I think there's an argument to be had on 'owned by the public, but operated by private industry.'
Another on 'built by private industry, but owned by the public.'
Government ownership isn't a panacea and has historically faultered when faced with innovative and expert requirements.
But I do think anything that trends towards monopoly makes sense as 'let the public own the simplest level, exposed via standards, and innovation happen above and/or below that.'
Because the choice presumably wasn't {Radio Shack business-as-usual} vs {acquire Radio Shack stores}, but rather {Radio Shack disappears as a retail entity and channel for Sprint} vs {acquire Radio Shack stores}.
If you can pipeline upcoming requests and tie state to a specific request, doesn't that allow you to change how you design physical memory? (at least for inference)
Stupid question, but why wouldn't {extremely large slow-write, fast-read memory} + {smaller, very fast-write memory} be a feasible hardware architecture?
If you know many, many cycles ahead what you'll need to have loaded at a specific time.
Or hell, maybe it's time to go back to memory bank switching.
In my observation, outsourcing is caught in the middle here.
The work that was outsourced is (a) formulaic, (b) simple enough to be clearly documented, & (c) high-volume.
That's literally the wish list for good automation opportunities: why have a human automaton do something when a CPU can? Especially when you've already documented it ad nauseum.
And to large degree, this is a problem of large outsourcing shops' own making. They were content to get fat and dumb off labor arbitrage vs upskilling their talent and trying to provide higher value-add.
They all have their tiger teams, but the bulk revenue is putting lower-cost employees on higher-billable-rate contracts.
A core issue here, though, is that contracts add a wrinkle into the "automate everything" approach. Often, it is the clients themselves who resist adopting the automations proposed by the outsourcers.
It's why, when businesses say they want efficiency, I start with the Efficiency = Output / Cost equation and ask if they want to increase output, or decrease cost. Most companies buying outsourcing want to reduce cost, most outsourcing providers want to increase output.
That is exactly it. A big part of the mental model is understanding the concept of tidy data from Hadley Wickham too.
I could not understand some of the design choices until I understood tidy data and not being much into R, I never ran across the idea previously.
Mike Bostock is so brilliant and has put in such an immense amount of work into d3 that if you even start trying to build your own data visualization javascript library you will end up leveraging d3 at some point as to not reinvent the wheel.
Another on 'built by private industry, but owned by the public.'
Government ownership isn't a panacea and has historically faultered when faced with innovative and expert requirements.
But I do think anything that trends towards monopoly makes sense as 'let the public own the simplest level, exposed via standards, and innovation happen above and/or below that.'