https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13419313
"> A young executive had made some bad decisions that cost the company several million dollars. He was summoned to Watson’s office, fully expecting to be dismissed. As he entered the office, the young executive said, “I suppose after that set of mistakes you will want to fire me.” Watson was said to have replied,
> “Not at all, young man, we have just spent a couple of million dollars educating you.” [1]"
The boss's response makes a lot more sense than the usual fluff, though: "If I fire you now, the next guy to make a mistake won't admit it and we won't find out about it until it's too late."
> That website sold millions of euros worth of tickets every day.
The claim wasn't that a single airline sold a million dollars per day, but that a third party on seller sold a million euros worth of tickets a day.
Is that plausible?
Consider The City in the Sky:
Every day 100,000 flights criss-cross the globe with more than 1 million people in the air at any one time. Dallas Campbell and Dr Hannah Fry explore the world of aviation.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5820022/At any instance there are one million people aloft.
At any instance there's at least 50 million dollars worth of ticket sales in play - how much during a 24 hour day would you estimate?
Is it possible for a single third party seller to capture a million euro per day?
I'm a frequent flyer and I got a feeling that most airline ticket booking pages are broken in some way more than half the time. Maybe not often broken to the point that they're blank, but definitely broken to the point that booking a ticket isn't possible (I prefer blank, so that I don't waste like 30 minutes on not being able to book a ticket).
Also most of the internet seems often broken. Oh hello Nike webshop errors upon payment (on Black Friday) for which helpdesk's solution is: just use the App.
Everything can be a guilt trip if you try hard enough.
Then I met a guy, now a good friend, that made me do my first "pull the plug migration" on his most important website. He lived on this.
I looked at the site going down, horified. He mocked me, then proceeded with the udate. It didn't work. The site stayed offline for hours.
Then it worked again. And nobody cared. It had zero consequences on traffic.
User were pissed off for a few hours, and life goes on.
I mean look at Twitter, which was famously down all the time back when it first launched due to it popularity and architecture. Did it mean people just stopped using Twitter? Some might, the vast majority and then some didn't.
Downtime isn't catastrophic or company-ending for online services. It may be for things in space or high-frequency trading software bankrupting the company, but that's why they have stricter checks and balances - in theory, in practice they're worse than most people's shitty CRUD webservices that were built with best practices learned from the space/HFT industries.
People who take on high risk projects are underappreciated. But many managers prefer employees who can reliably deliver zero value, than those with positive expected value but non-zero variance.
That development would be an obvious investment that pays for itself. I’m in banking, and terrified of making even a slightly complex deployment without validating it in production first. (Complex here referring to that it might be dependent not just on code changes, but also environment).