gambiter

A binary file from whatever logging system, OTOH, is effectively proprietary. Even if the logging system provides you with tools to work on them, you have to 1) know that it's a log file for that logging system, and 2) be familiar enough with the tools in order to work with it.

Except according to the article (which you posted and are defending all over this thread, so I'm guessing you actually wrote it?) the author has NO intention of honoring those who prefer text logs, in fact using the phrase "so vigilantly against text based log storage". To use your own reply, you can prefer binary, if it fits your case better, BUT DON'T HATE ON TEXT STORAGE.

Here, here! If it's a measly 55-channel toy, I'm sending it back.

I would also like to point out the conclusion in the article you linked:

> These 3 studies add to a growing body of evidence on the adverse health effects of soft drinks; however, given the limited and conflicting data available, these findings can at the present time be considered only suggestive, not conclusive, but they warrant further investigation in other prospective studies with data on long-term intake of soft drinks, diet soft drinks, and aspartame

Take that along with the extensive references in the Wikipedia article and you can see why I say the public is asking the food industry to prove a negative. The closest they can come is, "something that contains aspartame seems to be a bit unhealthy, but not always, but sometimes," yet those same people (like you) will say that aspartame itself is the issue. It's just silly.

The problem is, there is no proof in that statement. It's just suspicion, fear, uncertainty, doubt. Instead of proving an actual harm, anti-GMO people are asking the industry to prove a negative.

It would be like asking for a cup of water, and I hand you a cup that I filled from my Brita filter. You complain saying the mechanism contains a carbon filter, and that you believe a carbon filter can contaminate the water. Suddenly you're forcing the burden of proof on me, essentially asking me to prove your fear incorrect. Your fear that is based on... nothing. That's not how science should work. If you have uncertainty about something after the initial studies have been completed to verify safety, the burden is on you to prove it's a danger.

In the case of GMOs, the industry has thrown the public a bone, so-to-speak, and done extensive testing to show that the crops are safe, even when there is no indication that they SHOULD be unsafe. Now, don't get me wrong, there is evidence that PESTICIDES are unsafe, but there's no real evidence that just adding something like a carrot gene to rice is dangerous. NO. EVIDENCE. Yet that doesn't stop people from complaining. When the evidence doesn't support their view, they immediately say that the research was funded by the evil GMO corporations, and rarely even bother to actually look up the real study.

It's like Aspartame... It's one of the most tested food ingredients in history, there is ample documentation to show that it is perfectly safe, yet some people still believe it causes everything from diabetes to cancer. How much solid, peer-reviewed proof do they have to back up their belief? None.

Sad, but true.

I'm sorry, but I have to *sigh at that one. They don't have a monopoly on anything but THEIR OWN marketplace.

Anyway, have fun with your opinions man. I'm sure you're a bit hit at parties.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Also, a theater buying a TV/Radio station and not allowing competing theaters to run ads is perfectly acceptable and realistic.

Overall, I'm failing to see your point. Not to be a broken record, but these are competing businesses. It doesn't really matter if you s/Apple/Amazon|Google/g and s/Pebble/Netflix|Roku/g, all you're really arguing is that a company doesn't have a right to control a marketplace that they OWN.

I get that choice is great for the consumer, and I totally agree. It's absolutely best to have the ability to choose the devices you want, have them interconnect, and to be able to run the software that you want on them. I also think there should be no war or crime, and that the 1%'s money should be spread out evenly over the population. I (shockingly) think that no one should treat ANYONE unfairly. Unfortunately, we don't live in that world.

As long as we allow competition between businesses, they are going to, well, compete. Just because one gets very large and popular doesn't suddenly mean the rules have to change for it.

Apple has obviously gone to great lengths to make their walled garden a reliable and safe place for consumers who have chosen to buy their products. If you talked to Tim Cook or Jony Ive, I bet they would make a case that the best thing for consumers is to be entirely invested in the Apple ecosystem. After all, it DOES give you the most consistent experience.

