1. Using the AWS cost calculator is pointless, naturally an entity the size of NASA would get heavily discounted rates.
2. As data volume grows, the complexities of working with that data expands. NASA appears to be embracing cloud computing by embracing a paradigm where scientists push computation to where the data rests rather than downloading data [1], [2], [3], thereby paying egress on only the higher order data products.
3. The report notes that NASA has tooling to rate limit and throttle access to data. This, in itself, proves that NASA didn't "[forget] about eye-watering cloudy egress costs before lift-off".
People may scream about vendor lock in, which is a fair complaint; but acting like NASA just didn't think about egress is misleading.
NASA is ultimately a science institution, I think diverting effort away from infrastructure management and towards studying data is likely a wise decision.
Yeah, it's definitely not a perfect system. I say this as my wife is currently on maternity leave. We've definitely adjusted our budget and had to plan accordingly.
The biggest point that I try to make when describing the system is that it's not a government handout, it's just an extension of unemployment insurance.
The idea of increasing deductions to bring up EI values seems reasonable, although I imagine it could be a hard sell for men who never intend to use it (not saying that's a reason to not do it, however I'm sure there would be opposition). An opt-in system could be better, but then that kind of goes against the idea of insurance (you'd likely only opt in if you knew you'd be needing it and it'd be advantageous to do so). I guess the argument against the idea would be "just save your money instead" which would bring us right back to where we are today.
Agreed. In Canada, a woman or man can take up to 18 months of paid leave (although, if you take over 12 months, you'll be getting the same absolute amount of money but just spread over the extra months) to care for a new child. Your employer, by law, is obligated to hold your job for your return (provided that you were an FTE). The money you receive is simply collecting unemployment. It's money that the employee paid into the system, so it's hard to scoff at their right to utilize it. Like other unemployment benefits, you need to have been employed to access this money. To be competitive, some employers choose to "top up" the pay to a certain percentage of your full time wage (for some or all of your leave), but that's just a perk that employers can opt to offer.
I think this policy is entirely reasonable and entirely reasonable. The side effect is that there are often "matt-leave" openings at companies (i.e. covering for someone while they're away), which is a good way to get to know a job on a temporary basis and for employers to get to know a hire without a long term commitment.