If you want to collapse just run a system at 100% for baseline, there's no slack, there's no capacity to meet new demands, you're just running a permanent failure mode if there's any perturbation in the system.

▲

xnx 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Efficiency is the enemy of resiliency.

	▲	bumby 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is only true if you define efficiency as the inverse of redundancy. Sometimes efficiency is gained by reducing waste, not redundancy

▲

stuxnet79 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Except ... the collapse never happens. Once your engineers burn out or age out you just hire fresh meat and the cycle repeats. The issue I have with these types of articles (and books like Peopleware / Slack) is they never provide any actual metrics that may convince the beancounters to try a different approach.

▲

hilariously 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Your systems just continue working at full capacity when all your engineers burn out and you hire new people who know nothing? Huh, that's a new one to me.

	▲	kaikai 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Your baseline capacity is always lower than it would be with experienced, fully trained, happy engineers. It seems normal because the system doesn’t support anything better.

▲

annoyingnoob 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Age out?