Efficiency is the removal of redundancy.
-
@sandorspruit @ekuber we do that as well, we have a subscription with a very local farmer who prepares a box of vegetables and fruits every week. They don't produce everything, but everything is seasonal and organic. And every week is a surprise: "what are we going to eat this week?" 😛
-
One thing I keep seeing is the same lessons being learned across different disciplines: pilots and doctors learning about the importance of checklists, road and industrial machine engineers learning about safe by default design, industrial and software UX designers learning about how to best make machines and humans talk to each other. We need more cross pollination. Across industries. Across borders. Across people. That's how we build a better future. And for that we need to listen.
@ekuber
It reminds me of people trying to figure out gravity before it was common knowledge. They ascribed the fact that stuff falls down to god or any other outlandish idea.The same happens if you ask a liberally educated person to explain cooperation.
They use individualism, idealism, utopianism, reinvent the wheel.
We have tools for this for over 100 years. It is called planned economy, socialism and materialism. Its dead easy but the knowledge has been forcefully replaced.
-
@jrdepriest @ekuber is each step going to continue being redundant? Because if each step is as efficient as possible, that's a single point of failure at each step and future steps won't solve that
If you have error checking and loops or retries, it might. If future steps verify what comes out of previous steps, it might.
My point is that you can have a redundant overall process with efficiency in the individual pieces and that just focusing on overall efficiency in general doesn't make sense.
But that assumes you get to design the whole system and understand all the inputs, outputs, and failure modes. And whatever passes for a threat model, fault tolerance, and risk appetite. Or possibly regulatory requirements or contractual obligations. Or how much time you have to build it.
Anybody who says "we only focus on efficiency" is vastly oversimplifying.
-
Efficiency is the removal of redundancy. Redundancy is a necessary element of resilient systems. The unbounded search for efficiency has one result: brittleness.
@ekuber This reminds me of an argument I had with management of the network operations center where I worked. I made a beautiful point about "pickle factory staffing" versus "firehouse staffing" but it took them months to see my point.
-
@ekuber
It's a cross-and multi-disciplinary group looking at how high-reliability organizations can, do, and should work, how systems fall, and how the human parts of those systems help them not fail completely.
https://www.resilience-engineering-association.org/Good starting places in the literature are Dekker's "A Field Guide to 'Human Error'", the Woods paper "The Theory of Graceful Extensibility: Basic Rules that Govern Adaptive Systems", and (from a different end of the community) Leveson's Engineering a Safer World.
-
Efficiency is the removal of redundancy. Redundancy is a necessary element of resilient systems. The unbounded search for efficiency has one result: brittleness.
@ekuber and boy has private equity prospered by gutting all the redundancy they can find while leaving the rest of us to deal with the inevitable system failures.
capitalism sure is efficient when we let capitalistic vultures define efficiency
-
I'm all for global chains of distribution: specialization is real and you won't ever grow bananas in Alaska (even if Iceland showed it is technically possible last century), manufacture a computer chip in Paris or produce wine in Greenland, but we as consumers have to accept and understand that having pineapple out of season anywhere in the planet is not reasonable at the prices we're used to paying. In some French super markets I've seen signs on the produce next to the price with the country of origin and helpful information of when the growing season is. I found that as an excellent nudge for the almost entirely fictional homo economicus. I'd like us to surface that information to everyone for everything. Maybe that way people would understand just how connected we are.
@ekuber i think it's an EU regulation that you have to indicate the origin of fruits and vegetables. This is certainly the case in Italy too, they generally indicate regional production too. And it does impact sales somewhat, but people buy out of season fruit from abroad just the same, cause it's a cultural issue.
-
One thing I keep seeing is the same lessons being learned across different disciplines: pilots and doctors learning about the importance of checklists, road and industrial machine engineers learning about safe by default design, industrial and software UX designers learning about how to best make machines and humans talk to each other. We need more cross pollination. Across industries. Across borders. Across people. That's how we build a better future. And for that we need to listen.
