To save time, I guess. They deleted the inactive code, so, why not, they thought. But then they forgot to deploy that change (to one server).
Bugs and configuration errors will happen from time to time, and might look silly in retrospect. But the real problem was, I think, that there was no kill switch (managers and tech leads should have decided to add long ago)
Estimate what a real human can do in a day, and use that as the limits. Verify that the system behaves ok for some time, then scale up the desired trading volume and limits, observe, scale, repeat.
But you don't do it by making a (bad) guess up front and then just leaving it at that.
Yes definitely, one has to assume that from time to time, bugs will reach the prod servers, no amount of tests and code review can completely prevent that.
Hopefully the kill switch system is reasonably easy to code review and test :-)
And not many seem to care or remember. Was so far away, to another group of people, won't happen here, what does it matter
Except that to some extent, similar things are happening here -- Putin was, from what I've read, using FB to do psyops, to prepare his 2014 takeover of parts of Ukraine: making up and spreading stories about Russians getting abducted etc, ... Which helped him with the 2014 annexations, and leading up to his invasion and war today. More people dead than in Myanmar.
A bit surprising that the current US gov doesn't seem to look at FB as a psyops threat against itself?
I wonder if that isn't happening already here and there.
Bigger ones? What'll happen when areas large as a country, becomes mostly uninhabitable.
One more thing: There might be more authoritarian regimes in countries not affected that badly by the climate changes -- because the migrants will want to go there. And then the voters in those places, choose more brutal and authoritarian governments who build borders and use violence to keep the migrants away.
So, more war and dictatorships in the future, is one scenario?
It's also about politicians and people in power, staying in power by keeping conflicts alive. For example, Netanyahu regularly bombing some important Hamas person in Gaza and Hamas then firing rockets, was good for Netanyahu's and the Hamas leaders' popularity (as far as I've understood).
> only about land by default
Hmm, I think to a somewhat large part, the conflicts are ways for the people in power to stay in power.
What do you mean with "by default"?
Have a look at The Dictators Handbok btw and try to see the world from the perspective of someone like Netanyahu or the Hamas leaders. How can they increase/keep their power and wealth, using the conflicts as tools.
It's also tribalism ... Many things at the same time going on?
Regardless of how much the hardware and services already cost, the company can always make more by showing ads too? Meaning, no profits or prices are high enough.
(Unless they show far too many so people start leaving ... That threshold might be high though; Linux is too cumbersome for almost everyone?)
Yes, and for countries too: most large countries are controlled by psychopaths, eg Putin, Xi, Erdagon, Bolsonaro, Trump if the coup had succeeded (maybe next time).
Whilst smaller countries are more often somewhat well functioning democracies.
The more layers of power one has to climb to get to the top, the more beneficial it is to "be able to" happily manipulate, step on and destroy others
Actually it's sometimes a helpful feeling -- or evolution would have made it disappear.
But yes, many people feel shame too often? In a non constructive way,
At the same time, consider this: You're trying something new, maybe singing karaoke for the first time. It doesn't go well, you sing the wrong tones, the wrong lyrics, and the others start looking at you with surprise and a bit disappoinment in their eyes.
Should you continue singing more and more songs like that, they'll start to think that you're clueless about the impression you're making on others. They can start thinking you have some minor mental problems (if you sing bad enough and go on and on happily).
But instead you feel ... Shame, and withdraw: that day you don't sing more karaoke songs. Back home, you practice in the shower, and two weeks later you try again an now it goes ok.
> so they can hire the laid-off from other companies
They don't only hire recently laid off people. Most people who apply do that for other reasons I think. Also, maybe eg Google s recruiting accuracy is better than other companies lay-off accuracy
Bugs and configuration errors will happen from time to time, and might look silly in retrospect. But the real problem was, I think, that there was no kill switch (managers and tech leads should have decided to add long ago)