julie1

Either you let the market do, and the price will logically higher, or an authority will decide who can stay. In first case, Techies are indeed provoking the eviction of long time inhabitants, on the other hand how do you decide those who leave, those who stay? You choose the people contributing the most to the economy, or the one that relatively are bringing nothing but cost? (fireman, under-educated workforce, public services (trashs...), policemen....)

Well, let's hope techies will learn how to do all these underqualified/cost sink jobs when these people won't be able to afford any more housing.

Well, USA should understand they are litterally pumping the moneys of other nations costly education & R&D that makes it very difficult to have this capacity of innovation.

On the minus sides, yes, you don't do brain drain by offering cheap sweets, on the plus side, it gives back point of growth.

Well, I myself is only a first generation migrant on the continent, and I don't care what people say, but I give my change to the first nations. and I hear a small voice in my head saying that calling yourself anything but just another human is the slippery slope to troubles.

Just the problem of redistribution is like a problem of multiple bath tubs pouring water in a bigger common bathtub (the wealth) and how it is recycled (the water flowing back to the top in no respect of any scientific analogy).

you could globally be happy that for all the bathtubs of the world to observe a ratio of wealth repartition that is less extreme.

but where does this wealth/water comes from?

the rich who are already experiencing a favorable bias toward tax paying or the active workers who are paying relatively more taxs comparing to their income?

Tax does not transform into wealth maybe?

No, but education does: a worker with an easier access to the education worths more for the economy. Health insurance makes a worker available in good conditions for more productive years. (No wonders that health insurance are almost forced for highly paid workers; the company should ensure its working forces are productive).

So if the richer don't pay as much taxes, taxes being more profitable for the richer it is de facto (just by the sheer disappearance of the resources indirectly provided by the states) a logical decrease of the «second order» resources.

Yes in the world globally situation increases positively in terms of repartition, but locally because mostly we have the same incentive all around the world, the situation decreases.

The inequality are globally more balanced, but locally tending towards more non linear repartition. With a nice sigmoid.

this will go on as long as there is no fiscal equity amongst all citizens, whatever the country, whatever the religion, or social/political/economical belief.

It all boils down to how retro action works. And the shape of the curves of taxes. Every single steps, every non linear progression you make, you introduce distinct clusters of citizens which interests will diverge with the rest.

Put a sigmoid in the way people pay taxes/get credit refound, and your society will have a sigmoid in its structure, thus creating the probability of some divergence of opinions on what is equity or egality.

Are the 2 extremum wishable? All persons living at the average, or a cast system with n distincts layers, or can their exists «harmonious» level of wealth in a society that could results in less frictions?

Mathematically I am pretty sure we could agree that when a curve have 2 extremum that are not optimums (casts system or uniform normative systems) we should find the rules for an optimum in the middle.

Now in real life, maybe it is time to see the inequality not as a philosophical problem, but rather as process that can be engineered for the greater good of every one: slackers, billionnaires, hobos, politicians all alike.

The first step at my opinion would be to forbid any rules in the form IF DISCRETE cond A then apply X else apply Y in laws and tax formulation.

What about vizualizing randomness ?

Like in this article ? http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/oldtcp/tcpseq/print.html

The biggest argument against republic being a possible implementation of democracy was made centuries ago by Pericles. He stated that any system favouring money will end in ploutocracy (having only the richer's interests being represented). Republic filter's out a lot of people from the game of being eligible. It selects on a random criteria that will always end to be money at the end.

Republic whatever its implementation can be always will result in a feedback loop based on resources: money, media time, «fame», knwoledge, wisdom... As a result whatever the rule you make it will always end up favouring in the representation the guys with money. (you need exposure of your argument to win, that always ends up in making a 1:1:1 relation of exposure=money=probability of winning)

Democracy's goal however is to have all the population being represented. So as you can see these 2 systems are de facto mutually exclusive.

