alexatalktome

So I was also at this meeting. I agree that its a really spoiled discussion. But there is also a lot more un-published cost cutting. They have been aggressively slashing budget for servers (!) and hiring. Also I don't think the very ad-hominem attacks on employees are warranted, they're spoiled but they've been given the leeway and been told its ok and to expect that.

Freezing hiring is typically considered pretty aggressive.

> I wish Google would go through the Meta route and lay off 15%. I’ve never worked with a lazier, more spoiled group of people in my life.

I think making people just be more productive is probably better. I'm sure existing attrition is enough. I do think the fun budget cuts and that sort of thing are pretty silly to cut. If the median salary is 300k, then a few hundred per person is a drop in the bucket.

Internally the rumor is that our CICD pipelines failed to stop bad commits to certain AWS services. This isn’t due to tests but due to actual pipelines infra failing.

We’ve been told to disable all pipelines even if we have time blockers or manual approval steps or failing tests

Rumor is that our internal pipelines are the root cause. The CICD pipelines (not tests, the literal pipeline infrastructure) failed to block certain commits and pushed them to production when not ready.

We’ve been told to manually disable them to ensure integrity of our services when it recovers

AWS services are all built against each other so one failing will take down a bunch more which take down more like dominos. Internally there’s a list of >20 “public facing” AWS services impacted.

Seems unlikely many firms would want to scale out the hardware of their own network - rented from Amazon no less- instead.

Heard it may not launch soon because the project is so stressful employees may quit before it’s done. Lots of weekend work and lying management.

No internal use. This is a hype driven white labeling.

No this is a Antenae-as-a-service

Can confirm there’s no internal use. It’s a fresh project to capitalize on 5g hype.

They’re working with a partner for hardware but redoing their software. So it’s a pretty low-touch white label job.

They have internal use planned but it was started explicitly for sale to external customers not internal.

Oh my god you run KubeSail! Neat!

I saw this and thought “can I use kube sail and host stuff in a mini cloud?”

Dude, are you trying to miss the point to score internet argument wins?

This man is writing large, thoughtful explanation -complete with concessions and limits- that is not hyped and not biased and you’re latching on to minor details and using that as a reason to poo-poo the logic? You’re petty arguing against a calm factual explanation. They’re not even good arguments.

“You could have done that by putting it under your bed” is so silly and intellectually dishonest. Try to imagine the other side here, and at least consider the possibility that there is room for additional value beyond your world view. At least try to see the other side even if you won’t want to see from the other side.

Generally, I agree with the sentiment that I don’t want government meddling with what people say online and I find that to be a dangerous topic for congress to discuss.

Optimisticly, one of the “solutions” she proposed is to open fb up to suits for their algorithmic choices (excepted from 230). Meaning that fb can be sued for using an algorithm that drove people to behave or feel a certain way.

I’m not sure what would come of that. You’d either (a) never be able to prove anything so it wouldn’t matter or (b) you’d force everyone back to time-based news feeds and similar things that would avoid those suits.

I think an algorithmic exemption would be great for many aspects of technology too. Racist facial recognition algo used by police? Lawsuit. Algo used in hiring that secretly makes women less likely to get engineering jobs? Lawsuit. There are plenty of discussions on how algorithmic stuff has negative bias but we pretend it’s ok because a person didn’t do it.

If this pricing model described in these tweets is actually accurate once R2 is released and once AWS responds (assuming that R2 doesn’t suck for other reasons) then this is business-plan-changing good pricing.

Imagine a competitor to YouTube. Storing tons of video content is expensive. Serving it to users is also expensive. Especially with those egress pricings. 1M * 1gb of egress costing 54k is completely undoable profitably unless that data is very valuable. Meanwhile <$1 is “put this MVP startup product on my credit card while applying to YCombinator” affordable.

If R2 could point to Backblaze instead of S3 as a compatibility layer (S3 compatible so should be easy), the you could have CHEAP redundancy and low costs without any egress fees.

I can think of several niche video sharing use cases not wel serviced by YouTube that just aren’t profitable enough to host so haven’t seen any startups succeed and I can totally see it now happening. Maybe I’ll try to make it happen…

Apples entire dev relations team needs a complete overhaul. Pour money into big bounties - they have it! Then use that as justification for charging 30% IAP. Also maybe be nicer to Indy devs who help promote your platform.

I think the intended attack is to fake an apple login page with the link. You open an actual apple.com page first when you find a tag - so pretty safe to scan - then if you open the link you’ll get an apple login page. Not suspicious.

Now you’ve phished the apple credentials off someone thinking they’re helping find you lost keys. Less people would scan a random QR code they found. And even fewer would mistake it for a real apple login and feel compelled to login.

Heard from support that replying with negative responses are likely to shut it up.

They track the rate of negative feedback and high negative feedback will kill it over time.

Because trans people deserve basic civil liberties? And who better to fight for them than the American Civil Liberties Union

Can you name the companies and a source? I recall a few weeks ago there was a HN post about congressman but I didn’t recall seeing cyber security in the list.

The alternative story told internally is that the predecessor to AWS originated from a white-label storefront offering sold to traditional retailers entering the digital world in the early 2000s.

Edit: Target, Borders (the late bookstore) and gap were example users. It was called merchant.com (website url now redirects).

Supposedly AWS came about when merchant.com and the main site became hard to manager resources for, so they were broken out into services and APIs a la AWS.