tempnow987

That's not what is meant. The folks working at SpaceX work hard. The question is, when they look to slow down and go to another company, does having SpaceX on resume for 2-3 years vs widget maker X make it more or less likely to be hired.

The idea that spacex engineers are lazy / don't work hard etc is fanciful thinking. SpaceX being badly managed? Maybe true. But engineers at spacex? If you look at competitors like an engineer on the SLS project (which has taken 10-20 years to get to one 20B rocket launch) - no question who you'll want to hire if you are in "new space". I think for old space companies - probably still worth hiring SLS type folks just given that they will know how to deal with the paperwork of those jobs.

I would NEVER work for Tesla or SpaceX (work life balance way off). But neither would I claim they are lazy or poor engineers.

Is this a real statement? At least in SV the last few years, ex-tesla and ex-spacex in terms of getting funding for projects was a big win. Some went to apple et al as well for pretty good money.

I know of a few folks from what I would call older line engineering (thinking boeing / SLS type places) actively looking to get onto a musk company (younger folks generally pretty eager to do work).

It's pretty visable when you see NASA administrators doing presentations and then SpaceX folks (who all seem like they are in their 20's to me). Pretty clear you are getting a lot more experience at SpaceX then in the big SLS subcontractor stack for example. I'm adjacent to this space a bit and I think most of the senior folks leaving tesla / spacex (plenty of them) have all landed pretty well despite your claims.

They have a build process video. A lot of knowledge is in folks heads as well from what they said - and nothing is "mass produced" really. And it's all at the absolute limits.

Zeiss covers their mirrors and lenses. The smoothness is extreme: "If you were to enlarge such a mirror to the size of Germany, the largest unevenness – the Zugspitze, so to speak – would be a whole 0.1 millimeters high."

Then they have positioning / tilt accuracy.

"If one of these EUV mirrors were to redirect a laser beam and aim it at the Moon, it would be able to hit a ping pong ball on the Moon’s surface."

What they don't say is what the yield is on these. I've heard they have to try and make X to get y that can hit all the specs.

In the machines themselves didn't they have to build in both an electron microscope and an atomic force microscope for defect detection?

And then the environment they operate in is terrible from a wavelength absorption energy / contamination (tin?) issues etc.

Ah, I suppose you'd prefer they switched to Affero GPL v3 (which BTW IS open source and written by FSF itself) - check it out here:

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html

This license turns out to be very difficult to use for almost developer.

The "hackers" on HN don't have much appreciation for real world use cases / customer needs.

I'm not sure if this was permitted, but I worked with a nonprofit that ran a program for kids that bought apple products and AppleCare on them all. Apple was essentially a program sponsor. Anytime someone tells me how terrible Apple is for the customer, after having to MAIL IN products to other providers who sit on them for MONTHS, I just have to laugh. Many other providers it's not even worth trying to get warranty service because you end up not having a computer / laptop etc for weeks.

What a stupid take as is increasingly the case with ifixit.

How does adding manuals and parts make something LESS repairable? At worst you are no better off than you started.

And for all the crap apple gets for things like their batteries, I used to do fleet battery stuff on dell machines using a third party providers and the rate at which these machines BURNED through batteries was insane. THis was a while back, and not sure if it was the chargers, or how they were used (plugged in a lot of deep drained a lot), but for whatever reason apple's battery management tech really seems to get some life out of their batteries.

Also, once they started validating batteries so ifixit type places couldn't drop bad batteries into phones, a lot of the trouble there went away as well.

Anyways, a screen replacement under apple care is $29. I'll report back how "terrible" the process is (first time in years that I've broken my screen).

Ethernet is in the 12,000 megawatt energy usage range? Pretty impressive - and will be a nice savings if that energy usage goes away.

IPv6 does neither in most cases unfortunately.

IPv6 could blow routing tables sky high.

We burn 64 bits of the space (!!) on the "privacy extensions" changing part of ipv6 which is totally insane, and so you have a constant churn for 64 bits of the space. This churn complicates a fair bit of local area network address use.

You can get a static IPv4 block if you need it with business class service as well for that site. Despite claims it's a total pain to get IPv6 static blocks assigned by ISPS.

Your internal network can be subnetted however you like if you do any site to site VPN if using NAT. you are not dependent on uplinks at all.

Now if you have a business with a bunch of sites, not all may have full BGP etc setups. For example, you might do a dual WAN link - one fiber at 1gbps, another at 300mbps for backup. This is seamless with IPv4 in most cases.

