ELI5: Guys, I have a few questions about programming and FreeBSD

Shareholders do care about profitability. When a company sets free a considerable amount of staff stock prices go up nicely. That is because of less payments to "human resources" which is a quick effect on quarterly earnings.

Having "happy employees" is nice to have, because they do not go to the boss so often demanding more money.
 
In US, Big Tech is having layoffs right and left, with frankly no regard for anything but profits. Disgusting, IK, but that is today's reality.

Now You are right insofar that a cloud infrastructure does also have to be well planned and designed and managed. But the main difference now is: there is no skill necessary for that! It is not necessary to understand how things actually work. It is perfectly enough to just throw around buzzwords like "docker", "agile", etc.
Yeah, just wait until that bites the brass in the ass. With lower-paid workers, you can teach them to push a limited set of buttons in a specific sequence, and if they keep messing up, just replace the staffers with fresh bodies that cooperate better. But right now, it seems like money is being thrown at what exactly? utter lack of skill. I've seen posts on these Forums (too lazy to look for links right now) that mention "senior engineers" who have no idea what a compiler is, much less understand how a firewall really works. That's supposedly the 'basement stuff supporting the cloud, everything's taken care of already, no need to really know what's going on there'.

Dammit... right now, Zoom as a service has better infrastructure than ChatGPT. Yeah, it takes somebody smart to design the infrastructure. Building infrastructure is not the same thing. People laying bricks are not architects.
 
Shareholders do care about profitability. When a company sets free a considerable amount of staff stock prices go up nicely. That is because of less payments to "human resources" which is a quick effect on quarterly earnings.
Sure this works. Until it starts to backfire, e.g. because
  • you're generally understaffed
  • your staff is all unmotivated
  • you "accidentally" lost valuable knowledge (hehe, ask Elmo "freeing the bird")
  • ....
And sure shareholders won't care, all they'll do is have a close look so they can exit quickly once such effects kick in. Still, it's a large risk for your business in the long run. In the end, it's not so much "shareholder value" that will keep your business alive, but a robust substance and business model :rolleyes:
 
Thats what is taught in business school: the purpose of a shop is to maximise profits. It is not to make a product, it is not to make a good product, it is not to make a product that suits the people - or anything along that line.
Looks like the hippie gets a quick understanding how the game is played. :)
 
In economy most curves do have turning points.
Sure. But this specific curve can also be avoided altogether. There are just different kinds of enterprises (or, the boards leading them). Those who think long-term, trying to build something durable and slowly increase value, and those who like to gamble, maybe including maximising personal profits over a short period of time and having some exit strategy in case it's going all upside down.

When looking for a job, you should try to end up with one matching the former scheme....
 
The "FreeBSD forums" cannot give a hoot about ANYTHING as it is a virtual place.
How do I explain (how to connect the dots between my usage of the term 'FreeBSD Forums' and implying that it's the users of the said Forums giving a hoot about anything) ?
 
The users of the said forums are not a homogenous community that share common values. For that reason you see a lot of different opinions hacking on each other.
Having fun with FreeBSD is enough of a common point that people gather here to see what others are doing, and meet other enthusiasts from all over this planet. Just treat it as shop talk. Yeah, there are ppl who can't take it, and lash out with a childish tantrum, or start acting sanctimoniously.
 
I thought this was a quality that binds us civilised UNIX-folk and sets us apart from that Linux rabble ;)

Reminds me of:

P7zJz1G.png
 
No, I think it just makes sense to please the shareholders by telling them that thanks to the cloud we can now get rid of 25% of our employees - or doesn't it?
So true. And these fads run through our industry like wildfire every so often. Dirty secret is that for all their talk of being "leaders" and "disruptors" most tech execs are herd cattle. They spook and go wherever the herd goes when there's a loud noise.

Having said that, the cloud is not all hype. Keeping servers is not expensive, but the people who keep your servers are. There are also skyrocketing power costs. You get a break on your power (and Internet traffic) if you buy in bulk. It makes sense to bundle up with other people to get these discounts.

But the biggest problem is resource planning, mainly because predictions, especially about the future, are difficult. You dance on this razor's edge of buying too much hardware and eating into your profits, or buying too little and having outages when you can't handle the load. The eating into your profits is very bad in the US system for reasons we're about to get into.