The big question is «are the human naturally bad?» If answer is yes: you choose republic to ensure only a subset of «capable citizens» are elected, but in the process you will mathematically converge towards a ploutocracy that will favor the more powerful/rich. Else, if all citizen are considered equally «capable» you can pick up any random citizen for forming a government. Hence living in a republic is NOT possibly living in a democracy.

Republic is just an aristocracy: it ensures the representant of the people are selected in a small subset of the population that tends to have more patrimonial. subset of the population that will tend to pass law to ensure the conservatism in the society so that their money is secured.

- a lot of trolls (Don't check I am a real troll);

- some actual freelancing jobs where I was pretty much a failure;

- took part in a website in a an uninteresting minor foreign language about free software;

- and I took part in some of obscure gatherings where people talked about free software like benjamin.

I am an average no one (you can actually check my background, I am a failure without any false modesty with ultra minor contributions, but I am not really ashamed). I am little bit excessive, but I can make people smile while talking about free software.

I have the weired idea however it does not matter.

I really don't think any open source programming language will accept my revolutionary idea that objects should follow the 17 rules of linear algebra (I swear I am convinced my idea is as brilliant as checking PRNG with Taken's series, or using L1 geometry instead of Euclidean while working with computers, and I swear I know I will fail and I am a bit crazy). I think I may be the member of the family you don't want to show to your neighbors/fiancée. But still I am part of the family :)

It's kind of cool, though. There is nothing wrong in not being successful or as fun as linus torvalds. I am pretty happy with it and I guess I am not alone in not feeling alone doing free software without being a star. Maybe like probably http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ROG5728 A gun nerd that cares the truth is said about the H&K P11.

I think the idea is more important than who you are.

Even though I am really no one, it is fun, and I like it... the way it is... I am pretty conservative. Sorry.

We made it a name, we made the rules by backing up our ideals with our code, and our definition of free software (sometimes great (python, Perl, postfix..) sometimes worthless (mine for instance ;) ).

Call me a vocal integrist. It may be true. But we all worked hard to achieve where we are today.

We fought to define Free Software in very precise way to backup our claim for freedom. CC (/NC) won't change the definition of free software without the people who defined it being a little pissed.

You cannot take our freedom away to define what free software is, because we all collectively took part in it thanks to theses licenses.

And for the record, I may be a so called integrists. But, making fun of my values because you don't like them or they don't suit you, is what integrists do.

CC-NC has something wrong: it parasites the meaning of free software «buzz/success» but is is far from being free as in free speech: free software -as commonly accepted by the two antagonists community known as open source/free software- must grant you the radical non discriminative freedom of use a software whoever you are, whatever you think, whatever you wish to do with the software: including making money.

Why?

Pick up your reasons for this, they are as good as they can be. Be it :

- it is better for interoperability to share correct code so that internet works better (ISC DHCPd, bind, TCP/IP stack...);

- I am altruistic (FSF);

- I want to make myself a name by having my code seen as a business card (some projects github);

- I want to prevent competitor to do a lock in on code (IBM, sun);

- fill in your evil plan for world domination through a value of externality (openBSD, Apple, me)....

Good or bad reasons, or morally biased don't matter.

Free Software open source do grant you the right to do whatever the frack you want with a software, because it is about free as in free speech. There are agreement on what free software is (FSF 4 freedom/Open Source Initiative) and NC (Non Commercial) do not fit in the free software criteria.

I repeat myself: there is nothing wrong in disagreeing and choosing a proprietary licence.

I do say, there is something wrong in pretending to abide by Free Software/open source conventions and not doing it: it is cheating to your users, it is deceptive and delusive.

BTW, I (very) loosely was in inspiration on this topic, so I can grant you that is the spirit in Benjamin Mako Hill thoughts, and I can provide french transations.

OSI : http://opensource.org/ open source initiative (bad guys);

FSF (Good guys with weired hats, beards and rituals) https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

Free Software Definitions admitted by good and bad guys : https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html commonly referred as the 4 freedoms.

why CC are a fraud (fr): http://www.libroscope.org/Vers-une-liberte-definie-Creative

WTFPL : The smallest exact Free Software Licence : http://www.wtfpl.net/

The cease and desist is NOT about the app. It is about parasitism of the brand.

