraged clients to pay the premium for their service. The choices then were a) host cheap and pay $150-200K in sysadmin salaries to keep it going while passing on these costs to clients or b) host at RS and use their economy of scale. Easy decision.

Then they got bought by Apollo and I hoped what I"d seen happen with other companies bought by private equity wouldn't happen. The PE model only gives a shit about profit, which is at odds with a service focus. Rather than seeing profits as the by product of a good model, excellent service, and loyal customers, profits become the measuring stick by which operational costs are measured.

So that Linux tech that cost $120K+ per year gets binned and replaced with two juniors who cost less but together are unable to accomplish in thrice the time what the binned guy could do. Hold times start to creep up because shit isn't getting fixed. So they hire more juniors who still can't get things done quickly.

Guys like me put up with this for a brief time and then bail because the pricing can no longer be justified.

I'm sure it's true that the bulk of their cost is support, but it's not fanatical anymore because the folks that really were so have been gone for years.

Their service level went from amazing to awful once they were purchased by private equity. As a result after having been Rackspace clients since 2007 my company started moving our clients away from them over 24 months ago and finished November of last year.

I very much miss when their support truly was fanatical.

Edit: duration of service, clarity

What you're referencing is more leadership through training and mentorship. What he was doing sounded more like him just doing more of the work solo and hoping/expecting people would respond.

There's a really critical difference between handling something with a junior riding shotgun / doing a write up vs just doing the work yourself. He didn't touch on this, but you don't propagate any knowledge just doing it yourself, and I think that's one of the problems with his version of "leadership by example".

All I can do is speculate as I don't know the answer to either question conclusively.

So...to speculate: I know that spam email is coming from an IP; I don't necessarily know that the IP is officially associated with a given domain. Sure, I could do a dig to see if the A record matches the IP, but blacklisting an entire domain is a pretty draconian step. I need my blacklist to be accurate, with a minimum of false positives, or its market value diminishes. Adding domains based on IP association is going to be more likely to induce false positives and increase the administrative overhead involved with my blacklist, even if that overhead is mostly automated through "get me off this blacklist" forms and the like. /speculation

As an aside, I've noticed that if a cloud provider recycles IPs (Digital Ocean) the chances of pulling a blacklisted IP off the heap is pretty good. At this point, even if all the server is doing is sending the occasional password reset email to a handful of internal staffers, we run the email through Mailgun. It just isn't worth dealing with the hassle of trying to get an IP off a blacklist.