Closed Poll: Would you code on the cloud
-
@Intercourse said:
You say specific, I say nebulous. It covers anything that is hosted by someone else
It goes further than that. Western Digital sells a product called My Cloud. They are referring to data stored in your house as "your personal cloud". The three major variants of cloud, "Public Cloud", "Private Cloud", and "Personal Cloud", literally encompass everything.
-
Exactly. The whole term is so dilute at this point that I do not use it. I never did, but now I definitely will not. It is just total BS.
-
How is "Cloud" different from the traditional word for doing this: "Hosted"?
Mostly, it's about a much shorter timescale. Hosting contracts are typically multi-month, whereas cloud services are used more at the one-hour unit or even “X requests” level. It sounds like a trivial change — in fact, it is in many ways, as can be seen by how many hosting providers adapted themselves to have cloud offerings quite rapidly — yet it enables very different set of use cases such as dynamic service scaling.
Cloud isn't (really) a technical innovation. It's a business innovation. That was jumped on by marketing…
I've been watching geeks trying to understand this for a decade now. Over and over it's “where's the technical difference” and yet there's nothing really there. Except there is in a different field of expertise. If you've not worked with the high-level business side of computing services, you wouldn't know to look for this stuff. I had the
pleasuremisfortune“opportunity” to work in this area when doing system architecture for an early PaaS offering. Which ended up a complete un-deployable clusterfuck for reasons I hadn't learned to really look out for at the time, but whatever…
-
Hosting contracts are typically multi-month, whereas cloud services are used more at the one-hour unit or even “X requests” level.
I see you haven't meet the poster child for SaaS - SalesForce. Obscenely high setup costs and long contracts are the norm for most of the cloud world. I work for a cloud provider and we don't sell anything with less than a three year contract.
-
I do my best never to think about SalesFarce, but would count them among the simpler “hosted service” brigade. I did note that Cloud was “jumped on by marketing…”
-
If the cloud is a business innovation, then why did most of the players who charge for usage (and that's a tiny number of them) adopt this billing model before the term cloud was coined? Besides, "bill for usage" is a concept that's hundreds of years old.
-
speaking of the cloud it's a shame that it's been misused so much my marketroids.
hosting your site/service/widget on a single server in a data center is not moving to the cloud! that's a hosted service plan.
Having your site/service/widget hosted on multiple servers across multiple data centers so that any network disruption has to disrupt the entire internet (or a large enough part of it) is coud hosting. you site/service/widget is in the cloud because it isn't in one place it's in a bunch of different places with fault tolerant blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah!!! blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. blah blah blah blah blah blah!
</blahrant>
-
RANDOM COMIC
http://www.logicworks.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/cloudanswer.jpegBecause cloud
-
Having your site/service/widget hosted on multiple servers across multiple data centers so that any network disruption has to disrupt the entire internet (or a large enough part of it) is coud hosting.
But... the market for doing this is tiny. If that were to become the accepted definition of Cloud, the term would die in obscurity - which would be fine with me. Since we hear about it every day, that obviously isn't the accepted definition.Let me clarify something; as a user, real Cloud services do exist. DropBox, iCloud, etc. all qualify. But when you talk about selling cloud services to a business, you are almost always talking about IaaS or SaaS. IaaS is simply your servers in someone else's datacenter, probably virtualized. They don't become more distributed or available by simply moving them elsewhere. SaaS is an age-old concept that never needed a new term, so Cloud is just a marketing term when applied here.
What you are talking about is PaaS. Building an app on Google's Cloud Computing platform or Microsoft Azure (the traditional part of it, they have rolled IaaS into the Azure brand) would be an example. AWS sounds like it fits into this category, but AWS is simply IaaS and provides very little redundancy unless you build your own by buying several instances from them.
A negligible fraction of the Internet runs on PaaS.
-
I'm not sure how 'fuck off' can be interpreted as 'maybe'
Ask any guy studying CS in college.
Filed under: wait, no, fuck, I study CS in college
-
Conclusion: cloud development's main use case are developers who are OK with a good-enough dev environment and just want to get right into coding, without messing around much with the setup.
That's pretty much it. Cloud9 seems fairly awesome exactly for that reason - you can run some Ruby, Node or PHP scratch code without having to set up the whole env. It's pretty much yet another fiddle, but with a lot of perks - like, for example, being able to push it to Git, or actually open it to something local (mocking a webservice?). And that Google Docs-like collab coding feature seems pretty sweet, too.
I wouldn't run an enterprise system on it, but it beats setting up your own Linux VM to test a few lines out.
-
collab coding feature seems pretty sweet
Exactly what I need, another code monkey greasing my code with
hertheir little paws and filling it with comments. My code is self-documenting and self-tested, thank you!
-
-
Yeah... since when is that a thing with English? For better or worst, we Spanish speakers are a bunch of sexists but at least we don't have trouble with the his/her thing.
-
Yeah... since when is that a thing with English? For better or worst, we Spanish speakers are a bunch of sexists but at least we don't have trouble with the his/her thing.
Oh, I was trolling.
I take the point of view that "he/him" are both masculine and neuter pronouns, depending on context. One, it has historical backing, and two, it annoys radfems, and three, it's far easier than matching counts of gendered pronouns, "gender-neutral" invented pronouns, "he/she", or pretty much anything else.
