stevecrox

stevecrox , 3 months ago

Debian would be a Volvo Estate, its the boring practical family choice, the owner is soneone boring like an architect or a financial advisor.

Arch is a Vauxhall Nova, second hand battered owned almost exclusively by teenage lads who spend a lot of time/money modifying it (e.g. lowering so it can't go over speed bumps, adding a massive exhaust to sound good but destroys engine power).

Fedora is something slightly larger/more expensive like a Ford Focus/VW Golf/Vauxhall Astra owned by slightly older lads. The owners spend their time adding lighting kits and the largest sound systems money can buy.

Slackware is clearly a Subaru Impreza, at one point the best World Rally Car but hasn't been a contender for a while. Almost all are owned by rally fans who spend fantastic amounts of time tinkering with the car to get set it up an ultimate rally car. None of the owners race cars.

OpenSuse is a Nissan Cube, its insanely practical. It should be the modern boring family choice, but it manages to ve too quirky for your architect while not practical enough for van drivers.

I don't know the other distros well enough.

I run Debian btw

stevecrox , 3 months ago

Nah Linux Mint is a Kia Ceed.

Ubuntu is a Ford Focus, they successfully stole the volvo estate market (Debian). The car was fun, good value and very practical. It was everywhere. Then Ford started increasing the size, weight, price, etc.. killing the point of the Focus.

So along comes Kia trying to make a competitor in the Ceed.

In theory the Ceed is a great car, its super cheap, lots of cabin space, nippy, the inside has every modern convenance, but....

• It plays engine noises via speakers that aren't aligned with what you are doing
• The boot space is rubbish, so 5 people can happily travel in the car you barely fit a suitcase in it
• There is an steering sensitivity button that stays on at 70 MPH with no indication on the display
• A Vauxhall Nova just out accelerated you

Your left wondering why anyone is bothering with hot hatchbacks these days as you climb into your volvo

stevecrox , 4 months ago

The Silicon Valley companies massively over hired.

Using twitter as an example, they used to publicly disclose every site and their entire tech stack.

I have to write proposals and estimates and when Elon decided to axe half the company of 8000 I was curious..

I assigned the biggest functional team I could (e.g. just create units of 10 and plan for 2 teams to compete on everything). I assumed a full 20 person IT department at every site, etc.. Then I added 20% to my total and then 20% again for management.

I came up with an organisation of ~1200, Twitter was at 8000.

I had excluded content moderators and ad sellers because I had no experience in estimating that but it gives a idea of the problem.

I think the idea was to deny competition people but in reality that kind of staff bloat will hurt the big companies

stevecrox , 4 months ago

Firstly it was just a bit of fun but from memory...

Twitter was listed as having 2 data centers and a couple dozen satellite offices.

I forgot the data center estimate, but most of those satelites were tiny. Google gave me the floor area for a couple and they were for 20-60 people (assuming a desk consumes 6m2 and dividing the office area by that).

Assuming an IT department of 20 for such an office is rediculous but I was trying to overestimate.

stevecrox , 4 months ago

Uhh how?

The rate of new features/changes is far higher, uptime went through a bumpy transition but is back to normal. From an engineering perspective it supports my point.

Twitters issues are Elon scaring away advertisers/annoying governments/content creators through his hard line on free speech allowing an explosion in hate speech.

stevecrox , 5 months ago (edited 5 months ago)

It isn't a good move.

A domain name can cost as little as £10, similarly most email services cost ~£5-£15 per person per month. Its normally pretty easy to link a domain to an email provider and doesn't cost anything other than time.

If a company can't be bothered to implement the most basic online branding people will make their assumptions and some will filter your company out because of it. With the cost to implement so low (e.g. £160 per year), even the loss/gain of a single customer would justify it.

stevecrox , 5 months ago

I thought server side anti cheat was the most effective. Since it can't be modified by clients and tracks clients for impossible behaviour.