> Musk dropping in pretending he knows the answers to this one too.
This is Musk's baseline. Nothing special about this case in that regard.
1,581 karma · joined October 22, 2022
This is Musk's baseline. Nothing special about this case in that regard.
The fact that a person was stabbed and killed on the street and the killer felt he could get away with it is kind of a good example of "the lawlessness" you're trying to downplay. This doesn't depend on the socio-economic status of the stabbing victim, or the attacker.
By "falling-out" you mean he tried to take over OpenAI but failed. Musk even tried to claim OpenAI "had fallen fatally behind Google" to validate his takeover.
https://www.semafor.com/article/03/24/2023/the-secret-histor...
What? You're making those claims. You're coming with bullshit excuses like "expectation of more money that nobody agreed upon". This blend of bullshit talk doesn't pop up when some unexpected event hits and everyone is suddenly expected to "be a team player", and crunch time hits and the boss expects everyone to "go above and beyond". You better believe this investment road goes both ways. Being a team player means getting a share of all team wins, and a cold slice of pizza ain't it.
> For the overwhelming majority of jobs, you get paid only what's in your contract.
You're talking like yearly bonuses or performance reviews don't happen, and no one receives paid bonuses ever. Why are you pretending that employees don't get compensated by the value they create?
What? No, it does not. If I create value for my employer, I better be compensated accordingly. If I don't then my employer is very quick in firing me. I can even be a top performer and get the axe, as the recent firing wave hitting FANGs demonstrates.
You keep your cold slice of pizza. I need to get compensated by the value I created and being forced to join bullshit HR events is not a compensation.
The only value these events generate is the Potemkin stuff: providing a dedicated crowd to a higher-up, and marketing material for HR.
I repeat: what leads you to presume this is something employees enjoy? I mean, is it conceivable to you that any random person prefers to be forced by HR to attend an event on their own personal time instead of spending it with their loved ones, or even doing something they love?
You get a salary everywhere you work. Do you do volunteer work for a living?
If I explicitly and directly work on something that makes my boss richer, you're damn sure I want to be rewarded by the value I brought to the company. The salary is what I charge to be in the building, but if I get my employer to actually hit a compensation milestone you're damn sure I want a cut of it, and a warm feeling inside that my boss is richer along with a slice of pizza mandated by HR is absolutely not it.
Sorry, that's a bullshit excuse to avoid having to pay employees.
The very blog post from this discussion explicitly touches the issue of perceived value. Everyone seeks to maximize the value that they generate from their work. That's why salary is the single most important factor in deciding whether a job is worth it's and that is why yearly bonus and salary reviews are the single most important factor in retaining employees.
Why is anyone trying to fabricate this idea that getting paid is not the single most important reason why most of us work?
Why do you presume employees like pizza parties?
What leads you to believe that HR-imposed mandatory, non-paid gatherings after hours are something enjoyed by employees?
Those who already want to gather after hours to socialize are already doing it, without needing HR to be involved.
I think you missed the whole point.
The point of pizza parties as exemplified in the article was to commemorate purely monetary milestones. Your boss rakes in a few millions, and all you get is a pizza that you need to share with coworkers? That's bullshit.
But hey, some people like the bones that their boss throws at them.
I'm not sure you read any of the links I posted, or that you had any intention of informing yourself before trying to dismiss facts you find inconvenient.
The fact that Obama was repeatedly subjected to racist attacks, even from high-ranking members of the republican party in very public statements , can't be brushed under the rug. This was not "one guy", or even an isolated incident. The two links I posted correspond to remarks from multiple high ranking people in separate incidents. These racist attacks were made repeatedly throughout Obama's tenure, and were never criticised or stopped by the republican party, which clearly were leveraging those to mobilize their base.
How can you even start to attempt to hide that fact? In what world do you live where blatant, real-world, and very public racism doesn't exist.
We don't.
If you're serious about this, you're also responsible for not pushing for doxing of random suspects. You can't argue that there are good witch hunts and bad witch hunts.
