Yaml is the language nobody needed. All we wanted was a better JSON format that supports comments and doesn’t crash with an extra comma as the end of a list, eg: [1,2,3,]
It is, it was then used regularly across project as a sign that touching this code is very dangerous and should not be done except by the experts of that codebase.
Fun nostalgia to see it out there :)
Note that I doubt anybody ever got fired for modifying these parts of the code. In particular, automatic refactors would have modified these (safely); and it’s a scary warning about negative consequences of messing up.
Cars rarely spontaneously burst in flame and causing a chemical fire taking that takes hours to put out. I am all for safe e-bikes, and these bootleg batteries are dangerous to the population and to the way the population sees this alternative transportation mode.
The binlogs are applied first, then the deletes are emitted.
There’s also support for read after write consistency within a single cluster by adding a canary to the memcache key warning to read from the master replica after the write succeeds, that’s a really cool feature for a multi region eventually consistent system
I'm going to assume you are not trolling and hope this will change your mind, but I am not sure what proof you expect will convince you. It's worth asking yourself before reading these what is the level of proof you require to be convinced, and then see if these are fulfilling your expectations.
I have not read this one in depth but maybe it will help change your mind on some misconceptions: https://skepticalscience.com/
I'm happy to link similar studies from across the world if you speak other languages.
I know for every link I send you, you will find an equal number of links from climate change deniers. Put please put in perspective the number of people on one side of this issue and the other: the overwhelming majority of scientists agree.
And even if they are wrong, is it really that bad to try to burn less oil and make the air less polluted and our planet more hospitable?
The faster the plane goes, the more fuel it consumes due to the drag increase by the square of the speed. In a world where fossil fuel is needed to fly airplanes and where oil is causing a destruction of the world we inhabit, it's dangerous to suggest we should make the flying industry polluting more than they already are.
If anything we should look at the trade-off benefits of flying with the least amount of fuel consumption per passenger and miles flown. Flying faster than mach-1 to save time will be reserved to a small elite. How does it benefit the masses?
It's only higher than other big tech companies because they have so much difficulty hiring new grad. it's what's holding the funnel together, the moment comp drops compared to the others they will lose a ton of candidates.
I think your point of view aligns well with the idea that increased density and good alternative transit options lead to less need and want for cars.
But rural and isolated areas can’t live without a car (or a credible alternative).
As much as I’d like car to disappear, there’s a lot of use of it that we can’t replace without severely altering some of the population’s quality of life
I'd love to know as well, especially for software engineers.
I'm wondering if there are opportunities in this field for distributed systems experts, but not a necessity.