Edmond

The same hoard trading phenomenon seems to be happening with Blackberry. A number of insiders have already dumped shares, meaning anyone buying those shares isn't buying shares from a short seller, they're buying from people who recognize the price is outrageous compared to business fundamentals.

Bottom line, short sellers are definitely going to suffer, but so are a lot of robbinhood kiddies.

The use of "Big O Notation" itself as a way of referring to algorithmic complexity seems like a misnomer, considering that the topic is about analysis rather than the notation used to express the results of such analysis.

Unfortunately academic textbooks have terrible "UX", so students end up dealing with confusing presentation of topics, hence we're stuck with labels such as "Big O Notation".

https://www.desmos.com/calculator/ccoiiocfbw

However, there is a general crappiness around software innovation (or the lack thereof) these days that hides behind "sexy" CLI tools with a few "sexy" options. Some of these tools are very popular and can be difficult to assail but the smell of mediocrity (or lack of ambition) around them is hard to shake off.

A comment left on the post does in fact hit on one of the reasons: the lack of interest in creating user empowerment technology. The obsession with CLI tools for instance is framed as simply facilitating better integration, while this is true, it is also a convenient excuse to avoid the difficult task of building user interfacing software.

It is however not at all comparable to what's required in traditional programs. You can compare the course requirements between traditional curriculums and this one...the gap is wide.

Of course one can argue that a lot of time and money is wasted pursuing traditional Comp Sci degrees:)

A CA that can issue a certificate to a third-party without the consent of the domain owner is not a trusted CA by definition.

In other words the issue in Kazakhstan should probably not be viewed as a technical issue...authoritarian governments will always get their way if the only recourse against them is a technical solution. In the case of Kazakhstan, they are forcing their citizens to accept the compromised CA, that is not a technical problem to solve.

It feels like a lifetime ago but people forget that one of the things that made myspace so appealing was the ability to "pimp" one's profile page. It was an aesthetic and security disaster but it was also AMAZING.

People who wouldn't know what HTML meant if their lives depended on it were willing to learn the basics in order to personalize their profiles. Then facebook happened.

Even facebook at first was receptive to the idea of some degree of personalizing with facebook apps, but as they grew bigger and powerful it became obvious that total control was the best for their bottom line.

Now people have full blown computers in their pockets all the time and all they can think of doing with them is scrolling down and clicking "like" button. This is great for our "AI" revolution because user interaction/engagement with computers has been dumbed down to its stupidest form thus by comparison the "AI" seems very smart.

The service relies on third parties to perform verification and issue certificates, just as the domain name certificate authorities do. The difference is that the information on the certificate can be anything, not just domain names.

Users use the Certisfy app to make use of those certificates, by making various claims against their certificates (think: location, age, name, even height:)..etc)

Think of the app as a kind of trust projection and information verification toolkit/client made for ordinary consumers.

Ultimately the goal is to create a service that can serve as a generic and scalable solution for internet information trust. Everything from dating/social-media profiles to academic credentials can be authenticated with a service like this, all while preserving user privacy.

The user just needs to learns how to perform some simple operations with the app, they never have to know about private/public keys.

>I find it interesting that a couple people on their partners list are Notaries Public--adding digital signature to the list of functions a Notary can perform would make the migration to digital signatures easier.

That's the main idea here, to delegate trust generation to appropriate entities...this would scale to meet the need of the internet. Today, unless you have hundreds of billions in the bank like facebook, information verification is not practical.

Also send me an email (in profile), I can issue you a short lived trustworthy certificate to try out the service :)

Perhaps a simple timestamped based appendage can be added for the sake of email client authentication. In other words reject the email if the signature is older than a few hours/minutes.

A lot of them seem like run of the mill productivity software, it is a crowded market with big incumbents.

The ones with unique offerings may just be too marginal to garner a large enough customer base, business customers ultimately want full feature suite products.

The article is about making money (even from the title)..the commented upon line is insinuating that if you think the article isn't for you (ie you just randomly stumbled upon it), then you obviously are not interested in making money...sarcasm :)

There is a much better approach that doesn't have the privacy problems that the proposed solution has: https://certisfy.com

Use good old PKI with the verification process for generating certificates delegated to suitable third-parties.

Patronage is hardly unique to African countries.

The primary reason the software development field has evolved to be preoccupied with saving/re-using/inter-op code is because of the difficulty of building even the most trivial piece of software.

Unfortunately code hoarding is simply a reflection of the age-old human flaw of wanting to recoup sunk cost, you assume if you've invested a lot of time into something, it must be worth holding on to for as long as possible :)

If software was as easy to make as a piece of office stationary is easy to write on, no one would care about code reuse/saving/interop...you don't see anyone saving post-it notes or even excel docs for indefinite reuse.

Basically any solution that gives you a decent amount of configuration options is increasing falling under the low-code banner.

https://www.confighub.com/

I however wouldn't call WAF solutions snake oil...Web security in general follows an approach of layering Swiss cheese with holes in them, you hope that if you layer enough protection you can plug all the holes.

Leading WAF solutions have pretty decent coverage for SQLi and other payload attacks. If you're not sure of security in your code then your next best choices is a WAF.

The fact is the internet is in need of a privacy-friendly information verification solution that scales...when it comes to approaches for achieving this I think the more the merry.

uses plain PKI certificates to solve identity and information verification in general.

This is an attempt at such a solution. Happy to answer questions.