You picked an awfully disingenuous way of framing your question. Just because you can find someone who dislikes Obama because of some random reason that does not reject or refute the pervasiveness of racism as a factor in the vitriolic hatred directed at him.
https://edition.cnn.com/2016/12/28/politics/carl-paladino-re...
Are you really asking why Elon "pedo guy" Musk would need to ruin his reputation over frivolous bullshit?
Isn't "correlation does not imply causality" already a household expression? If we are engineers why are we insisting in specious reasoning?
Have we learned nothing from Reddit's Boston bomber witch hunt?
What leads you to conflate poverty with criminal activity, and proceed to victim-blame those who dare complain about criminal activity?
What political beliefs are you referring to? The one about SF's crime wave sounds precisely on topic, for example.
Edit: those downvotes were very quick.
Nonsense. Each team owns it's services, and they know best what works and doesn't work. It makes no sense to claim organizational inertia as a valid reason to prevent you from picking the best tool for the job.
To add to that, microservices allow you to gradually upgrade services without having to be blocked by the idea of having to go through major rewrites. You just peel off a concern, get it up and running, and direct traffic to it. Done.
...except when your single piece breaks and you get your whole service down. Then what?
I'm not sure you got the point. The need to provide interfaces and establish contracts and pledge SLAs is irrelevant and a non-issue. Naturally, your goal is to have a perfect uptime and never break interfaces, just like your goal when working on a monolith is to not add broken code that crashes the service.
The whole point of microservices is that you are entirely free to make any decision regarding the things you own, and your only constraint is the interfaces you provide and consume, and SLAs. From those interfaces inward, you are totally free to make any decision you think is best without having to bother about anyone else's opinions and technical choices and tastes and permissions. You can run one service behind your interface or hundreds. As long as your interfaces are up, you can do whatever you like. That greatly simplifies your problem domain.
> And all what you're speaking of can be achieved by properly modularizing the code of a monolithic application.
No, no you can't. Think about it for a second: can you pick your software stack? Can you pick what dependencies you adopt? Can you rewrite your code in any other language? Etc etc etc. Your hands are tied left and right.
I think you inadvertently pointed out one of the advantages of microservices: the ability to bootstrap ideas without having to be hindered by artificial barriers to entry. If you have an idea and want to show it off, you just implement it and make it available to the public. Call it "aspirational goals", but I don't see any advantage in barring people from providing value without having to wrangle bureaucracies, red tape, and office politics.
Indeed the main selling point of microservices is People, more specifically how to set hard boundaries on responsibilities and accountability while ensuring independent decision-making.
Another important selling point of microservices is flexibility. It's trivial to put together an entirely new service from scratch, written in whatever technology crosses your mind. With microservices you don't even need access to a repo.
Your comment reads like a strawman. I didn't needed "studies". It was good enough if there was a guy with a blog saying "I used postgres as a message broker like this and I got these numbers", and they had a gitlab project page providing the public with the setup and benchmark code.
That's not it.
You made no point. Just because you don't want to follow a topic that does not mean it's ok to censor it and stop everyone from liking things you don't like. That would be a stupid thing to defend, specially considering your content is already served by recommendation systems.
Some monitors indicate that hackernews has a 99.84% uptime in the past 30 days. Hardly "perfect".
You're just missing the whole point of why you need n>1 instances. You're focusing on what might be the least compelling reason for the majority of applications, which is scalability.
Reliability and fault tolerance is a major selling point, and you can't simply expect to have adequate performance in more than one region if you're providing your services out of a single box in a single data center. The laws of physics ensure your quality of service will suck.
Operations also compell you to have multiple instances, ranging from blue/green deployments to one-box deployment strategies. And are you going to allow your business to be down for significant amounts of time whenever you need to update your OS? How would you explain all that downtime to your boss/shareholders? Are the tens of dollars you save on infrastructure a good tradeoff?
Also, security is also a concern. You're better off isolating your backend from frontend services, and software-defined networks aren't a silver bullet.
And in the end, are the tradeoffs of not designing your web services the right way really worth it?