Profile

Cover photo
Michael Fiedler (Mike)
Works at Datadog
Lives in New York, NY
306 followers|31,057 views
AboutPostsPhotosYouTube

Stream

Michael Fiedler

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
1
Add a comment...

Michael Fiedler

Shared publicly  - 
 
#IfIHadGlass, I would probably wear it to augment my life. Biking, skydiving, or when refereeing roller derby, for instant recall of plays, or capturing those special fleeting moments. Keeping my busy life in more order, and staying active all the time.
1
Add a comment...

Michael Fiedler

Discussion  - 
 
Some of the FFS Crew attended DevOpsDays NYC 2013 (rescheduled due to Sandy). After two days, we sit down for not one, but two! talks - one with Mathias Meyer, of Travis-CI, the other an overall wrap up of the conference with +Nathen Harvey , +Patrick Debois and +Julian Dunn and myself.

Links:

http://foodfightshow.org/2013/01/devopsdays-with-matthias-meyer.html
http://foodfightshow.org/2013/01/devopsdays-nyc-thats-a-wrap.html
1
1
Michael Fiedler's profile photoNathen Harvey's profile photo
2 comments
 
Done. There's a "Share" button next to the "+1" button below a post.
Add a comment...

Michael Fiedler

Shared publicly  - 
 
Curious: Do you check G+ (more/less/same) than other social networks you are subscribed to? (Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Friendster(!), etc)
1
Shmuel Yonah's profile photoChristine Sica's profile photoNaomi Libicki's profile photoMike Kunkel's profile photo
6 comments
 
less defiantly less. the date of the question Vs the date of the answer illustrates that...
Add a comment...

Michael Fiedler

Shared publicly  - 
 
Want to see what it looked like?
4
Add a comment...

Michael Fiedler

Shared publicly  - 
 
Seems like the current primary use of G+.... is to talk about G+.
12
Matt Graham's profile photoCherry Fury's profile photoMichelle T.'s profile photoNikki Mergency's profile photo
6 comments
 
Im trying to figure this all out now LOL
Add a comment...
Have him in circles
306 people
Yaniv Skornik's profile photo
Joseph Smith's profile photo
Melenee Suarez Burns's profile photo
Gavin Lee's profile photo
Shmuel Yonah's profile photo
Andy Chase's profile photo
Dotan Zomet's profile photo
Vince Milosevich and 4 more were tagged in Michael Fiedler's photo.

Michael Fiedler

Shared publicly  - 
1

Michael Fiedler

Discussion  - 
 
 
Some of the FFS Crew attended DevOpsDays NYC 2013 (rescheduled due to Sandy). After two days, we sit down for not one, but two! talks - one with Mathias Meyer, of Travis-CI, the other an overall wrap up of the conference with +Nathen Harvey , +Patrick Debois and +Julian Dunn and myself.

Links:

http://foodfightshow.org/2013/01/devopsdays-with-matthias-meyer.html
http://foodfightshow.org/2013/01/devopsdays-nyc-thats-a-wrap.html
1
Add a comment...

Michael Fiedler

Shared publicly  - 
 
Been looking for this for a few days.
Jean-Baptiste Quéru originally shared:
 
Dizzying but invisible depth

You just went to the Google home page.

Simple, isn't it?

What just actually happened?

Well, when you know a bit of about how browsers work, it's not quite that simple. You've just put into play HTTP, HTML, CSS, ECMAscript, and more. Those are actually such incredibly complex technologies that they'll make any engineer dizzy if they think about them too much, and such that no single company can deal with that entire complexity.

Let's simplify.

You just connected your computer to www.google.com.

Simple, isn't it?

What just actually happened?

Well, when you know a bit about how networks work, it's not quite that simple. You've just put into play DNS, TCP, UDP, IP, Wifi, Ethernet, DOCSIS, OC, SONET, and more. Those are actually such incredibly complex technologies that they'll make any engineer dizzy if they think about them too much, and such that no single company can deal with that entire complexity.

Let's simplify.

You just typed www.google.com in the location bar of your browser.

Simple, isn't it?

What just actually happened?

Well, when you know a bit about how operating systems work, it's not quite that simple. You've just put into play a kernel, a USB host stack, an input dispatcher, an event handler, a font hinter, a sub-pixel rasterizer, a windowing system, a graphics driver, and more, all of those written in high-level languages that get processed by compilers, linkers, optimizers, interpreters, and more. Those are actually such incredibly complex technologies that they'll make any engineer dizzy if they think about them too much, and such that no single company can deal with that entire complexity.

Let's simplify.

You just pressed a key on your keyboard.

Simple, isn't it?

What just actually happened?

Well, when you know about bit about how input peripherals work, it's not quite that simple. You've just put into play a power regulator, a debouncer, an input multiplexer, a USB device stack, a USB hub stack, all of that implemented in a single chip. That chip is built around thinly sliced wafers of highly purified single-crystal silicon ingot, doped with minute quantities of other atoms that are blasted into the crystal structure, interconnected with multiple layers of aluminum or copper, that are deposited according to patterns of high-energy ultraviolet light that are focused to a precision of a fraction of a micron, connected to the outside world via thin gold wires, all inside a packaging made of a dimensionally and thermally stable resin. The doping patterns and the interconnects implement transistors, which are grouped together to create logic gates. In some parts of the chip, logic gates are combined to create arithmetic and bitwise functions, which are combined to create an ALU. In another part of the chip, logic gates are combined into bistable loops, which are lined up into rows, which are combined with selectors to create a register bank. In another part of the chip, logic gates are combined into bus controllers and instruction decoders and microcode to create an execution scheduler. In another part of the chip, they're combined into address and data multiplexers and timing circuitry to create a memory controller. There's even more. Those are actually such incredibly complex technologies that they'll make any engineer dizzy if they think about them too much, and such that no single company can deal with that entire complexity.

