Before Yahoo! went public David Filo contacted Larry Wall and gave him the option to buy a good portion of pre-IPO stock at a low price.
The reason? Yahoo! could not have existed without Perl.
FFmpeg has been used in so many profitable ventures (hint[1] hint[2] Netflix). I sincerely hope there is a business leader with the same level of consciousness and grace that will do the same for Michael. He's one of the heroes of the past decade. Internet video streaming would certainly not exist as soon as it did without him.
Kudos to Yahoo! What a different time, thankful tech companies. But this is no more, only after public shaming did the Googles/Facebooks chip in money for OpenSSL and GnuPG when those projects almost collapsed. And they gave rounding-error level of their multibillion cash piles.
This is why the community is broken and sadly some of us feel cornered to do Affero or just not open source. I used to be hardcore BSD, but times changed and had to adapt.
These the majority of the community is selfish, doesn't contribute back, doesn't even give credit to most of the tools behind their UIs. See:
Being LGPLv2 was enough to get FFmpeg some income streams, because almost any shareware video converter you could find shipped it without credit or source distribution, and the SFLC would go after them for copyright violation.
Not sure if there was much contribution or acknowledgement for the longest time from any company (Google, FB, Vimeo, Netflix, Zencoder, etc) using it, and I remember the best they'd do for bug reports was say "yeah it crashes sometimes" and refuse to send sample files.
Eventually Google did have some people contributing full-time, of course. They paid me 1x GSoC (one week's engineer salary) for more than a year of work once. Um, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
Less a different time, more a different company. The sad part is, that sort of culture is why they "lost".
Thinking about more than yourself never seems to work out in this world. I really, really wish it would. And I'll personally continue to follow my conscience over my wallet. But the wallet always wins in the public arena. In all facets of life.
I think you're in a bubble. Lots of people have interest in the 30s given it was the golden age of Hollywood: Gone with the Wind references have entered the cultural lexicon, so have The Wizard of Oz references.
Yeah but even then, you have The Three Stooges, The Marx Brothers, and Charlie Chaplin. All 30s-era comedy groups similar in notoriety to Monty Python.
In high school and college in the 70s, people did not go around quoting the Marx Bros. They were generally regarded as belonging to their grandparents' generation. It's just not like Python quotes today, which seem to be just as pervasive as in the 70s.
Can you even think of a MB quote without looking one up? If I made a pun on one, would you recognize it?
Yeah, like I said, I think you're living in a bubble and/or this is confirmation bias. I grew up in the 00s and, from my perspective, I see Monty Python as belonging to my grandparent's generation. No one in my age group commonly quotes Monty Python.
If people still do quote Monty Python, I think it's a culty minority or people who study media. The same status as the Marx Brothers and other comedians of bygone eras.
I don't feel like looking up why you think that's a real comment. Just sounds like "Paid for by the council of American Samoans who don't bother actually reading or watching anything because they're probably illiterate".
Linus is just being Linus. He's brusque, non-chalant. He's inflammatory to get people to listen. His thesis here is that bad DBus performance isn't due to context-switching overhead or buffer copies (which can be solved by moving the daemon into the kernel), but instead it's due to malloc-intensive / utf8-parsing-intensive marshalling.
Secondly, he's saying that if performance is being used as an argument for kdbus, then that's an invalid argument.
He's totally right by the way. In this pure message-passing benchmark, where the message-passing overhead is the majority of the work, the slowness is not in kernel-scheduling/system-call/kernel-buffer-copies. People confused a potential impossible-to-overcome bottleneck as the most relevant bottleneck.
But that doesn't mean there isn't a reason for kdbus. Kdbus allows for much better authentication than UNIX sockets do (you can authenticate with pid, pgid, uid, gid, kdbus token, etc.). Also it allows for message-passing security policies to live in the kernel which is crucial for security applications. The tangential performance benefits are nice too, even though the bottleneck wasn't in the kernel to begin with.
Responses like yours are why I enjoy to visit Hacker News.
Sorry for going meta - I'm just a bit disappointed because your tone used to be the normal thing on HN, even when there were just as many disagreements. People were able to keep it friendly. Today not as much; I find HN has become too mainstream and "reddity", and the tone in general too emotional and aggressive, about who or what is right.
This wasn't unexpected, but still, it is good to see not everyone has moved into that direction.