-
i'mma leave this here and run away:
Gender Neutral Pronouns: They're Here, Get Used To Them – 03:49
— Tom Scottthere's a solution.
-
there's a solution.
Jeebus that's overly verbose. I assume he is advocating "they/them" which is an offense against nature.
Like I said: English has perfectly cromulent neuter pronouns. They happen to be the same words as the male ones.
Very very very very few people are out to exclude wymyn when they say "hey guys" and feminists should really find a better thing to gripe about.
-
i.... see.
Welp that means i'm off to find a different thread to play in.
g'day all!
-
I quite like it and if that pisses off more MRA's then it's more fun!
-
i.... see.
Welp that means i'm off to find a different thread to play in.
g'day all!
I wasn't talking about you or the other you.
There's no good solution, and the historical one isn't bad unless you're looking for something to be offended by. It's not as if people didn't recognize this 40 years ago, either: I remember one of the original AD&D sourcebooks saying that it was going to stick to "he" for neutral because something like "centuries of use has stripped gender from the male pronoun."
-
I quite like it and if that pisses off more MRA's then it's more fun!
Hey, if people wanna use it they can. But I reserve the right to start asking why they're not also using words like "penpersonship."
-
i.... see.
Oh, also, I was mostly griping at the form of the video, not the content. I tried skipping through bits of it but everywhere I landed was another explanation of gendered pronouns in other languages. I didn't find an actual argument.
-
Like I said: English has perfectly cromulent neuter pronouns. They happen to be the same words as the male ones.
Actually, no. The singular gender-neutral pronoun is 'it'. The only reason people use the gendered pronouns in a genderless context is because people are offended when you call them 'it'.
And for completeness, the plural gender-neutral pronoun is 'they'.
@FrostCat said:Hey, if people wanna use it they can. But I reserve the right to start asking why they're not also using words like "penpersonship."
The 'man' part of words like 'penmanship' comes from the much older word 'mana', which means 'person'. So 'penmanship' is already gender-neutral
I'll take my Pedantic Dickweed badge on a bed of pilau rice please
-
offense against nature
Um, no?
Usage of plural pronouns to refer to singular entities has been used in English for a long long time. The royal "we" is another example.
-
Um, no?
What have we come to when a fellow can't engage in a little harmless hyperbole.
-
I also forgot to mention that the English Language is a cultural construct and not something natural.
-
a little harmless hyperbole
In a community that has rewards for pedantry, I wouldn't call that harmless.
-
-
pendantry badges.
Also, it's lame that you can't click on a person in the badge-specific page and see the post that earned the badge. I guess @codinghorror doesn't do that, and so he doesn't think anyone else needs to.
-
Badges aren't closely tied to posts (except maybe the likes ones). The flagging for mod attention is just so they can be notified, it isn't actually tied in with the actual badges.
-
The flagging for mod attention is just so they can be notified, it isn't actually tied in with the actual badges.
Well, yes, I know, but the pendantry badges call right out you probably need multiple flags to be awarded, and as several people have pointed out, most of the denizens are stingy with flags and likes.
-
Also, it's lame that you can't click on a person in the badge-specific page and see the post that earned the badge. I guess @codinghorror doesn't do that, and so he doesn't think anyone else needs to.
Filed 3 months ago:
https://meta.discourse.org/t/badges-request-for-reason-field-on-manual-badge-assignment/17625
-
-
Do we have those?
2^n badges? Would have done a matching set of 3^n badges but the queries were taking far, far, too long.
-
How about n^2 badges?
-
The values of the badges isn't the issue, it's deciding if that value has been obtained yet that takes so sodding long.
-
-
Not very unambigiously - not sure if he was saying he wanted someone else to do mock-ups or he'd done them and was working on it.
In the interests of laziness, I (1) didn't ask for clarification and (2) presumed the latter.
-
Yeah, I guessed the latter, but then again, might not be.
The kind of person that would write Discourse, I wouldn't put past deliberately writing something ambiguous like that. He did say he'd like it to work.
I'm not sure what you need visual mockups for, although apparently you can now click on the title to go to the actual post, which I didn't realize....wait.
Wait....
Wait a sec. What the actual fuck? The Great Topic badge shows the title of the post of the one person who got it, and there's a link to the other post. Nice Post does the same thing. But nearly every other badge DOESN'T.
What kind of fucking sadistic monkey would write something so fucked up? How do you get like that, too? Perhaps from smoking ground asbestos?
-
. But nearly every other badge DOESN'T.
Depends on the options and query generating the badge:
If a post can be identified from the query, and the relevant checkboxes are crossed, then the post is linked to the badge.
-
If a post can be identified from the query, and the relevant checkboxes are crossed, then the post is linked to the badge.
+ add some discoursistency in there for good measure
-
I remember one of the original AD&D sourcebooks saying that it was going to stick to "he" for neutral because something like "centuries of use has stripped gender from the male pronoun."
2nd Edition PHB, IIRC. 1st ed likely had similar language.
They further said something that in written language, use of male pronouns is clear, concise and consistent in a way nothing else is. Which is a pretty good point.
Filed under: feminism has started its descent down the Heglian slope a long time ago
-
2nd Edition PHB, IIRC. 1st ed likely had similar language.
That sounds right.
They further said something that in written language, use of male pronouns is clear, concise and consistent in a way nothing else is. Which is a pretty good point.
Exactly.
