These perspectives are very negative. An alternative view is that there are tons of interesting problems and projects and applications to be worked on, and to some degree at least you get a say in which ones you work on.
In Go, if runtime.GOMAXPROCS() returns 1 or is set to 1 (meaning, Go only has access to a single system thread), the 'for' loop canabalizes the scheduler and the goroutine is rarely or never scheduled.
That fact doesn't make the OP's statement true, or have anything to do with the optimization bug, but it is worth pointing out that there are situations where Go correctly cannot guarantee that goroutine is executed.
Investors pull the strings. The behavior isn't the result of an investment, but failing to implement procedures after the fact to stop future incidents definitely can be. Not through action, but through inaction.
Meaning, more ethical investors (also known as: Board Members) might say "We need to do something about this."
Looks great. My main complaint is that the templates feature appears to be reinventing Terraform. Would have been cool if we could use the Terraform templates we already have, or even provide support for CloudFormation (given this is an AWS-only tool).
awless is currently in its early life. We also plan to support both CloudFormation (first) and maybe Terraform at some point. CF and TF are exhaustive but more complex than awless templates.
awless is meant to simplify how we can create and manage an AWS infrastructure (which is originally our own need at Wallix), and we wanted to have simple templates as part of the CLI.
To be a tad more concrete: GunDB can run in the browser as well as on servers; CockroachDB is a traditional, client/server database. GunDB is aiming for eventual consistency, but when I looked a year ago, it seemed like the algorithm they chose wasn't actually convergent--nodes could diverge because non-commutative updates could be applied in different orders on different nodes. CockroachDB, by contrast, is a serializable, single-key linearizable store. I don't think GunDB offers transparent sharding or SQL, both of which are important aspects of CockroachDB.
Aphyr, thanks! I appreciate seeing you here and replying. GUN Author here.
First, to answer @sroussey - Kyle is correct, GUN is an eventually consistent graph database that runs browser/server with extremely high availability, while CockroachDB is trying to be a strongly consistent, linearizable key/value SQL store. To read about what we guarantee/don't, check out these articles:
The last year we've focused on performance, and can now do 25M+ reads/sec (no cache miss, disk I/O performance isn't particularly interesting to us). More on that here: https://github.com/amark/gun/wiki/100000-ops-sec-in-IE6-on-2... (we're not kidding about it being able to run in the browser)
With regards to commutative / non-commutative, @Aphyr, slight correction: Different machines will converge to the same value, it is just that you'd need to use a commutative CRDT on top of gun (we have one here: https://github.com/amark/gun/wiki/snippets-(v0.3.x)#counter ) for them to converge to their combined value.
Example: GUN treats primitives as atomic, so if you try to `gun.get('some').path('math').put(5 + 2)` it will converge to the atomic value of 7. So if two machines do `gun.get('some').path('math').put(currentValue + 2)` at the same time, both machines will converge to the fixed atomic value, not a commutative value - you need the CRDT for that.
I mention this in the "What could go wrong?" section of the talk (linked above), and it is easy to add the necessary CRDT when you need it - actually, this was inspired by you @aphyr, from our discussion a few years ago.
Note: @Aphyr, we built a distributed testing framework ( https://github.com/gundb/panic-server ), and now that our "performance improvement" stage is done, in the near future we're going to start building distributed correctness tests (we're rolling out to a government client soon). We'll probably be in touch with you in the next half year or so. :)
Great work, keep it up. You are always a huge inspiration. <3
Edit: With regards to sharding / SQL, we don't have SQL support yet but somebody is currently building a prototype for it. Sharding, not built in, but peers store the data they request, which acts as a natural shard, but nothing fancy - for more info check out this article: https://github.com/amark/gun/wiki/sharding .
I can't generalize for every school, or everyone at every school. I attended an engineering program at one of the top 5 schools by total international student population.
Honestly, international students are cliquey. Many of them that I talk to openly admit to cheating on their english proficiency exams universities require you to take before you can attend. Meshing with local students is nearly impossible if you don't understand the language proficiently.
I'd expect you'd see roughly the same numbers if you looked at American students in Chinese universities, or elsewhere. But we have to make this anti-American because its Quartz, and Trump is bad, right?
It might help if you understand why they're cliquey. Many of them are living away from home for the first time, so hanging out with familiar faces and having shared cultural references is comforting (though it sounds wrong). They may not be as proficient in English as they are in their native tongues, so they speak their own languages when they're with each other. And of course to an outsider, a group of people speaking a foreign language seems very forbidding and closed off. Believe me, they (mostly) don't want to be seen that way.
