The thing is that according to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights privacy and the right to private communication is a basic human right. And GDPR was literally enacted to enforce this human right.
Now one basic principle of democracy is that supreme courts are superior to the people in power. Someone needs to watch the lawmakers so to say. Because it could actually be that the European commission enacts laws that are illegal. And Chat Control 2.0 could actually be illegal because it violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, somebody has to take them to The Court of Justice of the European Union to test it.
My experience after 20 years in the hosting industry is that customers in general have more downtime due to self-inflicted over-engineered replication, or split brain errors than actual hardware failures. One server is the simplest and most reliable setup, and if you have backup and automated provisioning you can just re-deploy your entire environment in less than the time it takes to debug a complex multi-server setup.
I'm not saying everybody should do this. There are of-course a lot of services that can't afford even a minute of downtime. But there is also a lot of companies that would benefit from a simpler setup.
You hear this over and over again that Europe is over-regulated and this is why tech-companies don't succeed here. I would say this is utter bullshit. If you look at the acquisitions made by the tech-giants it just that anything that is going to be successful is instantly bought up by these companies.
People probably don't know how little Google for example builds in-house with everything from Analytics to Gmail being of European origin.
GDPR partly covers this since it's stated that the user must get information about how personal data is used in a clear and easy readable form. But I guess, there's some wiggle room how to interpret that. The law actually suggest that the industry could come up with symbols – like on food packaging. Your website could have a bunch of standardized icons in the footer to inform you how data is used, but since we don't have that it seems like the industry didn't like that idea of transparency.
Most commercial organizations are not "internet" companies. They can run their business on a single VPS. Even e-commerce sites with several million euro turnover can run their Magento instance on a single VPS. Or industries manufacturing things can still run their inventory software or ERP stuff on some cheap VPS.
These kinds of questions would fry my brain. I seriously wouldn't know how to respond to such stupid open-ended questions.
> Can you share an instance where you had to learn new tools or technologies quickly?
If you work with technology it's your fucking job to learn new things every single day?
> Can you tell me about a situation when you made a mistake?
You make fucking mistakes daily, but unless you are a retarded moron you just learn, adjust and move on?
> Can you give me an example of when a major change forced you to re-plan an ongoing project?
Have this person ever worked on a project? Not a single project have ever gone according to plan EVER in the history of humanity!!! But you fucking deal with it because that's what you are getting paid to do!
"An Amazon Web Services (AWS) engineer last week inadvertently made public almost a gigabyte’s worth of sensitive data, including their own personal documents as well as passwords and cryptographic keys to various AWS environments."
I don't think anybody is against optimizing government agenesis and their spending. People question the motives behind it. This is clearly done with ideological intentions, because Elon and Trump thinks that the big government in itself is a problem – as all fascists do. When you remove all government agencies and replace them with corporate interest you get what Mussolini called Corporatism but what we now know as fascism:
This would mean that they would have access to everything stored in Keychain too if you have that synced with iCloud… Which I believe probably most people have. So they will essentially have access to millions of peoples email accounts then.
The point with a syn flood is to try to saturate the OS limit for open sockets. From an attackers perspective the whole point of a syn flood is to do a DOS without needing much bandwidth.
My experience form 15 years working in the hosting industry is that volumetric attacks are extremely rare but customers that turn to Cloudflare as a solution are more often than not DDOS-ing them self because of bad configured systems, but their junior developers lack any networking troubleshooting skills.
Most (D)DOS attacks are just either UDP floods or SYN floods that iptables will handle without any problem. Sometimes what people think are DDOS is just their application DDOSing themself because they are doing recursive calls to some back-end micro-service.
If it was actually a traffic based DDOS someone still needs to pay for that bandwidth which would be too expansive for most companies anyway - even if it kept your site running.
But you can sell a lot of services to incompetent people.
I think the author forgot the most useful use case for globals, and that is variables that has to do with the context the program is running under such as command line arguments and environment variables (properly validated and if needed escaped).
What if we come to a point where even the investors don't care if you can finish a product at all? If the pitch is good enough and they think you can bring in more investors down the road, they will get back their money at a higher evaluation anyway. This would actually explain why so many startups fail – nobody cared for them to succeed anyway, because the initial investors got rich even without there being a product.
Politics did not belong here at a time when CEOs for tech companies cared about creating new tech. But if tech company CEOs buy of politicians and romanticises nazism and facism publicly then suddenly tech becomes political and then it belongs here.
Have you ever met any person who says bullying is a good thing? I have not, yet it appears in any group of people large enough. So obviously people rationalise it somehow. How do you think they rationalise it to themself then?
Bullying is always wrong according to everyone, but that person being bullied is always the exception. “If they could just act in another way we wouldn’t be “forced” to do this to him/her.”
Now one basic principle of democracy is that supreme courts are superior to the people in power. Someone needs to watch the lawmakers so to say. Because it could actually be that the European commission enacts laws that are illegal. And Chat Control 2.0 could actually be illegal because it violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, somebody has to take them to The Court of Justice of the European Union to test it.