Api For Getting Quotes

The term “statelessness” is getting at the fact that the server doesn’t care what state the client is in.

Rea­sons Why I Loved Be­ing With Jen I love what a good friend you are. You’re re­ally en­gaged with the lives of the peo­ple you love. You or­ga­nize lovely ex­pe­ri­ences for them. You make an ef­fort with them, you’re pa­tient with them, even when they’re side­tracked by their chil­dren and can’t pri­or­i­tize you in the way you pri­or­i­tize them. You’ve got a gen­er­ous heart and it ex­tends to peo­ple you’ve never even met, whereas I think that ev­ery­one is out to get me. I used to say you were naive, but re­ally I was jeal­ous that you al­ways thought the best of peo­ple. You are a bit too anx­ious about be­ing seen to be a good per­son and you def­i­nitely go a bit over­board with your left-wing pol­i­tics to prove a point to ev­ery­one. But I know you re­ally do care. I know you’d sign pe­ti­tions and help peo­ple in need and vol­un­teer at the home­less shel­ter at Christ­mas even if no one knew about it. And that’s more than can be said for a lot of us. I love how quickly you read books and how ab­sorbed you get in a good story. I love watch­ing you lie on the sofa read­ing one from cover-to-cover. It’s like I’m in the room with you but you’re in a whole other gal­axy. I love that you’re al­ways try­ing to im­prove your­self. Whether it’s running marathons or set­ting your­self chal­lenges on an app to learn French or the fact you go to ther­apy ev­ery week. You work hard to be­come a bet­ter ver­sion of your­self. I think I prob­a­bly didn’t make my ad­mi­ra­tion for this known and in­stead it came off as ir­ri­ta­tion, which I don’t re­ally feel at all. I love how ded­i­cated you are to your fam­ily, even when they’re an­noy­ing you. Your loy­alty to them wound me up some­times, but it’s only be­cause I wish I came from a big fam­ily. I love that you al­ways know what to say in con­ver­sa­tion. You ask the right ques­tions and you know ex­actly when to talk and when to lis­ten. Ev­ery­one loves talk­ing to you be­cause you make ev­ery­one feel im­por­tant. I love your style. I know you think I prob­a­bly never no­ticed what you were wear­ing or how you did your hair, but I loved see­ing how you get ready, sit­ting in front of the full-length mir­ror in our bed­room while you did your make-up, even though there was a mir­ror on the dress­ing ta­ble. I love that you’re mad enough to swim in the English sea in No­vem­ber and that you’d pick up spi­ders in the bath with your bare hands. You’re brave in a way that I’m not. I love how free you are. You’re a very free per­son, and I never gave you the sat­is­fac­tion of say­ing it, which I should have done. No one knows it about you be­cause of your bor­ing, high-pres­sure job and your stuffy up­bring­ing, but I know what an ad­ven­turer you are un­der­neath all that. I love that you got drunk at Jack­son’s chris­ten­ing and you al­ways wanted to have one more drink at the pub and you never com­plained about get­ting up early to go to work with a hang­over. Other than Avi, you are the per­son I’ve had the most fun with in my life. And even though I gave you a hard time for al­ways try­ing to for al­ways try­ing to im­press your dad, I ac­tu­ally found it very adorable be­cause it made me see the child in you and the teenager in you, and if I could time-travel to any­where in his­tory, I swear, Jen, the only place I’d want to go is to the house where you grew up and hug you and tell you how beau­ti­ful and clever and funny you are. That you are spec­tac­u­lar even with­out all your sports trophies and mu­sic cer­tifi­cates and in­cred­i­ble grades and Ox­ford ac­cep­tance. I’m sorry that I loved you so much more than I liked my­self, that must have been a lot to carry. I’m sorry I didn’t take care of you the way you took care of me. And I’m sorry I didn’t take care of my­self, ei­ther. I need to work on it. I’m pleased that our break-up taught me that. I’m sorry I went so mental. I love you. I always will. I'm glad we met.

rickcarufel Monday, September 23, 2013 This is more like death throes than growing pains. When all is said and done Goodreads is nothing more than a glorified forum. Like other forums when the trolls are allowed to rule the roost they fail and close. All the complaints blaming authors is a smoke screen for the stalker trolls who don’t even know what a book review is. They think a book review is a weapon to be used against writers destroy their reputations, careers, livelihood and dreams. They are reacting in a frenzied exodus at the thought they will have be limited to using book reviews to review book and not to destroy writers. The goodreads site has been dominated by a stalker troll gang and is in ruins. Add to that the fact the API they sell is a total fraud. The trolls are going through goodreads and leaving hundreds if not thousands of 1-star ratings because they are angry they will no longer be allowed to use reviews for personal attacks on authors. Aside from the 1-star, no-read attack reviews from the trolls they also have a list of top reviewers posted on the site. The top six reviewers are posting over 1200 reviews a week. That means each of these people are reading and reviewing almost 30 books a day. How is that even possible? As a result they are under investigation for fraud by the FTC. I know that many complaints about the fraudulent API have been filed. So Goodreads is not growing it is dying, going the route of myspace and other social media sites that failed due to troll infestations that were allowed to get out of hand.

