gamacodre

I am 100% sure I will never be asking for that.

Now, figuring out how to get a containerization platform running in there might be a different matter...

> They want to do things their way... Hard to wrangle them

This can happen when the software group is seen as incapable, unresponsive, or even just slower than "business speed". I'd suggest talking to the individuals and their leadership (separately) to learn more about why they adopted X without talking to your department. You may well uncover missing or broken lines of communication, entrenched negative expectations ("it takes a month to get a simple DB query run, why would anything else be faster?"), and/or find processes so onerous that everyone tries to avoid them.

You were (unintentionally) trolled. My first post up there was alluding to the legend that Bill Gates once said, speaking of the original IBM PC, "640K of memory should be enough for anybody." (N.B. He didn't[0])

[0] https://www.wired.com/1997/01/did-gates-really-say-640k-is-e...

Huh, I guess that was as bad an idea as the 640K one.

Why 1TB? 640GB ought to be enough for anything...

Ofttimes Sony's "input" isn't much more than "your licensing message needs to stay on-screen for another 0.5 seconds to pass acceptance test X.X". Maybe they're doing more for non-AAA devs these days?

They did help us out when we ran into issues with the dev tooling, but then so does Apple.

Source: I was lead engine dev on a couple of mid-cycle PS2 games.

> A random bloke on the Internet just is trying to optimize for 1 problem, getting the right answer

Most random folks on the internet seem to be optimizing for dopamine hits, not correct answers. Anyone with an audience is optimizing for subscription uptake, which seems to reliably lead in the opposite direction from correct answers.

> Stuff about "mainstream [media] outlets" shunning all "decent journalists"

This kind of silliness does nothing but weaken the rest of your arguments, IMO.

I was responding to a comment about making money from ads, but a similar line of thought works for banking services, I think.

Suppose that your use of the water service was creating public lashback against the water utility for "supporting" your business. A loud minority is pestering the water board members and complaining that what you're doing ought to be illegal even if it isn't strictly yet. Some are pressuring other big water users to reexamine their contracts with the utility, and someone even managed to talk a pump supplier into severing their relationship with the utility. A different minority is yelling stuff about "rights" and making trouble at board meetings.

The easiest possible thing to do in this situation is to find some vaguely plausible reason to cut your access to the public utility, and tell you that you have to truck your water in yourself from now on. Note that this kind of stuff actually happens to farmers, refineries, and other businesses.

As far as what's "right"... Damn if I know. None of this is happening in a vacuum, and these decisions end up being made by people who are accountable to and influenced by their family, friends, and community for the choices that they make. Clear laws can dilute that responsibility, but only to a point.

This bugs the crap out of me, it sounds like "waaaahhh I can't rake in ad money being a provocateur". So deal with it. Get a day job. Accept that large chunks of society will hate you (that's the goal anyway, right?) and that your business won't be welcome.

Back in the 80's and 90's, working on consoles in very tight space constraints, there were times we’d go with a horribly inefficient implementation of something like sort, because we only needed to sort 8 things and the savings in bytes of code was more important than the savings in time from a “better” algorithm.

Those abominations could be tweaked throughout the development of the game, and along the way we'd sometimes "rediscover" a more common (sane) algorithm. The refinement in this paper reminded me a lot of that.

The issue here is that this outage was a result of all the routes into their data centers being cut off (seemingly from the inside). So knowing that one of the servers in there is at IP address "1.2.3.4" doesn't help, because no-one on the outside even knows how to send a packet to that server anymore.

My anecdotal experience matches yours. I work for a smallish business in an active growth phase, and the onboarding process for every employee starts with "Welcome to the company, here's your laptop."

> News should not be entertainment. News should not be for profit.

But why?

If "news" isn't profitable or entertaining (and FWIW I agree those shouldn't be preconditions for quality news), then it will have to be subsidized by someone. Who will do that? What is their reason for putting up that money? And - most importantly - who decides whether the end product is "good enough", and what changes can they demand for the subsidy to continue?

Sometimes it's the battery (system) even when the battery is fine. My son spent something like $1200 chasing the ghosts of electrical issues in a Ford Expedition with multiple mechanics. And they did in fact replace the battery at some point in there, to no avail.

It turned out that one of the battery _cables_ was bad; enough corrosion had built up under the insulation that the voltage would do all kinds of strange things depending on the exact load on the system. $20 for a new cable fixed it all.

