News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Old Geek by flukus on Thursday September 15, 2016 @02:27AM (#12503877)
The older I get the more I realize how these old curmudgeons were often right. They've been there to witness the cycles of technology and aren't impressed with the shiny new ones that are often worse than the old ones. They aren't interested in the cloud because it's modern day mainframes for instance.

Lately I've been taking a look at a lot of older tools and being pleasantly surprised by how capable they are compared to modern ones. I started coding professionally in a world of virtual machines and xml files, now where moving back to native compilations and json. Eventually we'll rediscover ini files and how there even simpler than json and we can avoid the curly bracket tax. I've used every build tool under the sun but recently discovered that make was simpler and better than anything else I've used. We've gone full circle on ORM's and now writing sql is in vogue again.

I wish I'd learned more from those guys much earlier.

Re:Old Geek by lsc on Thursday September 15, 2016 @04:20AM (#12504307)
> The older I get the more I realize how these old curmudgeons were often right. They've been there to witness the cycles of technology and aren't impressed with the shiny new ones that are often worse than the old ones. They aren't interested in the cloud because it's modern day mainframes for instance.

This is actually one of my biggest career problems. I mean, it's an advantage, too... I can pretty quickly understand new things, because they are similar to old things, but... on an emotional level part of me rebels from the new cool thing simply because the old thing worked, often more reliably, and this new thing? this new thing has a bunch of little subtle differences and bugs that I have to learn and deal with and fix, just like the old thing had a decade ago, so my natural reaction to the latest fad is usually a negative emotional response, and pointing out that it's essentially the same thing as the old thing.

This causes obvious problems, of course, with the people who got promoted for "demonstrating complexity" when they wrote or implemented the new system.

I need to learn to point out the similarities to the thing I know, but to do so without the negativity, because, uh, cultural fit. (so bitter!)

>They aren't interested in the cloud because it's modern day mainframes for instance.

This is the opposite of true. Mainframes were all about complete reliability; you can always rely on the hardware, or at least that's what you are paying for. "The cloud" is all about the chaos monkey, about writing your application to deal with any server failing (or returning nonsense) at any time.

The disillusionment with "the cloud" comes from having to deal with managers who think that "the cloud" means reliability, when it really means "write your applications so they can deal with hardware that is significantly less reliable than hardware managed by in-house sysadmins"

Re:Old Geek by flukus on Thursday September 15, 2016 @06:32AM (#12504780)
RE the cloud/mainframe comparison. I was thinking more of the centralization aspect. The web seems to have gone from this vast network where anyone could set up their own server, everything was decentralized (except DNS which was the source of quite a few debates) and no one had any sort of control over it. Now much of the web seems to have condensed into a handful of data centers and we've given too much control to a few companies. The recent cencorship of twitter (and now youtube) really crystalized this for me.

On the other hand I see things like docker (I was late to the game here) and even though everyone seems to be focusing on the cloud aspect I can see it being a brilliant tool for decentralizing again. The tech could easily be leveraged to make things like setting up an email server possible again for small companies or families.

> I need to learn to point out the similarities to the thing I know, but to do so without the negativity, because, uh, cultural fit. (so bitter!)

If you work it out let me know ;) It feels like I've spent a good chunk of my career doing this and I'm only 10 years in. The old reliable tools have all be on the same platform FFS.

Re:Old Geek by marcus_holmes on Thursday September 15, 2016 @04:40AM (#12504383)
re: Chaos Monkey. I love this, and I'm 48. 99.999% uptime meant that once a year your program did something completely disastrous because the server flunked.

Assuming our hardware was reliable was a mistake. Writing code so that it's chaos-monkey-proof is a great step forward.

As for the generational thing... meh, we're ugly. People like hiring the beautiful folks. Startup folks think they're immortal, having some greying old fart in the corner wheezing away reminds them that they're not.

Re:Old Geek by lsc on Thursday September 15, 2016 @05:32AM (#12504582)
Chaos Monkey is actually a reference to a tool that I think netflix released? huh. yeah, I see it on github:

https://github.com/Netflix/SimianArmy

I remember someone giving a talk on it in the mid aughts, and I think it's a wonderful way to describe what happens in real-world networks and systems.

>Assuming our hardware was reliable was a mistake. Writing code so that it's chaos-monkey-proof is a great step forward.

Hah. Part of it is that I am the guy who is responsible for keeping that multi-year uptime (and on most of my own hardware, this is mostly a matter of vetting updates, security and otherwise, and implementing workarounds) - but I like to point out that building a system that can deal with the chaos monkey is... well, it's way harder than throwing up a reliable SQL server with a reliable backup and someone like me on pager. Especially if you want to beat the "the system fucks up once a year" record that even mediocre server-grade hardware can achieve.

That said, if you can write such software, I agree that the end result is better, I mean, like half my skillset is in Linux/BSD and environments where reboots cost big bucks, but I'm not going to cry about turning in my pager. I'm just saying, it's hard and most people screw it up and end up building something less reliable than well-managed hardware with a competent oncall.

>As for the generational thing... meh, we're ugly. People like hiring the beautiful folks. Startup folks think they're immortal, having some greying old fart in the corner wheezing away reminds them that they're not.

