The last person I dated and I figured out we had probably been literally face to face a couple years before at an event, and I was probably talking to her boyfriend about something.
This was before Infrastructure-as-Code, Immutable Infrastructure, etc were popularized. 99% of the time, on greenfield systems, you shouldn't have to use Puppet or Chef or Ansible.
Runbooks-as-Code is also a great practice, similar to the notebook shown here. But they should be limited to one-time actions, like triage, recovery, etc.
> 99% of the time, on greenfield systems, you shouldn't have to use Puppet or Chef or Ansible.
I'm not entirely sure about this. One one hand, being able to set everything up once manually and just documenting the process usually will be easier, so people will opt for this, if given the choice.
Then again, I'm pretty sure that certain people aren't all that good at documentation and will write as little of it as possible, leading to this greenfield project that will inevitably turn into a brownfield project 5 years down the line now being at a disadvantage.
By then, nobody will really have any idea how to set up a new environment, or what exactly it needs. Worse yet, if you have some sloppily written documentation, that actually is no longer accurate and lies to you.
That's one of the odder things about the HN user base. How much we care about things seems to have little to do with how much they affect our lives. Most of us exist with a magic shield carefully affixed to our every point of contact with the electronic world that fully insulates us from anything we don't want to see, but it is maniacally important to us that Google doesn't know it was John Smith who searched for "sexy ostriches" eight years ago.
So because it doesn't "affect our lives" surveillance capitalism is okay? No.
It's about principles. We simply don't want corporations knowing anything about us unless absolutely necessary. It's bad enough that governments have to know about us. We really don't need the private sector mass surveilling the entire globe and exploiting our data for god knows what purposes.
Data should be a massive legal liability. It should cost them money to hold onto any piece of data about any person. They should be scrambling to forget all about me the second the transaction is finished.
I agree in principle - but you need a centralised government to punish them.
You could in theory have third party auditing and user reviews but almost nobody would care and they wouldn't have much power.
In practice I'd prefer a world without government and with companies tracking me over a government that steals half of my income and protect me from "evil" trackers.
Same thing with abortion. Of course wasting a human life is a tragedy, but it's hard to imagine economic model where you can guarantee the life of a foetus nobody knows much about, without needing a centralised entity. (you could in theory have protection agencies - as in The Machinery of Freedom - which guarantee your safety have you sign a contract saying you won't do that or else - but that would be hard to enforce).
> In practice I'd prefer a world without government and with companies tracking me over a government that steals half of my income and protect me from "evil" trackers.
What does "in practice" mean here?
I get the sense that when people say things like this, they think folks would have the lifestyles they currently have in the US, but much better because they don't have to pay any tax. In reality, a world without government would be run by the type of people who run Russia right now.
Great if you're connected to enough strongmen to be an oligarch I suppose but not that great for anyone else.
From what I see it has gone the way of "regardless" and "irregardless". I'm sure there's a cool word for this too. Antonyms that are actually synonyms.
Wait, just because throwaway787544 is OK with websites tracking where his behaviours on their domain, he should publicly give you and everyone his real name and address ?
If you walk in on a store that has security cameras in it and you accept to be filmed while you are in there, does that mean that I should be allowed and able to access you entire private photo and video gallery ?
Sorry but what's twisted is some pseudonymous throwaway account not only shaming people for caring about privacy but also proclaiming loudly that they don't care when their privacy gets violated. You gotta be kidding me.
well these are different purposes, aren't they? I do delete the cookies afterwards, so I don't care whether they get accepted or denied. But for this extention, the purpose was always just to get rid of the popups. I mean if you're automating it anyway, it's much easier to choose the happy path and comply isn't it? Those cookies can always be deleted later.
Try to worry a little less. You obviously cannot and will not stop worrying (welcome to parenthood!). But remember that far less well equipped people than you have been figuring it all out for thousands of years. You will too.
Ask for paternity and flexible hours. Work less, and care less about work. If you lose your job, you will get another one. Ask family and friends for help if you really need it. Do not worry about the future. One step at a time, one bridge at a time. It will all work out.
As long as clickbait drivel like this is upvoted, and advertising is legal, there will be internet.
And after that, when we return to the primordial ooze of AOLs and Prodigys and CompuServes, and even before that to UseNet and BBSes, when there is barely a commercial entity left, but there is still a wire to shove weird binary non-euclydian poetry into, there will be internet.
And even after, when illicit shortwave modems screech their crude 300 baud message across the planet, and very slowly a fat gray cat, Cheshire-grinning a question about a sandwich, progressively renders into a cracked and crudely lit LCD, an old meme will take form, and there, in the gray matter, there will be internet.
Nobody really knows when the body dies. After brain death, and then organ failure, and all the electricity's gone, a rotting corpse still feeds the world, mother's diesel for the biological engine of life. Who knows where the internet will go, or for how long, or in what strange aeons it will return? Who can say if ours was even the first?
Thank you. Too many commentators equate them being bored or disillusioned with something as meaning that thing is dead. Meanwhile umpteen millions of people carry on as usual. I’ve lost track of how many times newsletters, blogs, whatever have been declared dead. Whereas in reality all of these are still growing strongly in both number and user engagement. It’s lazy mindless valueless trend worshiping masquerading as analysis.
I see the internet as an extension of the telephone before it, then before it the telegraph, then before that flags on ships and messenger pigeons with like a color tied to their feet depending on who won the Battle of Actium. Blue meant it was Augustus, pretty efficient for that time.
Because we have no industry standards for ops. There are certainly IT standards, like ITSM, but the day to day product operations are ignored. And even if there were industry standards, nobody would implement them until they were forced to, same as the rest of the standards. Product people don't want anyone restricting them, and their priority isn't to ensure operations are reliable.
In particular inet_aton() function considers a single integer to be the 32bit form. Accepts decimal, octal, and hex. https://linux.die.net/man/3/inet_aton
Do. Not. Full. Rewrite. It would be absolute suicide and almost certainly fail. Just put that option out of your head.
1. Complete a risk assessment. List all the security, business, availability, liability, productivity, and other risks and prioritize them. Estimate the real world impact and probability of the risks, describe examples from the real world.
2. Estimate the work to mitigate each risk. Estimate multiple mitigation options (people are more likely to agree to the least bad of multiple options).
3. Negotiate with leadership to begin solving the highest risk, lowest effort issues.
But before you begin all that, focus on the psychology of leadership. Change is scary, and from their perspective, unnecessary. The way you describe each risk and its mitigation will determine whether it is seen as a threat or an exciting opportunity. You will want allies to advocate for you.
If all of that seems like too much work, then you should probably either quit, or just try to make small performance improvements to put on your resume.
