This is a really good example of how capitalism doesn't work so well in a digital economy.
Normally there is are various arguments about how the subscription pays for the development / invitation. But here we have a feature that's been there for more than a decade, the only innovation is figuring how to monetize it.
There is very little rational about car buying or branding.
In the eye of many consumers a car with 3 wheels and 1 with 4 from the same brand will have more in common than 2 identical cars with different badges.
What I see a lot is working with developers who believe the goal is to write software that can complete the task.
They demo it, release it and watch it immediately fall apart with first contact with the user.
What they should be doing is having a goal of software that cannot fail to complete the task.
Anyone else surprised how small the number is?
It looks quite big without commas but if you add them in it looks like the sort of number that is almost conceivable
43,252,003,274,489,856,000
43 quintillion, that's the type of number i've vaguely heard of.
Compared to the number of possibilities for a shuffled deck of cards
80,658,175,170,943,878,571,660,636,856,403,766,975,289,505,440,883,277,804,000,000,000,000
Thats a big number, and weirdly I think those 00s at the end are exact not a rounding error.
Cors is hard to understand because the browser is protecting you and the server from malicious code that the developers are not expecting to be there.
Its a hypothetical threat you cannot see during development unless you really go out of your way. If you can't see the threat it's hard to understand it, it you don't understand the threat it's hard to understand the protection against it.
Its one of those situations where you need to think like an attacker to see the whole picture.
We don't use unit of measurements.
We use metrics because we have a lot more context.
Rps, requests per second is a commonly used unit but it has no defined standard, you could and often do average it over time for reporting but no one says you have to. For scaling however you'll probably want to use the max not the average, because no one wants a web application where in business as usual 60% of the time it works every time.
Does the existence of that knowledge make a slight bias lowering the odd on no?
I could fork this and with a 1 line change earn dozens of dollars as long as I don't tell anyone what that secret change is.
Looking at the amount of wires going into this, my instinct is that this cannot scale, in 5-10 years this won't be doable for a Pentium chip, at least not as an at home hobby project. But I actually think it could go the other way, and in 5-10 years you'll be able to do this at home for far more sophisticated kit, unlocking crazy amounts of reverse engineering possibilities that were once thought of as near impossible, or at least only possible for a nation state scale setup.
It's not impossible that the Aws charges were wrong, it's pretty unheard of.
I don't understand why the details of the charges aren't mentioned in the post.
If you think it's unlikely you could have a $1500 bill because you 'barely use' it then that's just wrong. In the cloud single unoptimised choices can cost thousands if you don't keep an eye on your costs, you need to look at the charges.
Seems more of a productivity killer rather than an aid but cats are great marketing. I see no reason not to submit this for YC funding in the next round
I don't want to criticize cloud flare, I love what they do and understand the scale of the challenge, but most people don't and 2 in a month or so like this is going to hit their reputation.
This appears to be backfiring spectacularly.
It is a shame in many ways because a decent digital ID system would be very beneficial.
The problem is the approach is completely wrong.
There are already 10+ competing ID system which are now largely digital.
A solution on how to bring all that together done well could make things significantly more secure by reducing the attack surface and make it much more reliable.
Instead it looks like they are going for 1 more competing system, the implementation of which will be steered by politics and ideology rather than technology and technical requirements.
Is this anything to do with them taking passwords without consent?
I rarely use windows, and when I do one of the first things I do is switch from edge to chrome.
I think I set up edge and used it once to see what it was actually like, but I was pretty careful about the data syncing / sharing settings. I have the Microsoft authenticator app on my phone, I was pretty careful about the privacy settings on that too, but it's been through a couple of phone upgrades.
Somehow all of my passwords were making their way into Microsoft authenticator, so I must have missed something somewhere. I can only imagine how many millions of people must have had their passwords unintentionally slurped by Microsoft if they have been that aggressive with it.