So if you look at it from that perspective, who's right is it to go into a company and say, "No, that's not what's best for the consumer!" Obviously people like what they are getting, otherwise they would be defecting to Android in droves. Contrary to what some people are saying here, they DO have a choice.

Thinking through it logically, I just can't see any scenario where a company, no matter how large, should be forced to push a competitor's products.

Are you really saying you would allow it to run just so that you can 'help the consumer'?

Businesses are in competition... that's how the market works.

Maybe it's because people relate better to the developers who are losing money, than the company who is controlling it. My bet is someone with a basic understanding of business and marketing would side with Apple, and everyone else would side with the little guy, even if the little guy isn't in the right.

I 'forgot' the attwifi SSID long ago, and I have never had my phone try to auto-connect to one, even though they are everywhere.

The article ignores this because it weakens the headline.

It certainly seems that she knows what she is doing, and isn't just jumping in for giggles when the meters start beeping. She even mentions the inverse square law in the video you linked.

For now, thank you SO MUCH for mentioning /active and /best. I had no idea those existed, and they are exactly what I need.

I love the idea of stopping the 'split discussion' issue, but I feel like it's at odds with a site like HN where stories fall off of the front page so quickly. I'm not able to read it all day long, and I rarely look at it in the evenings. Especially when we have articles about potential gaming of the article positions, it seems unrealistic to expect that you would have a chance to actually get the real 'news' at any given point without duplicate posts.

What I mean is, there are certainly more than 30 in-progress topics appealing to HN readers. If I look at the front page in the morning and again in the afternoon, I'm only going to get a small subset of the topics that are out there. That's why I appreciate duplicates so much... it's really the only thing that makes a site like HN relevant to the occasional reader.

Anyway, thanks for supporting me even though I wasn't the most ambassadorial. :)

This is the first time I've seen news about this particular 'country', and I'm glad I saw it this time because it is interesting.

Duplicates FTW!

So he is apparently a family man, but he also spends 14 hours a day, 7 days a week on a project that hasn't largely changed in ages? Something doesn't add up.

> Did you miss the part where isc.org that hosts the bulk of the server farm does not charge for it?

It happened once. It could happen again. I refuse to believe there is no other organization willing to offer the same deal.

> For stratum 1 servers? You clearly don't understand what it is he's doing.

Yep, I realized my mistake after writing that, and the replies have made it clear that I was wrong. I still think there are options (remote access cards, for one) but I agree that VMs aren't the way to do it.

> it is unclear whether the $7k grant will even continue after April.

If that's the case, we'll see what happens in a month. If everything comes crashing down (it won't) I'll change my mind, but for now I believe one person being touted as the ONLY man who can do a particular job is incredibly wrong. Even if he were literally the only person on earth with the knowledge, it wouldn't be acceptable for everyone to rely on him... instead we should produce something as a community to replace this system. It's just not an acceptable option to have something this important in the sole hands of someone who could be in a plane crash tomorrow.

There are at least 4 simple fixes I can think of:

1) Move him and his family closer to the data center (Perhaps difficult)

2) Move the servers to a data center that's closer to his home (Not as difficult)

3) He could start using VMs like the rest of the world... physical access really isn't needed except for physical security (making sure the rack is locked and access is controlled), which data center employees can manage (Fairly easy)

4) Fire him and find someone else who would like a $7k/month stipend to do bugfixes (Fairly easy)

I personally remember the first time I used a recursive function for a fairly complicated use. It broke my brain for a while, but I thought about it for several days, stepping through all of the iterations until I had something that worked very well.

If I had been told I was a bad programmer because I was having trouble at the time, I probably would have given up.

I like this guy.

Just keep practicing. Varied things. Challenging things.

You'll get there!

Of course a piecemeal solution is more flexible, but as you said, configuration can be a beast, so many people prefer monolithic systems.

When was the last time ANYONE truly used Ctrl-S to save the webpage as HTML? And why would my inability to do it with a keyboard shortcut be a dangerous problem?