dialtone

This is not the point of the test, the test is about showing you that the load balancer in GCE can handle that many requests per second and with a single IP address. Whatever the machines are doing behind doesn't matter since the load balancer job is to handle a ton of traffic. This is practically the only case in which responding with 1 byte makes sense in the test.

Only if you don't use HTTP/1.1 on the proxy side.

    proxy_http_version 1.1;
    proxy_set_header Connection "";

In the proxy definition.

Read the article. This is the same thing as the IDFA but on the Chrome browser. Pretty sure you'll be able to reset its value or turn it off entirely.

Most advertisers don't want to reach you if you don't want to be reached.

The best time to push is the middle of the day of any weekday, possibly when there's a lot of traffic. You'll immediately figure out if there are problems and should already have the setup to revert or have enough tests to know that the basic functionality will be working.

If you push at any other time you'll end up not having any power on finding out when stuff is wrong. Friday or weekend pushes are an absolute bad idea most of the time.

Yeah, that's pretty much how it works. The frontend is anything that supports PostgreSQL as a database. Right now we use Tableau but we also used to have a custom WebUI on top of this service, it was very functional-inspired.

Unfortunately Ville is on vacation right now, otherwise he'd be glad to dive more into the details of how that piece worked.

Doesn't take so long actually, takes about 1 hour per day of data and every day we process about 10TB of uncompressed log files. The result of this can be stored and reused as many times as you need.

Agreed. Out of the box none of the other storage systems actually allow you to not worry about range scans at all. While HBase will repartition your data to balance the used disk space automatically, in most other systems you'll end up having to manually partition your data in different ways and then aggregate the queries across partitions.

This is pretty literally the main reason why many companies use HBase. Then in the same companies you can also find a good usage for Cassandra but it'd be a different use case.

In some databases, such as PostgreSQL, there is no difference between varchar(), varchar(N) and text.

http://www.depesz.com/2010/03/02/charx-vs-varcharx-vs-varcha...

And 7.8 MB really change practically nothing in the overall equation. 1 is a good point but badly argumented.

It's really a trivial cost compared to the DynamoDB price before. It used to cost about $3600/month to get 5000 writes/sec. Now in a bit more than 2 months you'll have broken even on the reserved price compared to the old DynamoDB price, and in a bit more than 3 months compared to the new DynamoDB price, for the 1 year investment. Any company using Dynamo for anything serious will probably rush to get the reserved capacity, since they've probably been spending a multiple of the reserved cost per month anyway.

Actually that's inaccurate... The A380 has 2 engine types and the issue only affected one of the 2 types, specifically the Rolls Royce engine. The other problem is that the issue was not a general flaw but some of the oil valves in the engine were not cut properly and would eventually break.

A better example of how this stuff hits the A380 are the cracks in the wings.

You are wrong and it is intentionally designed in the system. Why then have the verdict of a jury be final, with impossibility of re-trial, even in the eyes of Congress, if not to defend the Constitutional Right of Jury nullification?

From the same article[1] I quoted in another reply:

Theophilus Parsons, first Chief Justice of Massachusetts, explained:

The people themselves have it in their power to resist usurpation, without an appeal to arms. An act of usurpation is not obligatory; it is not law; and any man may be justified in his resistance. Let him be considered a criminal by the general government, yet only his fellow citizens can convict him; they are his jury, and if they pronounce him innocent, not all the powers of Congress can hurt him; and innocent they certainly will pronounce him, if the supposed law he resisted was an act of usurpation.

Or, as Patrick Henry put it:

Why do we love this trial by jury? Because it prevents the hand of oppression from cutting you off. This gives me comfort ” that as long as I have existence, my neighbors will protect me.

[1]: http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/02/05/a-guide-to-surviving-...

According to Clay Conrad, author of this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Jury-Nullification-The-Evolution-Doctr...

