jptman's comments

I have to admit I don't know this stuff first hand, but based on what I heard, it took quite a while for ITA to be fully "absorbed" into Google, during which time they didn't change much. I also heard that their first customer was more of a pilot or development partner. Also, from what I know about the airline industry, they change very very slowly and it'd take a long time from the time airlines are approached to the time things are actually in production, especially for something this critical.

I'm not sure I'd call it "failed commercially at solving booking". Google stopped their work on creating a booking system after the acquisition since they were never interested in getting into booking.

Those two have nothing to do with each other. Someone in that thread purely speculated and now there are 'rumors'.

Often times, if the work is critical enough, you could argue paying the 3rd party with a track record, insurance or a strict contract for delivery, support is the logical choice. Sure someone in-house could do it, but if they screw up or create something that bites you down the line, is it going to end up costing more.

The cynical way to interpret this behavior though is the old "No one got fired for buying IBM". Paying a big name outside company is the safe choice because you can always blame them, but if you decided to go with the in house guy, there's no one else to blame.

I think you are underestimating the amount of video that gets uploaded to Youtube. Smaller sites may be better at stuff like this but that's solely because they don't have quite the amount of content. Hundreds of hours of videos are uploaded per minute. They may eventually have AI good enough to do a better job, but this is an unprecedented amount of content to review.

The CR reliability score I saw recently lumped together the power train reliability with the entertainment system jankiness. I think this makes it not as useful The JD powers rating still rates Honda highly.

Can someone explain the computation the article talks about further? All it says is that the array will go into a chaotic state and produce seemingly random output.

Google workers.. cheap?

Unfortunately, it's the heart string-tugging anecdotes that make policies happen in the US, not data.

But the app is required for configuration, not for actually using your wifi, right? Perhaps I'm wrong.. The overlap for needing to configure your network and the internet connection being down is probably very small, although not non-existant.

Doesn't Google already have a web based, but internal only, IDE? I don't know if that'd be easy to make external, but my understanding is that they've got a lot of internal users on it.

What's the alternative? Not announce new features that won't perform well on current hardware? If details emerge that they could have made the 6P perform well but chose not to, that's something to be disappointed about, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the rumoured 4k Chromecast. I wouldn't be surprised if they have some interesting tech to support it they don't want to make public.

Edit: Nevermind, it looks like Chrome lately has built-in support for Chromecast (I see it under the menu as Cast). From this, I can surmise a couple of things:

1. Google wants users to be able to use a chromecast out of the box without installing an extension. Can't fault them for that because believe it or not, not everyone knows how to do that. Or there's some limitation I don't know about in extensions that they want to get around.

2. This means that Google would either have to open-source the Chromecast functionality in the browser, or it has to maintain both the functionality baked into Chrome and the browser extension. So, they'd have to keep supporting a browser extension they'd not need for Chrome just to support Chromium.

I don't know.. May be a good compromise if possible would've been to bundle Chrome with the chromecast extension. But I doubt when someone came up with the idea of bundling Chromecast in the browser for purpose X, someone else in the team said: But think of Chromium!

> And exactly what assurances do we have that Google is properly vetting access to this information, given their complete lack of customer service and their historical inability to properly run adsense, their core business? reply

You could probably ask the thousands of ex-employees who'd love to make $$ by breaking the story to the media. Don't you think it would sell?

Also, often when I hear stories about that company not providing support, it's for a service that has at the very least hundreds of thousands of clients/users, a lot of whom pay very little or nothing. How would you provide support to all of them? Would someone who spends $1Mil / yr on Ads have trouble reaching someone quickly?

It's an anti pattern when it's used in a way that wasn't originally intended and causes a net loss for society. E.g, class action lawsuit against small manufacturing companies. These can cost more to fight than to pay off, even when you are in the right.

> Perhaps Nepal could improve child mortality first even if its not hipster enough for the west.

Yes, the government should simply ban child mortality. Why didn't they think of something that simple? Also, until child mortality is solved, they shouldn't go after any low hanging fruit. What's the point?

I've done 2 & 3. What's the best way to go about doing 1? Pointers to a good guide would be much appreciated.

As you wish, here's some Coleslaw: Awesome job Microsoft! I'm very curious to see if the larger industry embraces .Net on Linux / FreeBSD as one of the core languages. At some of the big tech companies, Java and C++ are still king, partly because of their OSS echosystem. Would be great to see C#, F# up there with them.

I'm curious to know what kind of leverage he had over the distros where it wasn't just "ask". Any suggestions on where I can find some info?

I'm a bit curious about your comment. Do you mean during development you run your code on a REPL and change portions of it , or do you mean you run code in Production in a REPL and change portions of it as it's running?

I'm interested to know your setup in either of those cases. The one inconvenience I have about REPL based development is that I need to copy over an expression from my editor into the REPL and if I make any changes in the REPL, like fix a typo, I need to make sure to copy it back to my editor.I guess this may be because I don't use Emacs and have an editor and REPL in one.