I work in a small team, we have ~30 active clients and other ~100 or so that are low maintenance or dormant.
We don't have an on-call rotation but I desperately want one. Because if no one is on-call - then all of us are on-call. Any one of us could be called at any time if one of our larger commerce projects falls over.
To me on-call is a necessary burden that means when I'm not on duty I am completely free to ignore my phone.
I'll certainly feel more positive about helping outside of the 9-5. I do like to be helpful, but perhaps that'll wear off like some kind of honeymoon period, juxtaposed to my current situation.
I'm always looking for more positives in such a system because I want it to work. Tuesday to Tuesday sounds great. Other comments here highlight the difference between critical fixes and patch it laters. Any other insights are welcome.
I wouldn't call those shenanigans fun, just frustrating. I know exactly the roads you're referring to. We drove that pass between SA and Vic a good 10 times in just the past 2 years and Google just couldn't figure out that it took far longer by those roads because you can't safely go at speed. There's just too many blind hills.
There's something increasingly messed up with Google's algorithm lately and there's little control. We've recently just been going up and down the east coast and it's idea of "eco" or "short" is just wild. There was an unsealed 15% grade climb over a freaking mountain, it just refused to think of a better way (the motorway that went around it).
I'd be less upset if there was more control over the options. Like a "prefer motorways" or "less turns" or "less hills". Even a "I'm towing" option.
I know it has that data to do it, why not let us use it? Hell I might even pay for it.
> There's something increasingly messed up with Google's algorithm lately and there's little control.
I haven't used Google Maps outside of the US, but I've always felt that it's got to be designed and built by people that have never driven a car in their life. They've almost certainly never driven in Australia. Sometimes updates bring good things, and sometimes they declutter the screen by removing important information like the names of cross streets.
If it's regularly sending you down avoidable gravel roads, you really ought to use something different. I'm more or less happy with google around me, although I'm comfortable enough with my surroundings to recognize and ignore most of the bad ideas; otherwise, I'd try something from Here --- they're the corporate successor of NavTeq, and have been doing digital maps since the 80s, and I liked their maps on Windows Phone. Something based on openstreetmaps is also attractive from an ability to influence the data perspective, too.
>sometimes they declutter the screen by removing important information like the names of cross streets.
this is such a frustrating experience, especially out in remote areas where roads are long and change names without intersections. when I firat experienced this "feature" it made me realize that google maps is not an actual map, and I should get a physical map as backup.
> There's something increasingly messed up with Google's algorithm lately and there's little control.
I've also noticed this for pedestrian routes inside cities. For some reason, it likes to send you zigzagging when there's a perfectly good straight route. And this is Paris, so it's not like the straight road is an 8-lane highway with no sidewalk.
Your ticket has been closed because Google Maps engineers were unable to reproduce the issue in Silicon Valley.
My experience with both Google Maps and Waze is that despite having the best live traffic data, there are so many UI issues that it's almost dangerous to try to use those apps while driving. I'm seriously considering building my own navigation app just to get some usable information.
I remember learning A* at uni while at the same time experiencing it's quirks on our shared minecraft server.
The server was really chugging and so I ran a trace on it. I found the zombies were stuck in a loop trying to find their way into a village that we had completely secured with a large fence. Being a naive implementation (at the time) it meant they never gave up.
I recall there being a bug report with a good amount of detail about how they were going about fixing it.
A similar long-time bug in Dwarf Fortress: if you have a door or hatch marked as impassable by animals, but a stray tame critter (usually a cat) wants to get through, it will never give up trying to find a path to the other side. This can have a very noticeable effect on your fps, especially if there are several animals all trying to get past the impassable portal.
(Of course, one could argue that it's incredibly realistic behavior for a cat to very insistently demand to get past a closed door. It would be even more realistic if, once the door is finally opened, the cat would immediately change its mind and lose all interest in getting through!)
Been looking around for the past 10 minutes trying to find information on the mob-following implementation in Minecraft - can't find a thing. I assume it's just vanilla A* with some parameters?
Are we talking about friendlyjordies here? He most certainly has pissed people off. I wouldn't put it past mafia types to have a go at him after his relentless mockery of Barilaro. Not to suggest he's connected, just the whole Italian thing.
Not to take away from your point though. I too feel that our government, both state and federal, goes unchecked. Just that conspiracies about firebombing are hardly evidence. Instead consider the refusal to implement a federal ICAC or the NSW liberals overthrowing their own and cherry picking candidates.
I feel like the introduction of "store exclusives" really grated badly on an already well established Steam user base.
Gamers, and PC gamers in particular, are quite stubborn. I suspect there's a lot of loyalty to Steam for many reasons and Epic making their own copycat store split their already well-curated libraries. That and they literally yanked games already released on Steam and moved them to Epic, so I'd say that's where most of the bad blood comes from.
I have a government client that has locked down all outgoing access for a web server except though a socks proxy.
It makes simple things really hard - like a links checker, package dependencies, remote servers or integrations with Google.
We can't even run test scenarios on the machine because we're also locked _out_ of the server. Instead, we rely on their IT department to run test scripts that we send them via email.
We were debugging an elastic server connection for 2 weeks that was working perfectly fine in their "QA". It's a horrible existence.
Used to work at Ubisoft and they had this same policy, they used an authenticated http proxy, so you either expose your entire SSO credentials to your environment (HTTP_PROXY=http://user:password@proxy:3128) or you don't get access to the internet for all your console applications.
Even then, if you were using certificate pinning, it wouldn't work as the HTTP proxy would serve a "are you sure you want to continue" HTML page, which is of course not expected.
SSH is out of the question.
it's amazing what "simple" things break; like kubectl, gcloud, go get.
So frustrating. Countless development hours lost to bypasses.
> I have a government client that has locked down all outgoing access for a web server except though a socks proxy.
If you're running Linux, there's a utility called "tsocks" which wraps any other command and redirects all network servers through a SOCKS proxy defined in /etc/tsocks.conf, e.g.:
tsocks pip install somepackage
One downside is that since it relies on some linker magic, it doesn't work for static binaries. But for most common usage, it served me just fine.
My old boss used to say: "Be a chameleon. I don't want to know that I didn't write this."