274 karma · joined May 22, 2012
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: Remote Only
Technologies: Python, Rust, Swift, JS, Docker, Bash, Linux Systems
Résumé/CV: https://egd.im/resume.pdf
Email: hn@egd.im
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/danielsoneg/
---------
I've been a developer for 12 years, most recently at Twitter, including a stint managing. I'm a strong generalist - I've done everything from run servers to write iOS apps, and generally wear many hats.
I'm looking for remote-friendly programming roles at companies in the biotech & synthetic biology space.
Go Slugs! The UCSC campus is still the most beautiful place I've ever lived. I'm sad I wasn't more of an outdoorsy person while I was there - it was just an incredible place.
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: Remote Only
Technologies: Python, Rust, Swift, JS, Docker, Bash, Linux Systems
Résumé/CV: https://egd.im/resume.pdf
Email: hn@egd.im
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/danielsoneg/
---------
I've been a developer for 12 years, most recently at Twitter, including a stint managing. I'm a strong generalist - I've done everything from run servers to write iOS apps, and generally wear many hats. I'm looking for remote-friendly programming roles at companies in the biotech & synthetic biology space.
Nassim Taleb's Antifragility concept is relevant here as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifragility
(Also, 50 different cities and a couple stations for each? That's no small amount of work!)
Consumers are actual humans with complex lives that often also include producing things. Every seller that Amazon drives out of business is a consumer (or consumers) that no longer has an income. That's how this harms consumers.
This looks like they're turning every nob to 11 on the current architecture to try to get something that they can sell until they can come up with whatever will succeed the Core line.
AR right now is stuck because the display technologies aren't up to the task. The "Waveguide" approach has always fallen short - nobody's ever been able to make the viewing angle wide enough to be worthwhile, and the "passthrough" approach isn't really viable for walking down the street.
This is why I'm skeptical about Apple's AR moves - unless they've either got a totally new display technology or they've managed to do something incredibly clever with the waveguide approach, I just don't see consumer goggles working.
The only people I've seen doing something unique in this space is Tilt Five: https://www.tiltfive.com/ - they've basically done what you're suggesting: constrain the use case until you can actually build something for it.
I change my clothes at least once a day and add to my wardrobe on a ~weekly to ~monthly basis. Having been party to large system upgrades at even a reasonably competent company, I'd be shocked to find out that any surveillance system anywhere is matching that velocity.
This is probably one of the areas where the law's not quite caught up to reality.
50 years ago, the probable life story of a picture of you taken by someone in public was that it would be developed, maybe reproduced once or twice, possibly sold to a magazine or displayed somewhere, and then it would spend the next half century in a drawer somewhere.
In 2019, the life story of a picture of you taken by someone with an Android phone is that it is uploaded to Google's servers, where it's analyzed, tagged via facial recognition, combined with location data, associated with your profile, and used to build a better understanding of who you are, who you know, and who you associate with, so Google can package that data and use it to target better ads at you (and Google's one of the "better" players in this space, in that the worst they're likely to do is advertise to you).
I don't think it's quite caught up to people that the average amount of processing being applied to any given picture of them in 2019 is about on par with what the CIA would've dedicated to a picture of the Russian ambassador back in 1969.
Most network providers have peering agreements to handle reciprocal traffic flows. In other words, if you're Comcast, you send a shit-ton of traffic to, say, Verizon. But Verizon also sends a shit-ton of traffic to you, as well. Generally, companies will have peering agreements that express the price for which they will route traffic for other network providers, and generally if there's a lot of reciprocal traffic, the peering will be "settlement free" - in other words, neither party charges the other to route traffic. So, in the example above, you as Comcast would agree to route Verizon's traffic across your network for free as long as Verizon did the same.
Cloudflare is a CDN, which means they push a LOT of traffic out across a lot of networks, and it's likely they're not getting as much inbound traffic as they're pushing out. That makes it harder for them to negotiate settlement-free peering, since they're not providing as much reciprocal value to their partners. By owning 1.1.1.1, they can now claim any trafic sent to that IP as "inbound" to Cloudflare's networks for the sake of peering agreements. Since 1.1.1.1 gets a bunch of traffic from either misconfigured equipment or people doing silly tests, routing that traffic helps improve Cloudflare's ability to negotiate better peering agreements.
Which, honestly, is pretty clever, since most of that traffic is garbage.
It's the same reason there's not an Apple Television, there's an AppleTV - the display doesn't matter, the source does.
Grant the MP3 comparison, though - and that's why I'm trying to understand this. They've got smarter people than me pushing for this.
That said, I do agree the idea that they're fundamentally a company good at making high-tech, well manufactured items cheaper and at a larger scale than anyone else can and extrapolating that to luxury cars as a market is a reasonable and possibly sufficient view of this.
They've made a trillion dollar business out of small, high-margin electronics that consumers replace every couple year. Most of their products serve to enhance this business model or have high complementarity from a technology standpoint. The self-driving car project feels like an incredibly expensive diversion from this core business with limited technological overlap to their existing product lines. I'm trying not to see this as "Post-Jobs Apple finally jumps the shark," but I'm just not getting what the vision here is.
This isn't snark, by the way - I'd really love to hear a good model for what they're doing.
This is a remarkably limited perspective on a set of devices that people spend almost every waking hour using.
The difference with the new systems is that, while I might happen to come across an ad in traditional media because I woke up early or I might happen to be reading a paper I normally don't, there's practically no chance whatsoever for me to accidentally see an ad in Facebook's systems that's not targeted at me. That's a categorically different situation because I'm being explicitly excluded from that content based on factors specified by the employer, not just by luck or personal preference.
Also, the "implicit filtering" of traditional media only passes the bar because it can't actually be proven that the employer is filtering based on age, gender, etc., which isn't the case with an explicit filtering system. Yes, employers can still skirt the system with the traditional media targeting, but they're still illegally discriminating based on age or other factors.
My team at Twitter is hiring software engineers to help us build the stack that manages Twitter's server fleet.
Our systems manage over 100k physical servers in multiple locations, providing simple, reliable REST APIs to automate maintenance, tracking, and provisioning of the servers that underpin Twitter’s services. You'll be helping build some of the foundational services that run Twitter's infrastructure.
(And if that doesn't sell it: we've tested new features by rebooting enough computing power to land on the Top500. VMs are fun, but there's nothing like pressing "enter" and knowing several thousand actual boxes just power cycled.)
We've got offices in SF, Seattle, Boulder, New York, Boston, and a few other places, and we support remote work as well.
More details and application here: https://careers.twitter.com/en/work-for-twitter/software-eng...
Or you can email me at edanielson at, well, you know the domain.
How'd you do the conversion?