Episode 173 of The SitePoint Podcast is now available! This week the panel is made up of our regular host Louis Simoneau (@rssaddict), Stephan Segraves (@ssegraves) and Patrick O’Keefe (@ifroggy).

SitePoint Podcast的第173集现已发布！ 本周的座谈会由我们的定期主持人Louis Simoneau( @rssaddict )，Stephan Segraves( @ssegraves )和Patrick O'Keefe( @ifroggy )组成。

下载此剧集 (Download this Episode)

You can download this episode as a standalone MP3 file. Here’s the link:

您可以将本集下载为独立的MP3文件。 这是链接：

• SitePoint Podcast #173: Unleash The Chaos Monkey (MP3, 32:00, 30.8MB)

  SitePoint Podcast＃173：释放混乱的猴子 (MP3，32:00，30.8MB)

剧集摘要 (Episode Summary)

The panel discuss Microsoft launching it’s new Outlook web mail service, password-less logins and more!

小组讨论Microsoft启动其新的Outlook Web Mail服务，无密码登录等等！

Here are the main topics covered in this episode:

以下是本集中介绍的主要主题：

• Outlook.com – New Webmail from Microsoft

  Outlook.com –来自Microsoft的新Webmail

• XOXCO – More on password-less login

  XOXCO –有关无密码登录的更多信息

• Netflix/SimianArmy (including Chaos Monkey) · GitHub via Netflix Open Sources Chaos Monkey – A Tool Designed To Cause Failure So You Can Make A Stronger Cloud | TechCrunch

  Netflix / SimianArmy(包括Chaos Monkey)·通过Netflix开放源代码的 GitHub Chaos Monkey –一种旨在引起故障的工具，因此您可以 打造 更强大的云| TechCrunch

Browse the full list of links referenced in the show at http://delicious.com/sitepointpodcast/173.

浏览http://delicious.com/sitepointpodcast/173中显示的参考链接的完整列表。

主持人聚光灯 (Host Spotlights)

• Stephan: battellemedia.com – What we lose when we glorify cashless

  斯蒂芬： battellemedia.com –当我们赞美无现金时我们会失去什么

• Patrick: Nas – Daughters (Official Music Video) – YouTube

  帕特里克： 纳斯–女儿(官方音乐录影带)– YouTube

• Louis: intridea – grape – Framework for APIs

  路易： intridea –葡萄– API框架

面试成绩单 (Interview Transcript)

Louis: Hello, and welcome to the SitePoint podcast. We’re back this week with a little panel show discussing the week’s events in the web. With me on the show today are Patrick and Steven, Kevin is away this week. Hi, guys.

路易斯：您好，欢迎来到SitePoint播客。 我们本周回来了，有一个小组讨论会在网上讨论了本周的活动。 帕特里克(Patrick)和史蒂文(Steven)今天和我一起演出，凯文(Kevin)本周离开。 嗨，大家好。

Steven: Howdy, howdy.

史蒂文：你好，你好。

Patrick: Hey, Louis, we were so close to having all four of us back together again. This close.

帕特里克：嘿，路易，我们几乎要重新回到我们四个人之间。 这关。

Louis: We were minutes away, minutes away, but Kevin had a last-minute thing come up. But Steven’s back. Good to have you back, Steven.

路易斯：我们相距仅数分钟之遥，但凯文有最后一刻出现。 但是史蒂文回来了。 很高兴你回来，史蒂文。

Patrick: Welcome back, Steven.

帕特里克：欢迎回来，史蒂文。

Steven: Thank you, guys. It’s been weird not being on the show for a couple weeks.

史蒂文：谢谢你们。 几个星期没出现在节目上很奇怪。

Louis: It’s been weird not having you on the show for a couple weeks.

路易斯：几个星期没来参加演出真是很奇怪。

Patrick: Given that it’s your first day back, do you want to kick us off?

帕特里克(Patrick)：鉴于今天已经是您的第一天，您想开始我们吗？

Steven: Sure. I think some news just came out today about Outlook and the new Outlook.com. Microsoft announcing that they’re going to get rid of Hotmail.com or merge it into this new Outlook.com and they’re calling it “modern e-mail for the next billion mailboxes”. Kind of cheesy but it looks good. Kind of looks a little like G-mail. The Microsoft blog for Office has a pretty good description of what they’ve tried to do, and one of those things is reduce the clutter around your mail. It looks pretty cool. I don’t know. What do you guys think?

史蒂文：好的。 我认为今天就发布了一些有关Outlook和新Outlook.com的消息 。 微软宣布他们将摆脱Hotmail.com或将其合并到新的Outlook.com中，并将其称为“用于下一个十亿个邮箱的现代电子邮件”。 有点俗气，但看起来不错。 有点像G-mail。 Microsoft Office的Microsoft博客很好地描述了他们尝试执行的操作，其中之一是减少邮件周围的混乱情况。 看起来很酷。 我不知道。 你们有什么感想？

Louis: I am trying, I’ve been since a couple of minutes before this show, I’ve been trying to get into this thing. Oh my God. It just keeps going. I’ve been trying to get into it. Basically, every time I go to sign in to some Microsoft, and this has been the case for, like, probably more than a decade now because you had a, whatever it was, Passport was it that it used to be called and then that become the Live account and then I had a Xbox account and basically every time I try and sign in, it’s like, “No, no, no, you’ve already got an account.” And I’m like, “I have no idea.” Now I’ve been battling a captcha, for a few minutes now. Let’s try this one again. I’ve tried this three times. Hey! No, no, I failed the captcha again.

路易斯：我一直在努力，自从演出前几分钟以来，我一直在努力研究这个东西。 哦，我的上帝。 它一直在继续。 我一直在尝试进入。 基本上，每次我登录某个Microsoft时，情况就是这样，例如，可能已经有十多年了，因为无论您使用什么，Passport都曾经被称为它，然后成为Live帐户，然后我有了一个Xbox帐户，基本上每次我尝试登录时，就像，“不，不，不，您已经有一个帐户。” 我想，“我不知道。” 现在，我一直在与验证码作斗争，现在已经有几分钟了。 让我们再试一次。 我已经试过三遍了。 嘿! 不，不，我再次失败了验证码。

Steven: Let’s do a screen share here. We can read that for you.

史蒂文：让我们在这里分享屏幕。 我们可以为您阅读。

Louis: Basically, I can’t get into this thing. I’ve tried. I tried to just set up an account that I could use, just to see what it looked like. “You’ve reached the limit for number of attempts. These limits help us protect against spam. . .”

路易斯：基本上，我不能涉足这件事。 我试过了。 我试图设置一个我可以使用的帐户，只是为了查看它的外观。 “您已达到尝试次数的极限。 这些限制有助于我们防范垃圾邮件。 。 。”

Steven: You’re done.

史蒂文：完了。

Louis: I don’t even know. OK. Look, I can’t do it but I can check this thing out. I tried. I did, honestly, give it my all, but I’m not going to be able to have a look. It does look nice though. It looks like modern webmail. It does look a little bit like G-mail, but it also has its own aesthetic. Are there any features that are really sort of unique, killer features?

路易斯：我什至不知道。 好。 看，我做不到，但是我可以检查一下。 我试过了。 老实说，我确实尽了全力，但是我无法看一眼。 它看起来确实不错。 看起来像现代网络邮件。 它看起来确实有点像G-mail，但是它也有其自身的美感。 有没有真正独特的杀手级功能？

Steven: It does have some integration with Skype.

史蒂文：它确实与Skype集成在一起。

Louis: Oh yeah.

