• 0 Posts
  • 52 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2025

help-circle



  • If the government procurement person doesn’t really understand the deep technical requirements, they are likely to choose the bidder who also doesn’t really understand the deep technical requirements, and is the low bidder because they don’t realize what they are getting themselves into.

    By the time everyone realizes how much more is really required, they are already halfway through the project. The government could have saved money by choosing a more realistic higher bidder to start with. But once they have half a program from the low bidder, throwing that away and starting over doesn’t save any money. Better to just finish with the team that’s invested with the project.


  • I work at a large company that is critically dependent on VAX software written in the 1980s for almost every aspect of functioning. This was recognized as a problem. A replacement coding and testing team was established. It included a full-time team of contractors - a handful US based and I believe dozens located in India - along with a few full-time dedicated employees and maybe a dozen each of people brought part time out of retirement (the people with the 1980s knowledge!) and people with other main jobs who had to start dedicating significant time to support.

    It ran for two years, then two more years, then another year. Very much a case of “the more you know, the more you know you don’t know” in that the more functions were programmed and tested, the more edge cases and sub-function requirements were uncovered. This program has been upgraded in pieces by so many people for so many decades that no one realized how hugely complex it had become, and what an enormous undertaking it would be to replace it. But after five years - more than double the original two-year projection - it was coming together, more things being really finalized than new needs being uncovered.

    And then the software that the replacement program was being written with lost support. It was too old. Documents were written to try to give some future team a better chance of success, and everything was disbanded and shut down.

    Being peripherally involved in that really made me more sympathetic to fiasco large tech projects.


  • I get the “notified teams, they did nothing” frustration, but I have seen how it can happen with low-maintenance features in departments with turnover. Team has one tech-minded person who sets up $feature, it fills a team need and gets embedded in business routines and just works, no one has any idea where it came from other than, for a while, $techieTeamMember had something to do with it. Techie person moves on in their career, other team has turnover and as a result team completely loses even vague tribal knowledge of where $feature comes from, or especially if it is embedded inside another user interface, what it is called. Now notifications of $feature breaking are completely meaningless to the team - they don’t associate any words in the email with the thing they use.


  • It decreases the need for accuracy when used with shot. In a longer barrel, the shot will expand in a relatively small cone. Coming out of a short barrel, everything in the general vicinity in front of you will get little damaging pieces embedded all over their body.



  • Homeless people, on average, contribute less to society than housed people, on average. Generally multiple societal structural failures and bad luck are major contributions to a person ending up homeless, but their own genetic- and nuture-driven characteristics play a role, too, and having a higher physical and mental disability burden than the average human is common.

    Also, living remotely often means subsistence is a major part of how people get on, and subsistence is an intensely knowledge- and skill-based task highly specific to locale. Hunting in rural Alaska is not immediately transferable to hunting in Greenland, and dumping someone in rural Montana is not going to poof make them an expert gatherer.






  • Sometimes regular stimulation is enough. I saw one case where a man took on an orphaned infant where there wasn’t even any animal milk available to hack together formula, and the starving infant attempting to get milk out of his nipple every hour for multiple days was enough to get the one breast to start making milk, and the infant lived thanks to it.

    The need for suckling to stimulate milk production is a catch-22 for women who don’t make enough milk. They have to supplement with formula to prevent “failure to thrive”, but the infant spending some of its sucking time on a bottle instead of a breast reduces their supply even more, so then they have to feed even more formula… There are devices that run a tube to the nipple so the infant can get formula from the tube while at the same time stimulating breast milk production, and they work, but look like a huge pain.





  • For something like workplace safety, sure, we should have a regulatory body that researches, teaches, and enforces good safety practices so no one gets hurt putting up a building or running a fryer or whatever.

    If there is an armed gang hurting my neighbors and family - dealing with them is going to have risk of getting hurt, and I hope we pay someone enough to make that risk worthwhile for them and the loved ones they could potentially leave behind.



  • I started using in-shower lotion because I needed something (had a small wound that didn’t heal for more than a year), water-based lotions weren’t cutting it, and I couldn’t get the quantity right with oil-based (too little didn’t work, too much was uncomfortably greasy). Once I found it and it worked for me, I used the Olay in-shower lotion for many years, but it recently seems to have been discontinued, so now I’m using Nivea. The smell is too strong for my taste (pleasant, just too much of it), but at this point I am too hooked on the in-shower convenience to try anything else.