hueving

93 ms·

841.
by hueving 9y ago
Better pay for those lucky enough to work at the remaining 10% of restaurants. Not good for the remainder of employees.
842.
by hueving 9y ago
What a tired argument. Of course we are special. We are capable of genetically modifying our food supplies and building shelter that allows us to live in any climate on the planet.
843.
by hueving 9y ago
This is satire, right? You're suggesting that ideas don't make it from SF to mountain view in less than 6 months with thousands of people commuting between the two each day and cross pollination of meetups on both sides. Container
844.
by hueving 9y ago
>A proper salary is one where the workers can live their lives without worries about money or having to work multiple jobs to make ends meet. That's lacking enough concrete details to be meaningful. It seems to be 'more than th
845.
by hueving 9y ago
In-N-Out truly seems to be in a league of its own. The one I frequented in Mountain View would consistently have a line through off hours. I would show up midnight and still have to wait. Meanwhile, the Jack in the Box just down the street
846.
by hueving 9y ago
AMZN is entirely focused on long term gains and reinvesting money and the stock is killing it. Being publicly traded != making short term decisions.
847.
by hueving 9y ago
Doesn't seem to add up. Google, Amazon, and Facebook are just 3 examples of companies that give no shits about what public investors think and will spend money on the business.
848.
by hueving 9y ago
What is a 'proper' salary? Also, the very reason this is news is because it's 3x the average. If all of the restaurants paid the same it would just be the average and not worth an article.
849.
by hueving 9y ago
Because people vote party lines. If your goal is Republicans in office, then a little assault isn't gonna get in the way of that.
850.
by hueving 9y ago
'wildly blue' is incorrect about the population centers. If that were correct the vote would have gone to Trump given how the vast majority of the population is in the cities. Look at the election results from Missoula, Great Fall
851.
by hueving 9y ago
It has nothing to do with the resilience of cloud providers. If the cloud providers were resilient, then you wouldn't need all of the wonderful scheduling tooling from stuff like kubernetes to deal with unstable individual machines. Yo
852.
by hueving 9y ago
No, it's not advocating a conspiracy theory. It's pointing out that you aren't very secure when you are operating in a model where it's even possible to leak all of your client records without even noticing. Compare slac
853.
by hueving 9y ago
Nation states only attack companies they care about. That's the point. Once you have your info on slack, you share the fate with the million other companies that nation states might care about.
854.
by hueving 9y ago
This thought process ignores the fact that lots of money comes from rich people that make biased decisions based on these types of things. It's much harder to raise money if you aren't from a pedigreed school. Saying "just st
855.
by hueving 9y ago
Interesting stat. Does that same thing apply to STEM schools? Or is it just liberal arts colleges?
856.
by hueving 9y ago
Wow, that's a terrible emergent cruelty from a complex labyrinth of years of backroom negotiations. I'm sorry for your loss and that you had to pay for it like that monetarily as well.
857.
by hueving 9y ago
He's not purporting to report news. So no irony that I can see?
858.
by hueving 9y ago
And it never happened to every other company that has been acquired...
859.
by hueving 9y ago
I'm not sure where you got the impression that this is like USENIX. Eurocrypt is theory and application of cryptography. A significant chunk of publications have nothing to do with application and discuss interesting theoretical math.
860.
by hueving 9y ago
The difference is that they will only hack into your on-prem solution if you are the target. With a central service, all of slack's million customers get compromised because of one single hack.
861.
by hueving 9y ago
If it's not exposed to the internet, an out of date on-prem is still better than everything on a massive centralized public vendor server that 5 nation states are hacked into.
862.
by hueving 9y ago
Don't be intentionally obtuse. The point of the comparison was to highlight that lower detection of something doesn't mean less of it.
863.
by hueving 9y ago
The big part you're missing in this comparison is one slack compromise gets the attacker every slack conversation for everyone that uses it. If someone gets into an email server, they only get the mailboxes on that server. By centraliz
864.
by hueving 9y ago
>not because of the supply and demand. It's still supply and demand. When you have a monopoly on the demand side, you can significantly put downward pressure on the price. Supply and demand doesn't cease to exist even when the
865.
by hueving 9y ago
>anyone who has gone to an academic cryptography workshop has probably noticed how many more women there are in the room As someone who has spent a lot of time in academic security conferences, I have to wonder what you are comparing the
866.
by hueving 9y ago
This statement would hold water if the primary source of revenue wasn't EC2.
867.
by hueving 9y ago
An 11 year history is hardly worth betting what could be the future of your company on. Especially for something just slightly more convenient than what can be built in-house.
868.
by hueving 9y ago
Ok, then the error is much less egregious but there is still a sampling error I can see (at least based on my own usage pattern of Lyft). As a user of Lyft who owns a car the odds of me being sampled by this survey were significantly lower
869.
by hueving 9y ago
>I just don't understand this whole 'lock-in' mindset, it's just absurd now. If you don't understand it, then it's probably not absurd. Look into the whole free software movement and the history behind it (e
870.
by hueving 9y ago
The difference is that you can't be screwed by a single company deciding to change prices. When people refer to "lock-in", they are referring to being able to be screwed by a single vendor. Nobody cares if they are locked int

More ›