路易斯：哦，是的。

Steven: Which is kind of cool. Other than that, I don’t see anything that’s just going to blow people’s minds, reading through the features list. Now they do have this thing where they have the web apps, the free Office web apps included so you can edit your attachments without actually leaving the Inbox. So if you have, I don’t know, a photo or an Excel spreadsheet, you can just edit it there inside of the e-mail when it’s attached, which is kind of cool.

史蒂文：太酷了。 除此之外，在阅读功能列表时，我看不到任何会引起人们注意的东西。 现在他们在拥有Web应用程序的地方确实拥有了这个东西，包括免费的Office Web应用程序，因此您可以编辑附件而无需实际离开收件箱。 因此，如果您不知道有照片或Excel电子表格，则可以在附加了电子邮件后在其中进行编辑，这很酷。

Louis: Is this completely replacing Hotmail?

路易斯：这会完全取代Hotmail吗？

Steven: That’s the way I read it. It says that it’s going to try to move completely away from Hotmail. One of the bylines I saw on Twitter that was pointing to this said, “Goodbye, Hotmail,” so I don’t see anything about the end of life for Hotmail, in their release.

史蒂文：那是我的阅读方式。 它说它将试图完全摆脱Hotmail。 我在Twitter上看到的一条指向这一点的注释说：“再见，Hotmail，”因此，在它们发布时，我看不到有关Hotmail寿命终止的任何信息。

Louis: “If you’re a Hotmail customer and want to upgrade to the Outlook.com preview, just click “upgrade” in the Options menu of Hotmail. Your e-mail address, password, contacts, old e-mail and rules will remain unchanged and you can send/receive e-mail from your @hotmail.com or @msn.com or @live.com address. You’ll experience it all in a new Outlook.com preview interface. You can also add an outlook.com e-mail address to your account, if you want.”

路易斯： “如果您是Hotmail客户，并且想升级到Outlook.com预览版，只需在Hotmail的“选项”菜单中单击“升级”。 您的电子邮件地址，密码，联系人，旧电子邮件和规则将保持不变，并且您可以从@ hotmail.com或@ msn.com或@ live.com地址发送/接收电子邮件。 在新的Outlook.com预览界面中，您将体验到所有这些。 如果需要，您还可以在帐户中添加一个outlook.com电子邮件地址。”

Steven: Interesting. So it sounds like they’re going to keep those hotmail.com addresses alive.

史蒂文：有趣。 因此，听起来好像他们将保留那些hotmail.com地址。

Louis: They would have to.

路易斯：他们必须这样做。

Patrick: Yeah, you don’t want to kill those.

帕特里克：是的，你不想杀死那些人。

Steven: Yeah. It’s like killing @aol.com. I think it’s a step in the right direction. I do like the fact that they, I do use Outlook for work and I do like the fact that they kept that 3-pane reading list just because I think it’s what people are used to. So, I think this will be a welcome change for those who use Outlook in the corporate world, on a day-to-day basis.

史蒂文：是的。 这就像杀死@ aol.com。 我认为这是朝正确方向迈出的一步。 我喜欢他们使用Outlook进行工作的事实，我喜欢他们保留三窗格阅读列表的事实，因为我认为这是人们习惯的。 因此，对于每天在企业界使用Outlook的人来说，我认为这将是一个可喜的变化。

Patrick: Yeah, it’s funny you mention that, because I use Outlook myself and I’ve always disabled that 3-column look.

帕特里克(Patrick)：是的，您提到这一点很有趣，因为我自己使用Outlook，并且始终禁用3列外观。

Steven: Really?

史蒂文：真的吗？

Patrick: I’ve always gone with the message pane at the bottom.

帕特里克(Patrick)：我总是把消息窗格放在底部。

Louis: Old school.

路易斯：老学校。

Patrick: Maybe just out of force of habit. Yeah, yeah, old school, old school. So, I’ve pulled up an article from Reuters here related to this story and what I found interesting was some marketshare numbers that they quoted according to comScore for June of this year. According to them, Hotmail is still the world’s largest on-line mail service, with 324 million users, or about 36% of the global market. But, they say, it’s losing customers to G-mail, the fast growing rival, which now has about 31% of the market. Yahoo mail, meanwhile, is static at about 32%. There’s an accompanying graphic for this article that basically shows that Yahoo mail, year-over-year,from June 2011 to June 2012 static. Wherever they were, they’re at the same spot now. G-mail has grown. This chart is not exactly numbered in a way that makes it easy to tell you numbers, but it’s grown a little bit. Meanwhile, Hotmail has shrunk a little bit. They do say, according to Reuters, they are renaming Hotmail to Outlook. So it does seem like they’re going to push people to that new platform and they’ll be prompted over the next few months with opportunities to do so.

帕特里克：也许只是出于习惯。 是的，是，老派，老派。 因此，我从路透社那里引出了一篇与此故事相关的文章，我发现有趣的是，他们根据comScore引用的今年6月的一些市场份额数据。 据他们称，Hotmail仍然是世界上最大的在线邮件服务，拥有3.24亿用户，约占全球市场的36％。 但是，他们说，它正在将客户流失给快速增长的竞争对手G-mail，G-mail现在已经拥有约31％的市场。 同时，雅虎邮件的静态比率约为32％。 本文附带的图形基本上显示了Yahoo邮件从2011年6月到2012年6月的同比变化。 无论他们身在何处，现在都在同一地点。 G邮件已经增长。 该图表的编号方式不易告诉您数字，但数字有所增加。 同时，Hotmail缩小了一点。 他们确实说，据路透社报道，他们正在将Hotmail重命名为Outlook。 因此，似乎他们将把人们推向新平台，并且他们将在接下来的几个月中被提示有这样做的机会。

And you mentioned the Skype chat also, kind of a timely announcement from Google and G-mail is they just said that G-mail was getting a video chat upgrade with Google Hangouts too; and that was just yesterday. That’s kind of a funny timing there. Microsoft is tapping into the Skype integration and here’s Google with Hangouts, and it’s going into G-mail. E-mail’s hot!

您还提到了Skype聊天，这是Google和G-mail的及时公告，他们只是说G-mail也正在通过Google Hangouts进行视频聊天升级； 那只是昨天。 那是一个有趣的时机。 微软正在利用Skype集成，这里是带有环聊的Google，并且正在进入G-mail。 电子邮件很热！

Louis: Yeah, I don’t know. The other thing I was curious about is what kind of security options they have for webmail because I do use the two-factor authentication with G-mail. I’m trying to gather, I did see when I went to try and log in, there was option that said, “log in with a one-off log in code”, but I’m not sure if they offer maybe as much in the way of security, as G-mail does.

路易斯：是的，我不知道。 我很好奇的另一件事是，它们为Webmail提供了什么样的安全性选项，因为我确实对G-mail使用了双重身份验证。 我正在尝试收集信息，我确实看到我何时尝试登录时，有一个选项说“使用一次性登录代码登录”，但是我不确定它们是否提供了那么多功能安全性方面，就像G-mail一样。

Patrick: I should add onto that chart that I just quoted, there is numbers to the right as far as the percentage change over the year. Hotmail’s down 4%. Yahoo mail was up 2%, while G-mail was up 17%. So there’s a little more concrete numbers.

帕特里克(Patrick)：我应该在刚才引用的图表上加上，随着年份的百分比变化，右边有数字。 Hotmail下降了4％。 雅虎邮件增长了2％，G邮件增长了17％。 因此，还有一些具体数字。

Steven: I don’t know, Louis. I would think that they would want to go the way of the two-tier log in. I would think there would have to be something on their roadmap at least.

