yyyfb

> Your biggest pain point is most likely that you know your business very well, but you probably do not know enough about the business context of your partners.

I'm not in the market, but FYI, the tone of your post wouldn't make me want to buy your stuff. You sound too eager to lecture your customers instead of being eager to learn from them.

First off, as an occasional customer of logistics providers who sees so much crappy software held with duct tape and a wish, I completely agree that it is smart to bring it in house.

You need a solid team of at least two - a product person and a builder, preferably who have worked together before. Notice I didn't say CTO because some CTOs are admins rather than builders. Notice I also said product because you don't just need to build, you need to know what to build - and that might be part of the problem, if you're the one spec'ing the features and prioritizing bugs, you need someone to do this full time for you.

I'd look for one of the two to start with and make it clear that you will expect them to build the team up as their very first responsibility. Most great engineers have product people who they can recommend and most great product people have software engineers they can recommend.

I have come across people who operate very well with a specific offshore software dev team. If they can come in and bring their offshore connection, all the better (can be 1/2 as expensive as US). But in the formative stages, if you can afford it, I highly recommend an in-person team rather than off shoring, because it's a crapshoot that can be very expensive too if it doesn't work.

> information transduction in chemical waves has never been shown before

I feel like transmission of action potentials along neural axons fits that description though? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_potential

I guess TLS has a dependency on the public key infrastructure (eg Let's Encrypt, or whoever issues wifey accepted certs). Which makes end to end encryption between users harder (most of this stuff is intended for server auth and encryption)?

But otherwise big +1 not to reimplement crypto when the are alternatives. Another option for secret key stuff might be ssh?

With a single server sure, but anything complex than that, most companies don't have a well-rehearsed cold start procedure.

Have you been living under a rock? Nvidia tech is export-controlled and basically banned for export to China. Not that people don't find workarounds. I guess if I was the US I'd look to recruit smugglers and have them ship tainted / defective chips https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell...

From the airport map on its website: the drinking water dispenser is opposite gate C07. https://www.hamburg-airport.de/en/guide-explore/airport-map

That sounds like a lot of hassle. It's also possible to bring empty bottles and fill them up at the airport fountains, which is comparatively simpler IMO...

Hopefully something of the sort is happening now with Nvidia chips

That's not an exception, I think? Most online service businesses that I've worked with wouldn't be able to run their operations from a "cold start". That takes a lot of effort to engineer and in practice it doesn't happen enough, so that's a risk that most are willing to run with.

But maybe this isn't really what they felt that they needed at the time? I don't mean to defend bad practices, but your comment makes it sound like nobody had tasked you with re-architecting the business, and you took it upon yourself to show them how it should be done (in your opinion), without having earned the necessary trust. This might have also come across as patronizing, or at least antagonistic, and in any case unbeneficial. Not saying that's the case as I obviously wasn't there, just something to think about.

It's maybe better than to take the pain to set up git only to see people use it in the same way, setting up a gazillion branches called V1, v2_customer_fix, v3_final, etc...

I claim that these companies do not have a particularly high amount of in-house infosec know-how and outsource a lot of it, not necessarily just in terms of buying equipment, but also the service component of how to set up business practices in a secure way. It doesn't absolve them of their failures but I'm no less surprised in AT&T failing to protect data than I would be McDonald's.

The company called AT&T now and the company called AT&T that invented Unix have really nothing in common but a thin stretch of history by now. The technology development units of AT&T were split off into Lucent a long time ago.

Calling AT&T a tech company because they operate technological infrastructure is like calling Spirit Airlines an aerospace technology company because they operate jet airplanes.

No it all really changed when storage service manufacturers realized that they could market 1,000,000,000 bytes as "1 gigabyte", to people who then saw their computer tell them that there was about 7% less than a gigabyte in there.

AT&T and phone carriers in general are not technology companies. They are infrastructure companies that purchase off-the-shelf communication technology, slap a billing system on top, and then spend most of their time on operations (finding places to put towers, keeping the gear up and running) and marketing. The security component of communications isn't built by them, but by the equipment manufacturers that they purchase from. There are no strong penalties for involuntary data leaks - why would they do more?