Can we simplify further?

In fact, very scarily, no, we can't. We can barely comprehend the complexity of a single chip in a computer keyboard, and yet there's no simpler level. The next step takes us to the software that is used to design the chip's logic, and that software itself has a level of complexity that requires to go back to the top of the loop.

Today's computers are so complex that they can only be designed and manufactured with slightly less complex computers. In turn the computers used for the design and manufacture are so complex that they themselves can only be designed and manufactured with slightly less complex computers. You'd have to go through many such loops to get back to a level that could possibly be re-built from scratch.

Once you start to understand how our modern devices work and how they're created, it's impossible to not be dizzy about the depth of everything that's involved, and to not be in awe about the fact that they work at all, when Murphy's law says that they simply shouldn't possibly work.

For non-technologists, this is all a black box. That is a great success of technology: all those layers of complexity are entirely hidden and people can use them without even knowing that they exist at all. That is the reason why many people can find computers so frustrating to use: there are so many things that can possibly go wrong that some of them inevitably will, but the complexity goes so deep that it's impossible for most users to be able to do anything about any error.

That is also why it's so hard for technologists and non-technologists to communicate together: technologists know too much about too many layers and non-technologists know too little about too few layers to be able to establish effective direct communication. The gap is so large that it's not even possible any more to have a single person be an intermediate between those two groups, and that's why e.g. we end up with those convoluted technical support call centers and their multiple tiers. Without such deep support structures, you end up with the frustrating situation that we see when end users have access to a bug database that is directly used by engineers: neither the end users nor the engineers get the information that they need to accomplish their goals.

That is why the mainstream press and the general population has talked so much about Steve Jobs' death and comparatively so little about Dennis Ritchie's: Steve's influence was at a layer that most people could see, while Dennis' was much deeper. On the one hand, I can imagine where the computing world would be without the work that Jobs did and the people he inspired: probably a bit less shiny, a bit more beige, a bit more square. Deep inside, though, our devices would still work the same way and do the same things. On the other hand, I literally can't imagine where the computing world would be without the work that Ritchie did and the people he inspired. By the mid 80s, Ritchie's influence had taken over, and even back then very little remained of the pre-Ritchie world.

Finally, last but not least, that is why our patent system is broken: technology has done such an amazing job at hiding its complexity that the people regulating and running the patent system are barely even aware of the complexity of what they're regulating and running. That's the ultimate bikeshedding: just like the proverbial discussions in the town hall about a nuclear power plant end up being about the paint color for the plant's bike shed, the patent discussions about modern computing systems end up being about screen sizes and icon ordering, because in both cases those are the only aspect that the people involved in the discussion are capable of discussing, even though they are irrelevant to the actual function of the overall system being discussed.
3
1
Add a comment...

Michael Fiedler

Shared publicly  - 
 
I had one of those back then...
Alasdair Allan originally shared:
 
Interesting visualisation of the GeoCities torrent file, "The Deleted City visualization depicts GeoCities on a map, using the service's own neighborhood metaphor to highlight the way in which the websites ("homesteads") were organized. The size of the "lots" and locations demonstrates the different sizes of the various neighbourhoods," http://deletedcity.net/. (via +Audrey Watters and the O'Reilly Radar).
1
Add a comment...

Michael Fiedler

Shared publicly  - 
 
If you use Open Source software, and end up writing a lot of code to integrate/support that software with other software packages, should you in turn make your code open source?
1
Niki Gallo Hammond's profile photoMichael Fiedler's profile photoAmi Setton's profile photo
7 comments
 
First, I'll cop out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work
Then - in a very loose, oversimplified sense - are you creating a modified version of something, or if you suggest "integration", just using it in some way? The former would be a derivative work. In the latter case, you could (in some cases) keep all the glue code which lives outside the "work" as closed source.
As far as "*should*", I think that's an ethical and practical-resources decision :)
Add a comment...
People
Have him in circles
306 people
Yaniv Skornik's profile photo
Joseph Smith's profile photo
Melenee Suarez Burns's profile photo
Gavin Lee's profile photo
Shmuel Yonah's profile photo
Andy Chase's profile photo
Dotan Zomet's profile photo
Work
Occupation
Operations Engineering
Employment
  • Datadog
    Director of Technical Operations, 2013 - present
  • Magnetic
    Director of Engineering Operations, 2012 - 2013
  • 10gen
    DevOps, 2011 - 2012
  • Wireless Generation
    Senior Systems Administrator, 2007 - 2010
  • Mobimate
    Systems Administrator, 2005 - 2007
  • Self-employed
    Systems Operations Consultant, 2010 - 2011
Basic Information
Gender
Male
Looking for
Friends, Networking
Relationship
In a relationship
Story
Tagline
Human being extraordinaire
Introduction
Systems, roller derby, skydiving, improv.
Not much time for other things.
Bragging rights
Have jumped out of planes, lived in Israel for 20 years, referee roller derby
Places
Map of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has lived
Currently
New York, NY
Previously
Austin, Texas - Betar Illit, Israel - Jerusalem, Israel - Long Beach, California - Nachliel, Israel
Links