Because you cannot speak to unknown clients, there are only two solutions: either find your users and do a usability study, or be use case oriented. Work with use cases—that is, visions of the API user’s action—and then optimize specifically for these. Getting responses from users via a usability study is good and can verify that your expectations about the use cases are correct.

MONTH ONE ACTION PLAN Open a new checking account that is free of monthly maintenance fees. Notify your employer to have your direct deposit sent to the new account. Same with any automatic payments or transfers you make from your checking account—notify everyone of the new account. Balance your checkbook each month; verify all your withdrawals and deposits, and keep track that every bill you pay is recorded as a debit on your account. Open a new savings or money market account that is FDIC insured and carries a high APY. Make it a goal to build a savings account over time that has a balance large enough to cover up to eight months of living expenses. Sign up for automatic deposits into your savings account. If you have more than $100,000 at any one institution, make sure you understand the rules for getting full insurance coverage.

Platform dependence can be disastrous if not managed well. If you integrate too closely with a preexisting network, allowing them to control your distribution, engagement, and business model, you become just a feature of their network. Had Airbnb been conceived as a tool to manage Craigslist listings and nothing else, it would have served at the leisure of its parent platform—grow too large, or make a wrong move, and it might be existential. Frequently the larger network will simply reach up and duplicate functionality if it gets too popular—a playbook that Microsoft executed in the 1990s with Office and Internet Explorer, among others. Or if the underlying network decides that it no longer wants to provide the same level of API access, as both Twitter and Facebook eventually did, any products dependent on this became worthless overnight. In the end, cherry picking is an enormously powerful move because it exposes the fundamental asymmetry between the David and Goliath dynamic of networks. A new product can decide where to compete, focus on a single point, and build an atomic network—whereas a larger one finds it tough to defend every inch of its product experience. It’s one of the reasons why, particularly in consumer markets, it’s been so hard for “winner take all” to really happen in a literal way. The largest networks can take a lot, in many networks, but they remain vulnerable to any new upstart that uses cherry picking as a core strategy.

AWS and the Seven-Year Lead When creating Amazon Web Services (cloud computing), Amazon was essentially creating their own internal Internet Operating System (IOS) and then leveraging their technology infrastructure into a profit center. He said, “IT departments are recognizing that when they adopt AWS, they get more done. They spend less time on low value-add activities like managing datacenters, networking, operating system patches, capacity planning, database scaling, and so on and so on. Just as important, they get access to powerful APIs [Application Programing Interfaces] and tools that dramatically simplify building scalable, secure, robust, high-performance systems. And those APIs and tools are continuously and seamlessly upgraded behind the scenes, without customer effort.” —Bezos (2014 Letter) In other words, Amazon took the proprietary infrastructure they built for themselves and turned it into a service that any developer could use for their own purposes.

Salesforce API Integration Services Reduces Your CRM Cost, Get Easily Access, Flexible Salesforce Integration services With Certified Experts

He laid out the defining characteristics, workflow, and management as follows. A two-pizza team will: Be small. No more than ten people. Be autonomous. They should have no need to coordinate with other teams to get their work done. With the new service-based software architecture in place, any team could simply refer to the published application programming interfaces (APIs) for other teams. (More on this new software architecture to follow.) Be evaluated by a well-defined “fitness function.” This is the sum of a weighted series of metrics. Example: a team that is in charge of adding selection in a product category might be evaluated on: a)  how many new distinct items were added for the period (50 percent weighting) b)  how many units of those new distinct items were sold (30 percent weighting) c)  how many page views those distinct items received (20 percent weighting) Be monitored in real time. A team’s real-time score on its fitness function would be displayed on a dashboard next to all the other two-pizza teams’ scores. Be the business owner. The team will own and be responsible for all aspects of its area of focus, including design, technology, and business results. This paradigm shift eliminates the all-too-often heard excuses such as, “We built what the business folks asked us to, they just asked for the wrong product,” or “If the tech team had actually delivered what we asked for and did it on time, we would have hit our numbers.” Be led by a multidisciplined top-flight leader. The leader must have deep technical expertise, know how to hire world-class software engineers and product managers, and possess excellent business judgment. Be self-funding. The team’s work will pay for itself. Be approved in advance by the S-Team. The S-Team must approve the formation of every two-pizza team.

