Great session by @MarcJBrooker earlier on building technology standards at Amazon scale, and some interesting tidbits about the secret sauce behind Lambda and how they make technology choices - e.g. in whether to use Rust for the stateful load balancer v2 for Lambda.
🧵
The interesting Q is how to balance technical strengths vs weaknesses that are more organizational.
which is basically the same question that organizations all over the world have to answer when they consider adopting #serverless technologies like Lambda.
As a consultant, I often find myself being one of those guard rails for organizations that want to adopt #Serverless
(nice plug, self hi-five! ✋)
This line about avoiding baking language-specific choices into your contract and data is so important. It gives you an easier path to back out of that language choice if it turns out to be wrong.
https://t.co/qBh6wgGuz1
👍👍👍
"We use standards very sparingly, only in areas where we deeply understand the context and innovation has little upside"
This, so much this👆
Why? because incentives drive outcomes.
That's why the ivory tower architect is such a bad model - they make all the decisions but you're on the hook for it.
And that's how many organizations has adopted #serverless successfully, starting with one success story.
Love to see more details on how formal methods is applied here.
https://t.co/6p5MfXCyfR
More from Education
An appallingly tardy response to such an important element of reading - apologies. The growing recognition of fluency as the crucial developmental area for primary education is certainly encouraging helping us move away from the obsession with reading comprehension tests.
It is, as you suggest, a nuanced pedagogy with the tripartite algorithm of rate, accuracy and prosody at times conflating the landscape and often leading to an educational shrug of the shoulders, a convenient abdication of responsibility and a return to comprehension 'skills'.
Taking each element separately (but not hierarchically) may be helpful but always remembering that for fluency they occur simultaneously (not dissimilar to sentence structure, text structure and rhetoric in fluent writing).
Rate, or words-read-per-minute, is the easiest. Faster reading speeds are EVIDENCE of fluency development but attempting to 'teach' children(or anyone) to read faster is fallacious (Carver, 1985) and will result in processing deficit which in young readers will be catastrophic.
Reading rate is dependent upon eye-movements and cognitive processing development along with orthographic development (more on this later).
Sorry - a bit of a brain dump post - but I'd appreciate any responses and/or directions towards any applicable research.@Suchmo83 @Mr_AlmondED @TimRasinski1 @ReadingShanahan @mrspennyslater @TheReadingApe @PieCorbett @ReadingRockets @teach_well
— Mr Leyshon (@RyonWLeyshon) February 4, 2021
It is, as you suggest, a nuanced pedagogy with the tripartite algorithm of rate, accuracy and prosody at times conflating the landscape and often leading to an educational shrug of the shoulders, a convenient abdication of responsibility and a return to comprehension 'skills'.
Taking each element separately (but not hierarchically) may be helpful but always remembering that for fluency they occur simultaneously (not dissimilar to sentence structure, text structure and rhetoric in fluent writing).
Rate, or words-read-per-minute, is the easiest. Faster reading speeds are EVIDENCE of fluency development but attempting to 'teach' children(or anyone) to read faster is fallacious (Carver, 1985) and will result in processing deficit which in young readers will be catastrophic.
Reading rate is dependent upon eye-movements and cognitive processing development along with orthographic development (more on this later).
