I look at the egress costs to internet and it doesn’t check out. It’s a premium product dependent on DX, marketed to funded startups.
But if I care about ingress and egress costs, which many stream heavy infrastructure providers do.. This doesn’t add up.
I wish them luck, but I feel they would have had a much better chance from the start by getting some funding and having a loss leader start, then organising and passing on wholesale rates from cloud providers once they’d reached critical mass.
Instead they’re going in at retail which is very spicy. I feel like someone will clone the tech and let you self host, before big players copy it natively.
It’s a commodity space and they’re starting with a moat of a very busy 2 weeks from some Staff engineers at AWS.
Don’t promote people who don’t understand building systems. Everything is a system above 100 people, focus on scaling the things that matter below 100.
HR and Finance? Route it all through 1 person and outsource anything that takes significant time.
Tech? Give equity and significant targets to the CTO who should also be CPO until about 80-100 people. Fire them if they aren’t planners.
I don’t think you understand the problem space. Although, this is a great alternative for SMB’s who aren’t being targeted by attackers who are writing tools specifically for their business.
But, also.. A hardcoded “what’s 7\1=“ would also achieve the same outcome.
Barrier to beat is “can the attacker put together a webauthn emulator”. Low, but will work for many organisations for a long time.
How is this any different to auditors or penetration testers doing a crap job? The payment might be in the form of bonuses or more work billed, but it’s just not realistic.
Join Discords related to the stuff you’re working on, you’ll find people much smarter than you and any of your colleagues hanging out, talking about good approaches to designs, structures, infrastructure, etc.
You’ll also find idiots not worth listening to.
Remember you’re 6 months in / just doing the job is enough of a challenge. You’re calling yourself a lead for having full responsibility of the projects you’re working on. This is typically common everywhere except large tech companies.
Because in many countries writing down feedback creates a liability.
There are a lot of people not aware that their thoughts and feelings towards candidates constitute discrimination, and in the event of an employee or class action going to trial - written statements collected like you’ve suggested can easily create a view of systemic discrimination at any sufficiently large company.
Additionally the threshold and context for discrimination changes over time.
One day, you saying a candidate was too meek or reserved may be grounds for discrimination if they’re not in a customer or heavily-networking/presentation role.
Expecting employees to compartmentalize their personal lives completely during work is unrealistic and dehumanizing.
I’ve worked with American companies for years and sat through countless meetings where U.S.-specific events were addressed—9/11, BLM, elections, Black History Month, Thanksgiving, natural disasters, even sensitivity and active shooter trainings. Outside of local disaster/issues, none of these are directly relevant in my country, yet we empathize, because it’s human to care.
Here’s the problem: When divisive topics arise, companies either censor them entirely or let them play out. Censorship may be inhumane, but it’s efficient. Or, a company can solicit feedback and allow employees to hold non-disruptive, neutral events outside of work hours.
If this is the path, it has to be consistent. No exceptions for topics like the war in Ukraine or U.S. cultural movements. This approach avoids corporate bias while enabling individual expression without disturbing business.
Publicly held or large companies shouldn’t hold positions on sensitive issues, but employees should have the freedom to engage, with policies that prevent harm or offense.
And, by the way, a vigil doesn’t count as harmful.
But if I care about ingress and egress costs, which many stream heavy infrastructure providers do.. This doesn’t add up.
I wish them luck, but I feel they would have had a much better chance from the start by getting some funding and having a loss leader start, then organising and passing on wholesale rates from cloud providers once they’d reached critical mass.
Instead they’re going in at retail which is very spicy. I feel like someone will clone the tech and let you self host, before big players copy it natively.
It’s a commodity space and they’re starting with a moat of a very busy 2 weeks from some Staff engineers at AWS.