nunorbatista

I heard the podcast and honestly didn't see it like this. I saw Armstrong as a driven guy that puts business first. I don't think the "non-woke" communication was intentional, it was forced. The guy wanted the company to move forward and saw himself discussing other things that were not important for the future of the company.

Where I felt it was a but empty was on the part where he talked about the mission. I felt like he's trying to find a reason for them to exist when in fact their success until today is from retail investors pumping Crypto. I don't think there's much good in the world coming from their actions.

PS I don't have any Coinbase shares.

Hi HN,

I recently started a Cybersecurity newsletter aimed at engineers / IT Managers in a simple and casual way. I've been working in InfoSec for some years now and always found amazing how all Cybersecurity information is aimed at people that understand the majority of the base concepts. It seems like no one is trying to make it easy for who's really doing the field work, and this is leading to an increasing distance between the two fields (I've witnessed this in the HN comments).

The newsletter is currently in best-effort mode to be released weekly and I would love your feedback.

An aggregator is not an archive and at this level it works really well. Twitter is also a good aggregator and a bad archive but this is a characteristic of almost all social media platforms: instant, up to date information. Search, is not one of them.

Like what? Everything I find is just “breakthroughs” that I feel never reach mass market. There’s very little information regarding incremental improvements. I got a new Android phone that has an excellent battery but in return, it doesn’t have wireless charging because it just be too slow. This is not new technology, it’s a tradeoff.

Platforms such as Facebook are great aggregators of generic information, but are not very customisable when you want to discuss specific topics i.e. when people want to talk about cars, Twitter or Instagram are limited to comments when in fact you might want to have more features to generate interaction. They also don’t want to discuss it in the same place as their uncle.

I believe this is the point we are now: a lot of people have now discovered the positives of discussing with people alike and are searching for places where they have more of their kind. This is why Reddit, Twitch or Discord are growing strongly, unlike Facebook.

While more and more people are still joining the platforms, the future will bring other smaller places for niches. Social Media is not saturated, it’s fragmented.

I recently started to write a cybersecurity newsletter that will come out at least twice a month.

It's written in a light tone so everyone can understand.

https://cybersecurity.beehiiv.com/

You need to pick your fights. Some projects are just made to be "done" for reasons that are bigger than you. Sometimes you just have to get over with it, even if you have a contrarian position.

If you want to express opinions that conflict with the dominant zeitgeist, it's important to understand the context and position you're in. This is not black and white.

Good insights. Thinking back, this is the formula that worked well for me in the last 5 years. Lacking no. 2 was the one that brought me problems in the past but I managed to fix that. It was a very expensive learning.

The issue I have now is with no. 3. I just can't be part of the tribe I'm in right now and believe me I tried. I care about my colleagues, even the ones that are harder to work with, but although I like the overall mission of the company, the mediocrity is real and I just can't get on this boat.

I've been told I'm charismatic and this has been an advantage, but I recognize this is not something everyone can just decide to be. Social skills are a long learning process and I often think back at my young days working at the pizza restaurant as a place where I learned the most at this level.

I honestly believe the no. 3 is the harder one to grasp because it's the only one that it's not depending on you: you can work on all the other points (i.e. be a better dev, work on how you accept feedback or how you work on your charisma), but at the end of the day, if you can't get behind the values of the tribe, the only option you have is to fake it. This is what I've been doing.

I'm developing a knowledge graph for Marketing case studies and examples. I work in the Digital Marketing field and every time I want to take a look at what other brands are doing is always a mess to find good examples. The idea is to have everything in one central place where you can check for brands by industry and region and then learn how they are approaching a topic i.e. e-commerce for EU companies in China, social media case studies for TitTok, etc. Still no domain registered, should be up next week or so.

For some time I thought I was the only one with issues on LinkedIn. I'm happy to see I was wrong. My fundamental issue with it is that I believe it takes more from the society than what it gives back, it's extractive. On a world where inequality is rising and unemployment is hitting records on multiple countries, LinkedIn keeps its approach of having to pay $29 to see more things and get advantages. If you're based in countries where $29 is too much, too bad for you. Its purpose is to make money with my job search, not with the fact that I found a job.

Cloudflare doesn't offer a WAF in the free plan, only a DDoS attack mitigation service. This means it doesn't go into the application level (i.e. no SQL Injection protection or XSS). They do, however, offer a filtering capability. You can see more in the Cloudflare page [1], they explain well what it is. None of the features they talk about come in the free version.

[1] https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/web-applic...

I thought about responding to some comments here but I feel like this point deserves a comment on its own: not to defend Cloudflare, but charging at least $19 / month, having 100 customers (as he said on the post) and not using a proper fully featured WAF to protect an enterprise product is... amateurish?

Also, if the infrastructure is in AWS, CloudFront would cost cents if he really does have "4 requests per minute" with full integration and logs.

I have the feeling that with the advent of cloud solutions, very big companies depend on these really small and very useful tools that disregard almost entirely a number of best practices and standards. The Solarwinds incident is going to happen a lot more, that's for sure.

Regarding Cloudflare: I'm fine with the free product not being great, but hiding the logs is not understandable. I bet a lot more people would upgrade if they knew.

this was my first question, but it seems like this was a price driven decision.

This. Investing in the last decade has been easy. I'm not so confident for the next, specially for tech. I feel a lot of people currently think they're great investors but they've all started after 2008.

