Assuming Oracle has a very strong corporate environment as I expect it to, one could presume that many of their employees might be less inclined toward taking initiatives, ownership, and the likes while perhaps being better at taking directives.
All else equal, we cannot fit people into a mold; your interview process should help you answer these questions.
What you say is true; I learned, and am still reminded of it, the hard way from time to time.
But it's nothing more than a problem waiting to be solved.
In my case I'm solving this problem by using static sites and managed web hosting.
Put simplicity where simplicity is due and segregate the more complex requirements. Static sites are going a very long way now, and a lot can be done with JavaScript on the client-side with modern browsers.
In many cases no back-end services are needed, but when they are, it can make a lot of sense to segregate them in a way they can power multiple sites with the same functionality requirements.
It's really up to the needs you have but in the end I feel it can really be worth it.
Heck, latest web standards let us componentize elements, we might all be better off with a global database that contains all of them in JSON or YAML format which we can load/dump from and that contains some kind of ACL (ala Firebase can do that).
Static sites are different. That sounds like a much better model for hosting. It doesn't matter if the servers get destroyed if there is little to clean up.
> Guess how many side effects have been widely known since the 1970's?
Does this make it fine not to expect a doctor to inspect the list of known side effects for drugs his patients are taking?
I've heard this very story a few times already, perhaps the sources of data widely accepted by doctors are not up to par with what non-doctors consider as accurate, in some cases anyway.
Without knowing this specific case, I can't say for sure. But my broader point is that the knowledge base required of doctors is so huge that even if it's not excusable, it is understandable. Like online community moderation, it's really easy to point to cases where doctors got it wrong and assume it's all for naught.
Absolutely the accuracy of doctors should be improved, but the bar is not "are you as good as a UCSF resident?" (one of the best programs nationally) but "are you better than nothing?"
It just seems crazy to me to suggest that the median doctor, i.e. at least half, is worthless.
yeah, arrogant comment that was. I presume the guy always does his work at 100% or more, flawless, checking every detail and aspect, thinking 10 minutes before saying anything... We all have our tiny and bigger faults, yet somehow when it comes to health we expect impossible.
I have similar crappy experiences like most people here, and tended to hate all medical personnel uniformly. Then I started dating a young doctor - still can't wrap my head around how overworked over-stressed and underpaid piece of shit work that is.
Bear in mind that we're talking about biggest university hospital in Switzerland. Working ridiculous amount of hours (normal shift can be 10-13 hours, overtime unpaid), night shifts that will just mess you up mentally, crazy and dangerous patients, drug addicts, very real danger of contracting stuff like HIV or hepatititis C by single tiny mistake, or actually killing somebody by overlooking some tiny fact about N-th patient that night. You can end your career for life and end up in jail and/or with lifelong debt by one mistake. ONE. Even after directly saving life of 500 other people.
Compared to my comfy corporate job, where I earn much more, did get mistake or two in production over last 5 years (nothing critical like making loss, but still), well... We should be thankful that anybody clever is actually still doing that job. Most of them could earn more and have actually a life someplace else. Blame how system is setup much more than individuals forced to exist in it.
You're at least partly right about sites being crawled differently depending on popularity. I think the factors may not be limited to popularity alone, but we see this behavior documented in the crawling rate documentation Google provides its users/clients so there is no reason it couldn't apply to other "expensive" actions their crawlers do.
How this might work with the most popular sites out there?
We see it in on-page answers that provide extracts of pages with the answers to questions asked in search phrases that include a reference to the document they were sourced from.
Matt Cutts used to qualify sites like Wikipedia as "reputable" to the eyes of the search engine.
If you're interested in the export process: I use the Nikola static site generator to publish some of my org file as it supports multiple markup formats including org.
One evening, Master Foo and Nubi attended a gathering of programmers who had met to learn from each other. One of the programmers asked Nubi to what school he and his master belonged. Upon being told they were followers of the Great Way of Unix, the programmer grew scornful.
“The command-line tools of Unix are crude and backward,” he scoffed. “Modern, properly designed operating systems do everything through a graphical user interface.”
Master Foo said nothing, but pointed at the moon. A nearby dog began to bark at the master's hand.
“I don't understand you!” said the programmer.
Master Foo remained silent, and pointed at an image of the Buddha. Then he pointed at a window.
“What are you trying to tell me?” asked the programmer.
Master Foo pointed at the programmer's head. Then he pointed at a rock.
“Why can't you make yourself clear?” demanded the programmer.
Master Foo frowned thoughtfully, tapped the programmer twice on the nose, and dropped him in a nearby trashcan.
As the programmer was attempting to extricate himself from the garbage, the dog wandered over and piddled on him.
At that moment, the programmer achieved enlightenment.
--Master Foo Discourses on the Graphical User Interface
Yes ofcourse. It is am open chat, no private conversations are possible for the chat. But when user register, they can send private messages to each other. These i can not read.
Assuming Oracle has a very strong corporate environment as I expect it to, one could presume that many of their employees might be less inclined toward taking initiatives, ownership, and the likes while perhaps being better at taking directives.
All else equal, we cannot fit people into a mold; your interview process should help you answer these questions.
My two cents.