With IPv6 - if your routes flap, you have to readdress everything on your entire network (!!!) for that site. And these updates are SLOWER and worse from what I've seen then WAN failover on the NAT. So then you can try to do the workarounds (network prefix stuff). So if you flap around a bit the network is done. This could just be a tech reconfiguring things and pulling a cable and putting it back in seconds later.

And the list goes on. Network prefix stuff is poorly supported. You are basically forced into dual stack mode. Etc.

Great. I look forward to the answers!

Having been around the block a few times with folks who are

a) outraged

b) make ridiculous claims of criminal activity

I've gotten probably a bit too quick to assume they fall into a certain type of person. I look forward to hearing more about this parking lot that is so strictly controlled that merely driving through it is a crime.

The chance of this person individually owning a parking lot seems very very remote.

The chance that there was an illegal activity on the parking lot, if it regularly was in use by non-owners, seems even more of a stretch.

You can see plenty of videos online of folks "policing" spaces they don't ACTUALLY have the rights to (usually because they don't like skin color of someone).

I'm just saying, let's take the claims of criminal activity because someone was simply on a parking lot the OP claims to own with a grain of salt. A big grain :)

Some quick questions for your super outrage.

1) Did they break down a gate to get onto your private property?

2) Do ANY other folks use "your" private property? Are you falsely claiming ownership rights to something that has a form of common ownership?

3) When you claim it's your property and entry is forbidden - has ANYONE else given permission (explicit / implicit) for non property owners to access? Think of things like family members of an owner, guests, UPS drivers, delivery drivers , maintenance folks etc. Is it clear that anyone who is not an owner can't access? This is normally managed by an attended gate system or similar.

4) Are you one of those folks who like to yell at minority or others in your neighborhood who don't "belong"? We've seen videos of delivery drivers dealing with folks like you who (often falsely) claim ownership of property.

5) If you don't PERSONALLY own the property, have you been explicitly authorized to act as an agent of the property? You'd be surprised at the number of folks like you claiming personal ownership who actually have ZERO rights to trespass a delivery driver etc.

6) You've made a strong claim it's illegal for someone to come onto the property, CA law protects folks unless they have been trespassed. Has that occurred?

Note: Many property management companies partner with third parties to help manage lots. If you have a shortage of parking or someone actively managing lot (not you) they may contract for things like expired tags / stolen vehicles and other tow services. They may walk the lot. They can also pay for someone to come and see which cars may be parking regularly without paying required parking permit fees etc. Many homeowners PREFER that someone sweep their lots.

My number one pet peeve in the sales cycle. We just docusigned to switch to a new platform - 50% of this was because their demo and other videos ACTUALLY SHOWED THE PRODUCT and they had youtube playlists with more!!

I never had this problem on AWS though I did see some startups struggle with some more specialized instances. Are midsize companies actually running into issues with non-specialized compute on AWS?

Couldn't agree more. Not being able to show separate taskbar buttons is a productivity killer for me. And that's just part of it.

Do they actually talk to their (business) customers?

The major law involved here that you claim is safety related is this:

All officers have to be US Citizens and

"(1)Except as otherwise provided in this section, on a documented vessel— (A)each unlicensed seaman must be—

(i)a citizen of the United States;

(ii)an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence; or

(iii)a foreign national who is enrolled in the United States Merchant Marine Academy; and

(B)

not more than 25 percent of the total number of unlicensed seamen on the vessel may be aliens lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence."

What's interesting is that US Officers who meet standard international standards can serve on all these other ships / cruise ships flagged overseas and much more. But international crew cannot serve on a US flagged vessel, even one working entirely overseas.

So there is your reason why so few folks do US flag.

You could instead require safety (actual safety) and actual labor rules that simply applied to everyone, regardless of nationality. But nope, you've chosen to focus on citizenship instead.

We actually have an international standard for safety - STCW – Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers. But your UK wiper (a very junior grade) with totally current STCW can't work on a us flagged ship AT ALL.

And for everyone of these stories is a story of a startup that screwed its employees during a buyout by another big firm while founders walked in the gravy.

I've found a lot of the "secrets" really aren't that. The ideas are usually pretty public, and the questions come down to ability to execute and integrate etc. Stripe has a good position from which to expand linked lines.

Man, we got burned with a "contracted" credit card solution, complete with horrible support, service and billing.

Ironically, this system resulted in lots of insecurity.

Password resets were so common the govt agency OUTSOURCED them - and you just had to provide your username to get it reset. Literally, you called and said I need a password reset for account X, and they gave you a temp password over the phone.

I never complained about how easy this was because this was a CRITICAL feature. Sometimes we didn't even know why a password wasn't working - so after you got done with whatever client came in you called the number and got a new one.

