I don't think I am your target audience, but I will respond just so you have at least one data-point.
I don't use gestures. Ever. For anything (except unlocking my phone, which I am stuck with).
Opera 'introduced' mouse-gestures a long time ago, and like all other attempts I have tried; I cannot understand the point. I don't think that waving my hand/mouse/fingers around like a spell-caster writing runes in the air is ever efficient. There is far too many chances at misinterpretation, and it obscures the target action. Give me buttons. on/off-yes/no simple binary choices that give exact feedback.
Need something more analog (i.e. volume slider) let me input a number.
Nothing will beat a button, ever. Gestures are not more important than buttons, components, application and developers. But will need a new space in this new world, the one of the already arrived future.
Not even gestures being used by all the crowd all together will replace a binary and perfect button. However the world is changing fast and the evolution of the interaction with our computers, crowded with wearable vehicles household touch interfaces, Internet of things and so on, will definitely need a new approach on gestures. That's the reason we are trying to start a nice discussion about with the developers.
Our API enhances the ongoing apps. We created a non transparent overlay to have all the app components available however provide the alternative of having gestures enabled with a single line of code on any platform, designed on an online editor. It should not harm however have the alternative of doing them, under different accessibility scenarios and different body movements and ergonomics.
As you pointed out air gestures can be yet experimental and will definitely need more work on the input side. We think that our fingers are key as I expose it here at this blog http://www.gesturekit.com/side-effects-minority-report/ and I envision them having more alternatives to efficiently tackle more problems needing a deeper use of them touching rather than airing.
<quote>systemd was really designed with servers in mind, and really does bring a lot to the table for server admins.</quote>
Which is totally ironic too in that the server-admins hate it. (speaking just for myself here=) )
I am a sysadmin of a medium sized data-center. I am in charge of 100-150 servers at any given point. None of the changes that systemd 'fixes' benefit me or my systems.
Boot times? What's the point when it takes 10-minutes for the drive-arrays to spin-up?
Logging? I pray a system never dies and I have to access those rotten binary log-files from a live-cd.
Network changes/configuration? Nope, every server is configured with static network configs.
Power Management? Ha! That's funny. Downtime in minutes costs more then electricity does in a a month.
I could go on. But there is one major caveat: As a laptop user, systemd is fantastic.
As my Debian servers need to and/or get updated and start requiring systemd then I will just migrate them to OpenBSD. This process has already begun.
Systemd is changing things for the wrong group of people. Mobile/Desktop users have alot of wiggle room and areas that need improvement. Server admins need stability; in software, hardware, (script) syntaxes, and interfaces. Users need everything that systemd offers.
I will concede that systemd might be a good fit with Docker, and I am looking into that too; but I guarantee you it will be on it's own box and not homogeneous with the rest of my network.
All of Poettering's projects seems to be lifted straight from OSX.
Ran into a recent interview where he kept referring back to the OSX sound system when talking about Pulseaudio, and Avahi is zeroconf/bonjour. And with Systemd he constantly makes references to Launchd, the OSX "init".
BTW, Red Hat just now announced that the future of the company would be Openstack and the cloud. Fits perfectly with the push for containerization in Systemd.
More and more i get the impression that the "developers" mentioned as benefiting from Systemd are the likes of the Reddit crew. Reddit pretty much could not exist without Amazon's cloud services.
Meaning that for Poettering the future is two things, cloud computing and cloning OSX. And given the number of web monkeys that seems to sport a Mac, i am not surprised at all.
I just wish that they could avoid infecting the rest of the Linux environment...
My small datacenter results mimic BackBlaze too. Dead/dying seagates all over the place. So I notified management that we will only be purchasing Hitachi drives from now on. I have a BackBlaze server that I recently converted to FreeBSD & ZFS. I love the drive-density that Backblaze offers but I HATE the lack of physical notification when a drive dies.
Most ofther file-servers have a front-facing drive caddy, that usually has LEDs on the front to indicate disk access or errors. This is great because you can walk into the datacenter, and SEE which disk has failed. With the backBlaze system you can get /dev/DriveID but not know where in the array that particular disk is.
You definitely don't want to use drives from the same manufacturing run (batch) on the same array, since they are the most likely to fail all at the same time.
Second to that, you probably don't want to go single-source for your drives -- maybe use Hitachi with a mix of WD.
Because then a single firmware bug could wipe you out. Once the drives all hit 4500 hours or 700 bad blocks or some other trigger, they die. It's happened before.
Could also be caused by bad grease, or shoddy bearings, or pretty much anything.
A nice simple test that I like to give as a first-wave elimination:
Have a computer setup and running (all properly configured). Pull the network cable out of the jack a little bit (so it looks like it's plugged in but isn't).
Ask the person being interviewed to show me an IP being used by microsoft or google. (so ping/dig/nslookup/etc)
Let the person know that (a) the computer is in working condition (i.e. no drivers are missing) (b) the network works (i.e cables are good, switch is good, DHCP is enabled, etc.)
(c) tell them that this is a test to determine their troubleshooting skills
It is always disappointing to see how few ever open a term/cmd window (depending on the OS). 90% of participants just try to open a web-browser and type in "what is the IP address of google"
>Let the person know that (a) the computer is in working condition (i.e. no drivers are missing) (b) the network works (i.e cables are good, switch is good, DHCP is enabled, etc.)
So you lie to them? I don't understand what the point of this test is. My first inclination is to open up a term and ping google but I would be pretty annoyed that your "first-wave" test involved actively lying to a candidate.
If this is a user-facing tech-support position, then it is a hard job requirement that the candidate be able to handle being lied to by the user. I don't care what they say, they didn't check the cable, they didn't reboot, and they most certainly didn't not do anything that might have caused the problem.