Okay it seems like you want to keep this job so that's step one. The goal here is to keep the job. Now just arrange the chess pieces to accomplish your goal. Here are two things I would keep in mind:
1. Do exceptionally good work for the next 30 days. Bust Your Ass. Most likely this is his way of reasserting his superior status over you since you went out of line. You need to show him that he's the master and you're the subordinate. The best way to do that is to bust your ass and do the work the way he's dictated that he wants the work done. Don't do this passive-aggressively or in a desperate way, do this with determination, with purpose, authentically. Like you were born and live to serve him. Once you've pleased his ego, he'll have a harder time rationalizing firing you.
2. DO NOT COMPLAIN TO HR/LEGAL. Only say good things about your boss and how's he's so intelligent and you really respect his leadership and blah blah. Swallow your pride and openly acknowledge his criticisms of you and say this whole process is helping you grow as a person and be better. Repeat: DO NOT COMPLAIN TO HR/LEGAL NO EXCEPTIONS IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU THINK THEY ARE YOUR FRIEND. If you have negative things to say about him/the company, they will begin their campaign to disarm you and support the decision to let you go.
On a meta-note. I think you should actually leave the company and find a company/manager with a supportive culture. By staying at this company you are stunting yourself. You seem too dependent and fearful and that is a recipe for life-long stress and anxiety, both of which will ultimately kill you. Improve your independence and self-reliance, find another job.
I've hired and fired many people and I can tell you that getting fired is not that bad. Companies know there are bad companies and that personalities don't always mix. What matters most to a potential future employer is not if you've been fired but if you can actually do good work and you fit in. If you do good work and there are companies where you can fit in, you don't need to fear being fired from anywhere. You'll find your place.
> 2. DO NOT COMPLAIN TO HR/LEGAL. Only say good things about your boss and how's he's so intelligent and you really respect his leadership and blah blah. Swallow your pride and openly acknowledge his criticisms of you and say this whole process is helping you grow as a person and be better. Repeat: DO NOT COMPLAIN TO HR/LEGAL NO EXCEPTIONS IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU THINK THEY ARE YOUR FRIEND. If you have negative things to say about him/the company, they will begin their campaign to disarm you and support the decision to let you go.
This is idiotic. Yes, HR is there to protect the company. However this advice relies on you stating that you believe your manager is correct and stating there is nothing wrong with the way your manager is acting or between you and them.
Given that, and your manager now recommends firing, since you have openly admitted your boss was correct in everything he is firing you for and made it clear there are no personal issues between you and your boss, HR is going to completely support the decision to fire you. You have shot yourself in the foot.
Nothing changes if you don't raise issues. HR is protecting the company, but that would also include not holding onto a manager with a lot of complaints against them.
Thanks for calling my ideas idiotic. It probably seems that way because you're missing the subtext of this advice.
At worst HR/Legal will recommend that you get fired, at best you aren't on their radar. There is a very low chance that HR will go against your manager and fight for you. They just aren't incentivized that way: their job is to protect the company, not ensure fairness. HR people are awarded for cleaning up messes, not for interfering with the management structure. They risk more downside to support a single employee. In general HR departments are in a position of weakness when compared to management in companies.
His priority is to stay at the company, not make a change. The best way to maximize his chances of staying at the company is to not make a ruckus and do what his manager says. If he wanted to maximize his chances of making a change, however, the best way would be to go to his manager's manager. His manager's manager is actually incentivized to ensure his reports are doing good/non-illegal work. His chances of getting firing go up by taking that route, but in the slim chance his manager's manager has detected these sorts of problems in the past and is currently waiting for the straw that broke the camel's back then he might be successful.
I'm not advocating not making a change in the company, I'm just being logical w.r.t. to keeping his job right now. The spirit of my advice is "die another day." Right now he has very little influence to actually make change. Better to advance those goals once he's in a more stable position in the company. For him, the stakes are too high to risk martyrdom.
Seems like there is still a significant amount of initial latency by waiting for the first-byte of the HTML before making the subsequent requests for the dependent resources.
To actually minimize latency the server should understand what resources the HTML file is dependent on, and eagerly send those in addition to the request resource. i.e.
client: send me index.html and dependent resources
server: here is index.html, along with
other initial resources you didn't ask
for but will need
This avoids the latency of the second round-trip time to ask for dependent resources. Does anyone know if HTTP/2 allows for a scheme like this?
That is one of the main advantages of HTTP2 - it's called server push. When the server receives a request, it can send the headers for the requested resource plus the headers for as many related resources as it wants. The client can choose to either disable this, or reject pushed streams when it receives their headers.
