Linkedin is only useful because of the network effects of having a lot of people on it.
Most of the complaints about linkedin are about the people on it (and the tendency of some to use it as a platform for self promotion)
Any platform looking to replace linkedin would have the same issues.
The scope of IT at a JMPC or a BAML is massive, and has grown both through acquisition and organically over decades. Virtually any technology you can think of is most likely being used or (at least being supported) by some unit at the bank. In a recent year JPMC's IT spend was $12 billion. In my personal experience (at JPMC) I knew groups who were using Clojure and Scala (while my manager assured me such technology was not authorized at the bank.) I knew of groups on AWS, on e on Azure and some using an internal Cloud Foundry implementation. (My group was running bond monte carlo's in an abortion of an IBM compute grid system straight out of 1992.) I personally knew of Mongo, Cassandra, Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server and KDB installations. Kapital - possibly the most famous commercial use of Smalltalk originated at JPM.
The point is - it's difficult to make generalizations about orgs that big.
My (rather out-of-date) experience with banks is that they have no problem adopting new tech but they don't retire the old tech. Add in a bunch of mergers and you get an unholy mess.
I work in finance. My point was basically that the industry is usually slower to adopt the new stuff. Of course they will adopt cloud, but are the the first ones or are they 5 years behind the leaders. It seems they also tend to not change COBOL code often and are just adding new stuff in the new tech. So change still happens, but the scope and rate may be different than other industries.
This sounds awful. if you have a person sharing the same space you live in but turns out to be messy and abhorrent, you'll barely ever get a chance to talk it out with them.
Also there seems to be an assumption that both of you work long enough hours that you never bump into each other.
Hardly a well thought out plan.
I wrote a set of internal use systems using Lambda and API Gateway. I'm in two minds about it; its handy but at the moment I dont think its mature enough for a critical live system.
I'd like better ways to collect execution data for debugging and more visibility all round. With those it would definitely be a contender.
Indeed. Debugging them is painful at the moment. I'm using Apex to deploy a few and running "apex logs" gets me all recent logs, but that's pretty far from being actually debugging.
Is it really a good idea to name your open source module after a trademarked name ?
Xeon is the brand name for Intel's line of server and workstation processors and they dont strike me as the kind of firm that would take co-opting of a brand name lightly.
IIRC you can register identical trademarks as long as they represent something sufficiently different especially if it's a commonly used word, no one is going to confuse between a CPU an Ecig and a Scooter.
This is for user submitted content; not items put up for sale by a developer.
From the linked document
In the event you are a developer who submits User Content to Oculus, you acknowledge and agree that our agreements with you as a developer may supersede this section of the Terms.
I thought the point of the post was that it was "antidemocratic, immoral and plain evil" for developers to contribute to the success of an environment with such user-hostile terms. Am I reading too much into it?
If youre on a tight budget and IO is your main bottleneck it may be easier to purchase a number of decent spec desktop PC's with multiple SSD's in them. SSD's have really come down in price while performance and capacity have improved greatly. Same goes for RAM.
(Assumption here is that time is less of a concern than cost at the moment and youre not averse to doing some devops work. Also assuming that the processing youre talking about is some sort of batch processing and not realtime)
This way you can try a number of different strategies without blowing the bank on AWS instances (and worst case you have a spare workstation)
It's a complete POSIX filesystem, and we implement a log-structured filesystem on top of S3. So, you can use it with your regular programs expecting POSIX semantics.
Mounting S3 lets you view the objects in a bucket, but it doesn't behave like a regular file system.
s3fs-fuse is a one-to-one mapping and doesn't do things like atomic rename of directories, mutual exclusion of open exclusive, append to file requires rewriting the whole file and no hard links. This breaks the expectations of many linux programs.
Our implementation has these features and works with linux programs.
It's difficult to tell from your site - does it still use FUSE under the hood or is this a kernel-level FS? I'd check the RPMs if I could, but I can't download the RPM without signing up first.
Hi Ben, thanks for your feedback. We will add more technical details and clarify the differences between objectivefs and s3fs-fuse.
ObjectiveFS is a log structured filesystem that we implemented completely from scratch. It is a POSIX filesystem and works with the existing Linux and OS X tools and software.