Who will decide what curriculum to invest in? QAnon adherents are in some cases aggressively campaigning for positions on school boards. This scares the shit out of me.

I read that as "request authentication", i.e. some way to sign or HMAC the content of the request, with keys given only to the things that need to interact with the service.

If users are involved, then yeah you also need some kind of RBAC for it to make any sense.

"Fantastic for customers" is an overstatement IMO. A well-informed customer can stretch their budget without too many compromises by selectively shopping there. But that's exhausting, it's much easier to just run down your list or buy everything you can remember needing while you're there. This usually leads to major compromises in value, function, and the quality of life for everyone involved in the supply chain. Not to mention the chilling effect on the rest of the retail environment in every market they've decided to i̶n̶v̶a̶d̶e̶ enter.

Not meaning to cast any shade at this insulin product; it looks like a substantial improvement over what the US "market" for insulin was offering before.

That makes a lot of sense. Taking it further, you could also introduce a sliding scale for comment volume, like $1 for <10 comments/mo, $5 for up to 30 comments/mo, or the $100 "troll package" for up to 80 comments/mo.

But that’s the point of what I was trying to say. Their policies and more particularly their actions seem inconsistent from the standpoint of [science/politics/research/reason] because they’re based on [revenue/regulatory defense/regulatory capture/traffic].

That strategy is obviously successful, which is disheartening to me. But I’m not sure how to argue against it.

My guess would be that a "platform" for serious video content could not be financially viable on today's internet. It would need be able to alienate advertisers over points of principle, effectively argue those same points with regulators, and field an army of capable moderators. It would probably end up looking more like a public-interest media company than a video-sharing site.

Discovering an algorithm to govern on-site activity by the general public that doesn't lift the scum to the top could be a decent start.

Let me rephrase: It's the wrong platform for the discussion of anything controversial. Their ToS can pretty much be boiled down to "If you make trouble for us, we'll punish you. Or just delete your account." And "trouble" is defined as "threaten our business model in any way," which leads to their delightfully vague policies that try to balance the advertising revenue a loud idiot can generate against potential regulatory actions.

Eh, I'm not sure I agree. YouTube is manifestly the wrong platform for serious discussion of anything. All their incentives are are geared toward engagement volume, not quality.

The very best you could possibly expect from them is to include "science our advertisers don't hate" in recommendations.

In the doc, they claim:

> Antikernel is designed to ensure that following are not possible given that an attacker has gained unprivileged code execution within the context of a user-space application or service: ... or (iv) gain access to handles belonging to another process by any means.

The Palm devices were great, I had one of the originals, then Samsung had a flip-phone version, and Treos followed after. I used the heck out of all of them, and even wrote some code for the platform. It was really sad that they lost their way.

"Form factor" can be a slippery notion. The genius of the iPad design, I think, is that it _couldn't_ be mistaken for an educational device. It actually looked like it belonged in a leather folio next to some important papers, not in your kids' school bag.

AR is probably in its "hovertank" era right now, after years of interesting but largely useless demos.

Someday we're going to wonder how anyone managed to navigate or buy things in shops without realtime vision markup.

It depends a bit on the engine too. A long time ago I designed & built a multi-platform 3D game engine that used quaternions internally for many things, but exposed Euler PYR angles for most "game-level" object controls. We (the engine team) asked around and ended up deciding that the minuscule performance gain and better mathematical behavior from using quats everywhere would be more than offset by some of the devs being unable to reason about how the enemy ended up pointing the wrong direction, when looking at values in the debugger.

I'll sometimes read TFA as "the featured article," but I don't know whether I picked that up along the way or invented it to make internal sense of nice things said about TFA.

RTFA derives directly from RTFM ("Read The ... Manual"), which I always interpret with the full force of the embedded expletive.

What? You only put in one load balancer? What were you thinking?

Yep. ZX81 BASIC had 26 string variables (A$ through Z$) and 26 floating point variables (A through Z). No integer variables per se, but you could POKE and PEEK to get at 8-bit values anywhere in memory - which typically maxed out at 16K.

I think it's useful to distinguish between types of trust. You might trust a mill operator with $5 million worth of automated equipment that has a well-documented UI backed with years of training and industry support. However, you might not trust that same operator with unfettered control of a $2000 general-purpose networked computing device that can silently leak company secrets and offer a foothold to attackers inside your firewall _even if the operator does nothing obviously wrong_.