jpollock

A lot of the risk is insider risk. A hacked credential, an annoyed engineer going to a competitor, etc.

Think embezzlement. Think someone with a political agenda who changes the homepage on the way out the door.

Having a single point of control is asking for trouble.

I wonder how much of that are foreign central banks moving their gold reserves out of the USA... France, The Netherlands and Germany have been moving gold.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgyn8q8gqxo

If it's worker vs capital, I have always been compensated with capital.

Lots of places set the budget, and then apportion the taxes based on mark-to-market value of the properties (the mill rate is set to clear the budget).

As housing appreciates, the mill rate will decrease, leaving the tax burden unchanged.

It encourages people to participate in local elections because the budget sets the mill rate, and the council sets the budget.

Given that this is Canada, the first and fourth amendments don't come into the discussion.

Canada's rights are in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and they aren't absolute.

Part 1, Section 1.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

Subject to that, we get Section 2.

Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

(d) freedom of association.

If 80% of the tree is in the parent list for mold, the cache hit rate would be 20% - assuming the change distribution is even, which it won’t be.

I loved this documentary. It really captured what I loved about this job.

All of the billionaires have corporations, called the "Family Office". Moving the office would be a pain point.

They have been moving both themselves and their family offices.

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/google-cofounders-sergey-b...

It's very expensive to move the business that owns the assets, and then you need to ensure you don't become resident again.

Once the money moves, it won't come back to where it can be grabbed.

That's why the USA has exit taxes when giving up green cards and citizenship.

No, once you've spent the time and hassle to immigrate, moving back is unlikely.

Tariffs, the tariff on Chinese vehicles is 100%.

I'm surprised Git and/or Windows don't support symlinks?

"Years later the line of business asked for longitudinal reporting, cross-domain aggregation, and planning. The tool integrated with nothing, extended to nothing, had no underlying data platform, could not scale, and had to be rebuilt from scratch."

Any project that takes 2 weeks effort and lasts years (since it doesn't say how many, I read it as 3-5) delivering value is a win. That it needed to be thrown away? That's a couple of people out sick.

Doesn't assembly allow devs to ignore speculative execution as well?

You can place LFENCE(x86)/CSDB(arm) around code blocks, but you can do that in C too.

They will continue to breed, expanding territory unless there are predators. When they come across a culvert (or bridge), they will block it, eventually overtopping roads and washing them out.

If you can't look at the code, you need to trust interfaces to specify (and constrain) the implementation. The implementation needs to implement the entire interface and can't do anything not in the interface.

Otherwise, you're going to get bit by the Law of Leaky Abstractions.

The number of times I've been bit by systems not adhering to interfaces? Yeah, that's pretty frequent.

For example (from personal experience), the interface allows for race conditions, it's obvious they can happen (distributed systems), but the implementation didn't allow them, resulting in fun times.

No, it's the wafer starts that are driving prices. Switching from Nvidia to custom doesn't change the constraints.

I was in a high trust environment that didn't use dual auth on some things. They lost $250k to embezzlement.

High trust is high trust until someone exploits it, and the likelihood of encountering an exploit (embezzlement, fraud, political speech, etc.) approaches 100 as the total number of staff hours increase.

When you get into team development, doesn't it become the average? So, it's not just about your limits, it's about the team's average.

Otherwise, you're the only one who can fix your code, and becomes a whole bus factor thing.

I know that as Kernighan's Law. Seems to be something that seniors learn over time.

https://github.com/dwmkerr/hacker-laws#kernighans-law

"Everyone knows that debugging is twice as hard as writing a program in the first place. So if you're as clever as you can be when you write it, how will you ever debug it?"

There are also compliance reasons.

SOX requires code review by a second party. If the reviews are automated, the development process isn't in compliance and that can get expensive in a hurry.

It would be _extremely_ surprising if private repos were available via that contract. Corporations wouldn't use GitHub at all if anyone other than those given direct access had read/copy permission.

I prefer the second. :)

It's about the cognitive load and having to follow branches.

The second version minimizes the cyclomatic complexity, taking it to 1. The reader doesn't have to keep the if statement in mind when reading through the code, and doesn't have to worry about all the ways the code can get there if they want to modify it (e.g. to add logging, metrics, other logic).

Whether or not consume should be a separate function depends on how often it's called. Here, I'm guessing it's once. :)

I wouldn't think so. Most likely using a crass phrase to instill a feeling of urgency.

Probably didn't work. Remembered though.

Yes, but even then there are people who will ramp up faster.

If the company is using Common Lisp, do you have the 6-12 months to wait for them to ramp up, or do you hire someone who has done Lisp before? That is downstream from the technical decision to use Common Lisp, but it is a huge business impact.

The programming language can have definite business impacts. It can impact hiring, salary costs (if the skill is rare), ramp-up costs (if it needs to be taught), etc.

Even bus-factor comes into it.

Programmers will write more efficient algorithms if their employers tell them to trade time-to-market for hardware cost. Previously, it was trade hardware cost for time-to-market.

"Programmers" don't make this decision, the product owner does.

This matching up with sliced data, either sliced by recipient, or sliced by sender, so it makes sense to have primary state with cool backups. Particularly if the state is race-tolerant.

As long as event orderings are unimportant, or self resolvable this works really well.

e.g. if Events A,B arrive, but A+B => C and B+A => C, then as long as you durably record A, B, the end state is the same.

I'm not sure why "reroute" is a message instead of a response, I would expect it to be a failure response pruning the control flow. With the GTR being "default retry".

There's a lot of learned experience in that doc. Reading between the lines, both the logging and configuration systems have caused global outages (or near misses). Nifty to read.

This style of architecture fits with a "no global changes" and "never lose it all" approach to fault tolerance, accepting that there will be visits from "Mr. Cock-up" [1].

Very nice writeup.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5r8xwu0l8w

It depends on where your clients are, and where your servers are. You may have a lot of customers in a country and not want to host servers in that country (tax, regulatory, maintenance cost, etc.)

RTT from Hyderabad to the East Coast USA is ~300ms.

Then you have execution and database retrieval.

https://wondernetwork.com/pings

Yesterday. I was reviewing for an exam and came across a bug in the profs text. I took a screen shot pasted it in the prompt and asked. It initially agreed with the Prof, then checked it's work, revised and agreed with me, all while showing the work it did.

I was able to see why it got confused at the start, attempt to confirm, fail, and then calculate from the data and come to the opposite conclusion.