Regularly Scheduled Series: Fill & Download for Free

There’s been quite a bit of confusion surrounding William Shatner’s hair (or lack thereof) over the decades. By some accounts, Shatner started losing his hair as a child, around age 9, was fitted with his first hairpiece by the time he was a teenager, and lost a great deal more hair in his 20s (making a full-time hairpiece necessary for his chosen career in acting). If that’s the case, then Shatner has very likely worn a hairpiece in every stage, film and television role from the 1950s up to the present.This would, of course, entail his wearing a hairpiece to auditions during his early career, including for Star Trek.There is no question that Shatner’s hair color, texture and styles vary greatly from one screen appearance to another, lending to the rumor that he changes hairpieces as often as he changes acting jobs.Fellow actor George Takei claims that Shatner wore a toupee from the very beginning of the 1960s Star Trek television series.However, makeup artists on that show have claimed that Shatner did, indeed, have a full head of hair (and the makeup department would be in a position to know, since they shampooed, conditioned, dried and styled his hair on a regular schedule).In fact, to artificially age Shatner in one Star Trek episode (“The Deadly Years,” Season 2, Episode 12), the makeup department had to make him partially bald with a skin head wig, which implies they were covering up his natural hair:^^^ Shatner wearing a skin head wig (to cover his natural hair) in the 1960s Star Trek episode “The Deadly Years” (S2E12).As for Shatner himself, he still seems to enjoy perpetuating the mystery of his hair, even at age 89, and he has teased about the subject in various appearances, interviews and his autobiography over the years.

EDIT: Some people seem to be drawing the mistaken conclusion that because I specifically discuss Vancouver and Toronto, I’m suggesting thata) They are and always have been run by liberal mayors; andb) That I’m talking about the cities to the exclusion of the country where they’re found.To flog a dying horse: Canada, over its post-WWII history, has always been (broadly) a social-democratic state, leaning decidedly left by American standards. I used these two cities as examples because they appear nightly on American TV screens as somewhat idealised versions of the typical American locale. Now, back to your regularly scheduled commenting….Why speculate? Go to Toronto and see for yourself. Better yet, just turn on the TV and watch Suits, Smallville, or any other TV series shot in a ‘typically American’ location.People think that liberalism is some kind of radical ideology. It’s not. It’s a mere difference of opinion about the way we reach the same goals that anyone wants.Sadly, some elements of the media (the real lying media) have been so busy pumping the language of fear and isolation, designed to make people feel vulnerable and alone, that they’ve become pathologically insecure about political differences of opinion.What most self-proclaimed conservatives or independents don’t seem to realise is that they’re not a beleaguered minority. Nor are they a super-majority. They’re just people holding some of the many many widely varying opinions on a number of mundane issues.There really isn’t a huge disparity of opinion between conservatism and liberalism. Both are moderate sensibilities. One says ‘hold onto what you value’, and the other says ‘aspire to a better life’. In their heart of hearts, everyone has space for both.Liberalism is not a cancer, no matter what anyone says. And conservatism is not a jackboot step away from Fascism, no matter what anyone says.Go to Toronto. Go to Vancouver. Roll down your windows and unlock the doors. The weather is beautiful this time of year.You could have this if you really wanted it.

(I work on and with Oozie, I've played with Azkaban for evaluation purposes)Evaluation based on playing with Azkaban 0.6 and Oozie 2.2.1 and their documentation:What do Azkaban and Oozie do?Both allow to run a series of map-reduce, pig, java & scripts actions a single workflow jobBoth allow regular scheduling of workflow jobsOn the Functional sideWriting workflowsAzkaban uses a series of Properties filesOozie uses an XML fileExpressing workflowsAzkaban uses topological sort (similar to Make/Ant)Oozie uses a Direct Acyclic Graph (DAG) (PDL sytle)Supported types of actions out of the boxAzkaban supports: java, javaprocess and pigOozie supports: mapreduce (java, streaming, pipes), pig, java, filesystem, ssh, sub-workflow[In addition, Cloudera's Oozie version supports Hive & Sqoop actions]Parameterization of workflowsAzkaban supports variables, i.e.: ${input}Oozie supports variables and functions, i.e.: ${fs:dirSize(myInputDir)}Alternate Execution PathsAzkaban fixes execution path at workflow start timeOozie supports decision nodes allowing the workflow to make decisionsRegular SchedulingAzkaban interval job scheduling is time basedOozie interval job scheduling is time & input-data-dependent basedResource ControlAzkaban support resource locks (read/write/counter)Oozie does not have explicit support for resource controlOn the Implementation SideRuntimeAzkaban runs as standalone (one workflows) or server (one user, multi workflows)Oozie runs as server (multi user, multi workflows)Actions ExecuteAzkaban, actions run in the Azkaban server as the user running AzkabanOozie, actions run in the Hadoop cluster as the user that submitted the workflowWorkflows Submission, Management & Monitoring (server)Azkaban, browser/HTML onlyOozie, command-line, HTTP REST, Java API, Browser/HTML (monitoring)State of Running WorkflowsAzkaban keeps state of all running workflows in memoryOozie uses a SQL database, a workflow state is in memory only when doing a state transitionResource ConsumptionAzkaban holds at least 1 thread per running workflowsOozie only uses a thread when the workflows is doing a state transitionFailoverAzkaban, on failure all running workflows are lostOozie, running workflows continue running from their current state