The use of the API is secondary, but just a part of a proof in a dispute based on the claim of a brand that you are parasiting their immaterial actif called BRAND.

But you don't seem to know how french law works:

* the «raison sociale» of a company has not to be different from another company (ex: Mont Blanc = pen + desert + city), it has to be considered not too close on the naming and on the «secteur d'activité» to be considered parasitism. When you received your kit for funding your society (for instance @chambre de commerce), it is written black on white how the naming of a society should be done. Any brain dead accountant like mine even told me it is wise when choosing a «raison sociale» to first pay a (way too expensive) check into the INPI DB.

* a brand at the opposite of a software is not protected at his divulgation, but at its «territorial» registering (hence INPI and strong advice to make a search at the creation that given your SIRET no company has a name close to yours because else, parasitisme is almost already proven)

* the added presumption of an act are enough to be a proof (faisceau de présomption vaut preuve)

* AND you are dumb enough to make money in the sillon of leboncoin.

Constituting EXACTLY what the french law call parasitism.

I don't support them, but you are legally dumb or dishonest.

I would have respected you if :

* either you had been smart (making money from leboncoin, but registering the brand in a country where leboncoin had not registered (tuvalu? trinidad & tobago)) (remember the territorial part of the brand)

* either you were saying : I know I broke the law, but I think infringing (c) law is stupid because ....

BTW brand are covered by an international convention, so it would have been the same if leboncoin was german, US, or russian.

And the author is misdirecting the readers by providing a document not related to the claim he makes (TOS infringement vs «droit des marques» infringement).

EDIT/PS «nul ne peut se prévaloir de ses propres turpitudes» means that you cannot prevail your self of any wrongs if it is initially resulting from you not respecting the law. For instance if you build your company on a clearly fraudulent base (parasitism), you cannot claim for any reparation if you are shut down because it is a clear consequence of your actions. As a result, for the lawyer «faisceau de présomption valant preuve» his credibility in front of any juridiction would be voided.

It is a cease and desist letter on the use of a name «lebonXXX.fr» that in all due respect seem is a clear parasitism of a registred brand: it bears a similar name, it is related to the activity of the original site. And le boncoin.fr is registered @ l'INPI (national registration office of brands).

In PI law, the infringement is about the confusion that results in the brand aka reputation and not on the use of an external API.

It does not mean I support leboncoin, because I could not care less. @ least I don't appreciate people misleading others based on fake victimisation.

Cher jonathan: en matière de droit «nul ne peut se prévaloir de ses propres turpitudes»

The postgresql manpage says it loud: don't fucking use timestamp with timezone. It is bounded to political decision that makes it unusable compared to an UTC TS. Plus good practices says: store UTC present in local

Does any one Read The Fantastics Manual these days?

Just for the sake of thinking YC is not about posing, does anybody understand that actually each of your 4 Ghz core is actually taking 80% of its time at the HW level having page fault because the architecture is this way. It means, less that only 800Mega cycles are actually executed per seconds (or idling). Actual computer do perform as well as a 800MHz computer that would never page fault and are sucking more than 300W/h.

Doesn't this figures seem enormous?

EDIT: it should at least raise some incredulity, and if confirmed some serious questions on how we measure computer performance vs power efficiency.

TeX -at my opinion- in his mind is intended to be untouched after is death as a legacy to all software devs that will claim:

- you can do software bug free;

- you can do software that stand the test of time;

- you can do software that you can measure to be correct in regard to the problem it addresses. (Here: everlasting document typesetting).

It is the only source format/code I have from the 1996 that still compile and gives exactly the same output. And we all claim that softwares always have bugs, and must evolve. Sometimes I think we are just justifying our own lack of dedication and hard work for a perfect design that is stable and does the whole job correctly since beginning.

