RickHull

28 ms·

271.
by RickHull 12y ago
Yes, what you describe is not at all at odds with what I described. If it wasn't clear, I was describing only developer interaction with integration testing per a CI system, with nothing to say about deploying to production other than
272.
by RickHull 12y ago
Yeah, git-repo-per-project was an unspoken assumption. Also, "upstream and downstream" may not suffice analytically, as many interdependencies in this model do not satisfy DAG, even if they ~should~. Agile projects aren't o
273.
by RickHull 12y ago
I agree that breaking a production user's experience is as verboten as it gets for agile software development. That's why we have massive test suites and CI infrastructure. However, you do want to avoid "CI handcuffs",
274.
by RickHull 12y ago
The article argues only against sufficiency. Only if you believe that the 10k hour rule is without exception -- that it's not a broad statement about what is necessary for mastery in a broad range of fields across a broad range of tal
275.
by RickHull 12y ago
Rules may be simple, but adherence to them is not. For some, it may be impossible. Consider the first 2 rules of dating: 1. Be attractive 2. Don't be unattractive The rule for winning is simply to score more points than
276.
by RickHull 12y ago
I really wish people in general, and journalists specifically, had an appreciation for the difference between what is necessary and what is sufficient. The 10k hour rule says that 10k is necessary. The article says the rule is wrong becaus
277.
by RickHull 12y ago
In that case, it is entirely the wrong expression to use. To simply grow out of something is to primarily yield to natural processes. Babies simply grow out of breast feeding. Toddlers simply grow out of putting random things in th
278.
by RickHull 12y ago
I take issue with the headline, and I didn't see any support for it in the article -- that people simply grow out of addiction. Treatment or not, we can call that process of reducing one's addictive behaviors growth , but I do
279.
by RickHull 12y ago
As you noted, one of the wonders of capitalism (or free trade, or the right to transact, or the right to refuse to transact) is that every voluntary trade increases net wealth. Only when both parties are made better off does voluntary trad
280.
by RickHull 12y ago
> It has everything to do with the very real, undebatable fact that ratios with smaller denominators are larger than ratios with larger denominators provided that the numerators are the same. Tautologies are true, and identities necess
281.
by RickHull 12y ago
> Do you still maintain those things can't be compared? Only intuition tells us they can be compared. Utility theory given subjective preference gives us no tools to make the comparison nor any way of verifying it. We have only
282.
by RickHull 12y ago
I'm afraid you've misunderstood. I said that we cannot even determine more or less : > There is no way to say that my number one preference has more utility than yours == Ninja edit in response to clarification ninja ed
283.
by RickHull 12y ago
There is no known measurement of utils and good reason to believe there never will be. Our strongest insight into subjective preference is revealed preference. Without action, preference is not revealed, and where preference is revealed b
284.
by RickHull 12y ago
I don't disagree with your analysis, but this is not relevant to Krugman's argument nor my objections to it.
285.
by RickHull 12y ago
The last paragraph of that section strongly implies that the US fiscal multiplier is zero. Keep in mind that the multiplier needs to be greater than one for a positive effect. > More recently three economists with the NBER and IMF have
286.
by RickHull 12y ago
> the originating party does not have any mystical geas invoked upon it Incidentally, I've never come across this term geas . http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/geas (Gaelic mythology) A vow or obligation
287.
by RickHull 12y ago
Furthermore, most of Krugman's argument seems to be an appeal to envy. Without envy, what reason should anyone have to begrudge Steve Jobs or Bill Gates their enormous financial success. Wealth is not a zero sum game, and these men h
288.
by RickHull 12y ago
> The marginal value of a tax dollar is greater to someone who makes less than I do than it is to me. Perhaps you mean marginal utility? Strictly in terms of value, the wealthy tend to trade that dollar for assets rather than consumpt
289.
by RickHull 12y ago
My very first questions regarding a potential storage solution revolve around data loss: 1. Can we enumerate the data loss scenarios? 2. How is drive failure handled? 3. How may data be corrupted and such corruption detected?
290.
by RickHull 12y ago
I'm not sure I follow, or understand the goal. Are you suggesting that we drop all other CAs in favor of AOL as the sole root CA? The fundamental problem in my eyes is that of hierarchical, transitive, one-way trust. Take the Chines
291.
by RickHull 12y ago
There is a lot to digest, but so far this this looks like an excellent example of critical thinking, regardless of one's feelings or intuition regarding systemd. Both proponents and detractors have much to be thankful for in this arti
292.
by RickHull 12y ago
Perhaps this is a cloudlet then? Cloud computing is not merely VMs on demand. An essential nature of cloud is multiple distributed machines with the ability to transfer applications (or VMs) between machines for various reasons including
293.
by RickHull 12y ago
There are many network daemons besides httpd which, if they delegate request handling to any other process or system functionality, may: 1. Invoke bash somewhere in the call stack 2. Pass request data via environment variables
294.
by RickHull 12y ago
It's not hyperbole when it's accurate.
295.
by RickHull 12y ago
I completely agree with your assessment of Kerr, and there is nothing wrong with purely legal analysis. What got to me initially was the deliberate limiting of legal scope to warranted privacy violations, as though warrantless privacy viola
296.
by RickHull 12y ago
Orin Kerr is clearly a lawyer. He argues not for what is right but for what is permissible given the existing body of law. Where the existing body of law is wrong, his writings have no sympathy for the damage inflicted on its victims nor
297.
by RickHull 12y ago
> A ton of people have been able to successfully lose weight by paying attention to what and how much they eat. Go to any bodybuilding forum on the Internet and look at before-and-after photos and read accounts of how the transformation
298.
by RickHull 12y ago
The original question is why it still exists. The answer is simply that XEmacs still has users. I would guess that only the tiniest sliver are "new" users. Some of the existing users are surely developers who continue to mainta
299.
by RickHull 12y ago
Frankly there are plenty of private organizations desperate to take over Internet distribution of these documents, at no charge to anyone. If PACER can't match or compete with this, then they should step aside as far as distribution g
300.
by RickHull 12y ago
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon “a mill for grinding rogues honest”

More ›