Eh, I think that most of the startups that only hire pretty people also tend to pay such that they can't afford someone who is good who has a few decades of experience, so it might be more of a budgetary/age thing; young people, generally, will work for less.

I think it might also be a San Francisco thing. The fitness of the people interviewing me goes up and the wages they offer me go down when I head up that direction.

Re:Old Geek by throwanem on Thursday September 15, 2016 @07:07AM (#12504963)
The strong impression I get is that it's a seller's market for programming work most places in the United States, but a buyer's market in and around the Bay Area. I've never worked there myself, only visited, but I have known a lot of folks from there with hair-raising tales to tell. Things seem a lot more equitable elsewhere.
Re:Old Geek by lsc on Thursday September 15, 2016 @01:13PM (#12507902)
Eh, I'm contrasting San Francisco, above, with the South Bay; both are "bay area" (conventionally, the south bay is "silicon valley" - historically, San Francisco is not "silicon valley" though that definition seems to move every bubble.)

In the South Bay, I largely don't have cultural fit problems, and I can pretty easily score pretty good jobs at second and third-tier companies (getting jobs at top-tier companies is a real challenge, still, but considering the compensation and prestige at the end of that particular tunnel, I can see why.)

In San Francisco, though, I quite often have 'cultural fit' issues, and often can't even get into startups that pay really poorly.

Re:Old Geek by flukus on Thursday September 15, 2016 @06:39AM (#12504808)
On the other hand, most places don't need that level of reliablity. If a company email server went down for a few hours it's not that big a deal. Even for most large corps, only a certain few things need that level of reliability.

I often see it get written into contracts with very little thought as to what it means. You get some great looks from managment when you break the figure down into minutes though, especially when you don't have 24/7 staffing. A poorly timed cosmic ray could ruin your SLA.

* It would where I'm at now, because someone thought it would be a good idea to handle a critical business process by emails csv's.

Re:Old Geek by bandrami on Thursday September 15, 2016 @09:25AM (#12505893)
I've also seen people make the other mistake, though. I've had people screaming about 2 hours of downtime violating our 99.999% SLA, apparently not realizing the five nines means the thing can be down eight hours a year (an entire business day) and still be in spec.
Re:Old Geek by entropy_ on Thursday September 15, 2016 @09:56AM (#12506120)
That's not true. 5 nines, ie 99.999% uptime means that the maximum downtime in a year is about 315 seconds:

60x60x24x365 x (1 - (99.999/100)) = 315.36

Wikipedia confirms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_availability#Percentage_c...

So yes, 2hrs of downtime would most definitely violate the SLA. The 8 hours you refer to is the figure for 3 nines.

Re:Old Geek by bandrami on Thursday September 15, 2016 @10:42AM (#12506525)
D'oh. It was three nines, thanks
Re:Old Geek by informatimago on Thursday September 15, 2016 @05:28AM (#12504563)
They should hire us for remote work! :-)
Re:Old Geek by redditmigrant on Thursday September 15, 2016 @04:49AM (#12504413)
Its likely that someone who says "NO" all the time is right some of the time and its fair that they get credit for being right. At the same time, they need to be held accountable when something they said "NO" to turns out to be a really big deal. Im sure someone said Java is a fad when it was launched or that python was useless and so on.
Re:Old Geek by flukus on Thursday September 15, 2016 @07:50AM (#12505236)
A lot of people were saying no to java, at least on the consumer desktop which was one of it's first big aims. That's one of the thing's that young, naïve me put down to old farts being out of touch.

Two decades on their C/C++ win32/x apps are running and no one has java installed in their desktop to run mine. They have every reason to be smug.

Re:Old Geek by redditmigrant on Thursday September 15, 2016 @11:13PM (#12511590)
Obviously Java didn't succeed as a desktop application development language, but the JVM and the java eco system has succeeded by any objective measure. I see your point that what matters is what does a person say "NO" to.
Re:Old Geek by guelo on Thursday September 15, 2016 @12:10PM (#12507319)
.Net is pretty much Java. So after all the legal and marketing turmoil young you was basically right.
Re:Old Geek by flukus on Thursday September 15, 2016 @05:38PM (#12510030)
They hype around java was being cross platform and making the OS choice irrelevant, .net had the opposite effect.

When I look at all the apps installed in my computer, very few are .net apps.

Re:Old Geek by PhasmaFelis on Thursday September 15, 2016 @02:34AM (#12503903)
We're so eager to justify arbitrary technical fads. Use something until you have enough experience to start seeing its flaws, move on to something shiny and new and perfect until you've used it long enough to see its flaws, repeat.
Re:Old Geek by flukus on Thursday September 15, 2016 @02:35AM (#12503907)
> Use something until you have enough experience to start seeing its flaws

I think we've been completely skipping this step for the last few years.

Re:Old Geek by gaius on Thursday September 15, 2016 @04:50AM (#12504416)
You can very easily find yourself in a situation where every project is either your first in technology X, or trying to maintain something that was someone else's first attempt at using it. "Legacy" means "proven in production and making the company money" but too often these days it is seen as a dirty word.
Re:Old Geek by pmiller2 on Thursday September 15, 2016 @04:09PM (#12509412)
>Eventually we'll rediscover ini files

We kind of have. They're called YAML files now.