@ekuber but what if we just ask the magic bullshit machine instead. That's more efficient than listening!
-
Efficiency is the removal of redundancy. Redundancy is a necessary element of resilient systems. The unbounded search for efficiency has one result: brittleness.
That's a different perspective of how I perceive efficient systems as a decades long sysadmin sort.
To me: downtime is inefficient.
Redundancy: improves system availability and uptime, thus maximizing resource utilization.
Figuring out the balance is a challenge, perhaps even an art form.
I've been pretty good at it on occasion!
To me: SPOFs are horribly inefficient and to be avoided and mitigated whenever possible.
Let's take a simple example, of a NAS (Network Attached Storage). Presumably, comprised of a RAID (Redundant Array of Inexpensive [well, originally that was the acronym] Disks).
A RAID0? Hella fast, horrible, a single disk in the array will take the entire thing down, so for each disk in a RAID0? It adds a multiplicative rate of failure.
RAID1? Redundant, but meh.
RAID5? Now we're getting somewhere! Has some decent trade offs. Can lose a disk and still rebuild, but has some better advantages for a bit more storage and not horrible speed sacrifices.
RAID6/(NetApp would call this: RAID-DP, [Open]ZFS RAIDz2): gettin a bit more sophisticated: can lose two disks in an array simultaneously and still recover. Circa 2006? I encountered failures such as that when drive densities were around 72GB and a 2TB NetApp array cost around $60,000. Still: being able to recover from that kind of failure (and stay up and have data available)? Total life saver of a feature. The BER (Bit Error Rate) of disks, tends to go up, as disks get denser, and guess what the storage industry does? Makes denser disks cheaper and more widely available as part of their ongoing business model/design.
OpenZFS RAIDz3 (able to endure 3 simultaneous disk failures) is about the minimum I would tolerate for well over a decade; even better: a CARP (Common Address Redundancy Protocol) HA (High Availability) pair of OpenZFS RAIDz3 systems (kind of imagine creating a RAID1 of two RAIDz3s; but the abstraction layer is more at the TCP/IP layer, so the NAS is available, even if one goes totally offline for some reason).
There are of course, more elaborate realms of redundancy (I haven't even talked about off site stuff yet for DR[Disaster Recovery]) and generally speaking: the more impactful downtime is? The more critical such designs become. Circa 2002-2006 I was a Network Security Specialist at a company that had a "burn rate" of $100,000/minute for each minute of down time. My annual salary? Was like $75,000/year; so I felt the stress there pretty keenly if things went down for any appreciable period of time.
Heck, even before that I helped an employer go from "two nines" to "three nines" of uptime (despite being a much smaller company with a much lower burn rate, and in an industry where "five nines" was considered industry standard) but these days? It seems as if AWS doesn't even manage three nines, it's dumb founding; but I guess Jeff BeeZoos empire is too big to fail or something? I don't get it. Must be a cushy job if you can get it (when he isn't laying off 16,000 people at a time).
-
Efficiency is the removal of redundancy. Redundancy is a necessary element of resilient systems. The unbounded search for efficiency has one result: brittleness.
@ekuber Yes this is true, but there's a new kind of efficiency hindering process that provides no resilience against crises. It's things like Billionaires who, increasingly, not only waste valuable resources directly, but also influence policy making into wasting even more resources. It's what got us into car-centric worlds, despite of cars being highly inefficient and fragile systems.
-
Efficiency is the removal of redundancy. Redundancy is a necessary element of resilient systems. The unbounded search for efficiency has one result: brittleness.
Perhaps there's a lesson here for Wellington Water, the local councils and nNZ government.
-
Efficiency is the removal of redundancy. Redundancy is a necessary element of resilient systems. The unbounded search for efficiency has one result: brittleness.
@ekuber So let’s invent effefficiency, which will be the removal of reredundancy.