And according to an article that he wrote in 2003[1]:

Jury nullification occurs in 3-4% of all criminal trials. Jurors cannot be ordered to convict or punished for acquitting. A jury verdict of Not Guilty is final.

[1]: http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/02/05/a-guide-to-surviving-...

As a matter of fact a jury can do that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification although of course this is a controversial topic.

This is fairly easily solved by coloring the background area of those clocks a different color when they are supposed to be in-office. All the clocks will be on the same time and the backgrounds will be rotated depending on the culture of the area. With a very quick glance and without comparing N clocks, you can immediately see if all clocks have the time in the colored background and then set the appointment/make call.

You have to explicitly set it on, that means the user had to take a specific action, and that means there was an intent to do it.

How is a cookie 'just short of transmitting the user's SSN'? Microsoft itself, for example, doesn't support DNT for all browsers in its advertising network Atlas.

We didn't have downtime for various reasons but the ELBs we were using failed and the queue of starting instances was too big to see our few ones restarting.

The main systematic issue in EC2 is EBS, take that away and it will almost completely remove downtimes.

ELBs unfortunately use EBS so they are always affected in these cases.

The minimum will be lifted very soon. The reason for its existence is to phase in customers that will generate enough traffic to properly tune our bidding algorithms for the auction system that FBX uses. There's nothing specific about FBX that requires a minimum.

Maybe it's a stereotype and it definitely doesn't apply to everyone but I've never seen so much confusion as on american roads. I'm from Italy and we're routinely made fun of for the mess that is our traffic, the reality though is that in Italy it is way more predictable and correct, blinkers are always used for example, than in SF where I've lived for the past 5 years. Italy has very few miles of bicycle lanes and yet most people don't use an helmet.

As I ride around town on a bike, there are all sorts of people that either just don't look when crossing, or look at the sky when moving sideways on a lane, or simply cross lanes reserved for bikes with the idea that pedestrians always have precedence.

Many cyclists are also guilty of the same types of sins by stopping in the middle of the street without so much as moving on the side or they are simply not capable of riding a bike in a city or they just perform U turns without looking at oncoming traffic. A friend of mine unfortunately died on a bike here in SF, was it because she wasn't wearing an helmet? Nope, it was because she turned left without looking and a food truck ran over her. She was the first and only fatality for bike accident last year.

When I passed my Driving License test here in SF the examiner told me that it's usually the americans that gave her the most troubles while europeans tended to always pass at the first try.

So maybe it's a stereotype but it seems to me that the american government went out of their way to try to protect pedestrians and defend cyclists with the result that they now walk around without their brain sparing the necessary few cycles to keep themselves safe on the street.

EDIT: A funny thing that I've seen happening only here are cars that go through half of a cross-road and when they see you coming they just stop in the middle occupying the whole lane and forcing you to try to stop in a short space. If they went through instead of stopping there would have been no issues. This happens to me so often that I can't help laughing at it every time I see it.

Could the "some reason" be that the USB plug is not a mag-safe plug? I for one would definitely not welcome going back to a different type of power connector.

Does Cassandra support Range queries with the RandomPartitioner now?

This is not the main reason people would choose HBase. For time series data HBase is much better at load balancing the data and at storing the same data in sequential blocks so that in a single operation you can fetch all of the data points that are interesting. Cassandra supports range queries but the last time I saw it wasn't super awesome at load balancing data across nodes when using the OrderedPartitioner. Do I remember wrong?

So, instead of preserving the neutrality of the essential facility, which allows anyone to prosper and reduces unfairness (as demonstrated by laws and past rulings), we should allow somebody to harm smaller competitors who may or may not have enough capital to develop themselves and, at the same time, keep up a lawsuit against a bigger and more loaded incumbent.

It doesn't seem good for the free market (which is captured by a monopolist), not good for the competition, not good for the consumer, not good for the public good, not good for technological advancement and not good for business itself since new discoveries create new economies.

