Citizen Tayne posted:

They aren't making any money. They're hemorrhaging cash at twice the rate they're making it, and those are the "good" numbers they're showing investors.

Citizen Tayne posted:

They aren't making any money. They're hemorrhaging cash at twice the rate they're making it, and those are the "good" numbers they're showing investors.

my dad posted:

they must be making money or else the free market wouldn't have valued them so highly

A Wheezy Steampunk posted:

oh duh i mixed up git and github

i don't know what you mean by "hitting the sha1" but why not use a guid for author identification?

Luigi Thirty posted:

Progressive JPEG posted:

i just mean it's covered by the sha1 for commit id purposes

yeah i could see some kind of guid in commits that could be automatically joined against a separate user table. even if youre cis scum and arent dealing with a name change itd be nice to update the email addy on your old contributions every so often.

downside is youd deffo end up juggling multiple guids across repos or mebbe even within the same repo at some point even if youre careful to reuse the same guid because when you email someone a first commit either youd need to religiously include your preferred guid in the commit along with your preferred name/email, or theyd need to generate a new guid for your entry in their table. given the system was written to handle the case of commits flying between thousands of arbitrary people over email, fitting a per-repo user db into that adds a lot of complexity

so i could see why git authors may have decided to skip that feature

Beast of Bourbon posted:

i don't really see how Uber is losing money.

they pay their drivers a fraction of the fare [less than minimum wage], and they wrote the app 4 years ago, their overhead can't be that huge unless they have ball pits full of money or something they burn on a daily basis.

Beast of Bourbon posted:

i don't really see how Uber is losing money.

they pay their drivers a fraction of the fare [less than minimum wage], and they wrote the app 4 years ago, their overhead can't be that huge unless they have ball pits full of money or something they burn on a daily basis.

computer parts posted:

they have a lot of "free rides" promotions

Beast of Bourbon posted:

i don't really see how Uber is losing money.

they pay their drivers a fraction of the fare [less than minimum wage], and they wrote the app 4 years ago, their overhead can't be that huge unless they have ball pits full of money or something they burn on a daily basis.

H.P. Hovercraft posted:

Kitchens are expensive and dirty. This home manufacturing center has been by far the most liberating to eliminate. They are the greediest consumers of power, water, and labor and produce the most noise and garbage of any room. Moreover, they can be made totally unnecessary with a few practical life hacks.

First, I never cook. I am all for self reliance but repeating the same labor over and over for the sake of existence is the realm of robots. I utilize soylent only at home and go out to eat when craving company or flavor. This eliminates a panoply of expensive tools and rotting ingredients I would need to spend an unconscionable amount of time sourcing, preparing, and cleaning.

Next, I switched from beer to red wine. I buy with Saucey so I don’t have to use awful retail stores. Decent red wine is surprisingly cheap, pleasurable, and does not require refrigeration. I also end up drinking less liquid overall, meaning fewer bottles to throw away (I average about one trashbag / month) and fewer trips to the bathroom, meaning for a comparable amount of alcohol, when wine is consumed instead of beer there is less electrolyte loss and less after effects.

With no fridge, no dishes, no microwave, no oven, no range, no dishwasher, no utensils, no pests, no cleaning products nor dirty rags, my life is considerably simpler, lighter and cleaner than before. I think it was a bit presumptuous for the architect to assume I wanted a kitchen with my apartment and make me pay for it. My home is a place of peace. I don’t want to live with red hot heating elements and razor sharp knives. That sounds like a torture chamber. However, it’s not a total loss. I was able to use the cabinets to store part of my book collection.


I have not done laundry in years. I get my clothing custom made in China for prices you would not believe and have new ones regularly shipped to me.


The first space colonies will have no coal power plants. I am ready. For now though, as I am driven through the gleaming city, my hunger peacefully at bay, I have visions of the parking lots and grocery stores replaced by parks and community centers, power plants retrofitted as museums and galleries. Traffic and trash and pollution will evaporate, if only we are willing to adapt some routines.

Forums Terrorist posted:

the japanese are a race of shiftless bastards and the best thing would be to let the germans carve their government and institutions up like a turkey

A Wheezy Steampunk posted:

hmm, i think i sort of understand, thank you for explaining

Mr Dog posted:

A git repository is a chronicle of the entire history of the project. When you "clone" a git repo, you copy the entire project history to your computer. You then append some work to that local copy and then you "push" to automatically reconcile the central repository with your local repository. Most of the time it's just a case of copying your changes to the central repository, but if somebody else has performed some changes to the central repository after you took a copy of it then it is a little bit more complicated (but usually still automatic).

