yes, ff does a ton of background connections. use wireshark to see what it is doing. i tried to block all that crap once but after a while i just gave up.
it is still my primary browser because it is now the only alternative to google's monopoly(even though mozilla is de facto living off of google's money).
They're not only living off google money, they also fired all their engineers, and google is required by court of law to supply money and engineers to help maintain Firefox, ridiculous!
Scrum/Agile is awesome! I always used the daily calls to ask as much dumb shit as possible to make the meetings as long as i could so i could keep charging my hourly rate without actually working.
And I have gotten rid of people who were very clearly just being pedantic during every meeting and then would have a million questions (or just not build things to spec) when it came to time to actually work.
interesting. i was actually yesterday pondering whether youtube gave up on this since i have not had issues for months now. before i had to scrape all cache and logout. usually once a week. but then it stopped and all went back to normal. i am using ubo, still.
i remember reading years ago about the reason windows updates since 8 or 10 were so bad was because MS fired all testers and scrapped their testing hardware and now they are testing virtually in cloud. I guess nothing has changed, still. cost cutting at its best.
>MS fired all testers and scrapped their testing hardware and now they are testing virtually in cloud
Do you have any sources for this? AFAIK, according to the LTT wan show when he was duiscussing his conversation with MS baout Windows sleep issues, he laerned MS still uses plenty of bare metal HW for testing, especailly notebooks and in no way got rid of it.
The status quo was seperate software developers and software developers in test, and nearly equal numbers [1] (I haven't read this book, only the description, but seems authoritative).
The new normal changed around 2014, as described in this Ars Technica article [2]. In order to ship more stuff, more quickly, Microsoft eliminated the developer in test roles, removing the bottleneck of a specific role in charge of quality and hoping to diffuse the responsibility.
This addresses the 'fired all testers' part of your quote. I don't have references on the 'scrapped their testing hardware', but I imagine most testing hardware was maintained by developers in test, and when their positions were eliminated, they may not have had anyone to transfer the hardware to.
No, i just remember a comment from some former MS dev who knew something about the testing process in MS. I think it might have even been a comment in here actually.
> MS fired all testers and scrapped their testing hardware and now they are testing virtually in cloud.
I'm fairly certain this isn't the case. 1) Microsoft still adds Microsoft drivers for hardware; this implies having hardware and people to work with it. 2) Microsoft has a massive base of corp and gov customers buying hosting, surveillance, etc. Widespread issues with Windows would could affect that.
I'll go out on a limb and guess the fired all testers theory arose when the insider program became widely available to the public.
There was plenty of news coverage of the Windows test team being eliminated at the time of Microsoft's 2014 layoffs:
"Under the new structure, a number of Windows engineers, primarily dedicated testers, will no longer be needed. (I don't know exactly how many testers will be laid off, but hearing it could be a "good chunk," from sources close to the company.) Instead, program managers and development engineers will be taking on new responsibilities, such as testing hypotheses..."
The burden of testing software was shifted over to developers after the layoffs. If you check Microsoft's job listings, there isn't even a category for software testing positions anymore.
nope. as indicated by a sibling comment, Microsoft used to have parallel SDE and SDE/T tracks and orgs.
They killed the test org completely around 10 years ago because of course developers can just do TDD and ship an operating system with 30 years of legacy applications/hardware ecosystems around it. Or "telemetry will just tell us what to fix"
Of all the mountains of dumb shit this company has done in the past 10 years, this is actually what killed Windows for the people (like myself) who actually used to like Windows.
Edit: To add sources, I worked at Microsoft years ago and still have friends in those orgs.
I haven't liked Windows since Friends was still on the air, but even I must concede... the version shortly before they dumped their testing org, Windows 7, was probably the best version they made.
Windows 9x was extensively user tested using mockups made in frickin' Visual Basic; user feedback was incorporated into the next round of mockups to converge on something that was actually easier to use. It was agile development before that was a buzzword. What's replaced that? Just rolling out whatever UI brainfart the design team came up with into the product and using bitching on X (formerly known as Twitter) to gauge whether to keep it?
so you just walk the file and read a chunk, update the averages and move on. the resource usage should be 0.000 nothing and speed should be limited by your disk IO.
Custom number parsing, minimising the number of memory allocations to not be punished by the garbage collector. All sort of micro optimisations that make those solutions a terrible way to showcase a language (i.e. you can write much clearer and concise code but obviously slower).
I agree that the simplest solution in each language is the best way to compare - however this problem seems less about showing off java and more about challenging folks.
