Prop 8, officially titled Proposition 8 - Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry, was a statewide ballot proposition in California. On November 4, 2008, voters approved the measure and made same-sex marriage illegal in California.
On June 6th, 1978, nearly two-thirds of California's voters passed Proposition 13, reducing property tax rates on homes, businesses and farms by about 57%. The Environment Prior to Proposition 13. Prior to Proposition 13, the property tax rate throughout California averaged a little less than 3% of market value.
The interesting thing about Prop 8 is, a few years later, the outcome of the vote has been totally reversed, same-sex marriage is the law of the land, and it now has solid majority support. The will of the people can change in a short time. You could imagine a similar outcome for the Brexit vote, if it weren't such a permanent change.
I think the author is conflating several problems here. There are several ways logs can be used, and efficiency is a scale. For example, if I receive a bug report, I like to be able to locate the textual logs from when the incident occurred and actually just sit and read what was happening at the time. On the other hand, if I'm doing higher-level analysis such as what features do users use most, clearly it's more efficient to have some sort of structure format because you're interested in the logs in aggregate. The author makes it sound like they're advocating optimizing for the aggregate use case at the expense of other use cases. I think that the declaration that textual logs are terrible is an oversimplification of the considerations in play.
Also, if the author has a 5-node cluster producing 100Gbs of logs a day, the logs may also be too verbose or poorly organized. I work on a system that produces 100s of Gbs of logs a day but with proper organization they're perfectly manageable.
I think that a more nuanced solution is to log things that are useful to manual examination in text form, but high-frequency events that are not particularly useful could reasonably be logged elsewhere (e.g. a database or binary log that is asynchronously fed into a database).
In conclusion, as is frequently the case with engineering, I think the author oversimplifies the problem here and tries to present a one-size-fits-all solution instead of taking a more pragmatic solution. Textual logs are useful when meant for human consumption (debugging) and when they can be organized such that the logs of interest at any time are limited in size, and some other binary-based format is useful for aggregate higher-level analysis.
With a binary log storage system, nothing stops you from browsing all logs that happened around the time of the incident. Instead of locating the files, you just tell the engine to show you the logs from that time onwards (or from a little bit before).
As for our logs being too verbose: nope, read the article.
Also, it's not an one-size-fits-all solution: I have no problem with people using text. All the article wants to show, is that binary logs are not evil, bad, useless, etc, and that there are actually very good reasons to use them.
For example, storing logs in a database is one kind of binary log storage: most databases don't store the data as text.
I don't get it. It seems reasonable to me that you should be able justify getting a raise, even if that justification is "I can get paid more elsewhere but I'd prefer to get paid more here." You make it sound like "explain to me why I should give you a raise" is the same thing is "no."
is that not exactly what he was doing by asking for a raise?
Eg rarely does someone go to their boss with the thinking of "I'm not working any harder, nor am I taking on any additional work, but I'd like a pay rise anyway."
Every time ive asked for a raise its because I thought I deserved more. if you (my employer) disagree then I am happy to hear your thoughts on how I can do better but asking "why" just seems like stalling, as if you wanted me to think you didn't understand the expressed sentiment in asking for a raise.
To be honest this seems like passive aggressive management techniques to me, and I value honest straightforward employers who are proactive about employee happiness.
By the way, "I'm not working any harder, nor am I taking on any additional work, but I'd like a pay rise anyway" is a completely valid argument if you're not being paid the market rate.
Has the market rate risen by 20% while you were here? A 20% raise for the same work is completely reasonable.
Were you being paid below market because at the time the startup was just scraping by and couldn't afford it? When that's over, you'll need pay your people much more for the exact same effort&results.
Although occasionally this may be the case (pay cuts), it seems clear that the employer absorbs the risk of entering into contract with the employee at a certain time, with a certain market price. Interesting that the employee gets to partake in the upside but the employer gets the downside, with the exception of course of the employee getting fired.
I wonder - if there were really a way to gauge the current market for X talent (sort of a glassdoor salary index) - could employers purchase "insurance" or hedge their hiring price with "employee securities"?
In an inflationary environment, which is maintained pretty much all the time, it is much, much more common for market rate to raise rather than fall - i.e., frozen wages usually mean a loss for the employee.
That being said - have you seen what happens in shrinking industries? Yes, there have been companies that renegotiate a 20% decrease in wages, and fire/replace those who don't agree; it's exactly symmetrical as growing demand professions where people either get their raises or leave and need to be replaced.
>Every time ive asked for a raise its because I thought I deserved more.
I don't understand why someone asking for a raise wouldn't be prepared to explain why they deserve more. Either reminding one's manager about past successes, or information about current market value, if you think you deserve more, you should be able to articulate why.
> Eg rarely does someone go to their boss with the thinking of "I'm not working any harder, nor am I taking on any additional work, but I'd like a pay rise anyway."
No, I really don't. As I said to another poster, either you guys simply had no time to read a few lines of text or you already had your mind made up before reading them.
I simply think that a manager should be familiar enough with your contributions that they shouldn't need this information. If your boss is this unfamiliar with your contributions its pretty obvious they suck. I also think that a manager making you explain why you deserve a raise is fairly poor form. At this point we were already months past the point where i should have just gotten a raise without a conversation at all. If they had done that up front, I would not have been so quick to leave.
Sonic.net is great but unfortunately DSL technology isn't. I've also had sonic.net in two locations but my speeds ranged from 5-7Mbits. So it's worth a shot but it's not perfect.
Mostly consistency, but also because it's kinda funky when you have an 80 character line limit (also in the style guide). Tabs are one character but displayed as multiple.
Yeah, you basically just order it online and there's no problem. There are a couple of showrooms in Austin and from what I've heard, although you can't actually purchase it from the Tesla showroom, you are welcome to use their kiosks to order one via the internet.
It may be worth noting that the author, Peter Bright, is the Microsoft editor for Ars. He also happens to have a strong anti-google bias - I can't remember any pieces he's written that portrayed Google in a favorable light.
