flatline3

The judicial system shouldn't be able to force you to say anything you don't believe in, to your own customers, with no means of telling your side of the story.

Self determination is a sacrosanct right, and this punishment crosses the line.

> Or are they just serving up web pages to users? That's RAM and bandwidth heavy, but very CPU light. You still need the machines to scale your load, but you're not going to be using the CPU.

That depends very much on the efficiency of software your architecture. A well-architected web app can scale up RAM and CPU utilization much more closely than something modeled on zero shared state independent processes.

Additionally, even if your scaling model of RAM before CPU is the only possible one, that doesn't make the utilization effecient, and implies that higher efficiency could still be reached by scaling up RAM per machine.

I can't say I understand that. If RAM utilization is so vastly out-scaled as compared to CPU utilization, there's a significant resource use inefficiency at play.

Machines consume a baseline amount of power whether they're used or not; that power usage obviously increases with utilization, but ideally you'd have full utilization across the board.

If memory usage is so much higher than CPU usage, I have to wonder what it is that Mozilla is doing wrong with their architecture. Are they using pre-fork-style servers? Are they just provisioning poorly? What is it?

> CPU use is irrelevant to most internet servers.

Why? The CPU is used when the machine does anything. Ideally you're operating the machines at full capacity, less overhead to handle load spikes.

> Over the week, I operate my car engine at about 1.2% capacity. Maybe they should write about that.

What you're doing is inefficient, and they do write about that. The solution is called car sharing and public transportation.

I don't want my classified ads republished because I've chosen to publish the advertisement in places that target specific types of people.

It's incredibly naive to assume you know best.

We have our job ads republished by job sites with user bases that are far outside what we're interested in, and it results in a massive waste of our time in filtering those candidates.

Even if it is a single monolithic application, it in no way could explain the use of that much RAM.

In chrome, I'm seeing a <video> tag, not a plugin.

Anecdotally, gnome 3 attracted me. I now run a Ubuntu system, but I haven't switched my main desktop to Ubuntu because Mac OS X is still better (for me).

I think it would be wrong to reward the PadMapper author's ethically questionable behavior.

If Craigslist doesn't own the posts, then that means the users own their own posts, and you don't have their permission to re-use their posts.

This just puts you back where you started.

> Customers, coworkers, managers, do this intentionally or not, maliciously or not.

None of these situations are the same as an interview. If you're providing an explanation at the behest of the interviewer, why not also depart on a tangent, also at the behest of the interviewer?

I don't see why the "right" thing would be to reward someone for breaking your ToS and stealing your database as a means of creating a potential competitor to your business.

On top of that, even if PadMapper had not been slimy, I don't see why it's "right" to pay a sum for something you're perfectly capable of building yourself for less time, money, effort, and headache than what an acquisition would cost.

The storage format is proprietary and some kind of obfuscation of the image data is done.

According to the ToS, you don't own a license to the comics, so you can't export them, or even hold onto the comics if comiXology disappears.

I don't have a lot of faith in lionized history.

> So if your brilliant engineer spends their time telling younger or less brilliant engineers how they just threw out all their crappy (but functional) code and re-wrote so that they could tolerate reading it, it doesn't bring others along. If they 'sign up' for all of the work so it will "be done right" and then slow the whole project down because nobody can work on it, they aren't "adding value."

The problem might be hiring the younger or less brilliant engineers, and also placing them in positions where they cause significant damage, as it's driving your brilliant engineers to be toxic.

Do you have a point that you intend to write a supporting argument for, or are you just casting aspersions?