史蒂文：我不知道，路易斯。 我认为他们希望采用两层登录的方式。我认为他们的路线图上至少必须有某些内容。

Louis: Yeah, because for something like e-mail, especially because it is a master password, essentially, to all your other accounts because you can do a password reset, you really want an extra layer of security there. So hopefully we’ll see some stuff like that, I don’t know. It’s definitely interesting and, like I said, I’ve been through so many steps of Microsoft identities over the years, that I keep forgetting. I’ll have another one now. Then 10 years from now when I try and log into something else it’ll be like, “Oh, you already have an Outlook.com account and I’ll be like, “Really? Do I?”

路易斯：是的，因为对于诸如电子邮件之类的东西，尤其是因为它是主密码，从本质上讲，因为您可以进行密码重置，所以对您所有其他帐户都是如此，所以您确实希望在那里增加额外的安全性。 所以希望我们会看到类似的东西，我不知道。 这绝对是有趣的，而且就像我说的那样，这些年来，我经历了微软身份认证的许多步骤，以至于我一直忘记。 我现在再吃一个。 从现在开始的10年后，当我尝试登录其他帐户时，系统会显示“哦，您已经有一个Outlook.com帐户，而我会发现，“真的吗？ 可以吗？

Steven: Do I? I didn’t remember creating that one.

史蒂文：是吗？ 我不记得创建那个了。

Louis: Well it was on tape. There’s a proven record of you trying to create it.

路易斯：嗯，它在磁带上。 您尝试创建它的行之有效的记录。

Patrick: How did you get this video?

帕特里克：你是怎么得到这个视频的？

Louis: Awesome. Speaking of log ins and security and accounts and password reset and all that stuff, another story this week is a blog post on XOXCo.com. They’re sort of an app development company in Austin, in the U.S. On the blog this past week there was this post called, “Is it time for passwordless log in?” that got a lot of attention, both on Hacker News and on Twitter, and I thought it was interesting. It might be cool to have a little discussion about passwords. So the author, Ben Brown’s basic take on the issue of log in, is that passwords are hard and users get them wrong a lot. So he links to this other post by Luke Wroblewski just talking about some data points about how difficult passwords are for users. How many times a day people have to log in with passwords, how often password resets are used for different things. Obviously quoting stats from the recent password leaks, on the Gawker leaks. The top five passwords accounted for roughly one in four of all passwords. The most common password, 123456 was used by over 3,000 users.

路易斯：太好了。 说到登录和安全性，帐户和密码重置以及所有这些东西，本周的另一个故事是XOXCo.com上的博客文章。 他们有点像美国奥斯汀的应用程序开发公司。上周博客上有一篇帖子，标题为“现在是时候进行无密码登录了吗？” 在Hacker News和Twitter上引起了很多关注，我认为这很有趣。 稍微讨论一下密码可能很酷。 因此，作者本·布朗(Ben Brown)在登录问题上的基本观点是，密码很难，并且用户经常错误地输入密码。 因此，他链接到Luke Wroblewski的另一篇文章，只是谈论密码对用户的难易程度的一些数据点。 人们一天必须使用密码登录多少次，密码重置用于不同事物的频率。 显然引用了最近的密码泄漏中的统计信息，涉及了Gawker泄漏。 前五个密码大约占所有密码的四分之一。 3,000多个用户使用了最常见的密码123456。

Patrick: Wow. My younger days.

帕特里克：哇。 我小时候

Louis: Anyway, so the argument here, what he’s suggesting is a situation where you would come in to sign into something. You would enter your e-mail or start typing your user name or your e-mail address; you’d get an autocomplete list with user names; you pick the one that’s you; it sends you a one-off log in to your e-mail, just like as if you’d done a password reset, and then you’re logged in. Even if you’re not keeping the session, he suggests to keep the cookie active, which has the user name. So that when you go to the site again, even if you’re logged out, it would still say, “Hey, you’re Louis. Do you want to log in as Louis?” Then you still have to go through the process of checking your e-mail but at least it’s sort of a one-step thing instead of having to enter e-mail.

路易斯：无论如何，所以这里的论点是他的建议，这是一种情况，您将需要签入某些东西。 您将输入电子邮件或开始输入用户名或电子邮件地址； 您会得到一个包含用户名的自动完成列表； 你选一个就是你； 它会向您发送一次性登录到您的电子邮件的方式，就像您已重置密码一样，然后您已登录。即使您不保留会话，他也建议您保留该会话。 cookie活动，具有用户名。 这样，即使您注销了，再次访问该网站时，它仍然会说：“嘿，你是路易斯。 您要以路易斯身份登录吗？” 然后，您仍然必须完成检查电子邮件的过程，但是至少不必输入电子邮件，这只是一步之遥。

So I wanted to know what you guys thought about this. Obviously there was a big discussion on Hacker News following up on this and then he posted a follow-up essay just sort of explaining a bit more about what he thought and various approaches including OAuth, for log in and all those ideas.

所以我想知道你们对此的想法。 显然，有关此事的讨论在Hacker News上进行了很大的讨论，然后他发布了后续文章，只是在某种程度上解释了他的想法以及包括OAuth，登录和所有这些想法在内的各种方法。

Patrick: I think it’s an interesting idea. I don’t necessarily mind the idea of enter e-mail address, check your e-mail, click a link, log in. I don’t necessarily mind that. I can see where there might be some issues with it. I can see where people who might be hyperproductive, let’s say, and have all their keyboard shortcuts, and their password application might not like that as much as simply getting their password. I use KeePass to manage all my passwords and it’s pretty quick now. I don’t know that I would have a strong preference, but I can understand why some people might. I think that the idea of autocompleting names is only going to work for some services. I think there are certain other services where privacy may be more relevant, and where user settings might negate such a feature such as Facebook, where people opt out of the public search. You can’t have them autofilling the names.

帕特里克：我认为这是一个有趣的主意。 我不一定介意输入电子邮件地址，检查您的电子邮件，单击链接，登录。我不一定介意。 我可以看到它可能存在一些问题。 可以说，我可以看到哪些人生产力过高并且拥有所有的键盘快捷键，并且他们的密码应用程序可能不仅仅只是获取密码而已。 我使用KeePass来管理我的所有密码，现在非常快。 我不知道我会不会有强烈的偏好，但是我可以理解为什么有人会这么做。 我认为自动填充名称的想法仅适用于某些服务。 我认为在某些其他服务中，隐私可能更相关，并且用户设置可能会否定诸如Facebook之类的功能，人们选择退出公共搜索。 您不能让他们自动填写姓名。

Louis: Right.

路易斯：对。

Patrick: It doesn’t work. Those are some of the concerns that immediately come to mind. What about you, Steven?

帕特里克：这没用。 这些是立即浮现在脑海中的一些担忧。 那你呢，史蒂文？

Steven: I like the idea, in general. I don’t know if in practice, I would actually like it. I understand why you would want to do this. You’re trying to reduce a little bit of that work that me, as a user, has to do, but at the same time, I think there’s a bit of security in typing a user name and password, to me, or it makes me feel better. That’s not even security, it just makes me feel better and I can’t explain why. It’s just something, I guess, that I’ve grown used to. I think over time I could break the habit, but the whole selecting a name and stuff, I think that would be a very touchy subject for a large majority of web users.