>If this is a user-facing tech-support position, then it is a hard job requirement that the candidate be able to handle being lied to by the user.
Yes, I agree. Are we supposed to also assume that our bosses and interviewers lie to us, too? At no point does he say that he is emulating a user that needs support help.
Well if not lying, you should always entertain the possibility they are mistaken. The best confirm and reaffirm constantly. You know what they say about assumptions.
To be fair the first thing you do is look for relevant buttons to click on if there are any, the next thing is to google the problem, the thing after that is check it's all plugged in
All he said was that everything was in working order. He didn't say that the cable was fully seated into the receptacle. Your first inclination would challenge your assumption and you would likely follow the stack down to the wire. At that point you'll note that the link lights are off and reseat the cable.
This means - to me - that the network... well, works. And it clearly does not. If this was a Windows machine I'd probably wonder what the hell was going on with the Ethernet (!) sign in the bottom right of the tray and if it was a decent version of Ubuntu (11.x or earlier) then you'd also notice it quickly.
But still. He's pretty obviously leading the person astray by giving him the solid impression that the machine is in good working order. (which it is not) If you mean to say that he didn't CLEARLY specify that the "cable was fully seated..." I don't know what to tell you. That's a "gotcha" question. Not a good diagnostic one. Unless this is for a $12/hour CSR position. In which case, OK fine.
Every day, I have QA, tech support, my boss, and other developers tell me something that is not actually true, or simply omits any of the relevant information necessary to fix the problem. This is something you live with on a daily basis in a technical job involving complex systems that not everyone understands the entirety of.
If you can't solve a problem with only some information, and some of it incorrect, then how are you supposed to be able to help?
You are looking at this like it is a single-variable problem. This "test" should be easily solvable by a candidate. It is also a very bad one if it involves lying to the candidate. These two factors are not mutually exclusive.
No statement in that list is a lie; the computer is in working condition, the network itself works, the cable works, the switch it is connected to is working, DHCP on the computer is enabled. The cable being unplugged doesn't break any of those.
I don't know why this is downvoted. This is Hacker News, a hacker always uses the least amount of effort (the least number of lines of code for example) to achieve his goal.
Windows key + R / "cmd" / Return / "nslookup google.com" then when that fails, "ping 8.8.8.8" and when that fails, "Ipconfig /ALL", then ask "Do you use Dhcp or are ip's assigned?" as I reboot the computer and check the physical connections at the same time.
Doesn't giving someone a non-working computer that you tell them is working make you look like you haven't bothered to test it? As a candidate that'd be a warning that I'd be working with lazy idiots.
You should always remember that hiring is as much about persuading the best person to say yes to a job offer as it is about weeding out the bad people.
The question was "show me an IP being used by microsoft or google"
If you are asserting that google is not using the IP of it's public facing DNS service, this company is full of horrible tech people, so nevermind: I don't want the job.
I am a Sysadmin. The only advice I can think of is this:
Just build stuff.
Make use of virtualization and just start building systems. There is more then one 'role' a sysadmin will play and in some areas each specialty could be its own job.
i.e. A Windows/Active Directory admin vs an Exchange Admin.
Most good admins will know how to do a bunch of various duties, setup a Samba server; building a ZFS array; install a printer driver; configure a company Wiki and all the maintenance needed to maintain these systems.
And learn how to automate 90% of your tasks.
It's your choice if you want to be picky. If you want to only work on Linux systems, or to be more anal; if you only want to work on Debian servers, don't be surprised if it's harder to get a job. Spread yourself out and learn to be a Jack-of-all-trades. I prefer working with linux, but I jump up and resolve Windows headaches for my co-workers because that annoying 10% of the job makes me more attractive to my boss then the neckbeard who is a distro snob and refuses to touch anything except OpenBSD.
Build systems to do one job.
One DHCP server, one DNS server, one file server. Then start combining them and optimizing them. break them and then fix them. There are a million 'gotcha's that only show up when you start working with the systems and you never see in youtube videos.
As far as finding work; either 'exaggerate' about some of your experience while contracting, or start working help-desk and get your foot in the door.
Your resume will get you an interview, your real skills will get you the job.
This might be too broad of a question but could you give some pointers on where to start with automation? Possibly, what tools to look into, what major tasks would be ideal to automate, or what a typical workflow built on automation might look like?
I would start with small shell scripts (or the Windows equivalent).
Do you need to add users and set their initial password often? Note the commands needed, put them in a shell script and create a user with your script next time. Then make your script accept parameters and handle errors.
Automation has two main benefits: Simplifying repetitive tasks and reducing errors - and this can be achieved even with the simplest shell script.
For popular tools, you can take a look and Puppet and/or Chef, tools for provisioning servers and managing configurations.
You're against an advertising-supported internet? If so, there are places where you could start your protest that excute that a lot less transparently and with a few less orders of magnitude of vetting than here. Unless you prefer 'herbal Cialis' ads:)
Since the more literal meaning is "base" or "plinth", I guess they want Amazon Zocalo to be both the foundation and center of your document collaboration infrastructure just as the Zocalo in Mexico City once was the center for collaboration and discussion.
I don't use gestures. Ever. For anything (except unlocking my phone, which I am stuck with).
Opera 'introduced' mouse-gestures a long time ago, and like all other attempts I have tried; I cannot understand the point. I don't think that waving my hand/mouse/fingers around like a spell-caster writing runes in the air is ever efficient. There is far too many chances at misinterpretation, and it obscures the target action. Give me buttons. on/off-yes/no simple binary choices that give exact feedback. Need something more analog (i.e. volume slider) let me input a number.