1,339 karma · joined March 2, 2013
https://twitter.com/tomashertus
I'm a huge believer in this future of software. Having the UI layer completely abstracted from pre-written code and dynamically generated "on the fly" based on the context of the user is, I believe, the future.
Just think about the complexity of localization and how many IFs you had to write to solve different language versions, etc. in the old PHP code. A lot of that complexity can simply disappear.
Having dynamically built UI won't only be better for the user experience, it can actually allow us to create much more personalized experiences (I hate when UI teams constantly redesign perfectly fine software).
Interestingly, this will open up a completely new consumption interface, because I believe there will be a UI predefined by the creator of the application (your day 1 user experience) that will then evolve into a more personalized experience over time.
So much room to grow in this space.
Regardless, kudos to DHH and team for being so vocal about it, it's a great case study for product teams in similar lifecycle.
I don’t really use Facebook itself anymore, I’ve mostly kept Messenger for messaging. Curious whether this is an attempt to push users back toward the main feed experience.
In many cases, the price of a single movie is comparable to an entire month of a streaming service, which gives access to thousands of titles. Ownership can make sense if you repeatedly watch a small, fixed catalog over many years, but for most casual or exploratory viewing, the economics still favor streaming.
And the asymmetry is stark: attackers only need to succeed once. It takes just a single developer installing a compromised package to trigger a breach with potentially massive downstream consequences. So while I agree that quantifying impact is critical, dismissing large-scale seeding campaigns because “no one might have downloaded it” ignores the risk.
The technique is so pervasive that I did an extensive research on it. In fact, there are several well-funded and widely used applications, some generating millions in revenue, that unknowingly host malware on their infrastructure. In more concerning cases, these platforms are even repurposed as command-and-control servers for data exfiltration. We're increasingly seeing enterprises take the proactive step of blocking traffic to these high-risk domains entirely to strengthen their security posture (e.g. it's completely common to block all traffic from network to Dropbox or other file hosting services).
I stopped reading after this paragraph. Why to take advice from articles that is presenting delusional scenario about the returns? $100k after tax is good enough for Model 3.
For everyone else, I found this article to be super helpful to understand what kind of RSS functionality is available: https://ronaldsvilcins.com/2020/03/26/rss-feeds-for-your-git...
The outcome of my research was the following:
- Disjointed content moderation and cybersecurity departments: Not many companies have content moderation teams equipped to perform malware analysis or make cybersecurity-related decisions (the only company that does an exceptional job in this regard is Meta).
- If hosting malware doesn't impact the company's revenue and reputation, the content moderation team has other priorities.
- Section 230: Companies will refer to Section 230 when asked about hosting malicious content or scanning the content for potential malware.
If you are junior developer interested in learning development or a specific technology, it would be great project to build and open source though.
Your pitch mentions large costs for traditional SOAR products and that you want your solution to be focused on smaller companies that don't have money to pay for expensive SOC tools. Nevertheless, the market reality is that if a company has a SOC team (who is the traditional end-user of SOAR tool), they don't care about $100k for a SOAR because they will spend hundreds of thousands a month for log storage, security tools, and HR. It's much more common for your target audience to use ITSM as a security incidents management tool. Just look at what ServiceNow is doing in this space for example: https://docs.servicenow.com/bundle/washingtondc-security-man.... Based on this one fact, I think that you didn't spend enough time understanding your target customer who are in this case not SOC/Security teams, but IT teams.
Incident management is a critical process for every SOC team and its effectiveness is tracked by measuring the mean-time-to-resolve metric. How do you want to convince SOC teams to use open-source tools for their mission-critical process rather than buying one of the established SOAR tools that are integrated with their security stack? (& there are many options in the SOAR space) How can your product help companies lower the operational costs of case management? (improving the mean-time-to-resolve KPI)
Please, don't get discouraged by my comments. SOAR is an essential part of every security stack and the current offerings have flaws. But the narrative in your pitch is flawed and indicates a lack of understanding of current security buyers and personas.