traceroute66
Erm. Exactly the same thing applies ? AWS, Azure or "direct" ... its all still "trust me dude".
> Because you already have your BI and mails on these providers.
You might. Lots of people don't. My $work and many others included.
Where I work, US exposure is a risk in itself. CLOUD act, PATRIOT act and then the general political situation in the US.
We have been working hard to minimize US exposure to the maximum extent possible because the risk has gone from theoretical to actual.
Time for the daily reminder that ZDR is a pinky-promise.
ZDR is a contract clause. That means:
- It is subject to the rest of the contract, e.g. the good old "subject to lawful request or court order" carve-out clauses
- It is subject to random provider exceptions, e.g. see Anthropic and Fable.
- You have no way of verifying it beyond "trust me bro".
Basically you the only options are: - Run your own hardware which is obviously, the ideal situation
- If you can't run your own hardware, use confidential computing which runs the AI in secure enclave, e.g. Privatemode[1] (Germany) or Tinfoil[2] (US)
[1] https://www.privatemode.ai/
[2] https://tinfoil.sh/They probably asked Claude. Sounds like a normal LLM hallucination.
Should have followed it up with a second prompt to get the real answer ... "You're absolutely right. valuation is only $20b"
I'm quite sure your average American company is just as willing to plug random shit into the internet.
Hell, there are probably hundreds of reports out there of American companies failing to secure their AWS S3 buckets, so you don't even have to plug anything into the internet.
To be fair, there is more nuance to your statement.
A lot of it depends on your programming language.
For example with Go, with its extensive and excellent stdlib, you would be foolish to rely on large swathes of 3rd party libraries, because so much can and should be done using the Go stdlib.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, you have Rust with an effectively non-existent stdlib.
And the problem you see frequently with Rust is projects importing half the internet, with a Cargo.toml the length of your arm with hundreds of dependencies. Of course the project has never reviewed its dependencies source code, and the project probably barely keeps its dependencies up to date. Its a supply-chain attack waiting to happen, not if but when.
So with languages like Rust, you have to take an approach of "minimal reasonable dependencies", make an active effort to keep your dependency list short and in-control.[1][2]
> less well audited than public libraries
I also struggle with this particular argument because the reality in open source is "well, its open-source, it has many eyes" is in fact mostly a dream. Since we all know 99% of the time its a small group of maintainers (assuming there is are even multiple maintainers[3]) and not many (if any) external reviewers.
[1] https://tweedegolf.nl/en/blog/119/sudo-rs-depencencies-when-... [2] https://tweedegolf.nl/en/blog/104/dealing-with-dependencies-... [3] https://xkcd.com/2347/
Well, if they are residents of California, then they should "pay taxes regardless of residence", i.e. in California ?
Instead, decamping to Florida, Texas or wherever else seems to me very much paying quite a lot of regard to residence ?
US billionaires pay taxes ? Sounds like the start of a a great joke, what's the punchline ?
Remind me, who are those groups of people moving to Florida, Texas or wherever else just so they can escape the California wealth tax which is only a one-time 5% ?
Oh yeah, that's right. The US billionaires who are apparently so diligently willing to pay their taxes.
Yes, France is in the EU. However, the actions of France do not equate to the actions of the EU.
Despite what pro-Brexit type people will tell you, there is a lot of sovereignty in local laws within the EU. And the ability to set your own taxes is one of them.
"even better" is an understatement ! I was working on a dual-vendor network at the time, we ran Cisco and Juniper in parallel.
Working on Cisco always just felt like going back to the 18th century, I mean the whole candidate and active config thing alone in Junos was insanely valuable:
show | compare # diff the config
commit check # lint it
commit confirmed 10 # apply it, but don't persist unless confirmed
commit # confirm
Meanwhile, back in 18th century iOS land, a fat finger on the ACL would leave you with a bad day in the office until you rebooted the box via OOB.Oh right because American tech companies are not equally capable of shitty security.
Remind me, oh yeah ... it was just TODAY we saw that Azure exploit providing full cross-tenant compromise.
A big part of why European companies are turning away from American companies is the sort of MAGA bullshit you just demonstrated.
Some time ago my colleague and I were doing some due-diligence on Bunny as a potential service provider.
We asked them some basic security questions, nothing low-level, just some basic high-level overview type of stuff to roughly check if they were following well-known best-practices.
Their response was a consistent and constant "cannot tell you due to security reasons".
That rang alarm bells. Any provider such as them who is not sufficiently confident in their security to be willing and able to discuss security at a high-level perspective is not worthy of trust as far as I am concerned.
In relation to everything you said in your post, let's just say "trust me, I know".
But you missed the point I was making.
The GP said "Makes me wonder why enterprises still flock there".
And anyone who's had to deal with enterprise procurement knows if you've got a vendor on the list then its easier to deal with that one than push for multiple.
And then there's the whole budgeting thing. If management can see you're already buying every single employee in the org a Teams license, then getting extra budget for some Azure toys will probably be an easier sell then "yeah, I know we're paying Microsoft a lot of money, but can we have some AWS too". Since in their eyes Azure and Teams licenses is the same thing, "money for Microsoft".
Sadly the tech desk experience in enterprises tends to fall low down the list, if it is considered at all.
