What..? Yet another tech company who normally is pro any current social justice hashtag actually doesn't give a fuck about human dignity when push comes to shove? Wild...
Is it, though? It's not just about exposing an extra API endpoint which updates a DB row. There's definitely a lot of other business & technical design decisions to be made, such as retweets and quote tweets. "Since last year" could mean about six months, which doesn't sound that unreasonable for a pretty major feature (and one that gets a lot of press).
Yes. I got called out by some random "offended" person while discussing a master slave topology on i2c bus I was working on in an embedded system with a friend. It was a coffee shop in Austin so it wasn't exactly shocking but the first time in my life so worth mentioning. Also a company I worked at once declared we should use different terms going forward in our own systems that used master/slaves topologies, they had a variety of alternatives.
I think OP meant that no one should be accepting PRs without reviewing them, and that a bad PR that’s simply submitted should not break anyone’s canonical code.
Maybe pick 1 or 2 newspapers you consider to be truthful to actually get a subscriptions for, besides using this addon.
I get it, there are newspapers out there you really don't check out that often, and they have no free articles per month or "purchase this article", and paying 20 dollars for a subscription for 2 articles a month at 10 different newspapers is a little much. But the more people don't pay for news, the more clickbaity and hyped up journalism will be.
This. Some of the news paper sites mentioned in the list do a good reporting and I subscribe to a few. Quality reporting is not cheap or easy and takes efforts. Let’s pay for quality else we would be left with click-bait, as supported and no information content news.
It seems like the current model isn't working too well. The more outlets clickbait the more they damage their brand. And people get a lot of news through Reddit and Twitter these days completely bypassing news outlets.
Where do you think the well informed people on Reddit and Twitter get their info? I'm being slightly facetious, and there's obviously independent reporting and direct witnesses to events online. But you take away the journalism organizations at the core of the system and then the influencers on twitter on reddit have nothing to inform their hot takes.
I don't know why people still think that. NYTimes is basically back to their glory days of revenue and profit, the FT is doing extremely well, etc etc.
Non paywalled news outlets will be clickbait - they are 100% dependent on advertising revenue and need to get clicks. Paywalled sites generally aren't.
Because while the "top-tier" media outlets are doing extremely well (NYTimes, WSJ, FT, etc.), everyone else is suffering. Huge numbers of media outlets have closed over the past 20 years and there are now far fewer journalists in the United States. Local newspapers that haven't closed are often operating a skeleton crew. And this trend has consequences: numerous studies have linked the decline of small, single-subject and local journalism to increases in political polarization and local corruption. (I worked at Harvard's Shorenstein Center which did much of the research.)
As bad as this article makes AWS sound, it's actually the reason you should go with AWS over say Azure or GCP; when AWS goes down, its owners actually feel the pain with you, Microsoft and Google run their own stuff elsewhere...
This is simply not true. Microsoft dog foods tons of its own software and all internal cloud services I know of run on azure. Also, having consumed both cloud service offerings, customer support within Azure was far more responsive.
Source: used to work as a SWE on a flagship Azure service
> Microsoft dog foods tons of its own software and all internal cloud services I know of run on azure
so it's even more embarrassing how terrible the software is.
trolling aside - if this is true, the state of e.g: MS Teams is a travesty. Implementation of replies to messages implemented in 2021!? So many bugs, etc. it seriously damages productivity. And don't get me started on sharepoint.
Since it seems I need to back up my statement: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29492884 is one example... Is that teams' fault? No, but they'd be able to call 911 if it wasn't installed.
I have a running list of teams bugs/flaws/inferiorities, it's currently about 30 items, will probably publish it sometime soon
Google does not run the bulk of their services on GCP. Unlike AWS, GCP was not a productization of their existing infrastructure, but rather a separate cloud product developed fairly independently.
I'm sure that's changing with time.
YouTube also has its own infrastructure independent of GCP and the rest of Google
GCP is not separate from Google's core infrastructure; rather, it's built on top of it. That means that while you can certainly have GCP specific outages, this kind of core infra "everything is down" situation is almost guaranteed to hit everything, GCP and not included. A lot of GCP sub-products are productionizations of existing Google tech; e.g. BigQuery is a public version of Dremel, an internal database/query engine they'd been using internally for a while.
I'm pretty sure YouTube hasn't had their own infra in quite a while. When I was there ~8 years ago I think it was all integrated already. Certainly database, video processing, storage, CDN were all on core Google infra, and I'm sure the frontends were too though I don't remember looking into that explicitly.
There aren’t 100k Googlers developing on top off GCP services to get their job done on a daily basis. That’s the big difference between the two clouds level of dog fooding.
> There aren’t 100k Googlers developing on top off GCP services to get their job done on a daily basis.
Doing something on top of GCP rather than the normal way at Google was a huge pain. Borg tutorials and documentation were just far superior, I could get a thing running on borg in an hour from not knowing anything about borg, I spent a week trying to get something running internally on GCP but still couldn't get it right (our team wanted to see if we could run things on GCP so I was tasked with testing it, I couldn't find anyone who knew how to do it so we just gave up after I didn't make any real progress). That was the worst documented thing I've ever worked with. And even worse the internal GCP pages were probably running in california and probably weren't tested from Europe, so the page took like 2 seconds between mouse click and it responded to anything.
That was years ago though and I no longer work there, but at least back then the work to make using GCP internally seamless wasn't done. Maybe it is simpler if you run everything in it and don't need it play well with borg, but there is a reason why it isn't popular internally. And likely you wont find many engineers who left Google who recommend you will use it, since they probably didn't test it and if they did it probably was a bad experience (unless they worked on GCP).
Source? I'd be surprised if Google does not dog food. Though, I guess when GCP had their recent global load balancer outage but neither Gmail or Google search went down maybe not.
I'm a bit out of the loop, but the vibe for years was "It isn't broke, so we're not going to rewrite it to run on something else."
Actually, it's a bit more than that. Some half-decade ago, Google Cloud got stung by a coordinated attack over the holidays where attackers used stolen credit cards to build a net of GCE instances and do an attack on Tor via endpoint control. Cited by SRE in the postmortem was the relative immaturity of the cloud monitoring, logging, and "break glass" tools that SREs were accustom to in Borg... Essentially, Cloud didn't have the maturity of framework that Borg did and they felt the extra layer of abstraction complicated understanding and stopping the abuse of the service.
This report had a chilling effect internally. Whereas management had previously been encouraging people to migrate to Cloud as quickly as possible, after this incident software engineering teams and the SREs that supported them were able to push back with "Can we trust it to be as maintainable as what we already have?" and put cloud on the defensive to prove that hypothesis.
That’s not the impression I got from the last 24 hours, nor the last few years.
1. Scale is hard and downtime is hard, HNers either recognize the struggle or appreciate their lack of experience. When AWS fails many armchair architects come out to suggest solutions but many more techies just sympathize with the Amazonians.
2. Technically, Amazon has built something impressive. It might not be what you want, or what others have, but AWS is impressive in scale and scope and even reliability. Many people share credit where due.
3. One can criticize the treatment of warehouse and delivery workers that Amazon is known for, but this has little baring on the tech workers there nor AWS generally. So AWS stories tend to be free from the social critique the company as a whole receives.
I think the important distinction is that some of us test locally, test on staging then test on production, and others ONLY test on production. No matter how hard you try, no test environment can truly replicate production, but that doesn't mean you should do away with staging completely.