I think pretty much every "group" is cliquey. My own Masters class (about 20-25 people, 50-50 American/foreign) splintered into 2-3 disjoint groups almost immediately after the introductory mixer. I understood and spoke English fine. But not knowing any American pop culture (music, TV shows, sci-fi, games etc. and my own introversion, meant I didn't know then how to deal with people I didn't that have much in common with) meant that I was filtered out of the most likely "group" (students roughly my age). They may all have been speaking English but all the alien (to me) cultural references made it seem forbidding (who's Stephen Colbert? what's Arrested Development? why is it a faux pas to admit liking Coldplay and U2 and Nickelback?). I ended up hanging out with other students from my own country.
> I'd expect you'd see roughly the same numbers if you looked at American students in Chinese universities, or elsewhere
You're right. Most people struggle to flourish socially in foreign cultures; I think this is universally true.
> But we have to make this anti-American
I didn't see the article as anti-American at all. It was more "Isn't it unfortunate how these students are missing out?"
I personally blame myself for my own social isolation during my Masters. I should've tried harder.
To be fair, at companies when people interview and deny a candidate for "cultural fit", they mean "this candidate doesn't interact and know the same cultural references as my in-group", so this type of exclusion is pretty common.
Out of curiousity, did you meet or make many American friends? To me, I enjoy meeting different people from different cultures. I imagine I am not the only one.
Not many. I too enjoy meeting people from different cultures but...it's difficult, for me at least. I mean I find it hard to make friends period, regardless of culture.
I understand that. Going back to your original comment, I think Americans will understand that you don't get those culturual references, and several will not mind showing you and helping you. For me it's actually a lot of fun to show different parts of american cultureand seeing someone else experience it for the first time (Like here: https://xkcd.com/1053/ ). One of the most interesting things that happens if they ask "well why is this part of culture like this", because sometimes I do not even know, so I get to learn a bit about my culture as well.
Agreed. And that's the part that I take the blame for. When you're adrift in a culture, you should ask for help. In my (relative) immaturity, I thought asking questions would be considered annoying, rather than being a way to build bridges.
I understand why you could have that mentality though, you can't be blamed for it. I hope sometime you would be able to visit the USA with that knowledge and get a better experience!
I've noticed this at my college firsthand; I see groups or pairs of Chinese students speaking solely Chinese. Speaking in their native language isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it certainly makes them less approachable.
From my experience, these Chinese students probably did try at first to make friends with local Americans, but were made fun of because of their accents.
So rather than be humiliated, they chose to just hang out with people who won't insult them.
I do wonder if they were making fun in a mean way or just poking fun in good nature. Of course, the person experiencing it is the one who can better tell, but it is often not obvious when lacking cultural context. One of my closest friends early on laughed at me because whenever I pronounced "vehicle" it sounded to him as "bagel", it did hurt my ego but I quickly got he meant nothing bad by it.
That said, if the American students were really making fun of the accent of Chinese students in a mean way, I can only assume they themselves never tried speaking any kind of Chinese. It is insanely difficult to get to "understandable" in a tonal language if your native language is not tonal, let alone "without funny accent".
Going off-topic from the OP: Not only that, but when I was a foreign student, the Indian and Chinese students had networks of past-year students, who'd built up databases of exam questions. While perhaps strictly not cheating, this gave them an advantage, because some professors repeated questions from previous quarters/years. Some of us thought that was unfair, and talked with the professors and they were unwilling to ensure that questions were not repeated. So we asked the professors to give us exam questions from the last few years, and made them available to everyone in the library. Hopefully this at least leveled the playing field a tiny bit, but I'm not sure it mattered in the grand scheme of things. (Disclosure: I'm Indian too).
Everywhere I've studied made past exam questions available by default - and doing them as part of revision was absolutely standard. Certainly not cheating!
I am international myself and have seen international students cheating before. In one (really bad, no one cares) course that I took as an undergrad, everyone cheated. I was the only one who came to class and didn't cheat (or didn't know that you could cheat in that course). It was, perhaps not noble, but not rare for students (American + non-American) to pass on their exams to the next class and professors discuss how to deter that too.
This is exactly why I'm against this behavior -- the only one that are punished are the ethical ones [1]. Kept unchecked, soon you will have pressured all the ethical people into giving into cheating as well!
That's not very much given the capabilities and managed service. Anything cheaper probably means the single-node managed SQL offerings are more than enough.
Capital expenditures might shed some light on this. I don't think there's enough public data to be clear but in 2015 Amazon (4.8B), Google (9.9B) and Microsoft (5.9B) were at least on the same order of magnitude in terms of CapEx, whereas other major "datacenter" companies like Rackspace (475M) are much smaller.
I don't think you can draw any definitive conclusions from this, but calling it a class of size 1 or 2 is probably an overstatement of Google (+/- Amazon)'s advantage over Microsoft at least.
I get that things can be fluid, but its such a meat machine.