Why would an exec ever need to know about time/space tradeoffs? That's an engineering detail that is almost never relevant at the executive level. If you're pitching a business idea at this level, you're going to have a rough time.
Why would an exec ever need to know about time/space tradeoffs? That's an engineering detail that is almost never relevant at the executive level. If you're pitching a business idea at this level, you're going to have a rough time.
>> was thinking about making a product, they’d invite this person to hear the pitch and if they didn’t like or understand it, they wouldn’t make it.
He says this like it's a bad thing. When really the company is just trying to find out if the thing being pitched can be sold to a not-engineer.
Too often engineers love an idea because it "can be done". They can list features all day long, but lack the skills to understand (or articulate) the benefits to the prospective customer.
Why not rewrite the twitter stack from scratch?
Why shouldn't a CEO be able to sell the idea that P=NP. We can have the engineers work out the details later.
Boeing is one but a glaring recent example of that.
Twitter traded space (initially 140 characters) for time (you read it fast). That turned out to be a pretty substential decisions, also for consumers.
This is how I read the notions of space and time in that post.
I usually understand the term to mean that using more space lets you use less time and vice versa.
Someone who you think is smart,informed and honest says "Mary, who I know, is smart and works in this field wrote about this issue here: link" Could take you to fantastic info you don't see otherwise. Obviously critical thinking and possibly verification required.
Now you don't need that because links are all de-amplified and many of the most thoughtful and interesting have left. This is the real shame of it all.