I remember reading once that the larger your engineering org, the larger the percentage of your engineers should work on tooling. As the complexity of your system grows, the ability to know if your change causes an ill effect becomes more difficult. Large systems have large and complex tooling because it becomes a necessity for survival.
Wow, literally this comment made my stomach hurt. Now I am going to have to meditate on happy thoughts and hope the mind control will be used to keep the gut and mind happy.
I bought the low spec Pixelbook and gave it to my daughter. I replaced it with the high spec Pixelbook for myself. She since replace her Pixelbook with a 32gb 15 inch Dell XPS i9 for VM work specifically.
Prior to this, I gave my mom Chromebooks after she kept calling me for tech support for virus infestations, and it worked well.
Working with the Pixelbook, I totally agree with the VM bit. I would love to run Vagrant, MiniKube, KubeFlow, etc. The Linux emulation is good, but It's Google. 'We' can do it better. They probably did, but missed the adoption / backwards compatibility curve.
I hung out with a ChromeOS dude last weekend and he told me about how the Linux emulation is controlled by 'vsh' using their own replacement for QEMU, and inside that is an LXC container. Great for security, and I believe him. I entered one of the system vm's and saw LXC/LXD. The security seems great, but again, I can't do what I want to do. I felt dumb asking him about my 'emacs' in the ChromeOS Linux emulation. It always had a huge title bar on the top that took a bunch of the little screen real estate available. His answer was 'hit the full screen' button. I felt dumb. Usability for us dumb engineers will sell your product. Apple has abandoned the engineer market. The XPS flexible, but the Pixelbook is still sexy. I can't get my son to take my daughter's Pixelbook though, so maybe I am just old.
Growing up hungry, with worn out second hand clothes, and dysfunctional families happens also in post-industrial societies. The hunger for knowledge and escape drove me to the library and the outdoors. I remember being young and thinking, if I can get $1500 dollars together, I will have made it. Every decade it seems to get another zero on the end of where I think I can be successful, and I continue to love to goto work. In contrast, many of the people I work with went to elite universities and had curated upbringings. I see them also be successful and start at a much higher footing in life. I put my kids in the second camp, for better or worse. Growing up hungry shapes me to this day decades later.
You bring up so three points that I think about quite a lot. First point, I often wonder what impact the curated upbringing I am giving my daugther will have on her future outlook on life. I know I can't possibly know and she will ber her own person but I am a parent and I do wonder. Doing what you love was an alien concept to me and my peers. It was a case of doing what needed to be done. Fullstop. I ended up doing Computer Science because that is what was available. I probably would have prefered civil engineering but I had to make do with what I got (no I am not complaining). I don't know how to be the parent/person that says do what you love. I always have done what needed to be done.
On definition of success and adding another zero to your income. I don't hold an idealist view of village people. Having grown up with them I see them as normal people. You get happy village people you get vindictive villagers and your get carefree villagers. Having said that I have to conceed that village people seem to be less stressed than city people. They own less whether it is clothes, cars, bicycles ... and they worry less. I often look at how much we have in the cities compared to the villagers and intrigued by how much we have is still not enough. I guess we measure ourselves againsts our city neighbours and our "needs" grow with time. It seems the more we have the more we want and the more taxes we pay. I always make it point to visit the village once a year. Sit around, do nothing, with no urgency. It gives one more perspective on life.
The final point you touch on is how we may have started our journeys in different places and positions but we end up in similar positions (yes I know surviorship bias comes in here). Some of my colleagues come from gang ridden townships, some had a silver spoon and went to the best schools. You would never be able to tell listening to our conversations. We all discussing the Soccer World Cup, our kids coming birthday parties, corrupt politians, our bosses and the rising taxes. We all just people.
Thanks, I really liked the comment on chores with kids. I thought about that a lot this morning. Some people grow up doing nothing for themselves and seem to be successful in their specialization. Personally, I think the people that came from nothing are more of an anachronism than the curated upbringings (biased of course). Curated upbringings seem to have more reliable outcomes. Computers also ended up being my career and passion, but philosophy, architecture...
On money, it feels like a double edged sword. It makes life convenient, but it also disconnects us. As you point out, it only holds value in a situation, and it doesn't buy health, relationships, or time. I ride public transit to work for perspective. If I could teach my kids only one thing, it would to be empathetic towards others.
> Growing up hungry, with worn out second hand clothes, and dysfunctional families happens also in post-industrial societies.
Just pointing out that the parent didn't imply a dysfunctional family in their upbringing. Familial dysfunction is orthogonal to poor, hungry, and having old clothes; and in my opinion can be a far more life-constraining factor for the future.
I was thinking this too. Dysfunction can disrupt childrens' understanding of the world. Causing mistrust, accepting / repeating violent and abusive behavior. Or causing cycles such as loneliness that compound consequences indefinitely. Not saying these can't be overcome but obviously some people don't make it.
I most definitely agree. I just typed a response further up this trail saying the first bit of luck is having good parents or a good parent. Some of my cousins believe success can be brought about through witchcraft. In most cases, it is, unfortunately, something they learn from their parents.
I think part of it is that if you grow up poor you see a rise, where is a lot of people you are working with are happy where they are, although others perceive them as successful.
At risk of sounding pretentious, as you move through the economic strata of society, you realize that most people don't move - they are just where their initial socio-economic status put them.
So as a poor kid moving, you understand the ability to move up at a deeper level, and you are also capable of making moves.
I do find that the higher I move, the harder it is to compete.
Anyway, that's my rant. P.S. I am not implying I am somewhere high in life - far from it, but took a lot of little jumps to get even here, which is kind of depressing.
Not an expert, nor to take anything from Erlang (was amazed at how robust RabbitMQ was first time I stress tested it) but fault tolerance seems to be a part of OTP. To me, k8s ~ OTP, GO ~ Erlang, and Erlang syntax is a bit easier than GoLang, but might just be the way I was brought up.
OTP is the standard distribution & library of Erlang, and most of the fault tolerance is either that or the core Erlang runtime e.g. supervisors are part of the standard library[0] and the underlying systems are basically built into the language[1].
Distribution is likewise built into the runtime and language, most of the distribution-related BIFs are not only part of the "erlang" module/namespace but also part of its "prelude" (auto-imported in all modules by default).
So no, it is absolutely nothing like kubernetes in relation to go.
> [...] but fault tolerance seems to be a part of OTP.
Yes, mostly, but the thing is that OTP was possible at all because of how
the portions provided by the language and the runtime play together. You
cannot replicate the OTP as it is in Go because Go's runtime is lacking and
its communication model doesn't match.