This software is the one that makes me realize I am fraud and every time I print something with LaTeX I wonder how broken «progress» is when all the bloatware we have fail in so many aspects where TeX succeeds.

- At the beginning it is fun and new you are a pioneer (phase discovery) - Then you understand the concept and experiments its power (fun) and you have grown a culture with your alpha wave of compadres you become a native of the place; - then it has success in a brutal fashion triggering a new massive phase of «new comers» (proportion of new might be bigger than the one of old), it is the mass immigration/colonization phase - then there is a «cultural conflict» between the old and the new regarding the way to use the tool/to be part of community. This part can last a long time and I call it the Babel tower effect.

(I vaguely map the state machine described as a chronological effect)

Every community big enough and successful will suffer it. However in the process the «native» ideas are often killed, and the original success can be lost. Plus there is never a consensus, so some people will be feeling unwelcomed.

It can be seen optimistically as stochastic improvements (the pioneers will seed somewhere else and help discover new territories), or as a process of the mass integration the pioneers back into the crowd// normalization/colonization.

Internet may have many virtues but when it comes to human beings it does not change the eternal problem of «doing something together».

Every time you take part in improving the world and try to propose a worthfull alternative, there is a chance the culture will evolve in something different then what you help to build.

My advice is to fight the tendency for bitterness and leave these communities the same way Odysseus left Nausicaa.

Motorola 68K and specialized high quality embedded units? (like amiga): no it will be overprices compared to the cough future price of an evolutive PC. Which final form are below average quality and overpriced embedded devices.

Had you followed the way of the old wise and chosen motorola architecture, you would not have theses problems. :)

We may have too much clueless developer in the wild, imitating for security.

Like the more linux is spreading, the more the sect of the post devil spread, you recognize them with their dark incatation: chmod 777 (the number of the post devil) and chown root:root.

I don't care, I don't brag about it, I try to improve it by myself and it works. Neither proud nor guilty.

Bad practice 101: drinking alcohol on your work place.

I kind of see it as an occupational disease. And for every new jobs I try to voice myself against these practices. And it fails because I am over «reacting».

Now, I don't care.

The original study on nurses in Israel estimates the probability for stressed people to give in to addiction to be 150% more than average.

Coders are liking this culture of burn in/burn out like junkies anyway.

It is clear our way of working is health hazardous. I never saw another profession more despising that much CHSCT or usual working wisdoms or health protection.

In my former (game company) the alcohol was even bought by the company every friday and it was poorly accepted people refuses to share a toast. And I saw the casual boozing a lot in a lot of places.

The average drinking in computer development and drug use {when I include the graphists designer} are way above the average of my supposed to be unsafe with all these junkies suburb. I don't come from a favela, just one of the «banlieue» that gives nice rioting picture on CNN/fox news every 10 years.

The work culture in IT is the most dangerous and irresponsible I never saw. No respect for anyone, neither workers, nor providers, nor sometimes customers.

It makes me sometimes feel as if I was working with psychopaths, and I did my conscription, so I met psychopaths. But soldiers made me feel more secure.

Wait, you tell me there are a lot of devs on the market? No, there are a lot of clueless young people on the market with a huge student loan that studied CS but that maybe the worst developer ever but have a strong incentive to get hired (cheat): they have to reimburse their loans before they sleep under the bridge.

So, brute force attack require to hire a lot of expensive broken arms. If I were a recruiter, I would never hire a student with a loan to refund that young I would prefer an autodidact that understand the basic of economy: don't spend money you don't have and don't be a sheep.

Lastly the money for startups even if QE is turning in all worldwide economies is not there! Central banks are printing bank notes like mad men (China, Japan, US, Europe...) but this money is directly used in stock options and the bank never landed that few money (or when they do the compound interests are just mad). And public and private debts are fucking high. The economy is on the brink of a bubble explosion for which new startup are responsible.

So there is no money to turn startup that don't master their costing/pricing in real companies. (no money available on the credit market)

Yes basically startups is a phony ecosystem.

My advice: have balls.

