450 karma · joined July 5, 2008
You get free same day delivery. Amazon just greatly saved on last mile delivery costs.
That's the value of those nodes without having to store all the inventory.
That said I would be curious why storage is so expensive compared to DynamoDB ($5/gb/mo storage vs. $0.25/gb/mo).
We wrote a bit more of an overview of the campaign as a whole on Medium as well https://m.patronage.org/sacca-and-the-700k-twitter-match-76b...
We've always done work in the social good sphere, primarily working with non-profits directly. Once we reached the point as a company where we started offering benefits, we wanted to do offer something that would stand out and attract people who value impact and giving back.
We actually tried to run a program on our own, but found that even with just 4 employees, it was surprisingly difficult. When we looked at existing software solutions, they were all expensive and aimed at enterprise companies.
From that Patronage was born, and our employees are now able to give up to $100 a month, which we match with a single credit card transaction at month's end.
Happy to answer any questions about Patronage, or about what it's like running a donation matching program.
Also curious to hear from others who've either had experience with these programs at current or past jobs, or considered starting them as a startup/small business.
This tweet from former AppEngine dev Brett Slatkin caught my eye: https://twitter.com/haxor/status/411351463806263296
I still think Dynamo has a ways to catch up in terms ease of use to GAE, but it provides the performance, scalability, and replication like datastore.
As great as AWS and the Cloudfront/S3 combo is, it's maddening that the combo can't serve both gzip and non-gzip versions from the same url [1].
[1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5442011/serving-gzipped-c...
"For App Engine, leaving Preview will include providing all paid users a 99.95% uptime service level agreement, operational and developer support, billing via invoice, a new Terms of Service agreement geared towards businesses, and a new, easier to understand usage-based pricing structure for App Engine that is in line with the value App Engine provides. It will also reaffirm our deprecation policy whereby we will support deprecated versions of product APIs for 3 years, allowing applications written to prior API specifications to continue to function."
A quick comparison of the TOS shows that Compute Engine doesn't have the same policy, but IANAL, so I could be missing something.
With MaxCDN, I just upload uncompressed, and it will gzip upon request certain text file types (xml, js, css, etc.) [2].
[1] http://blog.kenweiner.com/2009/08/serving-gzipped-javascript...
Is this true? If I share a link so something on HackerNews, can PG now run social ads against that action?
I watched the video, I'm intrigued, now I want to use Swiftype -- but there is no search form on your homepage.
Searching your own site would be easiest, but I realize there isn't much content yet, so not the best demo.
What about using the logos of sites using Swiftype to activate a search form that actually takes you to their search results? "Trusted by these companies, give Swiftype a test..."
https://developers.facebook.com/docs/beta/authentication/#re...
http://www.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/chrome-frame-gett...
29:30 mark is where the admin rights discussion begins.
To others interested, Facebook has a pretty good tutorial/demo app: https://developers.facebook.com/docs/samples/canvas/
If the norm is even higher, then the increase is less as a percentage, but no wonder ATT won't release the numbers.
If you'd like to spend your days helping empower those same organizations, check us out:
http://www.bluestatedigital.com/careers/
We're hiring for several positions, including some non-coding jobs for those who like hacker news, but don't hack.
Boston: developers, sys admins, product and project management, client managers.
New York/Washington DC: client managers and a few other content and analytics positions.
And a partial howto from one of Google's Appengine devs, Nick Johnson:
http://mapvelopes.appspot.com/
http://blog.notdot.net/2010/04/Generating-PDFs-on-App-Engine...
Amazon would "make money" with access to interest free funds (money sitting in accounts), and by having more people pay for purchases via ACH, saving on credit cards fees.
Good luck.
http://epicureandealmaker.blogspot.com/2009/05/you-realithe-...
"Think about it. The political stakes for the Obama Administration in the Chrysler fiasco are monumental...
This leads to my second point. The negotiations over carving up claims to Chrysler Corporation prior to bankruptcy were just that: negotiations. Notwithstanding whatever principles of Truth, Justice, and the American Way the Chrysler non-Tarp lenders would have us believe undergird their positions, they were simply one party among many to a very complicated negotiation over the proper distribution of value of a very large and troubled company. Yes, there are general principles and precedents concerning the division of spoils in a corporate bankruptcy which normally guide such processes. Yes, many of these have been laid down over decades of contested and uncontested bankruptcies prosecuted through our court system.
That being said, none of these precedents are Holy Writ.
The parties to the Chrysler negotiation tried to agree to a prepackaged division of spoils which they could present to a bankruptcy judge and thereby speed the company's restructuring. They failed. Did someone—the government, the UAW, the non-Tarp secured lenders—overreach? Maybe. Does it matter who? Not in the least. A pre-agreed deal was not struck, so the distribution of claims to Chrysler will be determined in court, by a judge, who will listen to advocates for each group argue their case. The process will take longer, and perhaps introduce additional stresses and strains that Chrysler can ill afford, but everyone will have their day in court. Even those poor, put-upon non-Tarp lenders. In fact, even though they would likely be loathe to admit it publicly, everyone may be happier that the company has fallen into Chapter 11. That way, each can say to their own constituents that they tried as hard as they could, but were unable in the end to get everything they wanted. (Chief among these, by the way, I would place the Administration.)
The corollary point of negotiations is this: they are hard, and often unpleasant. Parties to a bankruptcy say hard, unpleasant things, they threaten and cajole, and they use all their powers of persuasion, soft and hard, to convince the other parties to the deal to give them what they want. In this context, why should anyone be surprised that agents of the government threatened recalcitrant lenders with IRS audits, excoriated their behavior in populist press conferences, or promised to destroy their institutional reputations in the public eye? The government was simply using the real and imagined powers at its command to browbeat its counterparties into agreement. This is standard operating procedure in high-pressure negotiations."