hpguy

One thing that helps me is this: whenever I'm in a situation that makes me nervous, I think about even more stressful situations in the past that I went through unscathed. For example, if I get nervous before speaking to a group of 10 people, I would recall events where I managed to present to a larger group of people. I was nervous then, but I "survived" it, no reason to think I wouldn't survive this one either.

Alright, since this is not the first time I see this: what the deal about people from Austin trying to shoo people away? As if Austin was really that great and everybody wanted to come there? And isn't it the case that the more tech people go live in the Austin, the better the tech scene and thus benefit tech people like you (I assume you're in tech)?

I had lived in the Bay Area, moved to Austin just to move to another place within a year. Austin has many nice things, but definitely not one of the top US cities I would consider building a family in. I can list out tons of things about Austin that would be deal breakers for many people and there are better cities out there in many aspects.

I'm truly puzzled by this sentiment from Austin people.

Sent. I'm benly ;)

Sent you 1000. My user name: benly

The data I put in Google is MY property, I want that data protected and don't care less about servers just as I do not claim ownership to the school locker.

bs. This makes it sound like these companies like Apple are harming the Chinese. I came from a developing country and I can tell you right now many people have to do much worse jobs to carve out some food for themselves and many others die from the lack of it. The moment you pull out jobs made possible by Apple and the likes, many will suffer.

Why would I prefer to plug and play (and toss away) micro, modular libraries/frameworks designed to interop or to be independently used instead of using a monolithic technology that pushes to my throat ObjJ, Cocoa and a other contraints that follow (like IE8+ only)? That needs an explanation?

What a hypocrite. You can joke dirty publicly, but when it comes to 2 friends making private jokes with one another, you become Joan of Arc, a heroine, an activist. Well "calculated" though, I have to say.

Don't know about Rails, but I'm building a MVP using Node.JS and hosting a free dyno. Can handle 250 reqs/s for dynamic requests (i.e. full stack, Postgres, Redis, Jade, Express etc.) and 1500+ reqs/s for static contents. I do use cluster with 3 workers though. Pretty happy with the result so far.

> Within a single request, Node can async its dealing with outside services (databases, api's, etc), but it is still only processing one request at a time. There is no 'synchronized' keyword in javascript. ;-)

This is as wrong as it can get. Multiple requests are processed "concurrently", in the sense that a request gets served as soon as an existing request awaits on async calls. It is different from thread-based concurrency and thus there is no need for things like "synchronized" keyword.

Can anyone explain why this random routing is supposedly good for Node.JS and Java? I mean the net effect is busy dynos might serve more requests while idle ones remain idle and that is certainly not good for Node.JS or anything. What am I missing?

The author is a developer, not a designer. And I don't see the point of trying to persuade people to not listen to her because she's among the awful designers although they already say they find her writing useful.