史蒂文：我总体上喜欢这个主意。 我不知道实际上是否会喜欢。 我了解您为什么要这样做。 您正在尝试减少我作为用户必须要做的工作，但与此同时，我认为在输入用户名和密码时对我来说还是有一定的安全性，否则我感觉好多了。 那甚至不是安全性，只是让我感觉好些，我无法解释原因。 我想这只是我已经习惯的东西。 我认为随着时间的流逝，我可能会改变习惯，但是对于大多数的Web用户而言，选择一个名称和内容整个过程都非常棘手。

Louis: Yeah, I agree with that. Someone does propose a compromise. First of all, he points out that there are services that he’s found where they sort of adopt the hybrid approach. Where, when you go to sign up for this service, you just enter your e-mail address and it logs you in, and you can go use the site and whatever. It has a “remember me” cookie that lasts for a very long time, so you’re essentially logged in for as long as you need to be. But if ever you get logged out and you need to log in again, then it will prompt you to set a password via a password reset. But initially you don’t really have to worry about it; usually you don’t have to worry about it. You’re just sort of logged in and then that’s the way it works.

路易斯：是的，我同意这一点。 确实有人提出了一个折衷方案。 首先，他指出，有些服务可以在他采用混合方法的地方找到。 在哪里注册该服务，只需输入您的电子邮件地址，它就会登录，您可以使用该网站以及任何其他内容。 它具有一个“记住我”的cookie，该cookie会持续很长时间，因此，您基本上需要登录的时间就足够了。 但是，如果您注销并需要再次登录，它将提示您通过密码重置来设置密码。 但是最初，您实际上不必担心它。 通常您不必担心。 您只需要登录即可，然后便是它的工作方式。

As someone in the thread on Hacker News sort of suggested, just inverting the order of the forgot password link and the password fields. Where it would just sort of be like, enter e-mail and send me an e-mail to log in, and then below that, rather than, “Oh, I forgot my password” it would just be like, “Oh, or would you rather log in with a password,” right? So maybe just change the order of priority. Because I get the feeling, I mean, for me, it definitely happens, especially services that I don’t use frequently, where I’ll just hit the log in page. I would have an easier time if I just clicked, “Forgot my password” straight away and got the e-mail and went to it but I always try and gamble. I’m always like, “I think I can remember it.” Then I try like three times and then I get sick of it, and then I hit the password reset. So I’ve had a shitty experience that I wouldn’t have needed to have, if I just used the reset straight away.

正如有人在Hacker News上建议的那样，只是反转忘记密码链接和密码字段的顺序。 就像是，输入电子邮件并向我发送电子邮件进行登录，然后在其下方输入“ Oh，我忘记了密码”，而不是“ Oh，或您想使用密码登录吗？”对吗？ 因此，也许只需更改优先级即可。 因为我有这种感觉，我的意思是，这肯定会发生，尤其是我不经常使用的服务，我会在其中登录页面。 如果我直接单击“忘记密码”，并收到电子邮件并转到该地址，我会更轻松一些，但是我总是尝试赌博。 我总是喜欢，“我想我能记住它。” 然后我尝试了三遍，然后就厌倦了，然后我按下了重置密码。 因此，如果我直接使用重置，我将有本来就不需要的糟糕经历。

But of course, I’ve started using a password manager as well. I use LastPass. I guess it’s sort of interesting, because for people like us who use a password manager, having to go to the e-mail is actually slower because we just click a button and we’re logged in.

但是，当然，我也开始使用密码管理器。 我使用LastPass。 我想这很有趣，因为对于像我们这样使用密码管理器的人来说，由于只需要单击一个按钮就可以登录，因此进入电子邮件的速度实际上要慢一些。

Patrick: Yeah, that’s what I was thinking. It’s almost like this is better for my mom or my brother, who’s not as into computers as I am. I’ve tried to get them into KeePass, and they’ve been using it a little bit but I think they’d prefer that kind of setup almost, most of the time, versus having to go to KeePass, which for them is bulky, for me it takes two seconds.

帕特里克：是的，这就是我的想法。 这对我的妈妈或兄弟来说似乎更好，因为他们不像我那样喜欢计算机。 我试图让他们加入KeePass，他们一直在使用它，但我认为大多数情况下，他们几乎都喜欢那种设置，而不是不得不去KeePass，这对于他们来说是一个庞大的过程，对我来说需要两秒钟。

Louis: Right. Whereas if you’re just clicking and there’s no keyboard interaction at all, you just click a link and it sends you an e-mail, you go to the e-mail, click a link and you’re logged in and then there’s a “remember me” cookie and you’ll stay logged in for like a month anyway. I think that’s pretty solid for most people. They don’t even think about it. It’ll just be like, every once in a while you’re going to have to go and get an e-mail and then let you log yourself back in, but you never have to remember a password.

路易斯：对。 而如果您只是单击而根本没有键盘交互，则只需单击一个链接，它会向您发送一封电子邮件，您转到该电子邮件，单击一个链接，然后登录，然后有一个“记住我” cookie，无论如何您都会保持登录状态一个月。 我认为对于大多数人来说，这是非常可靠的。 他们甚至没有考虑。 就像，每隔一段时间，您将不得不去收一封电子邮件，然后让您重新登录，但您不必记住密码。

Patrick: Right and I guess e-mail passwords will become that much more important to hackers; if that takes off.

帕特里克：对，我想电子邮件密码对黑客来说将变得越来越重要。 如果起飞。

Louis: Well they already are, right? Because it’s the same situation, right? Because every service has password reset by e-mail. So they are very important. That’s why kind of why I was referring to my concerns about Outlook.com having a two-factor authentication solution because it is that.

路易斯：好吧，已经是吧？ 因为情况相同，对不对？ 因为每个服务都有通过电子邮件重置的密码。 因此，它们非常重要。 这就是为什么我要提到我对Outlook.com具有两因素身份验证解决方案的担忧，原因就是如此。

Patrick: I have a zero-factor authentication. It’s kind of like public FTP, but for e-mail.

帕特里克：我有一个零因素认证。 有点像公共FTP，但用于电子邮件。

Steven: Now, I mean, one of these things on here that they bring up is the Yahoo log in screen. There’s nine items. There’s “create a new account”, “sign in with Facebook or Google”, then you type in your Yahoo ID and password, “keep me signed in”, etc., and then you have the sign in button. Do you guys use “sign in with Facebook or Google”? Do you all ever use that?

史蒂文：现在，我的意思是，这里提到的这些事情之一就是Yahoo登录屏幕。 有九个项目。 有“创建新帐户”，“使用Facebook或Google登录”，然后键入Yahoo ID和密码，“保持登录状态”等，然后单击“登录”按钮。 你们使用“使用Facebook或Google登录”吗？ 你们都用过吗？

Louis: I do use it on some things especially, and this is interesting actually now that you mention it, it will happen frequently for an app. Like if I download an app to my phone, some kind of photosharing app like, I use Streamzoo instead of Instagram, but like Streamzoo for example. I don’t really care about having an Streamzoo account, so when I open up that app, if I have to go through the process of creating an account on my little screen with a touch keyboard, that’s really, really infuriating. But if I can just click Facebook, redirects to the browser, the browser is already logged into Facebook, it kicks me back to Streamzoo and I’ve got an account, that is fantastic. So if I’m on mobile I’m much more inclined to use sign in with Facebook or Twitter or Google.

路易斯：我确实在某些事情上使用了它，而且，既然您提到它，这实际上很有趣，它在应用程序中会经常发生。 就像我将应用程序下载到手机上一样，是某种照片共享应用程序，例如，我使用Streamzoo而不是Instagram，但例如使用Streamzoo。 我真的不太在乎拥有Streamzoo帐户，因此，当我打开该应用程序时，如果我必须在使用触摸键盘的小屏幕上创建帐户的过程，那真的非常令人生气。 但是，如果我只能单击Facebook，重定向到浏览器，浏览器已经登录到Facebook，它将带我回到Streamzoo，并且我有一个帐户，那太好了。 因此，如果我使用手机，则更倾向于使用Facebook或Twitter或Google登录。

Steven: Got you.

