I assume it is hyperbolic. The OP clearly has issue with the Go language. The rant contains the common misunderstandings about it (no generics, must be bad), etc. Go has survived 11 years without generics (they might be coming) and underpins some of the most popular software out there. Clearly, it has something going for it. Pike and Google understand generics, but generics have pitfalls. So when Pike and co decided to design a new language, they took lessons from the years of history, rather than repeating the same mistakes. Go is a language that is easy for people to learn, but more importantly, get right. It is just as powerful as virtually any other language out there, so caters to the advanced programmer as well. Those attributes are something not a lot of languages can legitimately claim. And people, for some reason, get really upset about it. shrugs. I say kudos to someone for building a language that isn't a research project that crammed every possible "cool" concept in. I like learning languages and would rather appreciate them for what they are than whether they have X thing. If X thing is big enough to be a problem, then I don't use the language, simple. No need to get all worked up about it and post rants on unrelated articles.
Your first statement is not true, at least in the US. Copyright gives the holder the rights over the ability "to perform the copyrighted work publicly" (directly from US law). The wording from the law on public performances: "to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered". Even in the strictest interpretation of the law, no reasonable judge/lawyer would find that singing to a single friend would meet this criteria. So someone can absolutely sing a copyrighted song to a friend without being in violation of copyright law. You can even do so with a group of friends (as long as it is what is deemed a normal circle of family/friends).
There are two aspects to the comment though:
1. Did they access services/data as part of this?
2. Can/did they use what they got to impact customers/gain access to customer data.
The comment in the article speaks to #1. And of course, we have to take that with a grain of salt. I doubt any company impacted by this would be fully honest if there was a customer breach. Regardless, you also can't prove a negative. So all they can really say is what they did. Which doesn't mean services/data weren't compromised. Given the size of Microsoft, I find it hard to believe that every service running there has the logs/audit trail to know whether they were inappropriately accessed.
But I took the OPs comment to be focused on #2 as well. There is a very real possibility that having access to the source code could help the attackers attack customers. Having access to the source code can help in locating vulnerabilities that allow future attacks against customers/services.
I've worked in big companies like Microsoft, so can only comment from that perspective. Due to their size, they often do not have MFA regardless of location. Many didn't even use MFA. Most have been moving there, but it was long, multi-year projects. So I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft doesn't have MFA for everything.
If you are in the US, it doesn't necessarily matter whether the terms would hold up in court. The question comes down to how deep your pockets are and how much money you are willing to spend to fight Apple. Apple certainly has deep pockets. There aren't a lot of companies that can take the financial hit to fight against a behemoth in court.
I'm not sure more time makes it better. The logic here is that they baited you for so long that it suddenly became fair?
Apply that logic to other situations and it doesn't make sense. I get that `you` may be ok with this, but it doesn't change what it is.
Regardless of whether we individually feel what is happening is 'fair', we should be able to acknowledge why someone is upset and that this is indeed a bait & switch. Customers were offered unlimited backup and storage of the photos they took. Customers used said service with that expectation, while competitors to it went out of business, and now, they are forced to pay for continued service. That is a bait & switch.
The moment we have to start saying, "well, they should have known better" or "how did you expect this to be free forever" puts us into victim blaming territory. Just because someone could have been aware of a bait & switch/scam, doesn't make that practice not a bait & switch/scam.
And I'd disagree. Numerous engineers of differing skill levels (what I deal with day to day), struggle significantly when map/filter are added into the mix. And we may say "get better engineers", but we don't have that ability. We have to write code that is maintainable for the engineers we have and can get (and the ones coming in the future).
They don't run 100% on renewable electricity. They offset their non-renewable by buying RECs, which allows them to claim they are 100% renewable. RECs work by allowing you to use non-renewable energy (from the coal power plant that is local to your data center/business). Then, you buy an equivalent number of RECs from somewhere else (could be an entirely different state) and you are allowed to claim you run on 100% renewable energy.
See: https://www.google.com/about/datacenters/renewable/
"In 2019, for the third year in a row, Google purchased enough renewable energy to match 100 percent of our annual global electricity consumption". They are not running on renewable energy, they are simply buying RECs. Albeit, one can argue that is better than not buying RECs, but it is misleading to claim they are "running on 100% renewable energy"
As someone that bought the first Android phone and now has an iPhone...it is extremely noticeable how much better Android is on these fronts. But depending on the person that gap may not be important. For me, it is night and day. I felt Google had a long way to go on these fronts, so I was stunned at just how bad Apple was :(.
This feels a bit misleading. Both Microsoft and Google still use fossil fuels for their data centers. I understand the "value" of RECs, but it definitely doesn't mean your data center is actually powered by renewable or "clean" energy, despite it allowing you to claim that. I really wish these companies had to publish the real numbers. That would demotivate them to buy RECs though...so here we are.
These might be puff pieces, but at least from reading them, it seems like Amazon is actually moving towards doing things. Not only that, but they are getting other companies to sign the pledge and take action.
