All of our processing is done via Ray (https://www.ray.io/). Our early benchmarks are about 5k mesesages per second on a single 4 core VM, but we believe we can increase the with some more optimizations.
This bench mark was consuming a Google Cloud Pub/Sub stream and outputting to BigQuery.
Sanders plan will adversely impact the bay area, and home prices in particular. If you're making over $250k, the social security phase out goes away, you have 2.2% of extra income tax, and 6.4% of new payroll taxes. Add in 11% for CA, and you could easily be losing 70% to tax all-in at the margin. It'll be tough to get employers to pay an extra $100k a year to cover a $30k rent differential. Considering that you can already afford much higher quality housing with a higher standard of living outside of the bay area on half the money, why stay out here? San Francisco is gross anyway.
This plan will push the bay area in particular far to the right on the laffer curve. What'll happen to US GDP growth if the tech industry starts imploding and moving out? It's possible to make more in the bay area than in the rest of the country, but if you're only retaining 30% of that excess, all of which is soaked up by long-time landowners and the insane cost of living, why bother.
Where do you think the people that would live in new luxury condos go if there are no new luxury condos? Any chance they may buy up existing rental properties and evict long-time residents?
The idea (and I don't know if it is correct) is that a significant proportion of luxury apartments go to foreign investors seeking secure places to store cash in the case that Russia/China/Some oil dictatorship decides they don't like the wealthy individual in question anymore and they have to flee. Such investors don't care if the property is worth $1 million or $5 million merely that in an emergency it is worth some amount in the millions. There is also a question in the UK if such investors are engaging in money laundering using our property market. This segment of buyers therefore tends to skew the market with what would otherwise be irrational buying practises (extremely overpriced purchases, several million $/£ cash-in-a-suitcase purchases etc).
The problem for middle class people being that the domestic luxury condo buyers then get pushed into midrange property market where they outbid the middle class. The middle class then move into the low range property market outbidding the working class etc.
If new construction is allowed though, the people parking money will encourage more development. You can always add another 5 floors to the top of the building which nobody lives in like they do in NYC.
Nationally, rents rose 3% in 2013. 6% may not seem like much to you, but some kids got a few more Christmas presents than they would have without the increased housing.
Did the people that charged $200 million to build healthcare.gov get to keep the money after the project failed? What about the people that allocated that money, do they still have their jobs?
It seems kind of disingenuous to ask engineers to do a "tour of duty" at a substantially reduced rate, when they could instead contract at normal rates and actually deliver working software. If you want to help the government, contract at normal rates and actually deliver high-quality, working software - don't take a pay cut to do it.
If the people that can afford $3,000/month for rent don't have a place to spend it, they'll just bid up the price of the other housing. Nobody is going to build hovels out of the gate, affordable housing is luxury housing that was built 50 years ago.
Meanwhile, in Washington DC, rents are falling because of the increase in supply, while both the population and number of jobs in increasing. DC also has a unique character that they've been able to preserve despite growth; San Francisco needs to do the same, and fast.
San Franciscans need to start pushing the city for a lot of new housing units, probably 100,000, with expedited planning, approvals, and building if they don't want to get completely priced out of the market.
Goldman Sachs 2011 net income was $162,913 per employee. Average pay was $367,057. It's harder to get data on Google, but it looks like the mid-career median salary is $141,000. Google's Gross Profit (Total Revenue less Cost of Revenue) was $24.7B in 2011, and GS's was $24.5B. At the same time, Google had 32,467 employees to GS's 35,700. Yet, the Google net income was $9.7B compared to $4.4B on the GS side. The difference seems to be made up entirely by the difference in employee compensation.
Google's success doesn't and won't carry America's economy. And most of google's top paid employees are programmers.
It's the success of companies that design/make things that will carry America's economy. And these companies are losing their top prospects to Wall Street. Not a good trend.
I recommend the New Wave, though I also have a Charge TTi. I find myself using them all the time, and they last a really long time. I still have, and use regularly, the Leatherman Super Tool that I got in the mid 90's. I keep one in my office, one in my care, my girlfriends car, and one in the utility room. Really nice to have a solid multitool nearby whenever you need one.
