Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Segregation By Choice (Score 1) 265

by hsmith (#47324637) Attached to: Tech Workforce Diversity At Facebook Similar To Google And Yahoo
Perhaps it is because people don't find those companies do anything worth note. Google and Facebook try to recruit me once a year and I simply have no interest in working for them - I don't find anything compelling that they do for me personally. Perhaps females want to work somewhere that has a better mission than what they offer?

Everyone is looking for the discrimination angle but I think it is simpler than that.

Comment: Re:This means nothing without context (Score 5, Insightful) 265

by hsmith (#47324583) Attached to: Tech Workforce Diversity At Facebook Similar To Google And Yahoo
I went to a local Google office yesterday to watch the IO keynote.

Number of people in the room? 40

Number of women in the room? 2, 1 was from corporate.

Free to sign up, free to attend, so where were the ladies? I think this is just another made up issue people are looking to find a solution for.

Comment: Doubtful (Score 2) 307

by hsmith (#47180251) Attached to: GM Names and Fires Engineers Involved In Faulty Ignition Switch
Having worked in large organizations before, even surfacing problems to management in meetings the issues get ignored. Perhaps the guy wasn't smart enough to create a paper trail saying there was an issue. Seems like too nice a scape goat. Where is the QA? Anyone that designs makes mistakes, but the point is you have a team helping verify what you produce is up to spec. Telling me none of the other thousands of people involved in the vehicles didn't catch the issue either?

Comment: Re:AWS is too expensive (Score 1) 142

by hsmith (#47128131) Attached to: Amazon Wants To Run Your High-Performance Databases
We are using AWS for our startup. Our bills are around $2200 a month. $1700 of that is a charge to have dedicated instances instead of shared. this gets us 6 servers - 4 small 2GB RAM web servers and 2 4GB ram DB servers (in reality what we need at the moment, we can scale the DB later when we bottle neck).

We've done the math ourselves and in reality we could probably save some money (face value) or buying servers ourselves and colocating them. But, then you have to add in the maintenance costs, a part time infrastructure support person, downtime, replication, etc. Plus, things like good firewalls, load balancers, are terribly expensive which we didn't factor into the equation.

In reality, it boils down to convenience for us to stick with AWS, though it maybe a slight premium in the end. It simply cuts out a lot of costs having to deal with infrastructure.

Is AWS perfect? No, not really. Any big storm you pray to baby Jesus US-EAST stays up. But, we've been happy so far with it. I'd say all in all it isn't even a premium, factoring in all the costs it is probably break even at this point. But for us we were able to scale from $200 in server costs a month to $2000 a month easily and we can scale to $10000 a month easily. it has its value.

A penny saved is a penny to squander. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...