Capitalism is not a tool; it's a system of human relationships, typically intermediated by markets.
Tools can be used for different ends, whereas participation in capitalism determines the ends we apply our tools toward.
Participation in capitalism isn't optional for most people. If capitalism is a tool, it's a tool for a very small minority of people and a mandatory system for most.
haproxy allows re-dispatching failed requests some number of times. If you have an extremely brief outage due to a deploy, redispatching failed requests 3 times may be sufficient. I imagine other load balancers have similar functionality.
I don't think there's actually an inconsistency. On page 8 of the book linked, it describes "the charge, consisting of powder and duck-shot ...". Merriam-Webster[1] defines "duck shot" as "a medium-heavy lead shot used in duck hunting". Muskets used smooth (unrifled) barrels until around the middle of the 19th century [2], so they would have been well suited for firing shot shells.
Can somebody explain what project fifo actually does? Even after spending a bit of time on their web site, I can't tell what problem it's meant to solve, or what appropriate use cases might be.
Is it in the same general work-scheduling space as mesos? Kubernetes?
If there are more nodes requested than there are agents available, the scheduler will then start adding more Riak KV nodes to existing agents.
It seems to me like this tends to violate the promises you expect from Riak, in that you could end up with data replicated to three nodes that all happen to be on the same underlying hardware. Maybe set safer defaults?
During a general recession, there are fewer attractive investment opportunities. However, investment funds still exist and need to be put somewhere. It's easy for a bubble to form when too much money goes into one particular sector, but the bubble then only makes it more attractive for investment.
Housing is a traditionally safe, stable investment, and (at least in the US) large funds have been buying up homes at a huge scale for investment purposes.
I'd be glad to speculate further, but that's all it is. I can't point you to any articles on the subject.
The simplest option I'm aware of is to point CloudFlare to your load balancer, and have it handle removal of failed backend nodes.
The only big downside is that on AWS you can't have an elastic IP associated with an elastic load balancer, so you either have to run your own HA haproxy/nginx/whatever cluster in EC2 in order to have a single IP to point CloudFlare to.
If you can live with a subdomain you can point that cname to an ELB.
Alternatively, CloudFlare's API is pretty reasonable, so you could home-brew health checks that de-register dead nodes from CloudFlare. Even a simple nagios check handler could do that.
When I see security as a second-class citizen on user-visible elements, I assume that the same philosophy was applied on the parts I can't audit, even after the front-end stuff was fixed.
I don't understand why such a drop shipper would get any orders when pricing considerably above new. Do you have any insight as to why somebody would bother? Seems like a wasted effort.
I use FPM (https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm) for that and it works wonderfully. You can convert a tarball to RPM/deb pretty seamlessly most of the time.
If you're curious, the "dummy key" is a bump key. It's a relatively crude tool and is relatively hard on the lock, compared to traditional picking. There's also a certain level of professional pride, as you observed.
Hitting it with a mallet imparts force on the upper half of the pins, causing them all to briefly jump above the shear line, and at that moment the lock can turn freely without binding a pin.
A vibrating pick gun does essentially the same thing in a somewhat more controlled way.
This seems like a useful service, but I've been burned too many times to start using a service before I know what the pricing will look like. No pricing == no evaluation for me, as a general rule. General assurances that it'll be reasonable/flexible haven't panned out in the past.
I think the point of Google Fiber is to give Google a lever on big telcos. They have a credible capability to come in to just about any area and totally disrupt the ISP / cable TV market there.
Right now, all those ISPs are directly in between Google and their users. In any discussion about net neutrality, this gives Google a powerful and highly visible next-best alternative to a negotiated outcome.
Due to Google Fiber being available as a threat, Google will never have to pay net neutrality fees like Netflix does, because they can simply come in to an area and cause a huge amount of pain for the incumbent ISP that threatened them. Even just publicly discussing moving in to an area causes significant expenses for existing ISPs.
The two appear to get different results. To get up at 7:00 AM, sleepyti.me says to go to sleep at 10:00 PM, whereas jollynap says to go to bed at 10:45 PM. Obviously the latter is taking 15 minutes into account for falling asleep, but it's still an hour difference.
Take a look at Factorio. It's not perfectly what you're looking for, but the state of mind that it puts me in is right in between starcraft and sim city.
Tools can be used for different ends, whereas participation in capitalism determines the ends we apply our tools toward.
Participation in capitalism isn't optional for most people. If capitalism is a tool, it's a tool for a very small minority of people and a mandatory system for most.