The important thing is, after you've pushed your changes, your project history and the central project history are identical. In fact, the only reason that the repository on the server (and not, say, your copy, or Bob's copy) is the "central" copy is that everybody agrees that it is. The other important fact is, the reconciliation process assumes that history is set in stone. Otherwise, whose view of history is "right"? So if you share changes with other people and then change your mind and rewrite history then Git gets confused and it's a pain in the rear end for everybody involved to fix it.

The name attached to each change recorded in Git is part of this development history, it's literally just a string like "Anita Jones <anita.jones@example.com>". This is just a consequence of Git's mechanisms to detect malicious tampering (say, to insert backdoors into the development history without anybody noticing). If Anita gets a divorce later and changes her author string to "Anita Smith <anita.smith@example.com>" then all of her future changes will be tagged Anita Smith, but her name was still Anita Jones at the time when her previous changes were made. And you can't change the past in Git without having to manually repair every single developer's local repository clones so that they all agree on what happened in the past. Sometimes though somebody checks in an NDAed document or a private key or a production server password though, and you have no choice but to go back and manually scathe that out of the record on the server and on every developer's machine, but again, it's a huge pain in the rear end.

A Wheezy Steampunk posted:

this is a great explanation

i think the detail i was unaware of is that git communications happened over email, i thought they defined their own thing so when you do git push or whatever it was it's own protocol (?) communicating with the server, which would make guids really easy to use as user-ids

Mr Dog posted:

I'm sure somebody could make an argument that the observed phenomenon of mass-energy conservation is an instrument of the patriarchy if you tried hard enough

Mr Dog posted:

I'm sure somebody could make an argument that the observed phenomenon of mass-energy conservation is an instrument of the patriarchy if you tried hard enough

Mr Dog posted:

I'm sure somebody could make an argument that the observed phenomenon of mass-energy conservation is an instrument of the patriarchy if you tried hard enough

Beast of Bourbon posted:

i don't really see how Uber is losing money.

they pay their drivers a fraction of the fare [less than minimum wage], and they wrote the app 4 years ago, their overhead can't be that huge unless they have ball pits full of money or something they burn on a daily basis.

quote:

Uber Technologies Inc. is telling prospective investors that it generates $470 million in operating losses on $415 million in revenue, according to a document provided to prospective investors.

The term sheet viewed by Bloomberg News, which is being used to sell $1 billion to $1.2 billion in convertible bonds, doesn’t make clear the time period for those results. The document also touts 300 percent year-over-year growth.

The figures show the heavy losses that Uber is accruing as it expands its global car-booking operation amid fierce local competition. Uber is already operating in more than 300 cities worldwide and is raising money at a $50 billion valuation, a person familiar with the situation said last month. Uber is spending aggressively especially in China and as it experiments with its carpooling service uberPOOL.

“These are substantially old numbers that do not reflect business activities today,” Uber spokeswoman Nairi Hourdajian said in an e-mail. Hourdajian declined to say why the numbers are being used to promote a current funding round.

A Wheezy Steampunk posted:

i don't know anything about git but why is changing the author name a problem? shouldn't everyone have a numeric id or something and then a display name that can be changed at will? did the author(s) of git really think that no one would ever want to change their name?

Beast of Bourbon posted:

i don't really see how Uber is losing money.

they pay their drivers a fraction of the fare [less than minimum wage], and they wrote the app 4 years ago, their overhead can't be that huge unless they have ball pits full of money or something they burn on a daily basis.

Main Paineframe posted:

they pay any fines or penalties that drivers accrue for driving in places where uber is illegal, and they also hand out tons of free ride deals, fare cuts, and other marketing things. they spend all their money on bringing in more users so investors will give them more money. they could probably be profitable if they wanted, but constantly pumping usage numbers for investor storytime is way more lucrative than just being profitable normally

Mr Dog posted:

Anyway the original article reads like some sort of strawman parody of radical feminism, sorry. If Git's central data structures are "patriarchal" then so is the entire concept of published work.

ayn rand hand job posted:

what about the checkout cards at the back of library books

triple sulk posted:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-thrown-at-her/

Stymie posted:

possibly but it's a lot easier to demonize feminism when it challenges things we accept as "normal" or, even more likely, benefit us directly

hobbesmaster posted:

its kind of a lost battle for licensed engineers though

hobbesmaster posted:

depends on the breadth of the software engineer

hobbesmaster posted:

depends on the breadth of the term software engineer