vpeters25

They were done the minute mods broke their habit of moderating their subreddits. Some dedicated mods might come back, but it is really hard to return to a lost habits so the damage is done already.

I suggested them to put:

- A random video from the ones uploaded in the last minute.

- Another random video, uploaded anytime

In both cases, these videos should be shown regardless of language, view count, etc.

In most cases these random videos will be junk, but I bet there will be gems which would die unwatched otherwise.

Probably blankets embedded with a conductive metal mesh in a pattern designed to block microwaves could be issued to all US personnel in foreign countries.

I remember on my first year here in Texas, driving by Arlington's city hall and there were a bunch of second amendment rights guys protesting outside, armed to the teeth with assault rifles and camo pants.

The police in their HQ right across the street didn't seem bothered by it so I assumed it must be legal.

Just want to point out the law allows unlicensed carrying of a concealed firearm, keyword here is concealed.

It is my understanding you already can walk around with a firearm anywhere in most US states that don't ban firearms as long as is not hidden from view, all this law changes is the requirement to get a license if you intend to walk around with a firearm concealed.

> If so many people have trouble implementing agile maybe it just doesn't work?

The problem with agile and other empirical processes of project control is that it goes against the OCD tendencies of scientifically minded people. They assume that, since programming is all math and logic, software development projects should be as well.

They add micromanaging processes in a futile effort to control what they perceive as chaos and end up trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

> However, after seeing how badly it can be weaponized against developers, I'm certainly ready to throw out the bathwater, and I think this is what they're talking about.

Poor management is a separate issue from agile. Even so, I would rather stay on a poorly managed agile shop than go back to a waterfall shop.

As far as the "values on the left", I like to explain them as a 55/45 split (and adjustable depending on your reality): we still deal with processes and tools, we just take a second to think whether a process is actually needed when we can just talk to someone instead.

Example: on a small team, you might just ask "can someone please approve my changes?" instead of having a whole jira workflow with code reviews and approvals.

> Also I think the comparison to lean manufacturing has always been very shallow. I get the metaphor, I just don't think that human resources in engineering can be optimized like manufacturing processes.

Agile and Lean are empirical process controls, they are based on the same concepts. Ken Schwaber explains all this on the first chapter of his book "Agile Software Development with SCRUM":

Defined process control: same inputs always result in same output (manufacturing widgets on a production line).

Empirical process control: same inputs not always result in same output.

Schwaber conceived SCRUM (and was among the founders of Agile) after realizing software development required an empirical process control: give 2 dev teams same specs, 2 different apps will come out (they might do the same thing, but in different ways)

This 100%. One of the reasons people hate Agile is because they miss this point and keep micro-managing.

Every time I see an "agile sucks" post, I take the time to read it and every time (so far) I have found they blame the process for some key part of agile they missed. Quote from the article:

“Way too much of Agile has been not about technology, but about people and about managing things and about getting stuff done — not necessarily getting the right stuff done.”

This is the whole point of agile: progress on iterations, inspect and adapt at the end of each iteration.

Your team might build the "wrong stuff" for an iteration, realize it (inspect), then make a course correction (adapt). If you end up delivering the "wrong stuff" is because you didn't follow this very core principle of agile.

I find it hard to believe these so called "Agile Early Evangelists" can make such a statement. Their background in lean development should have made the familiar with empirical process controls, from where lean and agile come from.

My guess the author quoted them selectively to fit the "agile sucks" narrative of the article.

Edit: expanded last 2 paragraphs.

In agile, or any other project management process, the "customer" is not necessarily just the final user but any stakeholder.

As a rule of thumb: anybody who needs regular progress updates on a project is a "customer".

The difference in agile vs other development processes is progress reports are partial releases of working code instead of a percentage increase on a gantt chart.

I can confirm, I have grid-tied solar panels and have gotten outages in the middle of sunny days which is usually the time my panels are actually supplying surplus power to the grid.

Only way to have juice during power outages in my configuration is to add something like the 7K Tesla battery.

This is a good idea, but i think it could go even further.

Somewhat unrelated but if you really want to see how horrendously unfriendly the typical smartphone UX is, hand one to a technology-challenged grandparent (who can probably use a legacy cellphone/flip phone just fine) and ask them to call you.

They are more likely to accidentally take selfies than figure out how to call you, even if they have your phone number memorized.

It would be nice to have an android "main menu" which is just simply the dialpad when you turn on or unlock the phone. Add a button for "smartphone things" like search contact list or open other apps but keep it most elemental function (making phone calls) up front and and easy.

Rolling their own health care company might solve only part of the issue. I think the largest driver of healthcare costs right now is price gouging by providers with their charge masters, needless exams and procedures.

I have been thinking on a "simple rule" that could mitigate gerrymandering:

1. No congressional district can span more than 1 partial city and/or county.

This will force districts to be drawn to cover whole cities/counties and would stop ridiculous districts such as the Texas 34th which covers parts of at least 8 counties from the gulf coast up to San Antonio

> It also doesn't seem like the internet regulatory state of pre-2015 was a disaster.

This is a common inaccurate argument I have seen pushed by the telcos to justify repeal.

There are many well-documented cases of how the "big 4" ISPs were increasingly blocking, redirecting (Charter's DNS redirection), interfering (injecting javascript and/or ads) and throttling traffic to internet services (Netflix) from their networks before the Title II reclassification of 2015.

