Nah it's very apt and perfectly encapsulates output that looks plausible but is in fact factually incorrect or made up.

Also just peacocking, being that skid on the forums that took down PlayStation on Christmas will get you cred.

It's funny to think that the C-suite would ever give up their massive compensation packages.

They arent a monolith. They would gladly sacrifice n number of c-suites they dont know, if it increased their networth by 1%.

> My leadership is currently promoting "better to ask forgiveness", or put another way: "a bias towards action"

lol, that works well until a big issue occurs in production

But then it also works. Managers can scapegoat engineer who is asking for forgiveness.

It's a total win for the management: they take credits if initiative is successful but blame someone else for failure.

Which brings it full circle to engineers saying no to product releases after being burned too harshly by being scapegoated

That assume big issue don't occur in production otherwise, with everything having gone through 5 layer of approvals.

In that case at least 6 people are responsible so nobody is.

Many companies will roll out to slices of production and monitor error rates. It is part of SRE and I would eat my hat if that wasn't the case here.

The big events that shatter everything to smithereens aren't that common or really dangerous: most of the time you can lose something, revert and move on from such an event.

The real unmitigated danger of unchecked push to production is the velocity with which this generates technical debt. Shipping something implicitly promises the user that that feature will live on for some time, and that removal will be gradual and may require substitute or compensation. So, if you keep shipping half-baked product over and over, you'll be drowning in features that you wish you never shipped, and your support team will be overloaded, and, eventually, the product will become such a mess that developing it further will become too expensive or just too difficult, and then you'll have to spend a lot of money and time doing it all over... and it's also possible you won't have that much money and time.

Yes, I was SRE at Google (Ads) for several years and that influences my work today. SRE was the first time I was on an ops team that actually was completely empowered to push back against intrusive external changes.

I suppose that's a consequence of having to A/B test everything in order to develop a product

Have we learned nothing from Cambridge Analytica?

We learned not to publish as much information about contracts and to have huge networks of third party data sharing so that any actually concerning ones get buried in noise.

Also, if you're trying to run lean and cheap you can go very far with just a simple VPS like Hetzner.

As a start there should be common-sense gun control, like, if you get any kind of mental illness or violence on your record you lose your guns. Secondly, if a kid does get access to your gun in any circumstances you should also be charged with manslaughter.

Then you perform the mental health evaluation before you are allowed to even own a gun in the first place. Along with regular evaluations thereafter to continue to be legally qualified to own a gun.

Okay I got a little bit rage baited by this but to summarize- we Westerners value openness in government to prevent abuse and corruption, so getting mad about propaganda is common.

Companies are happy to use GPLv3 as long as they can put it behind a proprietary SaaS.

this makes Unix-style directories seem downright logical:

- programs go in /bin

- configurations go in /etc

- libraries go in /lib

- your personal user files go in /home/username

And then, there is /usr

It was supposed to be the user directory, but because someone didn't have enough space on /, it was somehow decided to put some stuff in there, so you have /usr/bin, /usr/lib, etc... But the user directories moved to /home, making /usr hold everything but user directories. Decades later, we still don't know what goes in /usr and what goes in /. In theory, what you need to boot the system should go to /, the rest goes to /usr, but in practice, there is no real rule, just don't break the scripts. Nowadays, distros tend to link one to the other in hope of making some sense without breaking too much stuff.

All that because someone was lacking disk space at some point in history.

But do you put extra programs in /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin, /opt/, ~/bin. ~/.local/bin or somewhere else entirely. Or if you're using homebrew, who the hell even knows how to make those the first choice in your PATH.

i thought /usr was a mounted shared volume for files that were static for everyone in the lab/office and the local machine machines files went in /

It should have been /shr for shared resources rather than unix shared resources (usr) to prevent people from confusing it with something related to user

god I wish it was that simple. Anything using the native package manager mostly follows this convention (with a variants like /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin, /opt). As soon as you need to install something that's not available from the system package manager all bets are off and you need to get ready for your home directory to never look the same again.

So, each thing is split through five completely different categories. And my /home/username still have to contain tons of configuration files.

These labels are unintuitive.

‘Bin’ is a generic empty container, and specific slang for a trash can. It might stand for ‘binary’ but what’s the difference between ‘binary’ 1s and 0s and ‘binaries’ aka compiled executables?

‘Etc’ is a dismissive way to refer to there being more things, too numerous to list: X, Y, Z, etc. in no way does it relate to configuration or options or settings or preferences.

‘Lib’ is fine I guess, but also what are libraries. If I ask my mom “what libraries do you have on your computer?” She’s going to be 1) confused and 2) assume I mean ebooks. I’m a programmer so I have a concept of what a library is - but how does that relate to my OS? Is it packages? Is it utilities? Is it frameworks?

accessible, intuitive, usable UX is a Very Hard Problem, there’s a reason it isn’t trivially solved with directory names like ‘bin,’ rather with elements of layout, colour, iconography, typography, you know, a GUI.

Users don’t want to solve a logic puzzle in order to interact with their computer.

except...

Yeah this is why I tell hacker/cracker corporate types to not even joke about time bombs and backdoors in company software.