It's a 'good-enough' approximation to an optimal selection process.

The probability of someone clicking on option A, B or C is unknown, but is expected to be constant when averaged over the population. Given the ratio of clicks versus views on any given option, the posterior distribution of that probability can be modelled as a Beta distribution. The experimental question is then: given the current estimates, which option should be presented to maximise the utility of the test?

For simply ranking the options, the utility may be the Shannon information. In this case though, the utility also has to incorporate the expected benefit of a click-through. One could set up a utility function which is weighted between the two outcomes, possibly varying over time.

In practice though, Beta distributions with different means tend to converge to separate peaks quite quickly, so taking a possible 10% hit on the current best estimate click-through outcome seems an entirely plausible approximation. Bayesian experimental design though could also tell you when to stop testing and stick with the winner.

On a counterpoint, the engine of a recent simulation project of ours is written in C++ and hand-optimized for speed. It took much more work to get VC 2008 to produce tight code than it did for g++ 4.5, and even then, the g++ compiled code ran a bit faster. (The code has a mix of fp and integer work, and the core of it and working set are small enough to fit comfortably in L2 cache; there are some unpredictable branches in tight loops too, for good measure.)

'Hundreds of millions'? Qantas has 33000 or so employees. Even a $5000 p.a. increase in salary to every employee wouldn't make it to the hundreds of millions. On the other hand, Qantas did just double its yearly net profits, to a total of $250 million.

So, don't the other domestic Australian airlines employ people belonging to these unions? Meanwhile Qantas doubles its profits, spends 10 million dollars on a re-branding exercise, and gives a 1.5 million dollar raise to its CEO. Now this current suspension is estimated to be costing them $20 million per day.

If I had to choose a side based on the available evidence, it would not be Qantas' management.

... at least, this matches my experience at an Australian game development company. At least we didn't have to suffer this for seven years before shipping, though.

Sure enough, after shipping, the company lost 70% of their coders and they were reduced to producing shallow clones of their original (good) game.

The game industry is, basically, sick.

Imagine if we could have a reset button.
Imagine a world where, physically at least, most decisions could be undone, and the only lasting consequences of a poor choice were social.
No more: crippled by that car accident; freak fall that took out your friend's eye; paraplegic after the top rope snapped; blinded after the pressure cooker exploded.

We should, as a society, be aiming to conquer death and injury. Technology can be our saviour. Physical misery through misfortune, or through the sheer arbitrariness of our biology and environment, may one day be only a historical curiosity, but we need to dedicate real resources and real time to the project.

Do not accept the status quo! The only reason why we have so much death, is that we haven't yet figured out how to fix it.

... if you're not in the US, and you don't use a Mac or Windows PC. Amazon does not sell MP3s to Australians; iTunes is Mac/Windows only. Personally, I've had most success with emusic.com, but as the querier has noted, their range is limited.

I really miss being able to walk into a store with a large classical range, have a listen, chat with knowledgeable staff, and have the chance of a serendipitous discovery. The web can theoretically provide the equivalent and more besides, but is hobbled by overly restrictive domains and copyright paranoia.

I must have a different calendar. When is Holiday? Is that after or before Septemberary?

Those of you who do not work hard but succeed regardless also pay, while those who work hard but are subject to some misfortune also receive.

Thanks to Microsoft, the typical computer user believes that sporadic crashing is unavoidable, machines and programs must be restarted periodically if they are to maintain efficiency, and that the threat of viruses is the price paid for the convenience of email. It has come to the point that recently, when trying to explain that it was important for long-running (scientific number-crunching) code to be careful about memory management, the people I was talking to refused to believe it was possible that a program could run for over a week without slowing down. Trying to convince people that the overhead of ECC in cost and speed for computers destined for number crunching is worthwhile is hard when they believe crashes and instability are as manageable and predictable as bad weather.

Remember the days of breathless warnings about emails, which if read, would destroy your computer? And how Microsoft made the dream come true?

I should not be surprised at the gall of Microsoft to suggest that this world-wide problem, born from their neglect and short-sightedness, should be addressed with public money.