Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:50%+ cheaper not to use the cloud (Score 2) 119 119

I would beg to differ on this. For CI, you can easily use spot instances which are dirt cheap. We pay $0.07/hr for ours. Assuming we had a build running 24x7x365, that's $613.20 per year costs. You'd be hard pressed to find a decent box for that price. Additionally, builds are not happening 24x7x365, but rather only when changes are made so your costs are even better than hardware, which is sitting idle and using power and rack space during the interim.

Comment Re:Bamboo OnDemand (Score 1) 119 119

We're using OnDemand for CI of everything and CD for some. We use spot instances for the workers because we don't mind waiting a bit for the test to happen. We typically have to wait ~3.5 minutes to get an instance but are only paying $0.07/hr for that instance. It's ridiculously cheap for us to do it this way.

Comment Re: Did Google do this right? (Score 1) 129 129

Good, it's public now. I don't have to RTFS because I was there when they announced and described this and had a chance to ask questions about it. It is brand new as of last Thursday and it is not an ARF based FBL. It is a single daily report that will give ESPs an idea of how their emails are being handled by the Google classifier. It will not be useful as an unsubscribe mechanism as it will not include any recipient specific data. Only ESPs are eligible and even then it will be limited as they roll it out and get feedback about the new service.

So, no, they still don't have an ARF based FBL.

Comment Re: Spam is not unwanted e-mail (Score 1) 129 129

Maybe legally but for most ISPs these days: spam is that which that their customers do not want to receive. I've heard it directly from postmasters at the majors. It doesn't matter if they opted in, have a relationship or any of that. If the customer no longer wants to receive it, it's spam. That's the base operating premise at this point.

Comment Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed (Score 1) 1223 1223

The OSS movement shouldn't care about what other people think. Software is created and put out in the wild in the hope that others will benefit. Whether a particular class of people use it or not is typically irrelevant (unless they are the target of the software). The only people who are likely to greatly care about this are the people trying to make money off of open source software.

Comment "Habitable" is used extremely loosly here... (Score 1) 451 451

I guess everyone is missing the part that we haven't actually confirmed the composition of the atmosphere and whether it corresponds to one of their simulated atmospheres to such a degree that their results are applicable *or* that the simulated atmosphere is actually usable by life of any kind.

For all we know, it has an atmosphere made entirely of nitrogen or one that doesn't have sufficient carbon dioxide to sustain a greenhouse effect and has substantially frozen out.

This is purely hype of a simulation based on mostly made up stuff to determine what compositions *could* work to sustain a temperature-habitable environment. Mars is nearly temperature-habitable but no one would ever claim that it is 'habitable'. The only really interesting bit is the ability to, in the future, spectroscopically analyze the atmosphere and plug the values into their simulation to get results based in reality.

Any given program will expand to fill available memory.

Working...