史蒂文：知道了。

Patrick: Yeah.

帕特里克：是的。

Steven: Makes sense.

史蒂文：有道理。

Louis: Then sometimes if it’s a service that’s really tightly coupled with one of those things or if it’s something that I don’t necessarily think I need my own account, I think it’s possible that when I tried it out, Spotify I may have just used Facebook or do they only offer Facebook?

路易斯：有时候，如果某项服务确实与其中一项紧密结合，或者如果我不一定认为自己需要自己的帐户，那么我认为当我尝试使用Spotify时，我可能只是使用过Facebook还是只提供Facebook？

Steven: I think it was only Facebook.

史蒂文：我认为那只是Facebook。

Louis: They don’t have their own accounts, right? It’s only . . .

路易斯：他们没有自己的帐户，对吗？ 这只是 。 。 。

Steven: Yeah.

史蒂文：是的。

Louis: OK. Well that’s another option.

路易斯：好的。 好吧，这是另一种选择。

Patrick: Yeah, they actually do an account system now. I don’t know if that was always the case but I do have a Spotify log in that is separate from the Facebook one and I use either one. For whatever that’s worth.

帕特里克(Patrick)：是的，他们实际上现在在做一个帐户系统。 我不知道是否总是这样，但是我确实有一个Spotify登录与Facebook登录是分开的，我都使用其中一个登录。 对于任何值得的。

Louis: Yeah, I definitely don’t mind OAuth, but as he point out in this, that does make you dependent on a third-party service. In the case of Twitter, which is, let’s say, somewhat more prone to outages than Facebook or Google. You are, perhaps, exposing yourself a little bit, but it’s the same case with Facebook or Google. You can’t guarantee that that stuff is always going to be available or that they’re going to keep providing the same OAuth service into the future.

Louis：是的，我绝对不介意OAuth，但是正如他指出的那样，这确实使您依赖第三方服务。 就Twitter而言，比Facebook或Google容易断电。 您也许会稍微暴露自己，但Facebook或Google都是这种情况。 您不能保证这些东西将始终可用，或者它们将来会继续提供相同的OAuth服务。

Patrick: Longterm listeners of this show will know that I never use a Facebook connector, Twitter connect, unless I absolutely have to, unless it’s absolutely required to use the service, as is the case with Lanyard, which is a conference directory site, and they use Twitter so that’s all you can sign in with. So I do use it there, but otherwise, I’m happy to have my own little user name and password, and create a new entry in KeePass. Such a great point I made and that’s the end of it.

帕特里克(Patrick)：该节目的长期听众会知道，除非绝对必要，除非绝对需要使用该服务，否则我绝不会使用Facebook连接器，Twitter连接，就像会议目录站点Lanyard一样，并且绝对不能使用该服务。他们使用Twitter，因此您只需登录即可。 因此，我确实在这里使用它，但是除此之外，我很高兴拥有自己的小用户名和密码，并在KeePass中创建一个新条目。 我提出的好观点到此结束。

Louis: What’s that? Yeah. I was just throwing it out there because I know a lot of people who listen to this show work on their own sites or applications. There’s all kinds of different approaches people can take towards passwords, as the author points out. The other point that’s interesting about the idea of using passwordless log in and logging in only via e-mail is that, as a developer of a service, that sort of absolves you of the responsibility of storing users’ passwords in your database, which we talked about on a recent show. Obviously there are ways of doing that securely but most developers seem to not do that. So if this saves you from worrying about it all together and you don’t have to store passwords and then you never have to go through public relations ordeal of having 30,000 passwords leaked and hacked.

路易斯：那是什么？ 是的 我之所以把它扔出去是因为我知道很多听过这个节目的人在他们自己的网站或应用程序上工作。 正如作者指出的那样，人们可以采用多种不同的方法来处理密码。 关于使用无密码登录和仅通过电子邮件登录的想法的另一点有趣之处在于，作为服务的开发人员，这种免责声明使您免于承担将用户密码存储在数据库中的责任。在最近的节目中谈到。 显然，有一些方法可以安全地执行此操作，但是大多数开发人员似乎并不这样做。 因此，如果这使您不必担心所有这些，并且您不必存储密码，那么您就不必再经历公共关系或三万个密码泄露和被黑客入侵的麻烦了。

Patrick: Which is a great point. Actually, it just kind of flashed to mind, as I was running through this, that’s a benefit. You can skip the whole password feature. Interesting. I haven’t actually run into a service like this on my own, in the wild, using this sort of authentication. I know you mentioned that some services are but have you run into any in your own kind of browsing that have been doing this?

帕特里克：这是一个很好的观点。 实际上，在我进行此操作时，这只是一闪而过，这是一个好处。 您可以跳过整个密码功能。 有趣。 实际上，我并没有使用这种身份验证自行运行这样的服务。 我知道您提到过某些服务，但是您是否遇到过以这种方式进行的浏览？

Louis: I don’t think so. I have had more streamlined kind of sign up processes like he’s talking about, like the sort of thing where you just type in your e-mail and then you’re logged in and you can start using the thing, and it’s only when you come back that they’ll go through another step of getting you to set a password or getting you to do something else. But a straight-up, just there are never any passwords? Other than OAuth, is the one that you see as people using Twitter or Google or Facebook. I haven’t seen people using this kind of a solution, although it’d be interesting to see.

路易斯：我不这么认为。 我有他所说的更简化的注册流程，例如您只需键入电子邮件然后登录并可以开始使用的东西，只有当您来时，他们将通过另一个步骤让您设置密码或让您执行其他操作。 但是要简单一点，就是从来没有任何密码？ 除了OAuth，您会看到使用Twitter或Google或Facebook的人。 我还没有看到人们使用这种解决方案，尽管这很有趣。

Patrick: And the third story today is that Netflix has decided to open source Chaos Monkey, a tool they designed to make their use of Amazon Web Services more resilient. I found that through a report by Alex Williams of Tech Crunch and according to a blog published by Netflix, “Chaos Monkey is a service, which runs in the Amazon Web Services that seeks out auto-scaling groups, and terminates instances or virtual machines, per group. The software is flexible enough to work with other Cloud providers, or instance groupings, and can be enhanced to run that support. In most cases, we have designer applications to continue working with an instance when an instance goes off-line. But in those special cases that they don’t, we want to make sure that there are people around to resolve and learn from any problems. With this in mind, Chaos Monkey only runs with a limited set of hours with the intent that engineers will be alert and able to respond.”

帕特里克(Patrick)：今天的第三个故事是，Netflix已决定开源Chaos Monkey，这是他们设计的工具，旨在使他们对亚马逊网络服务的使用更具弹性。 我发现通过Tech Crunch的Alex Williams的一份报告，以及根据Netflix发布的博客，“ Chaos Monkey是一项服务，该服务运行在Amazon Web Services中，以寻找自动扩展组，并终止实例或虚拟机，每组。 该软件足够灵活，可以与其他云提供商或实例分组一起使用，并且可以进行增强以运行该支持。 在大多数情况下，当实例脱机时，我们具有设计器应用程序以继续处理实例。 但是，在那些他们没有的特殊情况下，我们要确保周围有人可以解决并从任何问题中学习。 考虑到这一点，Chaos Monkey仅在有限的几个小时内运行，目的是使工程师保持警惕并能够做出响应。”

During the last year they have used Chaos Monkey to terminate over 65,000 instances running in production and testing environments. They say that in most cases nobody notices, but there are those cases where something does happen and they’re surprised. Then they’re able to make adjustments to ensure that it doesn’t happen again, that particular issue. Then they detail more about what it can do and what you can do with it, which we’ll include in the show notes and you can download Chaos Monkey on GetHub at gethub.com/Netflix/simmianarmy/wiki. I found this tool interesting. As you know, I’m not a developer but just the availability of a tool that basically tries to make the AWS fail, and other cloud services, and that they made it available is pretty cool.