Looking at some solutions they seem to include their own double parsing implementation. I built a home made serializer for csv files, I am using the default .net parsing functions and I find that parsing numbers/dates is by far the slowest part of the process on large files.
actually i think you can also just average each chunk and then add it to existing data. like read N rows(say all have one location to keep it simple), average the data from the chunk, update/save min and max, move on to next chunk, do the same but now update the average by adding to existing/previously computed average and divide by two. the result will be the same - disk IO will be the most limiting aspect. this "challenge" is not really a challenge. there is nothing complicated about it. it just seems "cool" when you say "process 1 billion rows the fastest you can".
say you load 1 million records and you average them at 5.1. you then load another million and average them at 4.5. so you 5.1+4.5=9.6/2=4.8. rinse and repeat. as long as you keep the amount of records processed per each run about the same, your numbers will not be skewed. only the last chunk will most likely be smaller and it will introduce small rounding error, like if it has only 10k records instead of 1M. but still it is the simplest solution with good enough outcome.
essentially that is how integrals are calculated in mathematics if i remember correctly. you take a curve and divide it into columns, the thinner the column the smaller the deviation(because the curve has round edges so your bar will have inherent error) and you simply calculate each column and then total it and you get the body/volume of the function. same principle like radians with circle. you are merely splitting the work into smaller pieces that you can process.
>On a cache hit, SIEVE marks the object as visited. On a cache miss, SIEVE checks the object pointed to by the hand. If the object has been visited, its visited bit is reset, and the hand moves to the next position, keeping the retained object in its original position in the queue. This continues until an unvisited object is found and evicted. After eviction, the hand moves to the next position.
Look at the animation. The description is confusing.
It uses a list that's treated as a ring buffer to keep track of keys currently in the cache.
The "hand" is a pointer that points to a given node in that ring buffer.
When the cache is full and a space is needed, the "hand" moves through that buffer (possibly wrapping around). Whenever it points at a node that hasn't been touched since the last time it was seen, that node is evicted and you're done for this time, otherwise it clears the visited bit for that node and keeps going.
(You're always guaranteed to find a node to evict, because worst case you scan through the entire set of nodes, and find the first node you cleared the visited bit of)
Maybe it's a bit odd that it resets the 'visited' bit on non-related objects (why are they suddenly not visited)?
For me it helped to rather think about 'visited' as a special case of a counter called 'valuation' (or something like that). New objects come in with valuation 1, on cache hits a objects valuation is set to 2, and when the hand moves left it decreases objects valuations until it reaches one that gets valuation 0, then it's evicted immediately. One could easily imagine a modified algorithm where 'valuation' could be increased further than 2 if an object got visited many times (but then eviction would be much slower in some cases).
Then this is all optimized by using a bool instead of an int since we truncate 'valuation' at max 2.
Yahoo has (or had) a very similar 'cache' for tracking abuse (ydod). As I recall it was patented, but I can't find the patent to confirm it has expired.
Really handy for tracking potentially abusive ips, if your table is big enough; on a request, check if it's in the table - if so increase the count and if it's above the theshold mark it. If it's not in the list, decrement the current item and move current to the next item.
An agressive user will clear out a slot for itself, and rapidly hit the threshold. Other users will come and go. You can iterate through and try to always clear a spot for a new entry, but it might not be necessary, depending on what you're caching.
The hand is a pointer on the queue to the current cache item being inspected. The cache miss eviction behavior depends on if the pointed to element is marked as visited.
If you're familiar with LRU/LFU, ring buffers (though this isn't such), and data structures this will probably make a lot more sense.
A rigorous course in data structures is fantastic for any engineer. Everything is data structures and algorithms at the end of the day.
> Officials explained that companies will be able to use commercially available databases to verify that users are old enough to access their content. The new law will take effect starting January 1st.
looks like the increased cost is not worth the profit. simple mathematics. capitalism is nature and you cannot fight the nature because sooner or later something gives.
I used to use it a lot but in time it becomes more of an obstacle than a net positive. http and websockets with json(front end), cbor(back end) or pb(back end) is the way to go. it gives you exactly the same features but zero restrictions. it is nice to have pb schema that is transferable into other languages but you can define schema in anything and port it to anything, it just takes time to initially write it instead of using pb as intermediary. the little layers of code it autogenerates is not worth the limitations you might be needing to overcome in the future with a larger project. also there is massive issue with no value provided vs null or empty or zero value. pb tries to solve this by using wrappers but in code that is massive pain to work with all the nesting. that was actually what broke the camel's back for me.
i just want to mention that i do not use rest, at all. i do use http methods and url routes but i never accept any rest rules for design or behavior. i am using something like json rpc but i am not using a single route to handle all communication. i still use the same approach as grpc does - route per method, but i keep the flexibility of naming and http methods. people seem to be very much stuck with rest and its limitations/rules for some weird reason.
it is still my primary browser because it is now the only alternative to google's monopoly(even though mozilla is de facto living off of google's money).