I’ve always wanted to try this out in practice. It seems like it would be a great way to find gaps in the specification.
There was some research in the early 90’s over multiple implementations as a way to avoid bugs. I still feel like it was dismissed prematurely or could be revisited.
My work would insist on calling the incident response or monitoring room a "war room". And I would quote this every time it was mentioned. It gets old, but I literally can not stop myself from repeating the quote when i hear the phrase "war room".
We had a major incident go down during our Christmas party, of the "We've got $50M of payload slamming into a wellhead at 1,400m, please advise" variety.
Our service hotline was overwhelmed, and promptly proceeded to provide the rather irate (for very valid reasons!) customer the personal cell numbers of half the engineering departement.
Thus, as we were in a bar in advanced stages of inebriation, all of our cell phones started ringing. Oops.
The bartender was brilliant, realizing that something very out of the ordinary had just happened, came over, got the basics from a panicking engineer, threw the other guests out of the pool /pinball lounge at the back, put on coffee (lots!), found some paper and pens and left us to sort it out as best as we could.
The disbelief at the customer end as they heard Motörhead in the background while we were on the phone with them? Priceless.
We eventually had a couple of laptops taxied in and set up a sort of proper war room, still with Motörhead blaring in from the bar.
Good times. We even got the system offshore going again before the wellhead called it quits.
I've also had a customer service desk rep give my personal cell number to a customer. Fun times. Chalk it up to "cultural differences": the CSD rep simply could not understand why I might be incensed that a debt collection agency who believes I am singularly responsible for some hiccup in their collection software now has a direct line to me.
Battery life used to be an important issue but now people have gotten used to carrying power banks around and it seems less important than it once did.
The problem is, in Atlanta anyway, there will literally be two Waffle House's on the corners of an interstate exit. I'm thinking in particular a Jonesboro exit I used to live near, but it wasn't necessarily unique.
It always amused me when I was younger that you could go to either one at 2am and it would be filled with both kids like me getting some food after a party and truckers stopping for a break. Filled!
I've heard that part of the reason for this is that Waffle Houses only come in one size, so if there's more demand they build more locations instead of bigger ones.
14 cents per ride is nothing! Maybe 1% of the cost of a ride.
Maybe they could save a bunch by colo or something else. But would 14 cents per ride really matter at all for their competitiveness. I’m not going to notice a 14 cent difference even if I do bother to price compare Uber with Lyft.
This is a VC fueled market. It isn’t really about small margins of this size.
Most traditional companies are based on having revenues higher than costs.
dotcom v3.0 companies are all about the potential and cornering the market. Amazon was exactly the same - it was founded in 1994 but didn't make a profit until 2001.
For Lyft having a taxi anywhere I want one with low wait times at low cost is going to secure their success. Not new features in their app, not even latency to the data center.
There's no reason they need to be spending such crazy amounts on servers - ostensibly to allow faster iteration. A new version of their app just isn't going to move the needle. Signing up new drivers will though.
I fail to see how the benefits AWS provides are so important they need to spend such crazy amounts.
They need to be seen to be doing something other than bleeding money.
Every extra driver costs them money, every lift costs them money. If they can hold out the illusion of "we know we can save money here when we've got time and have won the market", maybe it keeps the money rolling in.
More like 5% if they cost costs to 0. But realistically they can cut costs by maybe half.... so you're taking significant risk for cutting losses by... 2.5%?
If the company can’t figure out how to add a date to the subject line, they won’t be able to figure this out either.
It’s gmails bug, but I’m amazed they couldn’t figure out hiw to implement the fix. Amazed but not too surprised given how not nimble big companies are.
To be fair, the header should be significantly easier to implement. There is a truckload of issues with formatting a date in 100 languages that don't apply.
Incredible how Hacker News figured out the workaround in 6 hours, when they couldn't in 6 years.