在过去的一年中，他们使用Chaos Monkey终止了在生产和测试环境中运行的超过65,000个实例。 他们说，在大多数情况下，没有人注意到，但在某些情况下确实发生了某些事情，他们感到惊讶。 然后，他们可以进行调整，以确保不会再次发生该特定问题。 然后，他们详细介绍了它可以做什么以及可以做什么，我们将在展示笔记中提供这些细节，您可以从getHub上的gethub.com/Netflix/simmianarmy/wiki下载Chaos Monkey。 我发现这个工具很有趣。 如您所知，我不是开发人员，而是仅提供一种基本上会尝试使AWS失败的工具以及其他云服务，以及使它们可用的工具非常棒。

Louis: Yeah, we have actually talked about this on this show before. It was on my first appearance on the SitePoint panel podcast.

路易斯：是的，我们之前实际上已经在这个节目中谈论过这一点。 这是我第一次出现在SitePoint面板播客上。

Patrick: Wow. So like a decade ago?

帕特里克：哇。 像十年前一样？

Louis: It was episode 110. What was that, sorry?

路易斯：那是第110集。那是什么，对不起？

Patrick: A decade ago. No, sorry.

帕特里克：十年前。 不，对不起

Louis: Yeah, we did talk about it, really briefly.

路易斯：是的，我们确实做了简短的讨论。

Patrick: But it wasn’t open source then.

帕特里克：但是那时还不是开源的。

Louis: It wasn’t open source, exactly. It was something that they had blogged about and mentioned that they internally had this system that they used to test the resilience of their AWS infrastructure. But now, to see them providing it open source, so that other people can use it is fantastic. I think that’s a great idea. You know, there’s probably things, you always do a little bit so we’ve got a pretty resilient system. If one of our app servers, for example, just dies or even just locks up completely, it’s still there but it’s not handling requests, our system handles that pretty well. At some point we’ll notice, “Hmm, this one doesn’t seem to be handling any traffic and the other ones do seem to be handling a lot of traffic. Maybe we should just shut it down and start a new one and that works fine.” But I’m sure there are things, if we were to unleash an angry monkey in the server room, stuff would go wrong in a way that we can’t recover from. So to have a tool that you can just sort of automate that. Obviously don’t use it if you’re not paying attention.

路易斯：确实不是开源的。 他们在博客中提到了这一点，并提到他们内部使用了该系统来测试其AWS基础架构的弹性。 但是现在，看到他们为它提供开源，以便其他人可以使用它是很棒的。 我认为这是个好主意。 您知道，可能有些事情，您总是会做一点，所以我们有了一个相当灵活的系统。 例如，如果我们的其中一台应用服务器只是死掉，甚至完全锁定，它仍然存在，但它没有处理请求，那么我们的系统就可以很好地处理它。 在某个时候，我们会注意到，“嗯，这个似乎并没有处理任何流量，而另一个似乎确实正在处理很多流量。 也许我们应该关闭它，然后开始一个新的，并且工作正常。” 但是我敢肯定，如果我们要在服务器机房中释放一只愤怒的猴子，事情就会以我们无法恢复的方式出问题。 因此，拥有一个可以使之自动化的工具。 如果您不注意，显然不要使用它。

Patrick: Don’t let it run 24/7/365.

帕特里克：不要让它运行24/7/365。

Louis: Yes. Unless you are insanely confident in your DevOps guy.

路易斯：是的。 除非您对DevOps家伙有疯狂的信心。

Steven: That’s a neat tool. It’ll be well-received, and I look forward to reading some people actually taking the tool, and running with it. And seeing what they kind of come up with for their own use cases?

史蒂文：那是一个整洁的工具。 它将广受欢迎，我期待阅读一些实际使用该工具并运行它的人。 看看他们为自己的用例提出了什么？

Patrick: Do you think Amazon likes this? On the one hand, I’m sure they’re like, “Yeah, we need to prove that we are a great service and that we are resilient,” and then if everyone turns on this service, it’s just randomly trying to make things break, I don’t know. It’s kind of a funny situation.

帕特里克：您认为亚马逊喜欢这个吗？ 一方面，我敢肯定他们会说：“是的，我们需要证明我们是一项出色的服务，并且我们具有韧性”，然后，如果每个人都启用了这项服务，那就只是在随机尝试做事情休息，我不知道。 这是一种有趣的情况。

Louis: To me, it sounds like the kind of thing that Amazon would totally endorse. Obviously it’s allaying some people’s concerns about AWS because one of the things about AWS is that in theory the given EC2 instance, can just potentially go away at any point. Things just go wrong and they go away.

路易斯：对我来说，这听起来像是亚马逊完全认可的事情。 显然，这消除了某些人对AWS的担忧，因为关于AWS的事情之一是，理论上给定的EC2实例可能随时会消失。 事情出错了，它们消失了。

Patrick: Right. Clouds disappear.

帕特里克：对。 云消失了。

Louis: Yeah because it’s not a physical box, it’s just gone. It’s not there anymore. So they’ve always emphasized that people should build infrastructure in a way that’s resilient to one server happening to go away, and that you’re ready to start up a new one at a moment’s notice. But people don’t always take heed of that advice, and they’ll just sort of build it the same way that they would have built an infrastructure on physical hardware and that leaves them more open to failure, which in turn looks bad for AWS. If people build really, really resilient systems on AWS and if some of the servers go away or their database is no longer reachable or whatever, everything just keeps humming along, then that makes AWS look good.

路易斯：是的，因为它不是一个物理盒子，它已经消失了。 它不存在了。 因此，他们一直强调，人们应该以对即将淘汰的一台服务器具有弹性的方式来构建基础架构，并且您随时可以随时启动新的服务器。 但是人们并不总是会留意该建议，他们会像在物理硬件上构建基础架构一样来构建它，这使他们更容易出错，这反过来对AWS不利。 。 如果人们在AWS上构建了真正，真正具有弹性的系统，并且如果某些服务器消失了，或者它们的数据库不再可用或其他任何原因，那么一切都会变得嗡嗡作响，那么AWS就会看起来不错。

Patrick: Very true. I looked up the episode that you mentioned and it was actually May 1st, 2011. so now a little over a year ago. It was titled, “Louis’ first show”.

帕特里克：非常正确。 我查阅了您提到的那集，实际上是2011年5月1日。所以现在一年多以前了。 它的标题是“路易斯的第一场演出”。

Patrick: The Chaos Monkey has been causing chaos for awhile now.

帕特里克：混沌猴子已经造成混乱已有一段时间了。

Louis: It has. I liked your initial comment when I brought it up and I described what the Chaos Monkey was and Patrick’s response was that it reminded him of like in Sim City. Where you’ve got your whole Sim City set up and then you just randomly decide to throw hurricanes and floods.

路易斯：有。 当我提出您的最初评论时，我很喜欢它，我描述了“混沌猴子”是什么，帕特里克的回应是它使他想起了《模拟城市》。 在整个“模拟城市”都建立好了的地方，然后您只是随机决定抛出飓风和洪水。

Steven: Just start burning down buildings.

