"But the industry sure wants to convince us that scalability is the most important property of infrastructure, because then they can sell us complicated tech we don't need and support contracts to help us use it."
And lets not forget: replace any and all efforts at code optimization with "just throw another rack of blades at it".
What salient factors distinguish a cable company from a "mere" streaming video service? Demand programming? Nope. Time shifting? Nope. Advertisement? Nope. Other than the literal media the data flows over, what is the legally meaningful difference?
A cable company is a natural monopoly; servicing an area requires a large infrastructure investment, there is usually only one cable company willing to service a given household, and cable companies negotiate with municipalities. A video streaming service doesn't have these properties. This is a legally meaningful difference because much of the regulation imposed on cable companies is intended to compensate for lack of competition.
Cable isn't a natural monopoly, they are sanctioned monopolies due to their negotiations with municipalities; Previously their only competition was over-the-air broadcast. We have this model in place of a company being given sole propriety over the physical 'cable' infrastructure.
But, just look at what has happened now that Verizon can compete by using a different set of wires (FIOS). They want to compete because it is a huge business and the monopoly has been broken.
The difference with a video streaming service is that they don't own the infrastructure over which their service is delivered.
Of particular interest in this case, a cable company owns it's own infrastructure to transmit programming. A streaming video service over the public internet does not. Previous attempts to get the same ruling have failed on this difference.
The (scientist approved) test for determining basic matter phases is very rudimentary. Put the object/quantity in question in a can. Does it fill the whole space of the can, no matter what size can you use? Then it's a gas. Does it fill just the bottom of the can? Then it's a liquid. Does it instead retain its shape? Then it's a solid.
The urban legend says that it's like pitch; if you put it in the can, it will slowly fill the bottom of the can, but it will take many centuries since it flows so slowly.
This is not true, but it means your test would not convince anybody of anything.
I worked on Cloud Foundry buildpacks for 7 months. I was working at the Pivotal Labs offices in NYC and I can tell you this for free: devs want SSH access too.
When a box dies in staging, it's nice to learn why.
This is an old-school ops team that learned about "devops" and "immutable infrastructure" and figured now they have all the necessary arguments to kick the devs off the servers once and for all. Not progress.
Not if the only measure of interest used is literally self-reporting a binary "interested/not interested", like it is here. This is deceptioneering through statistics.
It seems that any statistics concerning gender should be treated as such until proven otherwise, regardless of which gender it is about.
Women are favored in child custody! Oh wait, when you consider how rarely men fight for their children, men are more favored! Oh wait, if you account for all variables except for gender, then...
Women are more likely to be raped. Oh wait, if you count being forced to penetrate, men are more likely to be victims. Oh wait, if you count out prisons as they are a special case that doesn't give information about the social trends of society, then women are still the primary victim.
Women get paid less for equal work. Wait, if you don't count all full time as equal but count overtime, they are paid equal. But if you look at raises based one experience then men are favored. But if you count experience based on hours worked instead of years (since someone working 80 hr/wk gets more experience in a given year) women are favored. But then if you...
In short, all of these issues are complex and you can manipulate the statistics to get the result you want.
>For some reason when we apply the same principle to being respectful to people who don't want to relive a trauma they themselves lived, it's ridiculous.
Part of the ridiculousness is that although it's relatively easy to know when you would be spoiling a show, anything can be a trigger. So it isn't even possible to supply a meaningfully comprehensive "trigger warning".
Below you will find a list (in no particular order) of common trigger warnings. If discussing one of these things, it is considered common courtesy to put a simple “Trigger Warning: [Subject]” before a post.
Please note: This is a work in progress. If there are any triggers you feel are missing, please feel free to drop us an ask.
Swearing
Rape
Abuse (physical, mental, emotional, verbal, sexual)
Child abuse/pedophilia
Self-injurious behavior (self-harm, eating disorders, etc.)
Talk of drug use (legal, illegal or psychiatric)
Suicide
Descriptions/pictures of medical procedures (even if they don’t contain blood or gore)
Descriptions/pictures of violence or warfare (including instruments of violence, such as knives or guns)
Corpses, skulls or skeletons
Needles
Discussions of -isms, shaming, or hatred of any kind (racism, classism, hatred of cultures/ethnicities that differ from your own, sexism, hatred of sexualities or genders that differ from your own, anti-multiple, non-vanilla shaming, sex positive shaming, fat shaming/body image shaming, neuroatypical shaming)
Any time slurs are used (this includes words like “stupid” or “dumb”, which are still widely considered to be socially acceptable)
Trans* degendering, or anti-trans* views of bodies
Dismissal of lived oppressions, marginalization, illness or differences
Kidnapping (forceful deprivation of/disregard for personal autonomy)
Discussions of sex (even consensual)
Death or dying
Spiders
Insects
Snakes
Vomit
Pregnancy/childbirth
Blood
Serious injury
Trypophobia (Link is safe.)
Scarification
Nazi paraphernalia
Slimy things
Anything that might inspire intrusive thoughts in people with OCD
Trigger Warning: The following post may contain something which might trigger some reaction from someone. Descriptions of possible triggers can be triggering, and are thus omitted here.
The more you need to warn against the less useful the warning becomes. Eventually you either have a massive list like a drug side-effect label that nobody reads or you have an extremely generic warning like the one above.
This post may contain swearing (depending on your choice of swear words) or inspire intrusive thoughts in people with OCD. Belgium.
This is a slippery slope argument, and in this case it doesn't make any sense. We can't know every trigger, but it'd be pretty surprising if a description of rape wasn't one.
Your argument has the same flaws as the argument that we should give up on trying to understand the programs we write because "Rice's theorem".
