I found this the other day: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksFhXFuRblg "NBC Nightly News, June 24, 1975" I strongly urge people to watch this, it's 30 minutes but there are many very illuminating insights within. One word for you: Exxon.
While I was young in 1975, I did watch ABC's version of the news with my grandparents, and continued up through high school. Then in the late 1980s I got on the Internet and well you know the rest.
"Back Then", a high percentage of everybody I or my grandparents or my friends came into contact with watched one of ABC, NBC, or CBS news most nights. These three networks were a bit different, but they generally they all told the same basic stories as each other.
This was effectively our shared reality. Later in high school as I became more politically focused, I could still talk to anybody, even people who had completely opposite political views as myself. That's because we had a shared view of reality.
Today, tens of millions of people see the exact same footage of an officer involved shooting...many angles, and draw entirely different 'factual' conclusions.
So yes, 50 years ago, we in the United States generally had a share view of reality. That was good in a lot of ways, but it did essentially allow a small set of people in power to decide that convincing a non-trivial percentage of the US population that Exxon was a friendly, family oriented company that was really on your side.
Worth the trade off? Hard to say, but at least 'back then' it was possible, and even common, to have ground political discussions with people 'on the other side', and that's pretty valuable.
They don't need a lot of tools to do such a deep 'search' of your car, they're not under any requirement or mandate to make it easy or even possible to repair.
In my 40+ years of driving, I've seen such disassembled cars along the road a hand full of times.
I also lived not too far from that location, and unfortunately got a glimpse of the aircraft as it was spiraling down. The scene on the ground was pretty hellish.
I am seeking a hands-on, team-oriented role at a stable, technologically innovative company where we will be able to facilitate evolutionary and revolutionary adoption of various technologies, intended to produce consistently growing operational return on investment.
I am passionate about improving operational processes and flows via the collaborative approach of design and architecture. Fundamentally, I am a programmer with decades of hands-on operational experience, ranging from all kinds of Linux system administration to databases to strong networking skills.
Collaboratively designing and shipping high availability is my forte. Through many and diverse focus areas, LiveOps achieved 99.99% availability in Q4 2011.
Above all, I seek to understand, assimilate and process all of the issues, big and small, that stand in the way of efficient and smooth operations, using that analysis to design elegant integration solutions. Shipping that automation so my co-workers can get their work done is job one.
Recently, something quite rare happened. I needed to Xerox some paper documents. Well, such actions are rare today, but years ago, it was quite common to Xerox things.
Over time, the meaning of the word 'Xerox' changed. More specifically, it gained a new meaning. For a long time, Xerox only referred to a company named in 1961. Some time in the late 60s, it started to be used as a verb, and as I was growing up in the 70s and 80s, the word 'Xerox' was overwhelmingly used in its verb form.
Our society decided as a whole that it was ok for the noun Xerox to be used a verb. That's a normal and natural part of language development.
As others have noted, management doesn't care whether the serverless thing you want to use is running on servers or not. They care that they don't have to maintain servers themselves. CapEx vs OpEx and all that.
I agree that there could be some small hazard with the idea that, if I run my important thing in a 'serverless' fashion, then I don't have to associate all of the problems/challenges/concerns I have with 'servers' to my important thing.
It's an abstraction, and all abstractions are leaky.
If we're lucky, this abstraction will, on average, leak very little.
> The single most important job humanity has is to get our eggs into more than one basket.
This is a defensible opinion, as are the others saying that the most important job of humanity is to fix our current basket.
While neither agreeing or disagreeing, I will note another very important thing SpaceX is doing:
"The value of beauty and inspiration is very much underrated, no question. But I want to be clear: I'm not trying to be anyone's savior. I'm just trying to think about the future and not be sad."
A lot of what SpaceX is doing is extremely inspirational, and I think the world could use more things to look forward to in the future.
I LOLd but then had to do the math. Turns out that the dry weight of a SpaceX Merlin engine, in gold, costs almost exactly the same as a production RS-25.
Current spot price of gold is $1800/oz. Merlin dry weight is 1380 pounds. 1380 pounds of gold is right at 40 million dollars.
I should not have said 'this is false'; the story very well could be accurate. Please pardon the harsh tone.
It's more correct to say that stopping and re-starting the whole car is not the easiest way to restart the MMU. It's quite possible there are people who aren't aware of the 'two thumb salute' method.
> On multiple occasions they've had to pull off the highway to turn their car off and on again to get the screen working.
This is false. Teslas have, roughly speaking, two computers. One drives the big touch screen, and the other manages the core automotive functions.
The media computer sometimes hangs/crashes; this has no impact whatsoever on the basic function of the car.
When that happens, it's an easy matter to reset it while the car is in motion; one just holds one button under each thumb on the steering wheel for a few seconds. The big screen will come back within a couple of minutes.