史蒂文：刚开始烧毁建筑物。

Patrick:Drop Godzilla in there.

帕特里克：把哥斯拉放在那里。

Louis: Just to see how things will cope.

路易斯：只是看看情况会如何。

Patrick: My citizens! Yes. That twisted sense of humor.

帕特里克：我的公民！ 是。 那扭曲的幽默感。

Steven: So I guess we can just start introducing spotlights this week, and I’ll go first. Mine really doesn’t have much to do with tech. It’s kind of a money thing. It’s a post by John Batelle, regarding what we’re talking about when we talk about the end of going cashless, or we talk about the beginning of going cashless. Everything we’re doing now is credit cards and on-line transactions and things and he brings up one of the points that I thought was really interesting. Which was we lose our anonymity when we do that. When you pay with cash, you’re anonymous, for the most part. But when you use a credit card or pay on-line, every transaction is known. It’s interesting. He talks about a book that just came out called “The End of Money” and there’s actually a Fortune magazine article called “The Death of Cash”. I just thought it was interesting since we live in a pretty technology-forward society, and I’m sure our audience will appreciate reading such an article.

史蒂文：所以我想我们本周就可以开始介绍聚光灯了，我先走。 我的确与技术没有太大关系。 这有点钱。 这是约翰·巴特尔(John Batelle)的帖子，内容涉及当我们谈论无现金的结束，或者谈论无现金的开始时的话题。 我们现在所做的只是信用卡，在线交易和其他事情，他提出了我认为非常有趣的观点之一。 那是我们这样做时失去了匿名性。 当您用现金付款时，大部分时候您都是匿名的。 但是，当您使用信用卡或在线支付时，每笔交易都是已知的。 这真有趣。 他谈论的是刚刚出版的一本书，名为《金钱的终结》，实际上，《财富》杂志上有一篇文章，名为《现金之死》。 我只是觉得这很有趣，因为我们生活在一个技术先进的社会中，我相信我们的听众会喜欢阅读这篇文章。

Louis: Yeah.

路易斯：是的。

Patrick: Yeah I was just at a comedy show last night, and they had some items for sale and I was there with my family and the table where they were selling the items was cash only. It’s not the first time I’ve run into that, but we were kind of pooling our cash together to see what exactly we could afford to buy. Not that we don’t have the money, just that we don’t have the cash on us. There’s pros and cons with everything. I love my credit cards, because I never charge anything I can’t pay for. I get a certain percentage back. I don’t buy things just to get a percentage, things I would buy anyway. Then, of course, you have kind of the built-in protections that come with just carrying a credit card versus carrying cash. You lose cash, it’s gone. You have a credit card stolen, I’m a phone call away and it’s blocked from use. But it’s interesting to consider the ramifications of it privacy-wise.

帕特里克：是的，我昨晚刚参加一场喜剧表演，他们有一些物品要出售，我和家人在那儿，他们出售物品的桌子上只有现金。 这不是我第一次遇到这种情况，但是我们有点把现金聚集在一起，看我们到底能买得起什么。 并不是说我们没有钱，而是我们没有现金。 一切都有利弊。 我喜欢我的信用卡，因为我从不收任何我无法支付的费用。 我得到一定比例的回报。 我买东西不是为了获得一定的百分比，无论如何我都会买东西。 然后，当然，您拥有一种内置保护，仅随身携带信用卡即可随身携带现金。 您损失现金，它消失了。 您的信用卡被盗了，我正在打个电话，并且被禁止使用。 但是考虑到它在隐私方面的影响是很有趣的。

Louis: Yeah. I guess there is something there to be said for the privacy aspects, but personally, the convenience just outweighs it by such a huge deal. I don’t know. The process, and I still do it, because I still obviously buy lunch when I’m at work and I usually don’t put $10 lunch purchases on debit, just because it’s a bit slower. But, yeah, I hate having to get a certain amount of money out and then just sort of have cash. “Do I have cash? No, I need to go get more cash.” It’s the worst of the first-world problems.

路易斯：是的。 我想在隐私方面有话要说，但是就个人而言，便利性远远超过了它。 我不知道。 这个过程我仍然会这样做，因为我在工作时仍然显然会购买午餐，而且我通常不花10美元购买午餐，只是因为它有点慢。 但是，是的，我讨厌必须取出一定数量的钱，然后才有现金。 “我有现金吗？ 不，我需要去拿更多的现金。” 这是第一世界问题中最严重的问题。

Patrick: Having money, having cash in your pocket!

帕特里克：有钱，有现金！

Louis: I was starting to starting to say, “Aw, man, it drives me insane. It’s the worst thing,” and them I’m like, “That is so not the worst thing. That is about the least bad thing that anyone has to put up with, anywhere.”

路易斯：我开始说：“天哪，它使我发疯。 这是最糟糕的事情，”我就像他们，“那不是最糟糕的事情。 那是任何人在任何地方都必须忍受的最坏的事情。”

Steven: While I was gone I was in Europe and we went to the Czech Republic. The Czech Republic’s exchange rate to the U.S. is $1 to around 18 Czech Crown. So you’ll pull money out of ATM’s, because they don’t take credit cards everywhere so it’s much easier to just carry cash and you’ll pull out some cash and you’ll come out with like 1,000 Crown, and you’re like, “Oh, man.” You’re having to do this conversion rate. We’re actually set to go to Vietnam in the near future and the exchange rate is something like a million to one so I can’t even imagine what I’m going to be doing when my brain is trying to calculate, “Well how much does this actually cost?” So I hope they take more credit cards.

史蒂文：当我离开时，我在欧洲，然后我们去了捷克共和国。 捷克共和国对美国的汇率是1美元兑18捷克克朗左右。 因此，您会从ATM机中取出钱，因为它们不会到处都带信用卡，所以携带现金要容易得多，您会取出一些现金，然后拿出1,000克朗，例如，“哦，伙计。” 您必须执行此转换率。 实际上，我们准备在不久的将来去越南，汇率大约是一百万比一，所以我什至无法想象当我的大脑试图计算时，我将要做什么。这实际上要花多少钱？” 因此，我希望他们拿更多的信用卡。

Louis: Yeah. It takes some time to just sort of get used to the thing, and you’ll still screw up. I don’t know, it happened to me. Every time I travel that’ll happen to me. I’ll buy something and then I’ll be like, “Wait a second. That actually costs significantly more than I thought it did.”

路易斯：是的。 习惯这种情况需要一些时间，但您仍然会搞砸。 我不知道，这发生在我身上。 每次旅行，都会发生在我身上。 我买东西，然后会说：“等一下。 这实际上比我想象的要贵得多。”

Steven: I just got ripped off. Aw, man.

史蒂文：我刚被偷走了。 真是的

Louis: Yeah. All right. Well that’s a cool spotlight. I’m going to bring it back to web development this week. I was a little bit off-topic last week, but no longer. My spotlight for this week is a little Ruby gem called “Grape”. For the Ruby developers out there, you might not have heard of this one. It’s a little micro-framework. So if anyone has used Sinatra, it’s pretty similar to Sinatra, in the sense that it’s a very, very lightweight framework. It serves requests over HTTP, but it doesn’t include a lot of extra stuff like view helpers or mailers or like Rails does. It’s really, really minimal. The primary difference between Grape and Sinatra, is that Grape is specifically made for building API’s. It makes it really easy to just request primers in a JSON format, and then return JSON, as well. So it handles sort of your content type headers, and all that stuff really seamlessly. So you can either use it for the project I’m currently working on, we’re building something that’s a service that’s only in API so Grape is a really, really great choice for that because you don’t have to worry about having a tempting language and all of this stuff you just set up some URL paths for various requests and respond to those requests. But you can also check it inside of a Rails application, if you want to use your API separately from your regular Rails roadmap then Grape might be a really good option for that, although I haven’t personally played with that. So, yeah, check it out. Yeah, if you just go to GetHub.com and search for Grape because the user name of the guy who puts it out, I don’t know how to pronounce it so just search for “Grape” and you’ll find it.

