hn_go_brrrrr

I can't tell if this is a Mark Twain joke or if you've just declined to provide any support for your argument.

> I even worked for Kink[dot]com (NSFW) for 4 years

Interesting! Doing what?

This is painful to read. Too soon.

I know of a case where an engineer asked for "nine fives" of reliability. The recipient naturally misread it.

It's remarkable that Mozilla managed to be worse than Google in the "changing their mind" department.

I guess technically true, since the only screens we had back then were the computer and TV, and I didn't give a damn about the latter.

As someone born in '87, I have no idea what you mean by "screentime wasn't an issue". I think it's more the case that it wasn't an issue for your daughter. I had plenty of fights with my parents about the amount of time I wanted to spend on my computer.

This is an unreasonable standard. Outside of trivial situations, there are no infallible tools.

That sounds like a nightmare. A cloud outage means no one can badge in anywhere, including at DCs?

They updated the churn policy to require infrastructure teams to migrate their users, not just dump the work on them. That greatly eased the unfunded mandate load on product teams. That hasn't stopped infrastructure teams from making sweeping changes, though. There's one in particular happening now that's enormous -- to riff on the "changing the engines midflight" analogy, it's replacing the fuselage without anyone noticing.

What's the problem with the Witcher?

Hypothetically speaking, of course.

"You can't take us down! We'll take _ourselves_ down, so there."

Is the HN hug of death truly only single digit QPS?

All of the above. Sometimes the system you need to change was written six years ago by an intern from another team that was defragged, in a framework that isn't supported anymore, and everyone keeps piling the tech debt higher.

Some parts of Eng are mind-blowingly incompetent. Google is remarkable not for "hiring the best people" but for how widely the quality varies by org. Some orgs have a reputation for incompetence.

Security and Privacy is a great example. Half the org is fanatical about protecting users, smart, effective, the works...and the other half is fanatical about ticking the right boxes on their forms and putting roadblocks in front of product teams because it makes them look important. Try getting something done when someone from the second group is paying attention to you, and yeah, it'll take nine months to launch a settings page.

Yes, there's bloat, but it's not as simple as "there are too many people so MMM ruins your productivity".

I was in one of these. We got equity and benefits, but we were explicitly exempted from normal bureaucracy. Our exec sponsor (and nominal manager) asked that we tell him before we launched or signed a big customer, and that was about it. Otherwise, we could do whatever we wanted with basically no oversight.

I'm pretty sure we could have gotten away with spending most of our time playing video games on the company's dime, if we had wanted. We probably would have been fired once someone found out, but that's pretty universal.

Surprisingly not. Code Search is excellent and supports all of the power user features you could possibly want.

It's a fair question to ask. It's easy to be trapped by a false sense of security.

You know you're doing well, and everyone only has small improvements to suggest. Why keep digging? There's nothing bad to find. After all, you're doing well.

You should email dang. I didn't bother to review your comment history, but if your new comments are avoiding whatever got you shadow banned, he'll probably give you another chance. Skipping that step, there's a very good chance your new account would get auto-shadowbanned as well.

I have never been so pleased to not get any of these references.

No, he went to get a promotion. He should have launched a chat app instead.

Only the C++ and Java rules are native, the rest are Starlark. I don't know Bazel internals so I can't really comment on your point about APIs.

If the language rules are all Starlark, shouldn't they be compatible?

Therac-25 would tend to disagree with you.

I would call that acerbic. There's none of the reversal in sense I expect to see in sarcasm.

Internally, Google has a page with emergency contacts for every product in the company. Naturally, there any many Cloud products there.

Someone with the Cloud to Butt extension edited the page to update their teams details, not realizing they were also changing every Cloud product in the process.

Sounds like a wonderful reason for a chargeback.

On the other hand, I can't write "sanity check" without getting on HR's naughty list.

This is rapidly getting into "justified true belief" territory.

Let's say you have concrete definitions of man and woman (and as many additional categories as you please). You see a person and believe they fall into one category. As it turns out, you are wrong, and they are actually in another category.

That you miscategorized someone has no bearing on the validity (or lack thereof) of your definitions.

The distinction is how you design. You don't need idempotence with a mythical "exactly once" system. Conversely, when you're debugging a system built on top of "at least once", you need to keep that property in mind in case the bug you're tracking down is lost idempotence.