fraggle222
Doesn't this prove that async is waiting for connections when you put a limit on it? The only way async wins is if it is free to hit the db whenever it needs to.
For me, there were some questions about my technology, but not a lot. Mostly we agreed on terms, and then they came up with a 40 page contract :) (the bus-dev guy said they don't really treat a small acquisition like mine that much differently than a larger acquisition in terms of contract verbiage). I had my lawyers (no I did not have any before this offer), review it.
But overall I felt that someone, who later I'm pretty sure turned out to be the CEO, had told their Business Development guy, just acquire this thing (and bring him along if you can), so they just went about doing that and it came out ok.
Cynthia Dwork and Moni Naor. Pricing via processing or combatting junk mail. In Proceedings of Crypto, 1992. Also available as http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il:81/Dienst/UI/2.0/Describe/ ncstrl.weizmann_il/CS95-20.
By the end of the stock market downturn of 2002, stocks had lost $5 trillion in market capitalization since the peak.[39] At its trough on October 9, 2002, the NASDAQ-100 had dropped to 1,114, down 78% from its peak.[40][41] Many online shopping companies, such as Pets.com, Webvan, and Boo.com, as well as communication companies, such as Worldcom, NorthPoint Communications and Global Crossing, failed and shut down.[42][43] Others, such as Cisco, whose stock declined by 86%,[43] and Qualcomm, lost a large portion of their market capitalization but survived, and some companies, such as eBay and Amazon.com, lost value but recovered quickly.
One of the first projects I "assigned" to myself when learning to program was to create a 3d environment and be able to scale, rotate, translate objects in 3d. It was easy and fun because I got to choose the language, the rules, etc.
This assignment makes me cringe a bit because there are a lot of hoops to jump through. But yeah, I guess, no pain no gain or something like that :)
How much of their insight comes from others (eg. senior staff, acquisition targets, etc.) and how much from their own noggin so to speak?
Or a better way to ask this might be, how would one go about replicating this insight if one is not a CEO of a tech company? What resources would I need to pull in, who should I be talking with?
It will be interesting to see in a year or 2 if they regret their decision or not.
Also this: "The MCAS deflects the horizontal stabilizer four times farther than was stated in the initial safety analysis document..[19] Due to the amount of trim the system applies to the horizontal stabilizer, aerodynamic forces resist pilot control effort to raise the nose." Wikipedia
Then I saw this: https://makanipower.com/makani/images/pages/technology/cta.j...
Here's an analysis : https://www.tradepartnership.com/pdf_files/2002jobstudy.pdf , written in Feb 2003 (Tariffs were imposed in 2002, which was when NY times article was written https://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/06/us/bush-puts-tariffs-of-a...)
Their summary:
"We found that:
• 200,000 Americans lost their jobs to higher steel prices during 2002. These lost jobs represent approximately $4 billion in lost wages from February to November 2002.3
• One out of four (50,000) of these job losses occurred in the metal manufacturing, machinery and equipment and transportation equipment and parts sectors.
• Job losses escalated steadily over 2002, peaking in November (at 202,000 jobs), and slightly declining to 197,000 jobs in December.4
• More American workers lost their jobs in 2002 to higher steel prices than the total number employed by the U.S. steel industry itself (187,500 Americans were employed by U.S. steel producers in December 2002).
• Every U.S. state experienced employment losses from higher steel costs, with the highest losses occurring in California (19,392 jobs lost), Texas (15,826 jobs lost), Ohio (10,553 jobs lost), Michigan (9,829 jobs lost), Illinois (9,621 jobs lost), Pennsylvania (8,400 jobs lost), New York (8,901 jobs lost) and Florida (8,370 jobs lost). Sixteen states lost at least 4,500 steel consuming jobs each over the course of 2002 from higher steel prices.
• While insufficient data exist at this time to measure the precise role steel tariffs played in causing such significant price increases, relative to the other factors, it is clear that the Section 201 tariffs played a leading role in pushing prices up. Steel tariffs caused shortages of imported product and put U.S. manufacturers of steel-containing products at a disadvantage relative to their foreign competitors. In the absence of the tariffs, the damage to steel consuming employment would have been significantly less than it was in 2002.
• The analysis shows that American steel consumers have borne heavy costs from higher steel prices caused by shortages, tariffs and trade remedy duties, among other factors. Some customers of steel consumers have moved sourcing offshore as U.S. producers of steel-containing products became less reliable and more expensive. Other customers refused to accept higher prices from their suppliers and forced them to absorb the higher steel costs, which put many in a precarious (or worse) financial condition. The impact on steel-consuming industries has been significant. In making policy for the revitalization of manufacturing, including the steel industry, our conclusions suggest that the effects across the full industrial spectrum should be considered. The lessons of the impact of higher steel costs should counsel a good deal of caution when import barriers are considered."
Oh and the chart they publish of prices from 2002 shows the following:
HR Sheet metal: went from about $220 to $300 ($ per ton) an increase of 36% HD Galvanized metal: went from $330 to $460 an increase of 39% CR Sheet metal: went from $305 to $405 an increase of 32%
Crypto currency doesn't stop this. You can dispute cash transactions and you can dispute crypto transactions. If I pay for something in crypto and it is not delivered, I can sue, complain, etc just as I would with a credit card. What you can't do with crypto is run to visa and have them magically reverse the charge (possibly screwing over the merchant). But dispute away my friend.
I feel like the Chevy logo and branding didn't help much with Volt sales. They could have done something similar to what Toyota did with Scion. Create a unique logo and branding.
Create a high tech brand that isn't associated with "Chevy". Is that just me?
A typical scenario is that you are in a corporate culture where, for whatever reason your manager does not "manage down", like at all. Meaning that they are not giving you direction and nor are they listening to any needs, direction from you (ok, maybe once per quarter?). Your interactions with them (if you are letting them set the schedule) are very limited. Now that can be great or bad.
Typically though these people (by essence of being someone you report to) control more corporate power than you do. They can perhaps authorize work, hire 10s of additional resources, approve muilti million dollar projects, set a budget for next year, etc. So it becomes imperative for you to 'manage up' if you want to achieve more than what you are being fed.
Just how to do that, maybe this book covers. Hope so.
They seem (at first glance) to have no concept of security in the sense of restricting people's access to certain content like in the case of all social networks.
Interestingly the entire point of bitcoin, for example, is that you don't need to trust anyone at all.
Can you clarify this statement?
I think there is a feeling (rightly or wrongly) in the community that LN is being sold as the future of bitcoin, and that this is not just about sending $.0001, but sending pretty much any amount. And there is concern, fear, etc that LN is one not ready yet, might have some issues we haven't uncovered, may be preventing us scaling in other ways, and may lead us to a bitcoin world we didn't sign up for.
>are using LN as some kind of punching bag
So yes, those concerns about the direction of bitcoin will lead people to beat up on LN, but mostly because there are strong champions of LN stoking those fears/concerns in some ways.
Probably if it was perceived in the community that the future state of bitcoin, was a really good combination of LN plus what we have today (on chain txs unrelated to LN settlements) then there would be less concern and divisiveness. Then it would be clear we have to grow/scale both parts. LN would be a nice solution to some use cases, and on chain bitcoin would need to scale to meet those other use cases (as well as support LN).