sabat

7 ms·

1.
by sabat 14y ago
I love how Jason Fried, the most self-important man in software (who can't code) is first on the list to diss the security patches. Fuck you, Jason. Learn to code. Then you can diss.
2.
by sabat 14y ago
Well, plus, Austin, your weather sucks. And, you're in Texas. You're the best that Texas has, sure, but still, you're in Texas.
3.
by sabat 14y ago
Not anymore. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/03/business/media/reddit-thri...
4.
by sabat 14y ago
Ruby is not, in fact, slow. This myth has been debunked so many times that I'll just leave the googling to you as an exercise.
5.
by sabat 14y ago
I have a friend who's an O'Reilly author. Granted, he's not the author of, say, the book on Bash, or Git, but it's a current book. He likes to joke around about how little money he makes on the book (now in second edition): "I make hundred
6.
by sabat 14y ago
Yeah, +1 on that idea. PDF would be really nice.
7.
by sabat 14y ago
Not quite. He's saying that people who think Ruby is slow are often people who have no idea how to performance-tune it.
8.
by sabat 14y ago
Yup. They're like any other tool. If you're not sure how to use and/or, then don't use them. Or, better yet, study up. Programming can benefit from nuance.
9.
by sabat 14y ago
Not sure why someone chose to downvote this to 0, but here's how the OP put it: The global lock is a feature of MRI that basically wraps a big mutex around all of your code. That's right, even if you're using multiple threads on a multi-co
10.
by sabat 14y ago
Due to the Global Interpreter Lock (GIL), your whole script is wrapped in one giant mutex. That means that you don't have code running in true parallel, so the data is not corrupted as it is in JRuby and Rubinius (which both implement real,
11.
by sabat 14y ago
I guess it's a lot easier to try things like this than to update your business model. That might require thinking and work.
12.
by sabat 14y ago
E.g. -- someone posted a link here to an article in which they describe using Google Hangouts for everything . There's a permanent one that everyone is on all damn day. There are special, throwaway hangouts for asides and meetings and anyt
13.
by sabat 14y ago
My own experience, anecdotal as it may be, is that this is entirely untrue. What matters is communication, not facetime.
14.
by sabat 14y ago
They're wrong to equate being remote with not producing value. If people are not producing value for the company, sure, fire them. If they are doing well, then why force them to relocate? What's the business sense in that?
15.
by sabat 14y ago
It isn't necessarily bad. But being about as good as AOL is not why Ms. Marissa was hired.
16.
by sabat 14y ago
I think we'd need to see this research. Just in terms of avoiding drive-bys, working remotely is far more stable and efficient (ergo productive).
17.
by sabat 14y ago
Yeah, and someone else's mom uses AOL for email. Yahoo: the new AOL.
18.
by sabat 14y ago
It takes a very specific type of individual to work at home with the same efficiency as in an office Yes, one who knows how to communicate. But you wouldn't want an on-site employee who doesn't communicate, either.
19.
by sabat 14y ago
Remote employees are a commitment So are on-site employees, who can screw off just as much as an off-site one. if the remote employees are not providing enough value to justify that investment in remote workers Then fire them. This kind
20.
by sabat 14y ago
Your bias is showing.
21.
by sabat 14y ago
Because when that one beefy server goes tits-up, you're out of business. Same with two.
22.
by sabat 14y ago
You know, I've had this going on all four of my Gmail/Google accounts (!) for well over a year now, and I still think it's totally worth it. It's not really a pain, and I can sleep better because of it.
23.
by sabat 14y ago
Man, I had this very idea a few months ago. :-)
24.
by sabat 14y ago
My site is wildly faster with CloudFlare. As with everything, YMMV.
25.
by sabat 14y ago
It's been a successful strategy for many companies, however perilous it might be.
26.
by sabat 14y ago
In other news, this is not a headline from The Onion.
27.
by sabat 14y ago
They're not synonyms; "and" is not a more readable version of "&&". As Avdi Grimm says: and and or, despite an apparent similarity to && and ||, have very different roles. It's worth using "and" and "or", especially consi
28.
by sabat 14y ago
I like what I've read, but with a couple of cavaets. Ruby is the way it is on purpose. Discouraging people from using features of the language because the OP (presumably) does not understand how to use them: that's an anti-pattern. The and
29.
by sabat 14y ago
This isn't actually news. I think I knew about Apatosaurus (vs. Brontosaurus) in the 1970s.
30.
by sabat 14y ago
Just waiting for the first person to announce that *BSD is dying, a la the ol' Slashdot trolls.

More ›