It depends on where you live. Where I live, I certainly am legally able to block the road as an individual. I have to do so peacefully and if I'd like to do more, file the appropriate permit. But I certainly can.
I don't have to think about it. My office has been shutdown on multiple occasions by causes I don't agree with (we are located by federal land). In fact, it happens at least once a year. Not once have I wanted the protesters to be prevented or forced to disperse. Is it an inconvenience? Yes. But it is their right and a right that is critical to democracy.
In a free democracy, it actually kind of does. As long as it is done peacefully and with willingness to engage in open dialogue. The ability to influence the powerful and rich requires being able to force their hand to have discussions. Without it, the democracy crumbles. And despite the irritation it may cause you or I, peacefully shutting down transit is one of the levers that doesn't require that power/money.
I agree AWS can do a lot better with the tooling UX, but adding write permissions like this is a conscious decision. In this case, someone purposefully added it (outside the creation UX flow). I'm not sure we can put the blame squarely on AWS for this one.
And they definitely haven't been doing nothing. They've drastically redesigned the permissions UX around S3 over the years. They introduced GuardDuty to allow automatic threat detection (such as S3 bucket having open permissions) which can be applied across your organization (not just an account). They definitely have to keep doing more, but implying they are doing nothing just isn't true.
But they are quite different. There are languages that are tightly coupled, but not true of all (like Go). You could write all your applications in the Go Language, but use a transpiler.
And as other comments call out, it is important to not conflate the two. A language issue is one that can't be easily fixed without breaking backwards compatibility. Compiler optimizations can be made (and is done all the time) without breaking the language.
staying with the theme of the article, by doing this repair as goodwill, it changes how they have to report it (if at all). So if there really would need to be a recall to fix a fault/safety issue with the exterior door handle, the data wouldn't be there for regulators to make it mandatory. Warranty doesn't apply in these cases. If a recall defect is discovered 5 years after warranties expire, the manufacturer is still required to fix it on all cars impacted. One of my vehicles had a seat belt recall 10 years after. So your "goodwill" could be just them trying to avoid a costly recall.
Note: this was just staying with the theme of the article and not that I agree with the accusations.
Though I'm not necessarily disagreeing, eliminating direct taxation is more complex than just giving oversight to states. If a state can say, "no, not giving you money unless we get it back", it becomes a lot harder for the country to function. Money from Connecticut helps pay for numerous programs in other states. At a high-level, we like to say that states would make the right decisions, but would they? Or would Connecticut say they'd rather have the money to sustain their state better? Of course, is the federal government making the right decisions?
Because flash was a plugin, not locked to that one little game. Once you install it, every website could use it. A lot was done, by browsers, over the years to try and give more control to the end-user, but Adobe didn't have too much interest. They were the dominate player, what other option was there!? Countless security vulnerabilities (https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-53/p...), siphoning personal data back to Adobe, etc. Looking today at what some companies are doing to harvest data, one could say they were just ahead of their time...
I would just say that usage isn't equivalent to want. I certainly can't put a number on it, but there is definitely quite a few of us that use Java because we are required to, not because it is what we want or the best tool for the job.
This assumes it is really that simple. You are adding a manual, human process. Humans make mistakes. Humans can intentionally make mistakes. Barcodes fall off, get defaced, etc. Those barcodes, hardware and software require money and up-keep. The humans receiving the products also can make mistakes and return the "wrong" item that happens to look the same (this is a source of counterfeits, even at Walmart/Target). And then we get into the shipment chain. Counterfeit swaps happen during the transit of packages to the warehouse and to the receiver's home. This is a really, really hard problem. And to be able to do it in a way that doesn't substantially raise the prices of the products only complicates that more.
There was a giant banner at the top of their site that explained there was global health crisis and shipments of non-essentials could be delayed. They'd been asked (told in some cases) by governments and others to prioritize eseential product shipments, so they did. They also told suppliers to stop sending non-essentials for FBA. If they had capacity (and items on hand) they've been delivering non-essentials (I've gotten some of my stuff sooner too). There was a big article that blew up here about how France was going to fine them for shipping non-essentials/putting workers at risk and gave them 24 hours to change their entire warehouse workflow/technical systems (Amazon responded by saying they'd need to shutdown for a bit to avoid the fines as they reworked everything to comply).
https://aws.amazon.com/workspaces/ perhaps? Seems like that is the existing AWS option similar to this offering. Would neat to see a comparison between the two.
I don't think this analogy works. For Fastmail, there is a cost regardless of whether you want to access government data. You have to pay for the account itself. For most cloud providers, there is zero cost for having an account. Even if they hosted this themselves, they could just as likely charge for data transfer costs...and get to choose how to collect that. They could choose PayPal and you have to create an account. Or they take credit cards...and you must have a card belonging to one of the networks they support. The barrier to entry doesn't change regardless of how many cloud providers there are, all it does is increase infrastructure costs unnecessarily.
It is no longer a common name in the US. It wasn't always used to describe a male body part (though it has in modern times). It is also the nickname for "Richard". So there are Richard's that prefer to be called "Dick". I'd imagine the people choosing it today (if any are) would be that it is a family name.