> The difference is operate vs. build. This is so key. I do a lot of government consulting and one of the iceberg issues right now is how to reconcile devops,

> The difference is operate vs. build. This is so key. I do a lot of government consulting and one of the iceberg issues right now is how to reconcile devops, whose economics are designed to facilitate revenue growth, with fixed budget public service horizons of a decade or more. The whole public enterprise model was up front costs for expensive developers, then offload it to cheaper operations teams on shared production infrastructure for long haul. The unspoken implication of devops/CICD/cloud/agile, etc, is that you have developers available to roll out patches and features, which sends the long term cost of the service multiplying. Imagine retaining your development consultants and a product team past the 2-3 dev years through the 10+ years of production, with no revenue growth and more probably, budget cuts. The table in the article provides a good overview, with the caveat that defence is not normal public services in government. Even many bank architects aren't close enough to the code of their services to meaningfully reason about what's going on. Tech is necessarily the expression of economic relationship models, where if you don't have a grasp of them, implementing tech without a view to the economics is going to sink some ships.