Readit NewsBut having experienced leetcode-style interviews on the candidate side, it's clear to me that they are no longer about figuring out and coding a solution on the spot. Interviewers expected a solution FAST, and to match that you need to have studied and learned the answer beforehand.
Whenever someone refers to planning as “lies” and whines about “politics” … you can be sure they are a difficult person who blames everyone but themself.
But I'll stop whining about politics when I'll stop witnessing well-behaved but incompetent people turn projects to failures.
There are two big problems with this take:
1. The author takes the "100% adaptation scenario" from the paper, and ignores the rest of the discussion. Yes, if we mitigate the effects of heat waves, there will be no effect. I could have guessed that myself.
2. The part of the paper is about the deaths directly attributable to heat waves on people aged 65+. That is a super narrow metric. Maybe the author should read the "Undernutrition" part of the paper he himself quoted, which paints a very different picture. And that's not even the full picture.
Would that help though, if drought periods hit Western Europe, like last year, and water levels in the rivers are as low as they were?
* a minority of plants were involved, it was only an issue because it happened on top of other issues (planned maintenances delayed due to covid, corrosion issues)
* the problem isn't actually the drought, it was the heat. The plants could keep operating, but they would have rejected water too hot, in breach of environmental regulations.
Besides, new plants can be built close to the sea instead of rivers to account for that.
In my data hoarding days (as a consumer, not FB scale), I found burning media an archive tool to be much more costly (and less reliable and more physical space) than simply using multiple hard drives.
Now, it could very well be that FB is able to buy burnable media at a much cheaper rate than consumers (i.e. perhaps there is more margin in media that massively bulk purchasing can reduce and the type of HDs that FB would buy would be more expensive than consumer drives, it could also be that actively used burnable media would be more reliable than actively used hard drives. while it's cold storage, its not frozen storage that is rarely used, with that said, the jukeboxes are probably expensive and suffer more reliablity issues than the hard drives), but on the consumer level, it just didn't seem to be a doable thing.
Ex: 8TB HD could cost $120. That's ~ 400 25GB single layer blurays. Now, 400 disks of optical media no matter how efficient one can store them will take up a lot more room than a single 8TB HD. For the 400 bluray blanks to be cheaper than the HD, they would have to be less than 30cents a disk. Glancing at amazon today, the cheapest I see for 25GB BDR blanks (and dual/triple/quad layer blanks are more expensive per GB, i.e. a 50GB blank would be $1.6 a disc) is about 40cents a disk. At that price level, you are better off just buying/copying to multiple disks for even better disaster recovery and it wont really cost you more than to store everything once on optical media.
anyways, if anyone could point out flaws in my assumptions (or why at FB scale the answers are different) I'd be interested.
That's a random study I found on Google, of course, I'm sure Meta has more accurate data on that.
Besides, you need to build the same kind of redundancy in both cases, so that shouldn't influence the choice.
[0] https://www.canada.ca/en/conservation-institute/services/con...
I see a lot of cities that measure bike lanes in total length, which misses the mark in two ways:
1. It often includes lanes that are shared with cars. These shouldn't count except on side streets. Basically anywhere where the speed limit is <25kmh; and
2. Focus needs to be given on contiguous cycling routes. It doesn't matter if you have 1000km of cycle routes if no section is longer than 2km and they're only connected by highways you have to share with cars.
Of course Amsterdam is the gold standard here and it shows how much you can do without necessarily taking up more space (eg the intersection design that puts cyclists in front of cars, which is much safer).
In a city like Paris having physically separate bike lanes will often mean taking away parking spaces or lanes of traffic. That's where the resistance will be.
It is feasible because Paris (the city itself, excluding suburbs) is a very crowded city, where owning a car has always been a luxury. People living in Paris itself who can afford a car, with the associated parking space and everything, are a minority.
People living in the suburbs are more likely to own cars and drive through Paris, but they don't elect the Paris mayor, so their opinion doesn't have much weight.
DIY only make sense at a very small scale or very large scale, everything in between is usually best offloaded to those which do it as their core competency.
Yes, in theory, in the middle scale, you should outsource things, but in practice, it only works if the managed service is at the right price.
I'm glad I haven't worked at a place that had such informal "policies" in a while. There have been a few attempts by twenty-something engineers with no commitments to establish such rules, but the culture wasn't that toxic, so they (politely) got told to shut up, and that was that. People's desktop background still get changed sometimes, but respecting people's boundaries goes a long way to make work bearable for everyone. And even with desktop background pranks, if in the slightest bit unsure, communicate beforehand and accept a "no". And don't do what one guy at another company did and use a homophobic meme right before their victim's demo call with an important customer, or you deserve everything that happens afterwards.
Is this really like that? Isn't there any Unix/DBA anymore? I associate DevOps to what at my time we called "operations" and "development". We had 5 teams or so:
1) Developers, who would architect and write code, 2) Operations who would deploy, monitor and address customer complaints, 3) Unix (aka SYS) administrators, who would take care of housekeeping of well, the OS (and web servers/middleware), 4) DBA who would be monitoring and optimizing Oracle/Postgres, and 5) Network admins, who would take care of Load Balancers, Routers, Switches, Firewalls (well, there were 2 security experts for that also)
So I think DevOps would be a mix of 1&2, to avoid the daily wars that would constantly happen "THEY did it wrong!"
Can somebody clear my mind, please!? It seems I was out of it for too long?!
Developers handle 1). Devops handle 2)/3)/5). Nobody does 4)