All these abuses happened during a small window of a couple years between the previous FCC's Net Neutrality regulations were thrown out by the courts and 2015, when the Title II reclassification happened.

Based on what happened in the south of Chile, I think they might want to wait a couple more decades before claiming escaped salmon didn't gain finhold in the wild:

My uncle was among the pioneers of salmon farming in the south of Chile on the early 70s. A storm destroyed their first farm causing salmon to escape to the ocean. The escaped salmon (chinook) started showing back in noticeable numbers just around 10 years ago.

The article's title seems click-bait. It makes good points identifying some of the already known weaknesses in bitcoin's design, but he is basically complaining that Satoshi didn't predict how his creation would evolve over time which seems unfair.

Maybe we don't need a unique id at the federal level after all. Financial institutions are already required to follow KYC (Know Your Customer) laws. For this they need a way to validate the identity of the customers they do business with. I guess they already have enough ways to do this without relying on SSN or a potential national id card.

BTW, after the Equifax hack, financial institutions should be mandated to stop trusting SSN as proof of identity.

> Lenny actually changes it's response depending on what the caller does. Pauses, keywords, etc.

It's actually a sequence of recordings played in the same order every time in a loop from the 5th. Telemarketers usually realize it a few recordings into the second loop.

Now imagine combining machine learning with conversation analysis to create the ultimate Lenny.

Think of this scenario:

Oppresive government wants cloudflare to stop hosting some dissenters site.

Cloudflare says no

Then such government tries again, this time accusing dissenters of terrorism or something else despicable such as child molestation or hate speech.

Cloudflare still refuses

Then someone in such government impersonates the dissenters and claims cloudflare is on their side.

Cloudflare immediately kicks dissenters out of their network.

Free speech is hard.

I sort of agree. I personally got tired of answering recruiters' questions about how much time i spent in frontend vs backend.

I also realized there was an increasing trend in job postings looking for "full-stack" so I started advertising myself as such.

Maybe an auditable electronic voting system: each candidate's campaign can run their own "miner" making it impossible to tamper with voter results.

On the other hand such a system might make the individual votes less anonymous ...

Edit: campaigns and any other interested party such as the press

> The only issue that irks me is that I can't resize a pool after it was created, can't add new disks, can't remove one (without risking parity).

Not sure why ZFS would not auto resize for you. It's the reason I have been using it for several years as my home NAS under a linux server. In my case I just replace all the disk on a RAIDZ with bigger ones and automatically resizes up.

Ah DCOM, fun times.

Back in SQL 6.5 days (and all the MS SQL versions up to, i believe, 2005), "precompiling" queries in stored procedures was recommended for performance reasons. It was even asked on hiring interviews, at least to me.

> I'm and old programmer and I've been arguing against business logic in SPs since SQL Server 6.5 and have been losing ever since. That's not an old/young argument.

> It's because vendors (in this case MS) recommend putting code in SPs. I suspect it has to do with lock-in.

If i recall correctly, back in the dark ages of Classic ASP and SQL Server 6.5, database stored procedures was the only feasible way of implementing a reasonably performing web application.

> The real problem is the assumption that this is a 'solved problem', i.e. that a) there is an one-true-way algorithm out there, and b) that is what the interviewer wants you to know (i.e. know in the sense of knowing a fact). That is true of too many interviewers, and that is the problem.

These "solved problems" are the result of countless hours of research by computer science experts with masters and Ph.D degrees. For those of you who studied computer science in college, you likely had lectures where the teacher or TA walked you through the process of resolving each of these algorithms.

Unless you are hiring for companies like Netflix, Cloudflare, Google, etc. where you basically need to invent new fields of research in computer science, expecting a programmer to "come up" with the same solution in 10 minutes a team of CS experts solved after many hours of research might be a little unrealistic.

Apologizes for the "me too" post:

It appears to be impacting gotomeeting, I get this error when trying to start a 12pm meeting here:

CloudFront is currently experiencing problems with requesting objects from Amazon S3.

Edit: ironically, my missed 12pm meeting was an Azure training session.

I was told that by GV support, but I'm struggling to find any other likely source for it.

I removed all redirections from my GV number and tested:

- I called from my home and cellphone, both hangouts and GV ringed.

- I asked my family and friends to try the number and it worked fine.

- Then I asked a recruiter who was having trouble and he got the recording.

- Same recruiter called using his personal cellphone, it worked fine.

While speaking with this recruiter on a different line, I asked him to put his phone on speaker and try calling, I was able to hear him getting the recording...

I did all this before trying to contact google voice support. To me, it looks as thought GV is in denial there might be an issue on their side and refused to look into it.

I speculate there is something wrong in the way calls get routed to GV from certain providers, or some sort of spam caller filter is blocking recruiters who might have been wrongly reported as "telemarketers" by google voice users.

Edit: formatting and grammar

I had a GV as the primary in my resume for years. Last year, many recruiters emailed me that calls weren't going through with a recording stating "The person you are trying to reach is not accepting calls at this time". I asked in GV forums to not avail.

I don't know how many nice job opportunities I missed when hiring managers saw my application but could not call me back until I detected the issue.

Ended up switching everything to a new VoIP number I can control in my asterisk server. Only feature I miss is the speech-to-text on voicemails.