The cost of changing jobs is pretty high, in my assessment. I mean, perhaps not if you're young, single and mobile; but if you are married with kids in school, own a home and pay a mortgage, changing jobs is personally very disruptive.
And then you have to develop a working relationship with your new boss and employer, and your new colleagues; you have to learn new tools and platforms, which may make you much less productive for up to a year. And all of these learnings carry risk - for whatever reason, the new job might not work out, and you might have to move again, this time maybe with a shotgun to your head.
The employer-employee relationship isn't symmetrical, even if you are a superstar engineer. No company has ever relocated just because a superstar engineer decided he preferred a warmer climate. Basically, staff are fungible, employers are not.
Things aren't going back to normal, when Australia opens up regardless of vaccination status thousands of people will die if they are lucky and tens of thousands if they are not.
The vaccines have been a huge disappointment with constant goal post moving the only way to keep people from noticing.
Agreed, that's really stunning - seen the analogy of cloud as the "modern mainframe" come up more and more recently.
I guess the (business) reason is that the centralized computing model enables enormous economies of scale. (Makes perfect sense from an operations point of view.)
What it seems to miss in the current incarnation/iteration, though, is the "power of distribution" - leveraging the fact that local compute capabilities (especially during development/integration) can help reduce the cognitive load, increase the efficiency, and thereby reduce overall costs.
There seems to be a tendency to focus mostly on the operational aspects, rather than the overall end-to-end developer journey. What remains to be seen is whether future iterations of "the cloud" will do a better job of embracing the power of distributed and/or hybrid.
The reason why AWS got popular everywhere I worked was that you didn't need to get buying new hardware past ops. You just spun up your own, then when it was supporting half the business you pointed at it and said "Gee wouldn't it be nice if we had a box in our own data center to run it?" then there'd be a fire lit under the ass of ops and you'd get your computers in a week instead of next financial year.
Now it's exactly the same thing in AWS. My next guess is that you're going to be running production code on fleets of devs computers because you don't have to get extra budget for AWS next financial year to afford spinning up another instance.
I'm not saying they can't pull it off, but why use this method that is very detectable when you can use others that are transparent to the user (see my other comment)?
If you haven't read the article read it, don't just read the title.
I have no idea if this is the type of thing they put as reading material in toilets in the pentagon (which I fully support if they also regularly run out of toilet paper) or if this is what top level intelligence analysis is.
If it's the former the West is doomed:
>The term "psycho-terrorism" was coined by Russian writer N. Anisimov of the Moscow Anti-Psychotronic Center. According to Anisimov, psychotronic weapons are those that act to "take away a part of the information which is stored in a man's brain. It is sent to a computer, which reworks it to the level needed for those who need to control the man, and the modified information is then reinserted into the brain." These weapons are used against the mind to induce hallucinations, sickness, mutations in human cells, "zombification," or even death. Included in the arsenal are VHF generators, X-rays, ultrasound, and radio waves. Russian army Major I. Chernishev, writing in the military journal Orienteer in February 1997, asserted that "psy" weapons are under development all over the globe.
At the time the Russian Armies largest concern was getting enough socks for it's conscripts in Chechnya.
I would expect to read material of this quality on the 4chan conspiracy board or maybe infowars if it's a slow newsday, not in official US government documentation.
> Tangentially related is the concept of a memetic hazard, although this would be more something that targets the collective hivemind rather than weapons that target individual human brains.
>>The only body-related information warfare element considered by the United States is psychological operations (PSYOP)[5]
>>What technologies have been examined by the United States that possess the potential to disrupt the data-processing capabilities of the human organism? The 7 July 1997 issue of U.S. News and World Report described several of them designed, among other things, to vibrate the insides of humans, stun or nauseate them, put them to sleep, heat them up, or knock them down with a shock wave.[9] The technologies include dazzling lasers that can force the pupils to close; acoustic or sonic frequencies that cause the hair cells in the inner ear to vibrate and cause motion sickness, vertigo, and nausea, or frequencies that resonate the internal organs causing pain and spasms; and shock waves with the potential to knock down humans or airplanes and which can be mixed with pepper spray or chemicals.[10]
It literally isn't. This is the equivalent of attacking a network switch by running main power into the Ethernet ports. I have no idea why they are using the word firewall here, a much better title would be 'Human senses have no fuses'.
>>According to Solntsev, one computer virus capable of affecting a person's psyche is Russian Virus 666. It manifests itself in every 25th frame of a visual display, where it produces a combination of colors that allegedly put computer operators into a trance. The subconscious perception of the new pattern eventually results in arrhythmia of the heart. Other Russian computer specialists, not just Solntsev, talk openly about this "25th frame effect" and its ability to subtly manage a computer user's perceptions. The purpose of this technique is to inject a thought into the viewer's subconscious. It may remind some of the subliminal advertising controversy in the United States in the late 1950s.
The whole thing reads like the National Enquirer but for spooks. I seriously hope that this is not the level of discourse in the military and 3 letter agencies (but expect it is with dread) because we'd be better served by a troop of chimps flinging shit at a chart when it comes to deciding what new technologies to finance.
At least it makes the last 5 years of insanity around Russia, Trump, Facebook and everything else we are having a moral panic over seem sane by comparison.
In 2006 SF was well on the way to world domination, google was the hottest place to work and a whole bunch of other things were cropping up. The long cold internet winter after 2000 was thawing and dotcom bubble 2.0 was just starting to throf.
I rather enjoyed the internet 2000-2005. It was like squatting and having a rave in an recently abandoned factory.
Even early HN ca. 2008 felt a bit like that. But honestly i don't have the feeling that much changed and i've been lurking on HN pretty much since since the beginning as a kid.
Google is still the hottest place to work, closely followed by Facebook (whether HN crowd likes it or not). Just look where the best and brightest CS graduates from top schools go to.
> Just look where the best and brightest CS graduates from top schools go to.
Yeah, it's not google or facebook. The people who go there today went to Wall Street/law firms 20 years ago. The shift started 10 years ago which is when it stopped being fun to work at google/facebook. Sure the people going there have the grades and cv but they don't have the brains.
#maths or #math at irc.libera.chat is pretty active.
For CS / Physics, perhaps try asking there too, I usually hang out in #emacs and #vim. #emacs is super active, so if you ask there, you will get good pointers