In essence, ignoring network neutrality is a net loss for everyone except the incumbents. Somehow they also managed to make you believe that it's for your own good, and without any theoretical or practical basis.

Whether the US adopts a blacklist is a matter of policy regarding criminal activities rather than its economic policy. What I believe is right or wrong in this case doesn't change the fact that, violating network neutrality for economic reasons is a huge fallacy.

Personally I believe these blacklists are useless. I'm also not completely sure why you think that carrying 'illegal information' makes the network not neutral... Does it stop carrying legal information afterwards?

This argument doesn't make complete sense. Not everyone can lay down cables or use phone lines or in general bring bandwidth to the house or peering with certain destinations. Bandwidth (intended as both the capability to transmit data and the infrastructure that enables it) is an essential (and limited) facility[1] and thus is susceptible to monopolies and it's hard to compete against those that have the infrastructure and agreements already in place.

A similar case to net neutrality has already been ruled in the past, always from wikipedia:

* The first case to use the idea was the Supreme Court's judgment in United States v. Terminal Railroad Association, 224 U.S. 383 (1912). A group of railroads controlling all railway bridges and switching yards into and out of St. Louis prevented competing railway companies from offering transportation to and through that destination. The court held it to be an illegal restraint of trade.

* Associated Press v. United States, 326 U.S. 1 (1945), in which the Supreme Court found that the Associated Press bylaws which limited membership and therefore access to copyrighted news services violated the Sherman Act.

* In Lorain Journal Co. v. United States, 342 U.S. 143, 146-49 (1951), the Lorain Journal was the only local business doing news and advertisements in town. The case was that refusing to place an ad for the customers of a small radio station was a Sherman Act violation. In the end, the court accepted an offer to simply accept the advertisements.

If you hold a facility that can't be easily duplicated you are not really allowed to do as you please with it but you need to offer service to everybody equally or you'll violate the Sherman Act[2].

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_facilities_doctrine [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act

Your sentence is strangely ironic... You want a completely free market without regulations and yet you are complaining that a company doesn't give out standard billing rates.

The idea of the non-regulated free market is that you'd choose with your wallet by going for another health care provider that tells you the billing rates.

If you want to force companies to reveal standard rates you are adding regulation. So is regulation needed or not?

Not even Adam Smith argued for a free market without regulation... He himself even identified several pain points and warned against "laissez-faire" economy.

Except when you have to factor in all the plane flights to replace broken HDD. And the risk of not making it in time for when it breaks.

Only 15% of them are using advertising tools? Are YC startups averse to this type of marketing?

What you say is mostly correct but I want to fix a few of your statements and assumptions.

Regarding the skepticism on the end results of retargeting I can say that all the transparent retargeting companies offer you A/B testing of your retargeting campaigns. What we do is show PA ads to a control group and your retargeting ads to the experiment group. What we see is a lift of conversions between 40% and 200% and CTR doubles at worst compared to non retargeting display campaigns, these numbers vary by industry but are a good representation.

Google has moved its entire network inventory to the Google Ad Exchange. What this means is that for every impression there is an auction in real time where multiple buyers bid in real time for the right to show an impression to a specific user. While it's true that Google might filter out impressions that they deem particularly interesting for them it is not what we are seeing on the exchange.

AdRoll.com adheres to both Do Not Track and to the AdChoices initiative. Both of these allow the users to opt out of all retargeting campaigns either from their browsers or from the Ad itself (through the AdChoices icon). More information regarding this initiative is at http://www.evidon.com.

Disclaimer: I work for AdRoll.com and we are the biggest self-service retargeting platform.

It's the other way around. The original intent of patents is to disclose the making of a device to the public domain in exchange for an exclusive royalty and eventually, after a certain amount of time, for the device to become public domain.

Since the royalty is exclusive it means that you are the only one that is allowed to profit from the patent and here comes the defendability of patents.

However if you really want to protect something then, by all means, keep it secret. Coca-Cola and Pepsi formulas are kept secret and will not be patented, for example.