Management becomes more complex, too, because the staff has to reach across the organization at a level and consistency you never had to before: different departments, groups, and business units. For example, analytics and business intelligence teams never had to have the sheer levels of interaction with IT or engineering. The IT organization never had to explain the data format to the operations team. From both the technical and the management perspectives, teams didn’t have to work together before with as high of a bandwidth connection. There may have been some level of coordination before, but not this high. Other organizations face the complexity of data as a product instead of software or APIs as the product. They’ve never had to promote or evangelize the data available in the organization. With data pipelines, the data teams may not even know or control who has access to the data products. Some teams are very siloed. With small data, they’ve been able to get by. There wasn’t ever the need to reach out, coordinate, or cooperate. Trying to work with these maverick teams can be a challenge unto itself. This is really where management is more complicated.

management as follows. A two-pizza team will: Be small. No more than ten people. Be autonomous. They should have no need to coordinate with other teams to get their work done. With the new service-based software architecture in place, any team could simply refer to the published application programming interfaces (APIs) for other teams. (More on this new software architecture to follow.) Be evaluated by a well-defined “fitness function.” This is the sum of a weighted series of metrics.

Zapier is the prototypical example of this. It’s a juggernaut, and not only because it’s integrated with over 3,000 apps. It has widened its moat with nonpublic API integrations, meaning that if you want to compete with it, you have to go to that other company and get their internal development team to build an API for you. That’s a huge hill to climb if you want to launch a Zapier competitor.

devices and you can build an application. You don’t need to ask for anyone’s permission to innovate. Write the app, launch it on your endpoint, and bitcoin will route it, because bitcoin is a dumb network. That is the power of innovation on the internet. It’s innovation without permission. It’s innovation without central approval. It’s innovation without a broad network upgrade. And that means bitcoin is not a specific financial network. It’s not a financial network for large transactions or small transactions, fast transactions or slow transactions. It’s whatever you want to use it for, based upon what you choose to do at the endpoint. Compare that to the current banking system. The current banking system is built around very smart networks, absolutely and tightly controlled to deliver very specific applications to very dumb endpoints. Even with your most sophisticated online banking, all you can do with your bank is access some HTML that delivers a set of services that they decided they were going to give you. You get no APIs, no ability to run additional applications, no ability to upgrade or innovate or change anything unless the entire network changes to support your new application. The current system has networks for large payments, small payments, or fast payments, but it’s not all of the above. Bitcoin is all of those things because it’s not discriminating, it’s neutral, it doesn’t care, it’s dumb. The power of pushing intelligence to the edge, of not making decisions in the center, moves the innovation into the hands of its end users and gives those end users the ability to build applications that are so niche that only a handful of people around the world need them. And they can build those applications without asking for anyone’s permission.

If user-controllable data is passed to these APIs, an attacker may be able to exploit these to access arbitrary files on the server filesystem. fopen readfile file fpassthru gzopen gzfile gzpassthru readgzfile copy rename rmdir mkdir unlink file_get_contents file_put_contents parse_ini_file

The team API should explicitly consider usability by other teams: Will other teams find it easy and straightforward to interact with us, or will it be difficult and confusing? How easy will it be for a new team to get on board with our code and working practices? How do we respond to pull requests and other suggestions from other teams? Is our team backlog and product roadmap easily visible and understandable by other teams?

You don’t want to understand the design of a car to drive it. You don’t need to understand chemistry to clean teeth. In a similar way, you don’t need to understand Windows’ code to write a simple Win32 application. You can become pretty efficient in programming for Windows just by having a working knowledge of the APIs (in this case the Win32 API) and knowing where to find the appropriate documentation. This is true for almost all systems. To code for Linux, Java, and the Web, you can learn just a tip of an iceberg and that is enough to get most of the coding done. The reason for this is the abstraction that wraps around every library or framework. This abstraction—the API—hides all the complexities.

Conventional software assumes that API users are second-class citizens who shouldn’t get full access to the software’s secret sauce for fear of losing competitive advantage. Twitter’s creators recognized that there was another kind of competitive advantage that came from complete openness: the advantage that comes from having the largest and most diverse ecosystem of software applications being built on your platform. Call it cooperative advantage. The burden of coming up with good ideas for the product is no longer shouldered exclusively by the company itself. On an open platform, good ideas can come from anywhere.

The Koch method for oil measurement followed a few simple steps. First, Dubose dropped his gauge line to see how deep the oil was. If the gauge line said it was fifteen feet and two inches, Dubose would record it as fifteen feet and one inch. Already, this meant that Dubose was getting an inch worth of oil for free. This was called “cutting the top.” Then he measured the “gravity” of the oil, which determined its quality. The top-dollar crude oil fell within an API measurement of gravity between 40.0 and 44.9, so Dubose fudged the numbers to push it outside of that range. This way, Koch would pay the oil producer less for the oil, even if the quality was ideal. If the oil measured 40.0, then he would record it as 39.2, for example. After Dubose drained the tank, he would take his final depth measurement, which was recorded to show how much oil Koch had taken. If Dubose measured that fourteen inches of oil were left, he would record it as fifteen inches. This meant he was paying for one less inch of oil than he had taken. This technique was called “bumping the bottom.