darose
Location: NYC
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: No
Technologies: Linux, Cloud (AWS, Azure, and GCP), Kubernetes, Terraform, Python, Java (among many others)
Résumé/CV: upon request
Email: [email protected]
It can't display me the branch I'm working on, starting from the commit that began the branch, until the last commit. (Or if it can, I have no idea how to do it.)
This isn't a functionality issue, but rather a conceptual one. Git just fundamentally thinks of branches differently than I do. (And, maybe most humans?) To me, a branch begins ... when I branch it. To git, a branch begins ... at the very first commit ever in the repo, since they consider commits that were made before the branch point to still be part of the branch. The branch point then is just another commit to git - and not even one that they think is important enough to highlight. But without any ability to clearly identify the branch point, you can often find yourself looking through a forest of commits that are irrelevant to what you're really searching for.
I spent the better part of an hour the other day trying to figure out how to identify my branch point. (For the record, the best solution I eventually found was: cat .git/refs/heads/<branch name>.) Just my $0.02, of course, but IMO this is absurd - and a big feature gap / user friendliness issue with git compared to other VCS's.
IMO git is just another step in the evolution of VCS's, and not necessarily even one of the better ones. Its concepts, functionality, and feature set are focused primarily on distributed development and multiple people maintaining different source trees ... which is fine for the Linux kernel and other projects that heavily use that use case. But many/most projects don't work that way, and for them a centralized VCS is sufficient. I have no doubt that a better VCS will come along and replace git one day.
Dailymotion, the global video-hosting company, is looking to fill multiple roles to help us staff up a green-field project, building out a new ad-tech platform from the ground up. Hiring for multiple tech positions, including Front-end Engineer, Data Science, and Big Data Engineer, as well as more senior roles.
Dailymotion, the global video-hosting company, is looking to fill multiple roles to help us staff up a green-field project, building out a new ad-tech platform from the ground up. Hiring for multiple tech positions, including Front-end Engineer and Big Data Engineer, as well as more senior roles.
YP is hiring for several tech positions. See: https://www.linkedin.com/vsearch/j?page_num=1&locationType=Y...
Hiring for multiple roles in our Digital Markets team. (Formerly the startup Sense Networks.) See http://www.linkedin.com/vsearch/j?locationType=Y&f_C=2583177...
Hiring for other positions elsewhere as well.
Sense Networks, an exciting tech startup focused on targeted mobile advertising, is hiring for a full-time engineering spot on our Hadoop / Data team.
Full job description at: http://www.sensenetworks.com/company/careers/
According to the article Goldman would routinely strip off the license/copyright from off of the open source code file and replace it with their own copyright. And that is a violation of many open source licenses.
Sense Networks, an exciting tech startup focused on targeted mobile advertising, is hiring for a full-time engineering spot on our Hadoop / Data team.
Full job description at: http://www.sensenetworks.com/company/careers/
Looking to hire:
* Senior Data Scientist
* Software Engineer, Hadoop/Data team
Sense Networks is hiring for a Hadoop-oriented Junior Engineer spot.
Details at: http://jobs.nytm.org/job/junior-software-engineer-back-end-d...
Paul Krugman of the NY Times wrote extensively both during the crisis and since about the correct way to handle this situation:
1. Put the failing bank into "receivership". I.e., a "receiver" (temporary managerment) appointed by the government takes over the company and tries to salvage it.
2. Fire the original management team. I.e., the ones that got them into this mess with their excessive risktaking. Good. They should suffer the consequences of their bad management decisions. That's capitalism.
3. Take on whatever additional debt or equity financing is necessary to turn the company around - without paying any regard to the positions or desires of the current stockholders. The current stockholders' positions' will likely get diluted to nearly worthless. Good. They should suffer the consequences of their bad investing decisions. That's capitalism.
4. After the company is turned around, take it out from under government receivership, hire a new management, and (if needed/appropriate) launch it public again via an IPO.
There's a long, established history for handling failed banks this way (read up on the S&L Crisis), and it's the proper way to keep an institution alive and out of bankruptcy, without rewarding the management and stockholders who brought it to bankruptcy in the first place.
Krugman often pointed out, though, that the Obama administration was too scared to go this route - perhaps because they were worried about the absurd accusations of "socialism" that the Psychotic Right would undoubtably have started screaming about.
So instead, they chose to reward the management and shareholders that caused the problem, by using government money to help prop up the value in their worthless company. Moral hazard indeed! Privatize all the profits, but give all the losses to the public. And socialism is the evil here?!?!?!?
Just about the worst password advice someone could possibly give. Hack someone's password once, and you've got access to all their accounts everywhere.
He downplays the most important phrase in the whole essay: "investors are afraid of a prolonged depression". And damn well they should be. As should the rest of us - very afraid!
He (and the investors he refers to) toss off that prospect like, oh, yeah, boo hoo hoo - we should all just let the market play itself out, if a depression comes so be it, and we'll all be better off for it on the other side. But a) I doubt very highly that we'd come out of it on the other side anywhere near to as good as we are now, and b) they never give any thought to the actual social consequences of that kind of policy.
Let me tell you, if the government does nothing, lets foreclosures just run their course, and lets the banking system collapse it will destroy this country. Tens of millions of jobs will disappear, tens of millions of people will be homeless and/or in poverty. Crime will skyrocket. And the risks of the country descending into either anarchy, revolution, or embracing right-wing totalitarianism in a misguided effort to restore "safety" will be tremendous.
Duh. Use your head, people! God I'm so tired of jaded rich people dishing out their out-of-touch laissez faire B.S. It's primarily the fault of laissez faire government policies that we're in this situation in the first place!
Step 9: Get some exercise! Ditto for exercise: -you're much more clear-headed, confident, and productive when your body feels in good shape.
Or saves them time.
And people will always spend on entertainment too - although, less pricey choices at times like this. And - let's face it - net-based entertainment is pretty much a bargain compared to movies, concerts, Broadway shows, etc.