So it's really security theatre + the security provided by the massive annoyance of setting up old internet explorer to login and all the other silliness (which really was security, we were not alone in struggles, they kept on having to do paper backup systems when stuff went down).

I often thought that a hacker could probably make all our lives easier by figuring out a way around the double VPN.

This was a long time ago though (10+ years) and I have to believe better now.

I was also in a govt / enterprise EHR type project. Similar story, but you had a double layer of VPN that only worked with outdate explorer / java etc (AT TIME OF DEPLOYMENT - the software was "new" to the govt agency and the poor health staff).

To skip all the sillyness - you basically had to password share, keep systems logged in etc etc to get anything done. Yes, security is important, but if it's 30 minutes to do anything, and then they did something like 30 day double password resets (on both layers of VPN) it's just chaos. Every password had to be written down, because when a patient showed up an clinician couldn't login it was a disaster. The millions they spent without every talking to anyone using this crap was mind blowing. We had in the end separate computers with locked down ancient IE and java to do some stuff on this system (auto or user updates to Java - which would pop up scary warnings given how old things were - would blow the fragile system up).

Then the one person who could create new accounts through a ridiculous process would go on some kind of 2 month union break at a time, and....

Where I was projects started on CentOS. Often once they got big / went to production, they were switched to RHEL.

And devs often used CentOS when playing around (ie, setting up VM's etc at home or just randomly) because you didn't need to talk to anyone to do so.

Where?

I just went on docker hub. I search for Redhat Enterprise Linux and RHEL.

I get ubuntu with 1B+ downloads. I get oraclinux, amazonlinux (?!?), alpine, debian and more. If they are releasing docker base images they are doing an absolutely terrible job getting them distributed. I'm honestly kind of shocked to see amazon here, are people developing against Amazon outside of just spinning up hosts on EC2 etc? Amazing. I might do that myself.

Edit: Amazon Linux looks fedora based for 2022 forward, but with 5 years of support - that's not a bad combo if they can deliver. I'm going to try it for my next project. Their Amazon Linux support has been poor in the past at times.

I just don't think they really figured out as a major priority the enterprise side of business delivery (training and more). Interestingly in business it's not London that is sometimes seen as their connection but maybe South African (it's the name with ubuntu or some background in founder).

Do you buy Red Hat Enterprise Linux? Or Ubuntu? Just based on the name I think RHEL as an advantage personally.

For sure.

It's the fear and obligation type attack.

You have an obligation to date me is the claim. I'm the "nice guy / good guy". (No, I am not obligated to date you.)

If you don't I will label and attack you as a narcissist, as "toxic" etc (that drives fear). (As soon as you start hearing this type of stuff - get out, because relationships depend on trust and someone looking to destroy you or making those kind of claims / threats is not someone to trust and are using fear and threats)

The folks who see this "all around" often have some of their own personal issues. I think one can by sympathetic to them, but be very cautious about a close personal relationship with them - drama and conflict.

My own experience is they are often searching for something (connection etc) because they struggle to find it. So they can get into heavy travel, sometimes drugs or more intense experience (desert raves etc) which provide a (temporary) feeling of connection without the hard work of ongoing community and relationship. I still see friends from high school and college. Is it easy? No. Is it worth it? Absolutely. Same with relationship (and marriage and kids). Easy? No. Worth it? For sure. And in that friend group, you can give each other a bit of a hard time for our personal failings - but it's never an attack like this (narcissism, your toxic etc). It's more like, there goes Joe, dine and dash again - with affection and an invite to the next hangout (and joe might need to get back for kids etc).

Right, and I think they missed some major opportunities as a result.

Would be great to have an offering as the basic base image for docker containers (outside of UBI).

They let Project Atomic die.

Then they let CoreOS Container Linux die I think?

They have a Fedore CoreOS but don't seem to promote it at all and I can't find images on docker hub for it.

The RedHat stuff is generally paywalled. CentOS is gone.

I know they are pitching the IBM cloud - I don't care about the IBM cloud - though they keep on advertising Watson to me as the solution to every issue.

The OpenShift brand was hurt by the enormous mess of complexity it was compared to K8 and things like ECS and Fargate etc.

Prior to going to cloud (ubuntu ended up being easier there even over paid RHEL) on-prem a lot of businesses are just structured around having a vendor, which basically means someone to call to both figure out what to use (unfortunately often dealing with sales folks) and then when issues come up (support / implementation consulting etc).