For the OP, having 1M is a great position to be in but also a two edged sword: you have the money but investing it all at once is psychologically hard. I saw an article on Seeking Alpha with an example portfolio for retirement that I generally agree with, you can take a look at it here: https://seekingalpha.com/article/4391859-retirement-portfoli...

YouTube recommendations are generally not good. After I activated my pi-hole it went completely useless. The other day I was suggested Japanese motorcycle drifting.

I wrote my masters around the YouTube algorithm and the implications on politics. Some of my findings: - The algorithm works differently in English or other languages; - The number of views is not a very important metric on the recommendations - The number of interactions is a much more important metric for the algorithm - The algorithm seems to be fairly simple: the more a video has the searched keyword, the better chance you have for it to rank higher - YouTube doesn't necessarily put you on a "bubble" as defended by some authors on other social media platforms. It suggests videos that are related but if no other videos are relevant, it has no issues with suggesting content that is contrary to the initial. An example would be: "Donald Trump speaks about the elections". If no other Donald Trump content is available, it will suggest content about the elections, and this might mean a video about an opponent

I consider the investment on my Masters was worth it. It changed the way I see the world and improved dramatically my writing skills.

Not sure if I agree. Taken from your ICO link:

"This means you are unlikely to need consent for: - load-balancing cookies that ensure the content of your page loads quickly and effectively by distributing the workload across several computers."

You can put a lot of things in this exemption list. I risk to say, even Google Analytics.

No Wuhan on the list? I guess we'll never know who ate the bat.

Dynadot has been my preference for some time. I migrated everything from Godaddy a few years ago. It offers Who Is privacy as standard and don't spam me every day.

Last month I had to do a PDF parser and searched a lot for a solution like Tika, but strangely this didn't come up. Cool, I'll test.

> - Do less but better. Whatever you do shitty now will come back

As everything else in life. This was a life aha moment.

Portuguese here: there's no error, it's fine.

I honestly don't see a lot of sense on your answer, mainly because I never said I liked or disliked a certain attitude from the FED or Boeing. You're generalizing what I said, and this is a recipe for misunderstandings, but even knowing this is poor discussion, I'll still make an effort: The FED can perfectly take anti-capitalistic actions (i.e. inject money to keep liquidity and thus interfering in the free flow of capitals) and Boeing can use that money to keep operating and pay dividends in 2 or 3 years, which is a capitalistic behavior. A similar situation is happening with BMW at the moment and here I'm clear with my statement: this is inherently bad because that money comes from our taxes.

You were the one bringing up there was some kind of connection between money and the engineering mistakes with the 737Max. If you read my critical thinking above, I'm just saying that capitalistic behaviors (stock buybacks to pursue investor targets) together with lousy engineering (proven in the case of the 737Max) are the actual cause of the problem. Now I clearly don't know enough about plane engineering but from what is known, the main reason for the issue was cost.

Khanacademy is great and don't get me wrong, but what I see is an engineering blog that doesn't force HTTPS and an ad for Google products. All that Khanacademy did was optimize code, setup the partner console properly and pay the (likely enormous) bill. As I read in another comment here: "How to scale: Make it somebody else's problem" + pay the bill.

Edit: ah, a case study from Google about Khanacademy. This post was definitely an ad: https://cloud.google.com/customers/khan-academy Another: https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2013/08/khan-academy-ru...

This is a great idea. Are you finding traction? I can try a couple of my domains here.

Have you tried Vimeo? The community is not great, but the player is decent.

> The Federal Reserve system is anti-capitalistic because it removes choice and agency from the market, which are critical components of capitalism.

I can completely agree with this if Boeing is nationalized. While it's not, if they receive FED money, they would just use it to keep operating, come back to profits in a few years and distribute dividends then. This is a capitalist behavior.

I wouldn't generalize the fact that financial issues can't impact engineering decisions because I've seen that happening in the past. In the case of the 737 Max is evident: they adapted the 737 with a new engine that was too big and because there was no space to put it, they placed it in an odd position and compensated with Software that was operating silently. They did this to avoid developing a new plane, which would cost them time and money.

> Bankruptcy is: a good thing.

This comment represents, unfortunately, what's wrong with capitalism and, at the same time, what makes it work. Bankruptcy is used by companies to get rid of debt and refocus their business, which is good. In the case of Boeing, an eventual bankruptcy comes as a consequence of a decade of buybacks to fill investor targets and lousy engineering in the case of the 737 Max. But hey, with infinite FED money, Boeing is not going down that easily.

Yes, you would still have to create a new "Secret chat" to have the e2e. The reason for that is explored here: https://telegra.ph/Why-Isnt-Telegram-End-to-End-Encrypted-by...

It's their approach and I'm personally ok with it. Due to my friends I use FB messenger a lot and they say it will take years to be e2e encrypted, so I believe it's a fair compromise from Telegram.

Telegram changed in the last couple of years. You can choose between secret chats (e2e encrypted) and normal which are just user-server storage-user encrypted. End-to-end voice calls is also a feature. If you ask me between the Google / Facebook messaging apps (Whatsapp, Messenger, etc) and Telegram, today I'd say Telegram has an advantage because it has a good UI, works across devices and the desktop client works like a charm. For someone that wants to ditch the Google / Facebook environment and be sure their grandmother can use it, I don't see much better options.

It's not as faulty as it used to be, but I see the old times made a reputation for it.