Readit Newshttps://solarsystem.nasa.gov/moons/saturn-moons/titan/overvi...
According to this (at the time of reading) a one way trip at the speed of light is ~75 minutes, so you will have approximately two and a half hours of ping.
Ouch.
Still, it raises an interesting question: how would a hypothetical Earth-Titan network protocol work?
While it is easy to bash on an inanimate object, there are some very dedicated and empathetic people who care deeply about the project. Some of those people do this work in their off-hours and some to this work as part of their daily work activities AND also in their off hours.
In that spirit, we want to make Jenkins better and created a separate group at CloudBees in the Product and Engineering teams late last year. They focus on open source work for Jenkins and on some proprietary things for CloudBees Core (built on Jenkins). We also have a dedicated user experience/product designer who started working on the project a few months ago. One of the first things he and I worked on was creating a curated, tailored version of Jenkins via the CloudBees Jenkins Distribution. This distribution will focus more and more over time on a guided workflow for continuous integration and delivery with Jenkins. These patterns will also be shared with open source Jenkins - some through direct contributions and others through suggestions (better plugin categorization, documentation, etc.).
Please use this comment thread to share your constructive, honest feedback about how we can improve Jenkins.
I've been using Jenkins heavily over the past year since a client of our purchased the enterprise version. It was billed to me as a mature open source product that has been refined over the years by people trying to optimize their dev operations. While I'm sure some people really care about it, the user experience is so utterly disappointing it's almost impossible to imagine how it got to this state without neglect.
Even if you ignore all the complicated stuff, the web UI is embarrassing. While I don't suggest a "pretty" UI is necessary for devops, I would think you'd have a quick win just by having some people re-style the existing UI to make it look and feel like something built this century and not require a dozen clicks to get to important information. There are also bugs that are so painfully obvious it makes me wonder how they still exist. An example is if your Github branch has a slash in it (eg. feature/something) you get a 404 error if you try to navigate to that builds' results.
There are also features that appear to have almost no value yet are in the core UI and clearly took some time to build. The weather icons representing various permutations of previous build states is one ridiculous example that comes to mind.
I would respectfully suggest you run through some real world Jenkins experiences like the ones mentioned in the article. Also setting up a new server, configuring non-trivial SCM settings, debugging Jenkinsfiles, etc. To echo the article's sentiment - it feels like I'm constantly fighting with Jenkins to do what I need instead of being guided into a mature set of features.
Conversely - Octopus Deploy is a related product I have been using alongside Jenkins which has been an absolute joy to work with. Everything from initial setup to configuring its agent software on host servers has been straightforward. It has a simple, elegant UI that provides access to important information and actions where you would hope to see them. And most importantly - everything works. I have yet to encounter a bug or experience any broken UI states.
I'm glad to hear CloudBees is making some effort to improve things and I hope PMs like you continue to be involved in the community and solicit feedback, even if it's hard to hear sometimes.
"For now, however, in hard-core physical science at least, there is little evidence of any major BD-driven breakthroughs, at least not in fields where insight and understanding rather than zerosales resistance is the prime target: physics and chemistry do not succumb readily to the seduction of BD/ML/AI. It is extremely rare for specialists in these domains to simply go out and collect vast quantities of data, bereft of any guiding theory as to why it should be done. There are some exceptions, perhaps the most intriguing of which is astronomy, where sky scanning telescopes scrape up vast quantities of data for which machine learning has proved to be a powerful way of both processing it and suggesting interpretations of recorded measurements. In subjects where the level of theoretical understanding is deep, it is deemed aberrant to ignore it all and resort to collecting data in a blind manner. Yet, this is precisely what is advocated in the less theoretically grounded disciplines of biology and medicine, let alone social sciences and economics. The oft-repeated mantra of the life sciences, as the pursuit of ‘hypothesis driven research’, has been cast aside in favour of large data collection activities [7]. And, if the best minds are employed in large corporations to work out how to persuade people to click on online advertisements instead of cracking hard-core science problems, not much can be expected to change in the years to come. An even more delicate story goes for social sciences and certainly for business, where the burgeoning growth of BD, more often than not fuelled by bombastic claims, is a compelling fact, with job offers towering over the job market to anastonishing extent. But, as we hope we have made clear in this essay, BD is by no means the panacea its extreme aficionados want to portray to us and, most importantly, to funding agencies. It is neither Archimedes’ fulcrum, nor the end of insight."
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsta.201...
This is so sad
The reason for is just how damn good all the Physics Theory is. People keep having to look closer and closer to try to find a place, any place, where the theory "fails" (in a sufficiently spectacular fashion) hoping that that might point the way to new phenomena and new theory. There's a giant multibillion dollar hole on the ground in Switzerland who's main purpose was to find a chink in the armor of HEP or help point the way to new theories. It failed spectacularly, but they're already talking about building a bigger one :)
Awww it isn't that bad. They found the Higgs and at least verified we need to look at higher energy levels to find anything new.
Is this truly the case, or is it just hard to monitor the paths of the multitude of objects passing by earth?
Headline: "Smart people do X"
"I do X, therefore I am smart!"
Oh the irony.
> So, if you enjoy your swears, and being awake really late, and have a messy room, don't worry. You have a higher IQ than most!
Again, replication is crucial. It's a Good Thing. It's just not a trivial thing that we can expect to "just happen".
Edit: Can't see to format it correctly, just check the original source.
(Atleast this is my understanding from watching Apollo documentaries/movies etc.)