The note at the bottom about web pages is interesting. I always wish browsers followed that behavior so the "Work Offline" button would actually work when I got on a plane. I'd be happy to sacrifice 10GB+ of my SSD for the browser to permanently cache (at least for the life of the Cache-Control header).
I wonder how performant a proxy like Squid would be to run locally with a disk cache.
Yes, they allow setting holds. Can't say if they are worth the money though. I've climbed on a demo and didn't particularly enjoy it. It's better suited for people working on endurance (you can climb vertically for hours) instead of technical ability.
I've climbed on well set routes and poorly set routes. At higher grades, good setting makes all the difference between an enjoyable, hard challenge and something I never want to try again.
I like the recent trend at most gyms to let members rate routes on a 5-star scale. You start to recognize good setters and climb their routes first. I wouldn't call it "setter worship", but good setting is something I can appreciate.
I live in Boulder, so there's no such thing as a small climbing gym here. As far as I can tell, people rate the routes. IMHO, the ratings end up being really accurate, one gym (Movement) even uses three significant digits.
I'm curious about the shuttering timelines that failed startups use. Three weeks is awfully fast to go from operational to shutdown for a service that customers rely on. I see two options, either could be reasons that a startup would fail:
1. Customers don't rely on the service.
2. There are no customers.
Otherwise, why not leave the servers on for another month?
EDIT: 3. The service isn't automated enough to be run without human intervention, even for a month. Which would also likely create failure when it scales.
Well, this politician is getting free money from me, which is a step beyond free labor. I signed up to volunteer for his web dev team a couple months ago, but never heard anything back. I guess they (correctly) decided to hire people for that, since it's not an option on his website anymore.
Yeah, it's really shocking to see how US carriers compare to the rest of the world (choose US in the Countries dropdown under the chart). I knew our wired internet speeds were lagging behind, but didn't realize LTE was that far behind as well.
With Google jumping into the wired internet business with Google Fiber, I'm surprised they haven't bought a controlling interest in T-Mobile yet (as Deutsche Telekom is always trying to unload T-Mobile on someone).
I don't understand why they would want to. Cell phone carriers aren't high profit business and has a ton of employees. Verizon has 180k employees and has net income of I see around 5billion profit on around 100 billion in income last year. Verizon FiOS pretty much got last Verizon CEO fired.
Google margins are way higher and Verizon employees more call center reps then all of Google in total.
From my understanding Google fiber is basically cheap dark fiber they got with some great regulatory concessions.
My view of it is Google spends enough just to prompt others to take actions (see their involvement in specturm bidding). Though my post might come off as judgemental, I'm not judging Google - that's merely good business for them to do. Wireless companies themselves are hardly examples of efficiency.
I don't see how them having controlling stake in TMobile helps them on that goal. I don't see either how wireless carriers have a real way to limit Googls mobile ad. I think Android alone accomplishes that goal, and until and unless phone carriers role out their own os alternatives that people don't hate, they'll be forced to offer Android.
Their involvement with spectrum bidding got them open access rights for only a few million.