Sure, in theory, if you've got a good CTO to fight your corner then YMMV, but not everyone does.
Microsoft still has employees ? ;)
(Sorry. Low bar. But in all honesty I thought they outsourced the majority of ops. I was surprised to hear in recent news that they actually had that many employees left)
Well, when you're already paying Microsoft $/user/month for Intune, Teams&co. you might as well use Azure too.
Only one vendor relationship to manage, and I suspect you probably have to spend far less money than you do with AWS to get some personal attention.
Those in the EU wanting EU-only inference should be aware Mistral put a 10% tax ("upcharge") on Regional Inference[1].
I think the point is more the amount of energy stored in a fully-charged or 80% charged battery.
In that respect it doesn't matter if your 160Wh battery is from a leading manufacturer or some knock-off factory. 160Wh is 160Wh.
Also the airlines have to draw a line about what level can be permitted without specific permission, what level needs authorisation and what level needs dangerous goods handling.
So suspect the numbers feel arbitrary because its the result of various committees having consulted with various different interested parties and then having the unattractive job of needing to write some rules at the end of it.
It is an inevitable part of the process that some numbers will need to be picked which can easily be explained to passengers, and are workable for manufacturers and the airline industry.
Actually not quite. The rules have tightened up significantly on powerbanks.[1]
First the same size rules apply as always, i.e. 100Wh, 100–160Wh with personal individual passenger permission and never above 160Wh.
Second, max two per passenger.
Third, you are prohibited from:
- using them to charge devices on-board
- recharging the power bank itself on-board.
[1] https://www.caa.co.uk/commercial-industry/airlines/dangerous...Average life expectancy in Japan is 85 with average 88 female and 82 male.
Meanwhile US is 79 (avg), 81 (f), 76 (m).
So I suspect diet and lifestyle is still more likely to kill you in the US.
Maybe it is per-se. Overall the Japanese diet is substantially more healthy than the US one. However Japan is also quite a white rice heavy diet on average, so comparable to the US's preponderance for processed bread. So if you're not careful in Japan you can quite easily go days without much fibre – it is much easier to get a healthy meal in Japan, but its also easy to get poor meals in Japan (e.g. 7-11 snacks) !
However the thing about Japan is they have an aggressive annual health screening programme which is mandated by law for all employed individuals (twice per year for those working in hazardous environment).
So the more interesting question for Japan might be in relation to early diagnosis and associated outcomes. I suspect both would be materially better than in the US but I haven't gone looking for the data.
And that's before we get to the subject of the US healthcare system.
Of course colorectal cancer has numerous causes but it is worth considering that when reading the somewhat clickbaity headline.
For those not aware, the 100Wh limitation is not Apple, but imposed on them by the airline industry (IATA)[1]
Anything over >100Wh && <160Wh requires airline approval at individual passenger level. Anything >160Wh is classified as dangerous goods and must be prepared and packaged correctly and put in the hold.
[1] https://www.iata.org/contentassets/6fea26dd84d24b26a7a1fd578...
It would also cost Tailscale nothing to build and ship a minimised version alongside the bloated version. Thereby making it officially supported option.
Because you just know support will start finger-pointing and asking you to install the bloated version if you tell them you're having an issue with your home-compiled minimised version ....
And certainly don't look at MikroTik's product naming. ;)
Quick reminder that in recent months Tailscale has had issues with age-old classic vulnerabilities such as input validation.
The problem with Tailscale is twofold.
First their attack surface is too big. They continuously shoehorn new features into the product.
Second they don't appear to do regular deep-dive code audits and instead they appear to rely mostly on the goodwill of third-parties to poke at select areas of their code as and when those third-parties feel like it. Hence simple vulnerabilities such as input validation keep on popping up.
Fancy SOC2 certificates are not the same thing. That's just dogfood for the corporate auditors.
At $work we are busy working on removing Tailscale. The bells and whistles of Tailscale sure are attractive candy, but we simply can't overlook the security risk of what has become a bloated product.
And if we subtract all those datacentres crammed with Nvidia GPUs ? ;)
If we're being honest here, the problem with the US is that it has always treated any sort of energy source as being infinite and has always been quite extravagant in its use of energy.
Whether a preponderance for gas-guzzling SUVs or datacentres the story is always the same. The US mentality is there will always be infinite oil in the pump and infinite electrons in the cable.
It might help if the US wasn't so anti off-shore wind at the moment.
Will they though ? Given the amount of vibe-coded slopware being pushed out on an hourly basis ?
Still to this day I see LLMs make schoolboy errors like use deprecated security idioms and call in far too many dependencies.
"it's quite easy to get LLMs to write...." sure. But it has always and will always require a human with domain expertise to check what it has (and indeed has not) written.
Not my area of expertise, but at a guess.
I think that is the reason the His Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition exists as a formalised concept (i.e. the party that came second in the elections), i.e. in the scenario you envisage, the King would still refuse it on the advice, but that of the recognised opposition minister (Leader of The Opposition).
But in reality an early election would likely be triggered the normal way well before things reached that state of affairs.
It would afterall be quite extraordinary circumstances if both the Prime Minister and Leader of The Opposition were pushing the king to grant ascent to a piece of law but the King still felt he should to refuse !