Tldr: $1,000 worth of engineering time to save $10 on inflight WiFi

There's been kind of a silver lining consumer benefit, historically. In early years, SIM locking allowed carriers in Europe to subsidize device cost based on expected revenue, effectively offering financing outside of the financial system, and benefiting a set of customers who wouldn't otherwise have been eligible for normal credit.

Because they signed an agreement with the NTSB not to "[provide] investigative information [or give] an analysis of factual information previously released", and then did it anyways.

https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20240627.as...

Markets exist where SIM locking has been prohibited for a long time (Wikipedia says Canada, Chile, China, Israel, and Singapore at least). Financing still exists in these countries.

The phone is absolutely not "collateral". The carrier does not take it back if you default (even if they could, they wouldn't be able to get anything of value for it). Unlocking is just an inconvenience that prevents enough people from churning that it lowers the risk of financing.

I'd be fine with power, I'm running off a raspberry pi that can do all this easily. Still I'm not sure how I'd go about plugging something like PIXI onto a custom display? It draws to a screen from a browser, and I need it to draw to a memory buffer...

I built a lo-fi device like this (with a LED matrix instead of a flipboard) and I didn't really find great software for building animations at a low pixel count. I ended up doing something super low level where I draw to a buffer directly using ImageMagick. If there's a better library I'd love to know.

When you look at GitHub, Visual code, and OpenAI, Microsoft looks like an innovation powerhouse who gets it.

Then you put Windows on a new machine and you remember that that Microsoft still exists. The thing is riddled with value-squeezing bullshit, like a stupid homepage in your browser filled with clickbaity crap, ads, requirements to sign up for an account just to use your own damn computer, etc.

I guess one of the benefits of Microsoft being able to operate with different cultures within the company is that, for example, they haven't killed GitHub the way that Google killed so many acquisitions. The problem though is that there not getting any culturally beneficial benefits back into their core and keep pumping a very crappy OS.

The benchmark data that they've used to assess their performance comes from Maersk https://github.com/blof/LINERLIB

I guess not without a minimum bound on the communication speed.

If you have a way to reliably transmit N bits in time T using P photons, you can transmit N+1 bits in time 2 * T using also P photons. What you would do to transmit X0,X1,...Xn is:

- During the first time slot of duration T, transmit X1,... Xn if X0 = 0 and 0 otherwise (assuming absence of photons is one of the symbols, which we can label 0)

- During the second time slot of duration T, transmit 0 if X0=0 and X1,... Xn otherwise

This only uses P photons to transmit one more bit, but it takes twice as long. So if you're allowed to take all the time that you want to transmit, and have really good clocks, I guess that theoretically this is unbounded.

Your competitive performance level seems like a pretty objective way to test

So not free speech?

Says you'll ban porn. Porn is free speech.

Says you'll ban spam. Unwanted commercial solicitation is free speech.

Says you'll ban incitement to violence and harassment. That is also free speech.

All that "free speech" means is that the government can't take a priori action to prevent it from happening. But there can be consequences.

All the popular platforms are free in that sense already. You will just have a boundary somewhere else for what you consider worthy of consequences.

Which is fine. I don't actually believe anyone enjoys a completely unpoliced platform. But maybe don't be so quick in saying you'll give a voice to the deplatformed, when you're a platform yourself and will ban people too for not adhering to your own speech police.

ISIS and Al Qaeda are deplatformed too. Will you carry their speech?

I'm familiar with the trade-off. But I disagree that there's a choice to make between safe and powerful. It is possible to make safe behaviors by default, while leaving the door open for more advanced behaviors. I guess code linters can help as crutches. But the right abstractions too.

It's the motivating example for languages like C++ in the first place (over assembly): type safety, easier reasoning about control flow, etc.

Note how the case here is very simple - waiting on a variable to change - but advice just boils down to "be more careful" instead of "here's the foolproof way to do this". You can only ask a programmer to watch out for so many things, and C++ has way too many of these things.

Countryside roads that normally get very little traffic can quickly get clogged. If you're prepared to sit in your car for a few hours you're good though.

Also no need for glasses during totality. Before totality, you can look at the shape of shadows through a piece of paper with a whole punched in it.