I'm definitely one of those who treat it like a filesystem :') . I'd love to hear a different point of view. Would you feel ok to share thoughts on how I could be thinking of s3 to fully appreciate the right way of using it?
3,936 karma · joined June 23, 2014
Blog at https://adnanissadeen.com/blog
I'm basically curious which larger products have been made with this kind of relatively ultra-light technological approach and have still succeeded.
I'm particularly curious if there are products that started out as a super simple application and then grew in complexity while maintaining this kind of approach. At what point did it break? Are there examples where it did not break?
Edit - by growing in complexity I mean feature/product complexity while maintaining technical "simplicity".
Or am I thinking about this backwards? If you are a single developer, you use your basic tools, and launch products that are light on complexity where the focus is to ensure it earns money and that's it.
[1] https://stratechery.com/2020/apple-and-facebook/ (scroll down to "Facebook’s Anti-Fragility" to read the relevant section
As a whole, the article reads like someone who isn't very clear in what they want to say. Paragraph wise and section wise, the bot has generated a very clearly on topic text. No more 3 horned unicorns found on the flat hills of Norway style weird continuations. I can actually as a human try and interpret what was meant to be said in a paragraph. At most, I'd probably say "huh.. that's a weird thing to say". But I wouldn't think "huh... That sounds like a bot wrote that"
And it's the latter that is most interesting. I think a blog maintained secretly by this bot would eventually be considered as "eh, that's a lot of articles that say a lot of words and don't go very far". But it's unlikely that it would be considered as a bot maintained blog.
This has considerable implications with the combination of deep fakes to create giant controversy driving content farms. I don't think we are adjusting fast enough to deal with this future. Our education systems don't train us to critically evaluate beyond the headline and the bullet points. Our news cycles encourage us to churn through information, share, move on.
The ability to work through information slowly and critically is going to become a vital skill way sooner than anyone can imagine.
At least, as far as probabilities are concerned, it's not a certainty yet but the probability is very very high it goes this way.
I think other commenters have pointed out that the reaction of global leadership has been a surprise with major effects that will be rationalised in the future. Making their reaction to the event itself the black swan event.
In a rational world, we'd have expected leaders to band together against a potential pandemic. That this level of incompetency should have been expected will be the rationalization that follows.
I've actually got the Klutz friendship bracelet book sitting right next to me. My sister got it as a gift when we were kids (17 years ago) and I appropriated it when she didn't use it after a year.
That book not only gave me a lifetime hobby, but it also helped me create my first business at the age of 15. Helped me learn the lesson that if you deliver quality, you can sell a product at 20x the market rate. I would sell the totem pole bracelet designs at a premium to my friends who wanted it for their girlfriends. I'd sell chevrons and other diagonal based patterns to friends who wanted their school flag colours. Sold the latter at a premium too because the material I got with the Klutz book didn't fray after the first wash (helped me decide what materials to continue to purchase later on).
All this helped pay for several shows and sporting events I wanted to go to.
I continued to make bracelets for my girlfriend (now wife) and those ones are seated on the table in our bedroom.
That book created a ton of good memories. But it got left behind when I left home when I was getting married :( .
Recently I discovered it at home and the clip (rusty) still works. And now I'm teaching my 4 and a half year old son the art of friendship bracelets too.
All that from 1 book. Thank you for all the memories given and the memories to come.
From my end, there are a lot of trivial things I have to go through where it's low effort on the researcher end (And I've even had automated searches where the researcher has sent mails to us assuming we'd have the same issue because of some similar HTTP Header or something similar). Thankfully I've gotten faster at keeping these out but it still takes up more time than needed.
From the researcher end, I assume it's frustrating where they put in the effort to craft a well documented mail and I have to inform them that it's a duplicate or known issue that we are currently working on a fix for. It's a hard call and I'll often have to use a judgement call on these. But it's made harder still when I'll suddenly see an issue that has existed for a long time be reported by a single researcher. And then in a matter of two days 3 to 4 other researchers will pop up with the exact same issue leading me to believe that either there's different accounts under the same name, or some kind of researcher group that works together in sharing findings (And maybe bounty).