Go for companies that do not label them startups that seems «unsexy», even with lower wages, and accept the job after you accept and understand their mission/business model.

Maybe helping family planning communicate better on their mission can be more satisfying in life than helping a delusive «self made man» have is first million before 25 based on a ponzi scheme (buying tools to startups that buys me tools without generating new products is a little mad, isn't it?).

That's the price to pay for not having an industry anymore and keeping people that took a 90k$ loans employed. Old programmers are a pain: they have knowledge. Sack them all.

Peering is just opened to anyone, and people prefer peering to buying. So people prefer to have the less possible amount of traffic leaving their AS.

http://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=15169

They peer quite a lot even in Europa, it is a good move when you want to become an ISP.

Still they consider it is the ISP to support most of the cost of the dimensioning of the pipes. Without returned value.

Pfiou, good idea to double check.

It would translate to overperforming. Compared to what? No one knows. It is oddly very used as a buzzword in marketing.

If so (I could be wrong), maybe it is not marketing but "pardon my french" juste like "idiot savant", "touché" and other french words that appears in the mouth of some that wants to look smart: it make us laugh very hard as a mix of posture and failure.

If your code degrade over time, sorry to tell you, a framework won't solve the problem.

If you have coders that don't care about maintainability of code correction, code organization in whatever technology, they won't care about what you wish.

As usual, they won't take the time to learn the frameworks, will diverge, and you are back to square one with no code that can be salvaged or reused. (at least with vanilla techs you may salvage stuffs)

I think you use frameworks to solve the wrong problems here: you are probably the problem by trying to ditch the lack of real engineering skills in IT (not the letter of engineering. The spirit: making things that are correctly built and are reliable over time... like a plane).

Yes google buys internet transit, but not in Europa, they expect the users to pay for their free services when they are not north american, and they provide the "free VoIP" services this way.

Google, amazon are the problems, they don't assume the cost of their services and make it stand inequally amongst the users. Google is killing the cost model of ISP.

In this condition, how do you expect a sustainable free internet if you destroy the business model of ISP ?

They will: it costs a lot of money to keep data alive.

And it is a shame, NSA data for research purpose should be put under the UNO protection: - it holds lower bits of informations interlaced with the "big data" like how flu is propagating; - we could analyse causality chains and propagation of ideas (the impact of culture); - we could see corruptions effects, measure it and decide if it worths the price; - we can record the variation and evolution of natural langage/style;

These data are a treasure, the should be opened after X years, but for economic reason, they will be deleted.

Mostly human, and avoidable but always present because people don't take the time to do it correctly. Quality, taking the time to make the things right, slowly, correctly, all that matters more than genius. Quality code at all level is the key to secure development. Every little things count.

I know a few openBSD developers, and their song about doing the right things, taking our times to do it correctly - simpler, with quality because it is the shortest path to correctness thus speed (what is the use of an incorrect program: none). This song is appealing. The fact they are strangely psychopathic paranoid nerds is not ;)

I think computer industry would be far better if we would slow down and focus on doing less software, but better built.

Less functionalities maybe, but the one that maybe more powerful. The stable foundation for sustainable progress.

And, if you like them -even though they are repulsing antipathic nerds- you can support them :)

I did not published nginx version though

It consisted notably in either stealing precious brains from the germany that was in need, and -more troubling- preventing some persons to face the consequence of their action in front of a tribunal (war crime).

For the record condor and gladio operations also are more than morally questionable and also rely on explicit infringement in what a state is authorized to do on foreign ground: killing people arbitrarily without a trial.

I don't think that creating in relation with stuff like the infamous P12 loge (in which il cavaliere was, and some of well known mafioso) a program of "pseudo communist terrorisms" that were in fact the opposite and resulted in civilian killed by terrorist actions is not kind of consistent with the USA claim of war on terrorism.

USA is looking more and more like the former soviet union. NSA invasive techniques to spy on citizens are now as efficient as the former KGB used to be (that became the FSB and whose latest well known head was V. Poutine)