Along with the reconnect solution already mentioned, you can also decouple your Websocket and business logic layers using something like Pushpin: https://pushpin.org/. This allows you to deploy your business logic layer without disconnecting/reconnecting clients.
Output metrics are things you can't control. For revenue, you can't force people to by your products. Inputs metrics are the things you can control. You can (to a degree) control price and selection. And you've established via analysis that those inputs metrics are associated with the output metrics.
A key part I think people miss is to make _sure_ your input metrics and output metrics are correlated. You would intuitively think that, say, lowering outage minutes would be correlated with revenue. And as a result, you should invest engineering and other resources in reducing outage minutes. But maybe experimentally or via some other type of analysis it isn't. Maybe users will tolerate some amount of outage minutes without materially impacting revenue. You can then utilize that knowledge to prioritize. Rather than investing in resiliency to improve outage minutes, you invest in something else because that will have a bigger impact on revenue.
Yup. If this isn't Congress' intent, all they have to do is pass a law saying so. "...when Congress addresses a question previously governed by a decision rested on federal common law the need for such an unusual exercise of lawmaking by federal courts disappears." - MILWAUKEE v. ILLINOIS via Wikipedia.
Given how A to B to C the logic of the ruling is, this case seems like a gigantic waste of the Court's time, though it was 6-3. So there was significant dissent.
I don't see how this weakens SEC enforcement. They can still seek enforcements. They just have to seek them via a trial by jury of your peers, which is one of the most foundational aspects of American law and one of the issues that led to the American Revolution.
Yeah. Reading the opinion, the logical argument of criminalizing a status (homeless) versus an action (camping in public) makes sense. The action applies to everyone.
We as a society need to continue trying to solve the problem of homelessness. However, leveraging the 8th Amendment, in part, to do it doesn’t make sense.
Nvidia’s profit margin for the H100 is supposedly in the neighborhood of 1000%. So they can afford give up some profit if they need to. Couple that with the fact that the software toolchain advantage is significant. That being said, I’m all for more competition in the space.
This is a classic ethical dilemma. Self-driving cars will kill some amount of people via malfunctions, accidents, etc. Some amount will be children. Should we ban the development of the technology? What if it only killed 1 child? What about 10? What about 100? How many dead children is the benefit of self-driving cars worth?