Thats what is taught in business school: the purpose of a shop is to maximise profits. It is not to make a product, it is not to make a good product, it is not to make a product that suits the people - or anything along that line.
I wish more people understood this. Corporations are not bad or good, they're made to make money for their investors. If that means clubbing baby seals, it's curtains for the wet puppies. In the US publicly held corporations have a fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder profits. They can (and will!) be sued if they don't.

I've not seen a workplace with happy people. I think the ambition is to have the people maximum unhappy, and there are thousands of reasons, mainly that the quarterly figures can never be good enough.
I'm truly sorry your career has been such a hellscape. Yeah, I had that job where Lumbergh took joy in making everyone miserable. I left and got a better job. I've even had some that were truly amazing. I enjoyed my co-workers' company so much we did lots of socializing after work and it was a blast. But yeah, those jobs are the minority.
 
Keeping servers is not expensive, but the people who keep your servers are.
I still sincerely doubt the "cloud" will do anything relevant about that. You still need people to manage all your "cloud assets". And in all but the most trivial scenarios, this will be just as much work (also because if your scenario is NOT trivial, you will have some need to keep some things "on premise", e.g. for regulatory reasons, and you will need to integrate all that zoo ....)
But the biggest problem is resource planning, mainly because predictions, especially about the future, are difficult.
That's more like it. Cloud providers enable you to adapt and scale more or less "in an instant".
 
That's more like it. Cloud providers enable you to adapt and scale more or less "in an instant".
Yeah, but the logical thing to do in these situations is what is now called "hybrid cloud", but almost no one does that. I still think it's a combination of factors.
 
I still think it's a combination of factors.
Sure. I'd just say this "scale quickly" factor is the most important advantage of "cloud" for most scenarios.

I'm sure scenarios exist where "cloud" enables you to just fire half of your ops guys. I just say that's most likely not the common case....
 
I would say that the closest work environment would be sysadmin before cloud and devops.
Just to clarify, I took cloud out of the scenario in my comment because I'm thinking about homelab setups.
As stated here:
For devops yes. But I like to learn "old-school system administration" for my homelab setups.

So it wasn't a statement against cloud whatsoever.
That being said, lets go back to the languages flame war, it is way more productive and inside of the scope of the thread.

Please and thank you ;·)
 
Sure. But this specific curve can also be avoided altogether. There are just different kinds of enterprises (or, the boards leading them). Those who think long-term, trying to build something durable and slowly increase value, and those who like to gamble, maybe including maximising personal profits over a short period of time and having some exit strategy in case it's going all upside down.
This is the old rule. This is no longer valid, it has changed with the Internet.

There are a few things to consider. One is, internet-shops do not need a distribution infrastructure and logistics, because it is already there, provided by D-ARPA. Growth, international expansion, etc. is all mostly no-brainers (compared with a traditional industry that builds, whatever, cars, furniture).

Second, let's look at a shop like e-bay. Anybody could have scripted a webpage that does some marketplace stuff. But in the end there can be only one.
So you are not free to choose between "slowly increasing value" and "gambling"! Instead you must hit exactly the critical path where your growth doesn't overwhelm yourself (and your financial resources) and still allows you to kick all others out of the business - because otherwise they kick you out.
 
Shareholders do care about profitability. When a company sets free a considerable amount of staff stock prices go up nicely. That is because of less payments to "human resources" which is a quick effect on quarterly earnings.

Having "happy employees" is nice to have, because they do not go to the boss so often demanding more money.
And everybody is happy with that situation. (Except a few anarchists like me.)
 
But right now, it seems like money is being thrown at what exactly? utter lack of skill. I've seen posts on these Forums (too lazy to look for links right now) that mention "senior engineers" who have no idea what a compiler is, much less understand how a firewall really works. That's supposedly the 'basement stuff supporting the cloud, everything's taken care of already, no need to really know what's going on there'.
Thanks for the feedback - I need that occasionally. Seems my reality tv isn't so far off reality. ;)
 
But in the end there can be only one
really? ebay and Amazon are a couple big ones, computer makers still sell via their own web sites, there's AliExpress, and the like... even online marketplaces have to line up logistics to deliver stuff to customers. It took forever for Amazon/UPS to get their act together and not make package delivery a hit-and-miss proposition in the US.
 
Back
Top