Mizoguchi

We had a sales pitch by a MS partner and they made it sound like provisioning/ migrating services to gov cloud was seamless. It makes sense there is overhead involved from compliance. Two years to pivot seems pretty crazy though.

Doesn't Azure have a separate cloud exclusively for the US goverment? If so why would they use the commercial one?

Indeed

As part of the settlement with the US over the emissions scandal, Volkswagen agreed to invest in developing Electrify America.

What they did was to subcontract with multiple vendors who could not agree on integrating their sloppy systems, so we ended up with unreliable EV charging stations running on different hardware and software managed by multiple companies with complete lack of oversight by the federal government who now wants to throw another $100M at it so the money can be stolen again.

Considering the hostile takeover of Twitter, the layoffs, lack of leadership and Elon pulling cables out of servers, the platform has been working exceptionally well, at least in my experience. Either it was built like a tank or some of the people working there are extremely competent. To be fair is not like Twitter has never been prone to issues. I'm an old enough user to remember the fail whale and many of the great outages of Twitter's first decade. It didn't became stable until maybe 5 years ago and even recently just prior to Elon coming in they had another hours-long downtime.

Lack of domain knowledge usually increases the amount of management you need too.

In software development for example your teams become much larger because you made the wrong decisions by not understanding the scope and requirements, selecting the wrong stack and tools and hiring the wrong people.

So now you need more management all the way from HR to procurement, engineering, support and legal to brute force your way into delivering.

And all these salaries and benefits need to be paid which means now there's less money to hire and retain qualified engineers and to invest in improving your products and services.

Once an organization falls in this cycle is very hard if not impossible to change, it becomes part of the culture.

"The right side version has extracted functions from an arguably worrisome implementation on the left"

Not amount of linearity and abstractions, or silly comments, can make bad code readable. I see this stuff at work all the time. To my team's defense I deal with a lot of chemists and physicists who like to write their own algorithms.

Comments are meant to pass information to readers about rare cases that may not make much sense at first but have a reason to be.

This is to avoid the introduction of bugs by tempting someone to refactor or "fix" your code.

A properly written code, with good naming conventions for parameters, variables and functions should be easy to understand without comments.

I should not need anyone to tell me the next few lines will

//Heat oven

That should be self explanatory by just looking at the code itself.

Let's heat up the oven then check if the pizza is baked.

Reminds me of Ep 123 of Darknet Diaries.

The way some diamonds (say a 2 carat round VSS1) refract light is pretty damn spectacular, no other rock or material can match it, so that may be a reason why some people want them.