Thanks for this explanation. Can you give a similarly concrete example of how, according to the docs: "When you receive messages in order and the Pub/Sub service redelivers a message with an ordering key, Pub/Sub maintains order by also redelivering the subsequent messages with the same ordering key. The Pub/Sub service redelivers these messages in the order that it originally received them." I'm a little confused about what scenario with ordering would lead to the need to re-send multiple messages.
Hey everyone, thanks for taking a look at my team's project. I'm an ex-apple Software Engineer, mainly with Ruby chops. This project has really stretched me. C++ firmware, React Native mobile app, Ruby on Rails backend with React front-end, and Particle.io for the IOT glue. Our team is based out of Cambridge, MA and we even have one in China now. Let me know if you have any questions, happy to discuss.
People on here seem to think the show is terrible. Is the Big Bang Theory equally terrible? It similarly makes fun of stereotypes and many people love that show and many scientists often think it's atrocious. Maybe the same thing is happening here.. hitting a little to close to home for some people.
I don't know about equally, but it is terrible. Watch a clip with the laugh track off (you can find them on YouTube) and you will realise how unfunny it is.
The funniness diminishes when you do that because that is a live audience, not a laugh track. The actors have to adjust the timing of the dialog to fit around the laughs.
When you watch without the laughs, that leaves gaps that turn into weird pauses, and can destroy the timing of a joke or funny remark. Timing is often a big component to making a joke work.
> many people love that show and many scientists often think it's atrocious
Most people who don't like everything that's on TV think TBBT is atrocious. Not sure what it has to do with scientists, as it mostly tries to poke fun of nerd culture. And it fails even at that.
Wow, I really can't believe the negativity there. This is creative and amazing. The guy seems like a winner. The comments on here are dreadful. The point here was to make a statement and get eyeballs. This site already has accomplished that.
I completely agree. This resume is a great way to filter out companies looking for front end drones to sit in a cube and work in a bureaucracy.
He's identifying himself as fitting into a certain culture of organization. Some of the comments here are a perfect example! Anyone that criticizes this as "inefficient" or that it's "making getting the details difficult" is missing the point. He doesn't want a soul-dead HR minion to find his details.
I can believe and understand the negativity, because:
a) making a statement and getting eyeballs is not always a good thing—a lot depends what kind of statement it is and how exactly eyeballs were attracted.
b) understanding when you shouldn't do something just because you can is a very big plus for a creative person. Alas, this resume shows the extreme lack of it.
If this is a flawed idea you can let me know (and I'm open to your thoughts) but this is what I'm operating under right now: I, nor no one I know, uses FB events for casual get togethers. Want to get together for drinks at the bar tonight after work? I wouldn't use FB events. I could send text messages to friends sure, or I could call them sure, but this is a fun easy way to accomplish that. That's what I want, and I don't have anything else that fulfills that.. if there is something else it hasn't made its way onto my desk yet. So its just a simple way t odo that, that's the value proposition at the moment.
Thanks for the feedback, someone else mentioned this too.. so clearly its something I should address. And here I was thinking it was obvious :) I wonder if G+'s 'hangout' feature being a webcam thing made you think it could be as well?
1) When you don't know how to do something you don't know how much you should pay.. and surprisingly it takes less time to learn than you would think. I wrote off learning Rails thinking it was harder then it was.. Sure it has its nuances, but in 45 days I've gained a really good perspective on building an app. But to learn, really commit! Build an app then when you are done, build another, and then another.
2) You have to launch and as soon as possible. Nothing else is as important. Motivation will die, money will be lost, and you'll have no idea what people will want unless you do. Period.
3) People telling you something is a good idea is not the same as people willing to use it. You can't base spending money and time off people, especially your friends, thinking something is a good idea. You have to test the waters (see point 2).
4) Join the community. If you are a reader of Hacker News, but don't code join the community of coders. I can't tell you how much more fulfilling it is to show up at local Ruby events as a coder, feeling welcome as "one of them" as opposed to as an entrepreneur seen as just 'hawking an idea'. Really, it's a great community of people once you are on the same side of the equation.
5) Distill your idea down to its simplest form possible. Convoluted ideas are difficult to pull off, difficult to convey to potential users, and difficult to convey to investors. Focus focus focus.
re: number 4: the difference in reaction to coders vs. entrepreneurs looking for coders at local Ruby events has been amazing. I got much better reactions as a beginning but committed Ruby coder than the guys that were there looking for a technical cofounder to do that part of the work for them. Showing a willingness and real interest in the technology really helps establish a rapport, in ways that I wouldn't have even guessed at before I started learning to code six months ago.
I now think it's totally worth the experience to make the effort to learn, regardless of whether you plan to be a 'biz guy' or 'code guy' in the long run.
Also, re: point 3: no kidding. learned that the hard way in my previous life as a writer/photographer. I'm still trying to figure out how to get better at giving that kind of feedback.