Basically, I'm not sure how much this is a HackerOne issue vs a general bounty program pain ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
No matter how correct you are, you won't get anywhere by making the other person feel stupid.
He gave me this after we went together to a conference on communication and I found the presenter to be making some rather doubtful statements. I asked questions and tried to break the presenter in the QnA session and when I didn't get what I wanted, I left. I was 15 at the time. So, I forgive myself but still cringe hard whenever I remember it.
This advice had and continues to have a really long lasting impact on me (especially in getting me out of my incredibly arrogant stage in life) and my relationships with people. I can still be critical of things while maintaining respect for the other person's context and intelligence. I've found that also helps a lot in disconnecting ego amidst a debate.
That's definitely how I feel about it at least. Others might feel differently.
That said, how does one actual build skills in this area. It feels like the author is able to do this here because it's a research paper in an area they have knowledge in.
How does one build up a general ability to critically evaluate numbers in a case like this? Does one have to know how to go look up formulas?
I recall an article from some time ago where authors released a paper about chocolate and health benefits or something similar but they intentionally gamed the numbers to find something that correlated. The press ate it up before the authors revealed the truth.
How does one go about becoming more literate in evaluating those kinds of papers and conclusions?
I'm willing to put in the time to read carefully and calculate. I just wish I knew what skills to acquire.
The waves of nostalgia are sure coming on hard. Thank you to the author of this. This whole site is a work of art!
I'm a huge advocate of async work especially in remote teams. Every real time chat about an importan decision has felt chaotic as people type message after message adding details and leaving out others which causes this long back and forth between people. The end result is always a mess leaving it to someone to go through it again and summarize information.
Messaging is just a bad format for focused conversations. Ceremony and friction are, like you say, a good thing. The physical parallel to this is sending in a request for a meeting with some details as opposed to just walking up to someone to chat with an idea you just had.
Not to say messaging is bad for everything. But it's definitely not good for calm, slow, focused conversations.
(also I say this fully appreciating that you were explaining the parent poster's view and you may not necessarily support it)
>It is safe to say that our industry has decided that containers are now the chosen way to package and scale applications.
Curious how the HN community feels about that statement. Not so much about the truth of the statement but about the fact that containers are becoming the de facto method of packaging applications.
Pick up the news paper, and it's the same thing you have to browse/skim through. Pick up the phone and it's tens of new items every few minutes.
This behaviour is not unique to children though. I watch adults at the hospital using Facebook and it's the same. It's almost like they just want to swipe rather than look at the content for real.
I have no idea what the long term effects of this behaviour are. Perhaps it's nothing and I'm fretting over it needlessly. But I've experienced it myself and it took behaviour similar to rehab to come out of it and be able to slowly enjoy content again. And it always feels easy to slip back into. It's terrifying.
But I use windows as my daily driver and what does work amazingly well for me is virtualbox and running a VM as my developer machine on it. I run Ubuntu server. And for developing, VS code has this amazing feature that allows one to connect to a remote and develop on it as if it's a local filesystem. This includes having extensions that interact with the remote too. This also means I don't do the whole shared folders dance with all its oddities around speed and syncing anymore. Honestly, it changed the whole windows dev game for me.
Once the new terminal for windows is actually v1 (not holding breath for that. Theres a lot of work for that. Its probably going to miss the winter v1 projection) I think the windows dev experience will be complete.
Ummm... I wish it were that straightforward but I can't be confident of that. Power doesn't balance out as much as we'd like it to. There are a lot of elected officials who are ok with doing as bad to their constituency and they get away with it fine. And by get away that might mean they don't get another term but they take their money and go live a life of leisure. No jail time, nothing of major consequence. And usually they'll keep playing the political corruption game using the connections built up. (Eg: bringing in "preferred investors" for a "commission")
Reality around political power is ugly af :(
That said, my confirmation bias never led me to consider how the situation could play out similarly for any other form of energy. So thanks for articulating those facts so clearly.