Given margins are often so good on subscription models in a redhat type world, I really wish they had gone a bit heavier on cloud focus (AWS / GCP / Windows in my case). Some free / base images container / vm focused pushed hard for everything from docker to cloud.

I thought ubuntu executed very well here (given their commercialization has always felt somewhat weak). They got images for docker / aws / gcp all first class and available at the basic level. They are also doing some deals with Microsoft and Windows Subsystem for Linux.

Not sure if anyone has done the docker image download weighted by base distribution analysis, but my own experience went from the centos / rhel was like everywhere to ubuntu and amazon's linux stuff.

I'm slightly curious about the author's ability to form solid peer relationships.

This person dated someone who was "emotionally abusive, hypersensitive, and disrespectful". Umm, it IS possible to just say, hey, I don't think this is going to work out. Then just move on. Back in the craigslist dating days dates could be seriously wild for those old enough to remember that. I never felt the urge to post a substack blog about any of it.

Every time I read these things I'm so thankful for my partner who is practical and grounded and I've never heard talk like this. We have 2 kids and it's a job and I can't even imagine doing it with someone who was constantly evaluating the other person for deficiencies. We both cut each other a lot of slack and it really works out for us.

When you find yourself diagnosing the world with various problems, a bit of introspection might be helpful. You may be projecting some internal dysfunction, and even if not, it's MUCH easier to address things with respect to yourself then to "address rampant narcissism".

"toxic behaviors repeatedly observed over an extended period with no apparent willingness for the perpetrator to change, lead to legitimate questioning." - Just the language here - "perpetrator" etc. Most people are just trying to make it through life in one piece. The language in this is throwing up my own pink and red flags.

That is the SFC's position.

The main reason the GPL exists was to insure changes to code (forks) were available to original developers of the code so they could include those changes if they wanted (this was a result of issues with earlier unix systems that had fragmentation from forks). Additional, Linus, author of Linux, has been clear that his focus is getting code back, what happens to hardware was not covered in his mind by GPLv2.

So there is a dispute as to what GPLv2 requires with respect to hardware. It's clear that the code must be shared, and that's what a lot of GPLv2 devs have focused on. That the source code be shared, including scripts used for compilation and installation.

But (one view) is that is separate from mandating behavior of hardware, and that hardware can still check if its running approved code and refuse to run if approved code is not loaded.

That's why this case is so huge. The actual developers of Linux are not likely to try to enforce a term they don't think exists, the SFC very well may.

The requirements were there, but yes, now you go from a relatively friendly group of developers eager to see code shared around to the SFC, which has very strong views on things like unlocks on hardware - I think it is potentially a pretty major change here.

In the past if you were a contributor and violated the GPL in terms of your product (that used yours and others code) it was only other contributors who could sue you (ie, you broke your deal with them, and they had the copyright that was violated).

There are different views on the GPLv2. Most of the contributors / developers on GPLv2 just wanted you to share back your code, so most litigation in this space followed that approach. Even there, it was at times pretty cooperative.

The SFC has a MUCH more aggressive view. They have views around DRM / unlocks on hardware and much more that are very user rights focused, but pose complications to developers. In the past though, they really couldn't pursue these claims because despite lots of contributors to projects, many didn't support their approach and so wouldn't work with them to make copyright claims. To give you a sense of some developers views:

"lawyering has become a nasty festering disease, and the SFC [Software Freedom Conservancy] and Bradley Kuhn has been the Typhoid Mary spreading the disease." - Linus Torvalds (key player in the Linux kernel development).

They and the EFF created Affero GPLv3 and GPLv3 to try and solve for some of the issues they felt were important, but developers didn't really get on board.

The key is SFC can now sue folks making and distributing devices with OSS software WITHOUT any permission or input from the creators and copyright holders of the software, that is what is so huge. And this is particularly important because many authors and copyright holders have different views on these issues compared to the SFC.

We went though this once with GPLv3 already. SAMBA for example moved pretty aggressively to GPLv3. I'm not sure apple kept contributing to it or updating it in their software once that happened.

You are missing a large value to GPL code, it's often developed collaboratively.

Consider carefully your example, you've contributed to some GPLv2 body of code. Now you ship that code on your device (making available corresponding source code, but not decryption keys). You are not the only copyright holder, this is a collective effort.

Can you avoid the GPL'ed requirements? No. More critically, this allows new requirements to be asserted (under the GPL) that GPLv2 developers might not have considered something they want to enforce (hardware unlock) but users and activists might want to try and enforce.

All good for the users. Glad to hear this is welcomed by developers and those hiring open source contributors. This is still going to be a change from past GPLv2 experience I think for some / many.