# Identify resource#

Who’s help do you need? What resources (e.g. computers) do you need? What resources might make your job easier?

## Test#

Another variation on how to achieve a goal. Said another way, should you take the time to imagine a plan a..c as an alternative to a..b?

* b: G1, S2: 3PM
| * c: G1, S1: 2PM
|/
* a: 12PM


## Estimate cost#

To administrate is to impose your values on another, in the same way that to buy from someone is to impose your value on them. They trust that your values are “good” when they accept your assets for some service (or other assets). A computer (as a resource) has no inherent values, so it’s not hard to impose your values on it.

There’s a major distinction between seeing yourself as a buyer (manager/administrator/orchestrator) and a seller (staff/machine/employee). When you are a buyer, you need to go beyond single machine scheduling. This document will often use the word “resource” for sellers, styled after the language in Management and Factors of production. This is not always appropriate; for more language see A word for people who work under a manager - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange. We use the term administrator (see Administration) as a synonym for manager.

Buying a machine (or getting reserved instances) is similar to getting a salaried employee, and renting is like getting temporary workers. Many deep learning machines are now significantly more expensive than minimum wage; see for example the instances listed under Amazon EC2 P3 – Ideal for Machine Learning and HPC. If you want to use a whole cluster, the costs are even more extreme.

As the manager of a team (of either people or computers) executing or comparing plans, you must convert the resources you’re managing (abstracting from them) to $because you aren’t doing the work that they do; you’re “hiring” them to be able to abstract from them (you could do everything a computer does on paper). To keep you (or now, your team’s) action weights in e.g.$/hr you can simply add the $/hr of all involved persons together (for as long as you have the same set of resources). When you report costs to your administrator, you can provide a single$/hr estimate. This will include your own rate e.g. salary (you’re selling to them) and the cost of any hardware or other resources you require amortized over the period they are asking about. From your perspective, though, all you care about are the hours (achieve your values as fast as possible, find a steeper gradient) and so there is no need to convert.

Time is not money, so in general you need to consider the $/hr for AWS instances and employees as well, not just yourself. Buying a machine for$4/hr that is 3x slower (on your workload) than a $12/hr instance doesn’t make sense; you can get faster feedback for free. If you saw time as money, you would identify that you need e.g. 300 hours on the first machine for a total cost of$1200, 100 hours on the second for a total of \$1200, and conclude it doesn’t matter which you choose. In general, there’s no reason that faster feedback will be any more or less expensive than slower feedback.

People start as mostly the same “instance type” and diverge. It’s their knowledge that really distinguishes people; we all rely on different abstractions which can make us incredibly more or less efficient than each other in different domains. What you pay a person should depend on what they know, which (ideally) you test in some way.