We will be more constructive. Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

Introduction

Politics politics, but after reading today's news on my favorite resource, I felt terribly insulting and ashamed of its users. This is a Commerce note in the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation .

The work of journalists is to spread the news, and the work of engineers is to compare the facts and draw conclusions. What do we see at the moment? Engineers read and blindly believe “yellow headlines.” They make assumptions out of thin air and lament that they have robbed everyone. A shame!

I am not surprised why there has recently been an outflow of professionals from Habrahabr. It makes no sense to guess the coffee grounds, we must appeal to the facts. The community is increasingly leaning towards flames and holivars.

A journalist who is not technically savvy, reading such an empty, but active discussion spreads further disinformation, where no one checks it.
')
There is an excellent resource “RosPil”, where you can, through common efforts, save budget money. But why all the “experts” do not work there? It's very simple - here you can write whatever you want, and in court you need facts and evidence.

Engineer, not a politician

An engineer, unlike a politician, must always rely on facts. No prejudice, no empty words, just facts. Our resource is not at all political. You can call it a discussion platform. Someone described the problem, backed up with facts, then there is a constructive argument in which, as is known, truth is born. But in a dispute, facts, evidence, arguments are cited, and only at the very end, expert opinion.

Remember that when a journalist writes “according to independent experts,” he means us. They will not hire a bunch of experts and conduct serious research for the sake of one note. No, and the names of experts - a complete anonymity. Therefore it is necessary to “keep the bar”.

Expert opinion

Expert assessment is quite time-consuming procedure. The weak link in it are the experts. The result of the entire study often depends on their selection. It can be wrong, biased, distorted (group opinion).

Therefore, it is worth resorting to expert assessments after analyzing all the facts. And only for those items that can not be assessed in another way. Moreover, one should not believe the opinion of experts who did not participate in the creation of at least 3 such systems from beginning to end.

Debriefing

Let's sort through the most critical remarks in order and try to determine their solutions. Naturally, we omit opinions that do not relate to the topic at all or are deliberately frivolous.

1. 404 error on the main page.

Yes, a serious misstep. But it should be borne in mind that 404 error is not 403, 408, 500 or any other. No page found. Obviously where the error is, everything is available. Any habr-effect here also does not smell.

Of course, it was more logical to show a static page “site under maintenance” or similar, the reaction would be much more adequate.

2. The site is in test mode.

I agree with Cooper. The site is either there or not. Other options should not be. Remember, it used to be popular to create a lot of sections in a knowingly dead website with the content “there will be news soon,” “the page is under construction”. Why are they to the user? When there is content and functionality, then you should show it to users.

Errors are everywhere, they need to be corrected. If users are used as testers, then you need to have a competent and simple feedback system. Found an error, wrote an error in support.

3. Four games for big money

It seems no one paid attention to the words of the author: “In my opinion, this is an example of success. Razdeli among themselves ... "(spelling preserved). There is not a single fact in the note that all this money was allocated for these four games. So, these are empty words. With this money, they could have made a whole bunch of different functionalities, which no one is in a hurry to study on the basis of project documents or TK. I think on the Internet you can find confirmation of the volume of work carried out. Then we can already say what was done and what was not.

4. State capacity

“Today, just with a colleague vigorously discussed this news.
At 36 million rubles, you can keep a staff of 10 people with sn for 100k 3 years!
For 3 years they will not even write WoW, but they will make quite a product for themselves.
But this is forgive me ... and the sound of the knives is heard. Shame! ”- it’s necessary to work, and not to discuss the work of others. There are no facts again. It should be borne in mind that the comments below indicate that a complete solution was supplied with iron. One ZP is not enough. By the way, for how many dollars and how many developers created WoW? 30 man-years is not so much. Back in those years, Brooks wrote about systems for which development thousands of person-years were spent.

5. Iron

The comments mention the figure of 16 servers. It should be borne in mind that in addition to them, switches, racks, power supplies, a data center, a decent amount of disk space, kilometers of cable, and perhaps load conditioners, will still be required. How much is it? Have a supply specialist? Calculate the amount, preferably in the interval. All prices must have confirmation. Maybe tomorrow I want fellow mini hosting at my place.

Comments like "I will collect you such a server for 2 thousand dollars" - I consider it just stupid. Firstly, it is simply impossible to use “samopal” for such serious projects. Secondly, who gave you a guarantee that he will not die at peak load in a couple of months.

To all this, the necessary cryptographic tools, operating systems, infrastructure software, which is not downloaded from torrents.

6. Comparison of the incomparable

Compare simulator with the portal, as it is not logical. In addition, the commentator cites a link to Wikipedia, where at the very end the figure of 2.5 million dollars per year is mentioned. There is also information that the simulator was developed from 2002 to 2009. These are serious investments. Maybe there is more detailed information on the network for this product?

7. Static business card site

Yet this is no longer just an information site. It has video, interactive elements, maps, tests, it is more like a portal.

If you pay attention to the contents of the site, it becomes clear that this is not a regular blog or a presentation site. The resource is intended for military personnel and those interested in topics. Perhaps for guests the site is simple, but for the military and other registered users, a new functionality is opened (social elements, workflow, secret communication via “our Skype” :)). And so there can be anything. The only place where this is all described is TK.

8. Other projects mentioned

Give at least links who did what. What does the air shake? Have you studied them? Have you analyzed? Reduced debit with a loan? Argue.

9. Hosting for 500 rubles.

Any hosting that I know for 500 rubles will not withstand such a load, just the presence of such functionality. Where to rent 16 servers with a balancer and infrastructure for the money? Give a reference?

The easiest test to explore the capabilities of the system. Check it under load: 1, 5, 10, 100 thousand users. How much will stand? And then take any project with a known cost and do the same. Draw conclusions. It will not be just words, it will be real indicators.

Constructive criticism

A fresh look is always useful, but write specifics. Well done those who found mistakes in games. And anyone in those. wrote support? Let's make the resource better. This is all ours.

Conclusion

Engineers are the technical elite. Let's match. Less yellow on the pages of Habr, less yellow to the comments. Trust the facts, and not the subjective opinion of a person without a name and surname hiding under a pseudonym.

Criticize, argue, this is the essence of this resource. Here everyone is equal, everyone has a word. The main thing is that this word should not be empty.

I am ready to give beer in St. Petersburg to someone who will conduct a comprehensive analysis of the voiced problems on the mil.ru part. And who, if not us? Sberbank and others are already creating new creations!

PS
You understand that this little thing can be not criticism at all, but simple PR, competition, etc. Celebrities often flash in scandals, just so that they will not be forgotten. A competent editor can create text with any emotional shade. Think!

Resources:
1. Article - habrahabr.ru/blogs/eCommerce/135955
2. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America%27s_Army
3. mil.ru
4. ru-compromat.livejournal.com/461508.html
5. moscow-post.ru/politics/virtualnyj_raspil_v_minoborony8233
6. izvestia.ru/news/511261

R.SS Appeared customer requirements

Order No. 0173100004511004289. This is an application for the development and support of the system, but there is all the information on the installed equipment!