路易斯：是的。 行。 嗯，这是一个很酷的焦点。 我将在本周将其重新用于Web开发。 上周我有点没话题了，但是不再。 我本周的焦点是一个名为“ Grape”的小宝石。 对于在那里的Ruby开发人员，您可能还没有听说过。 这是一个微框架。 因此，如果有人使用过Sinatra，那么就它是一个非常非常轻巧的框架而言，它与Sinatra非常相似。 它通过HTTP服务请求，但不包括视图助手或邮件程序或Rails所提供的许多其他功能。 真的非常非常小。 Grape和Sinatra之间的主要区别在于Grape是专门为构建API制作的。 只需请求JSON格式的引物，然后返回JSON，就非常容易。 因此，它可以处理您的内容类型标头，并且所有这些内容都可以无缝实现。 因此，您可以将其用于我当前正在从事的项目，我们正在构建的服务仅在API中提供，因此Grape是一个非常非常好的选择，因为您不必担心拥有一个诱人的语言以及所有这些内容，您只需为各种请求设置一些URL路径并响应这些请求。 But you can also check it inside of a Rails application, if you want to use your API separately from your regular Rails roadmap then Grape might be a really good option for that, although I haven't personally played with that. So, yeah, check it out. Yeah, if you just go to GetHub.com and search for Grape because the user name of the guy who puts it out, I don't know how to pronounce it so just search for “Grape” and you'll find it.

Patrick: And this week on Grandpa Patrick’s off-topic corner, so my spotlight is “Life is Good”, the new album from Nas, who is a rapper, for those who aren’t familiar. It’s just a great album. I’ve been a Nas fan for a long time. If you’re a fan of hip hop, rap or Nas himself, I think it’s an album that you’ll enjoy. It’s got some good features on there from Large Professor, Rick Ross, Mary J. Blige, production from No ID, Salaam Remi, 40, Heavy D and more. Really just a great album and the spotlight link will go to the music video for “Daughters”, which is a really cool song. Yeah, so no web development here. Keeping the streak alive.

Patrick: And this week on Grandpa Patrick's off-topic corner, so my spotlight is “Life is Good”, the new album from Nas, who is a rapper, for those who aren't familiar. It's just a great album. I've been a Nas fan for a long time. If you're a fan of hip hop, rap or Nas himself, I think it's an album that you'll enjoy. It's got some good features on there from Large Professor, Rick Ross, Mary J. Blige, production from No ID, Salaam Remi, 40, Heavy D and more. Really just a great album and the spotlight link will go to the music video for “Daughters”, which is a really cool song. Yeah, so no web development here. Keeping the streak alive.

Louis: That’s fine. I actually gave that a listen on audio last week. I quite liked it. It’s interesting in that it’s very much a Nas record, in the sense that I’m used to hip-hop records, especially hip-hop records from guys who have got a lot of exposure, really popular rappers, sort of kicking off with a really bombastic track, like grabbing you by the ears straight off from the first second. But this record takes a long time before kicking into high gear. It just sort of meanders through the first couple of tracks. I’m listening to it, and I’m like, “The style is there and he’s got the great, it’s a really interesting flow and I like it,” but he does get there. He’s just taking his time, and I appreciate that so, yeah, I’d second that recommendation. It’s pretty cool.

Louis: That's fine. I actually gave that a listen on audio last week. I quite liked it. It's interesting in that it's very much a Nas record, in the sense that I'm used to hip-hop records, especially hip-hop records from guys who have got a lot of exposure, really popular rappers, sort of kicking off with a really bombastic track, like grabbing you by the ears straight off from the first second. But this record takes a long time before kicking into high gear. It just sort of meanders through the first couple of tracks. I'm listening to it, and I'm like, “The style is there and he's got the great, it's a really interesting flow and I like it,” but he does get there. He's just taking his time, and I appreciate that so, yeah, I'd second that recommendation. 它太酷了。

Patrick: Cool. I think he kicks into that gear on the “The Don”, which I don’t know if you go to that song, but that song hits pretty hard, so.

帕特里克：酷。 I think he kicks into that gear on the “The Don”, which I don't know if you go to that song, but that song hits pretty hard, so.

Louis: All right.

路易斯：好的。

Patrick: Just two white guys talking hip-hop.

Patrick: Just two white guys talking hip-hop.

Louis: We should also point out to anyone listening, that the album in question does contain explicit lyrics.

Louis: We should also point out to anyone listening, that the album in question does contain explicit lyrics.

Patrick: Oh, yes, of course.

Patrick: Oh, yes, of course.

Louis: And is probably sort not suitable for children.

Louis: And is probably sort not suitable for children.

Patrick: Less vulgar than Britney Spears, more vulgar than Katy Perry. It’s in between those two, probably.

Patrick: Less vulgar than Britney Spears, more vulgar than Katy Perry. It's in between those two, probably.

Louis: I don’t know what those references mean, but anyway.

Louis: I don't know what those references mean, but anyway.

Steven: That made my night.

Steven: That made my night.

Louis: Thanks, guys. It’s been a great show.

Louis: Thanks, guys. It's been a great show.

Steven: Thank you.

Steven: Thank you.

Louis: I’ll see you all again in a couple of weeks.

Louis: I'll see you all again in a couple of weeks.

Patrick: Yeah, and so we’ll just take it around the table. I am Patrick O’Keefe of the iFroggy network. I blog at managingcommunities.com, on Twitter @iFroggy.

Patrick: Yeah, and so we'll just take it around the table. I am Patrick O'Keefe of the iFroggy network. I blog at managingcommunities.com , on Twitter @iFroggy .

Steven: I’m Steven Segraves. You can find me on Twitter @SSegraves. I blog at badice.com.

Steven: I'm Steven Segraves. You can find me on Twitter @SSegraves . I blog at badice.com .

Louis: I’m Louis Simoneau. I’m @rssaddict on Twitter. You can follow SitePoint on Twitter @sitepointdotcom. You can go to sitepoint.com/podcast on the web to get all the past episodes, leave a comment, subscribe to the RSS feed. You can go to iTunes, of course, to get us there; and you can also e-mail us: podcast@sitepoint.com. We’d love to hear what you thought. We’ll see you all next week for another episode of the SitePoint podcast. Thanks for listening and bye for now.

Louis: I'm Louis Simoneau. I'm @rssaddict on Twitter. You can follow SitePoint on Twitter @sitepointdotcom . You can go to sitepoint.com/podcast on the web to get all the past episodes, leave a comment, subscribe to the RSS feed. You can go to iTunes, of course, to get us there; and you can also e-mail us: podcast@sitepoint.com . We'd love to hear what you thought. We'll see you all next week for another episode of the SitePoint podcast. Thanks for listening and bye for now.

The SitePoint Podcast is produced by Karn Broad.

The SitePoint Podcast is produced by Karn Broad.

Audio Transcription by SpeechPad.

通过SpeechPad进行音频转录 。

Theme music by Mike Mella.

Mike Mella的主题音乐。

Thanks for listening! Feel free to let us know how we’re doing, or to continue the discussion, using the comments field below.

谢谢收听！ 欢迎使用下面的评论字段让我们知道我们的状况，或者继续讨论。