Some fabs are in china's sphere of influence admittedly, but please do explain precisely how this falls under eu jurisdiction beyond just both companies sell product there.
44 posts • joined 9 Jun 2016
Churchill's United States of Europe is often trotted out in defence of the EU and it's tiresome and disingenuous. The EU does not resemble the United States, if it did I suspect the UK would still be in it. Key differences you'll notice are that the US isn't run by a commission and that the federal government isn't trying to standardise every state law centrally.
One of the big benefits of clouds is the ability to bypass processes and approvals you need with physical tin.
Large companies required any kind of hardware spend to be capex which if you're even spending a penny thereof usually requires approval and sign off from finance and a host of other departments. With the cloud, most managers can just increase their opex footprint without any of the hassle associated with capex. This becomes really handy in companies which have reached the capacity of their data centre - you don't want to fight and be billed for an entire new hosting location just because you want to add one more server.
So yes, on-prem is cheaper but only attractive to managers in a large company if that company is excellent at capacity planning and has streamlined approval processes that are reasonable.
"that does make their arguments about controlling the market a bit hollow..."
No it doesn't, as there are other stores available on Windows including Steam which is by far the largest. They are free to compete for products and exclusivity deals and customers can choose to have one or all the stores on their machine - something not possible on IOS.
"As far as Apple "taxing" in app purchases, it is very difficult to see any justification for the "tax". Apple are not providing any service - they are just demanding money with menaces."
That isn't entirely fair, they are effectively providing a hosting service for packages so there is a service and some costs.
The big problem is that there is no alternative so this is a rigged market. I don't have a problem with apple making money from the app store, but I do have a problem with them banning rival app stores as that is an antitrust problem.
You do realise that having to manually create indexes inside a database cluster on lots of tables is time consuming and is separate from general infrastructure setup?
Yes AWS, etc has multiple admin panels but they give you a lot more than AD did (provision servers, serverless functions, database clusters, networking, etc). Besides, you can use terraform to script your provisioning anyway.
It wouldn't matter if Oracle databases we're completely self-managing. I suspect the cost of it and the concerns about lock in are something that few IT pros not already running Oracle would risk.
Personally, Oracle could release a database 50 times more powerful than anything else and I'd still avoid it due to lock in fears and the horror stories I hear about "licence audits".
The name isn't related to snowflake schemas which are a data warehouse anti-pattern. When I asked their sales team about that they stated the snowflake name was unrelated to snowflake schemas.
It's a really nice piece of tech with some cool features but it's quite expensive for a lot of SMEs compared to say Redshift but highly competitive compared to Teradata etc
I imagine it makes sense for some companies during the current situation - it's cheaper to buy your own but what if you've got multiple devs/testers working from home and due to lockdown/social distancing? Renting Macs on the cloud is probably a reasonable short term solution. Buying a Mac for everyone may not make sense and you may not want to send people to an office or data centre to set them all up.
I wasn't quoting Facebook, but thinking of the various books produced at the time of its introduction that disagreed on scope of GDPR. However, the fact that a court case is taking place proves my point. I've heard comments from several DPOs at companies along the lines of "a lot of this will only be determined by judge's ruling on court cases".
Ah yes, we don't need middle management. So what are the options? A senior manager deals with the bs coming from the exec team and the board while helping technical staff learn and grow while riding their Unicorn from fire to fire with an extinguisher in hand or; senior manager deals with the bs and expects a bunch of junior staff to plan projects, model and forecast costs, report progress, fight other mangers trying to hand off work, co-ordinate multiple teams all whilst actually doing the tech stuff they were hired for? I'm all for being empowered, but if you're paying someone a junior-mid level dev salary, I think it's only fair to give them the responsibilities of a junior-mid level dev, not half a manager's position responsibilities on top.
That probably isn't a concern for a woman who has continued ploughing the company she works for into the ground. Out of interest, how many layers of management are there between her and the lowest level of "doers"? Surely if they're between her and the lowest level they are in the middle, or is it the job title that makes them senior.
Maybe I'm just bitter, but during my brief stint at IBM I counted 7 levels between me and her and I was far from the lowest level.
Personally, I found it frustrating I had to wade through 22 paragraphs before reaching the actual reason to be concerned about the bill (which admittedly is a very good reason). Please could there be a little less commentary / scene setting next time or at least put the commentary at the end?
MS are porting everything they have to Linux so that they can run it on Linux in Azure (and presumably the Azure fabric on-premise stuff) so everything is being moved to .Net core. In the meantime, most .Net shops are running windows so need a path off the .Net framework platform and onto .Net core over time.
Personally I'd be bored shitless if I swapped building things for bug bounties so 2.7 times salary seems like a bad trade.
Also "The top earning hackers on HackerOne have earned more than the average salary of software engineers in their respective countries" makes me suspicious. How much does the average hacker earn compared to an average software engineer?
Postcodes are PII so you have not fully deidentified anything."
Post codes are not PII, they don't identify an individual and are freely available for download from government websites. If you combine it with other data it could result in what might be considered a PII dataset.
This law is a total mess, even the ico doesn't know what guidance to issue. At best we'll end up with the pii equivalent of the websites must notify about cookies rule. Most likely it'll all be decided in a wide variety of court cases which means legal standpoints will be a total shambles.
It's not a case of Java being good or bad, it's about using the right tool for the job. If you need to build things quickly and aren't concerned about maximising the use of your compute resources, a language like python is probably better for your organisation (significantly fewer lines of code, quicker to dev, easier to cross-train staff, etc).
If you're doing something like large scale data stream processing (100s of thousands of records per second and above) using Apache Spark and budget constraints mean you need to make the most of your cluster then you are much better off on the JVM (Scala / Java /etc).
Note: Of course you can scale Python to extreme levels (youtube) and Java (Google). However, most organisations don't need extreme scale.
Why do Spotify have to pay the songwriter if they've already paid the record label? I really don't see why the songwriter should be paid a royalty by the consumer of a recording (or distributor or whatever spotify is considered) by the consumer of said recording when the publisher of said recording has been paid - why shouldn't this be covered under the recording deal (i.e. publisher gets paid for use of recording, they sort out their own commercial deals with the songwriter)?
It just seems a messy approach with the only certain outcome being the creation of repeated legal issues.
It's pretty tiresome seeing the 'ends justifies the means' argument being dusted off to defend Torvalds again. The man clearly has a great amount of technical ability, but he's not a leader. Imho, Linux is the best os available, but it's still got a lot of flaws, being rude won't encourage more people to get involved and fix those flaws.
If I were allowed to run a country with no regard for human rights and the ability to imprison / execute people who didn't agree with me, I could also manage amazing growth and productivity. Literally starving to death is quite the workforce motivation.
However, we don't allow that in the West and I don't think it is something to aspire to. The fact we praise and do business with countries that behave in such a way appalls me.
I agree with the article - large businesses can afford to do this, but they often won't. As core systems that underpin the business are seen purely as cost, with senior management not understanding/refusing to acknowledge that no system changes mean they can't do all those new things they want. Apparently revenue generation is a concept only applied to sales fleshware.
"Maybe I'm wrong, but there must be something better to spend $26B on."
Oh absolutely, I would have thought porting everything they have onto Linux (Office, etc) would be good - they'd get more sales probably.
Of course, to me the dream would be to just have the Windows 7's UI as a Desktop manager on top of a Linux distro and get AD ported to Linux and then we'd never have to see Windows on the server or desktop ever again.
[Reluctant] Windows User [at work] icon
Alternatively, throw $25 billion in a fire and buy linked in with the final billion?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021