Hopefully this will be enough motive for rest of the world to stop a real modern day holocaust. There's no oil in North Korea but how's about lifting 30 million people out of hell?
How do you propose we do that? I am legitimately asking.
Right now NK has nuclear weapons with warheads capable of reaching at least Japan and a Chinese ally which is meant to come to NK's aid if they get attacked.
It could literally start world war 3 if we just attacked NK tomorrow without getting the Chinese and Russians aboard.
I think a lot of Western countries would love to liberate NK, oil or not. But the politics of the situation make that tricky to say the least.
I was there on the UO team. Fun fact: this server closet also gained an optical scanner as its security system, due I think to the generosity/love-for-toys of Richard Garriott. The optical scanner didn't work very well, and was way overkill, but it was super neat. We all felt like spies. Despite actually being geeks.
The URL shows https://www.facebook.com, and a green shield indicating a secure connection. What is displayed is not from facebook. Maybe you're missing it? Ad or social blocker installed?:
It seems like day by day the stories being posted on HN more and more resembles something like reddit, and by that I mean stories like this are just so minimal in value and more geared towards self promotion
Almost all popular videos on YouTube are just uploaded in lower quality on Facebook, and friends posting themselves in videos really have a limited audience and tolerance for ads.
Given Facebook's shady history of fake likes and other metrics fudging, it'd be a hard sale.
Who goes to facebook to watch funny or die? Anyone with even the minimal sense of humor and self respect won't waste time watching that lame show. Youtube might just be okay with l getting them go, because at the end of the day people go to youtube to watch videos, not facebook, unless you enjoy watching idiot of a friend's embarrassing moments drunk,
I suspect there are a substantial number of people whose primary interface to "what's new on the Internet" is to check Facebook. Sure, there are better tools, but it's hard to argue with the "everything in one place" approach.
No they can't. That goes against the US antitrust law. Likewise, Coca Cola can't tell a shop that they won't sell them their products if the shop also sells Pepsi.
wonder if they did it to increase their job security. "If I make something that only I can understand, my job is guaranteed, and if it's complicated the longer I can stay employed"
This is what happens when you hire bunch of fresh grads or inexperienced engineers who blow their load whenever there's a chance to reinvent the wheel and hoping it will catch on.
Experienced engineers know that technology that has stood the test of time is boring. But we are not in the business of designing "fun" ways of working constantly, we are here to ship software on schedule and produce something that is easily understood and maintanable by next generation of engineers, instead of getting bamboozled by a new buzzwords invented by empty suits (agile, tdd, xp, microservice, mvc up your browshizzle), regardless, if not an engineer, than some "manager" who can't code reads some article on HN, and decides that's the way to do it.
Why is there a consistent drive in the industry to invent new buzzwords and apply untested, complicated ways of working?
The compromise you have to make to have a micro service architecture doesn't make sense for anyone else other than Google or Amazon or extremely large organizations.
Even with such architecture in place, you are going to end up with far more overhead by using microservices, it simply isn't the case that by isolating individual components into functions, you suddenly get productivity.
It just infuriates me when engineers or product managers bored with their job constantly invent buzzwords to confuse, increase complexity, end up failing, and back to just regular old boring tech.
If it ain't broke don't fix it. Why the fuck would you want to now have 100 different API end points to do something that would've taken less than 50 or so lines of code? This doesn't make sense for 99% of software companies out there.
The majority of software companies (by employment) are enterprises that have thousands of legacy endpoints in different protocols like SOAP, MQ, or CORBA, deployed in various monolithic shapes.
They damn well will get a lot of benefits from microservices for their newer capabilities... IF they also work on the operational aspects (continuous delivery, a devops culture, and some kind of automated operating platform).
No one sane is publically advocating building microservices for a single team small app.
