HackerTrans
トップ新着トレンドコメント過去質問紹介求人

fdw

no profile record

投稿

Ask HN: What's the best book you read in the last year?

3 ポイント·投稿者 fdw·7 か月前·2 コメント

コメント

fdw
·14 日前·議論
> Where are the dozens of European tech winners? Seriously. They have the best education system in the world, strong social safety nets, cheap healthcare, and great lifestyles. Why have they not created innovative technologies that turn into worldbeating companies?

Maybe that is because there are US companies competing in the same space that are not held to the same regulations because of treaties like this one. It's hard to build a competitor to AWS, not just technically (although it very much is), but also business-wise - who would choose the unproven startup if you can go with the accepted best practise? By forcing US companies to equal footing, you give European startups more of chance. (Which is a Chinese playbook, too.)
fdw
·6 か月前·議論
The episode was based on the book Breakneck: China's Quest to Engineer the Future by Dan Wang (Amazon: China's Quest to Engineer the Future)

Very interesting read, with a lot more depth and details to this short (but accurate) summary.
fdw
·11 か月前·議論
IANAL, but GPL3 is compatible with selling the software (see Linux distros). However, it forces you to open up the complete source code and it allows the users to fork and recompile it as they see fit (but they must also open up their changes if they distribute it).
fdw
·11 か月前·議論
I'm a bit confused about the license: On the purchase page (https://get.trayce.dev/) you state that "a license must be purchased for continued use". But if I look into the GitHub repos (https://github.com/evanrolfe/trayce_agent and https://github.com/evanrolfe/trayce_gui), the license is GPL 3? So why do I need to purchase a license?
fdw
·12 か月前·議論
No, defense in depth is a best practice because you assume that each layer can fall. It is more practical to have many layers that are very secure than to have one layer that has to be perfectly secure.
fdw
·12 か月前·議論
They say this about sports, which is (usually) a zero-sum game: If I'm attacking, no matter how badly, my opponent cannot attack at all. Therefore, it is preferable to be attacking.

In cyber security, there is no reason the opponent cannot attack as well. So, my red team is attacking is not a reason that I do not need defense, because my opponent can also attack.
fdw
·昨年·議論
Thanks, that's also a very impressive visualization. Slightly too much and confusing, but amazing nonetheless. Thanks for sharing!

I'll also have a look around your repo. And maybe I know feel inspired to put some more work into mine - thanks for the kind words.
fdw
·昨年·議論
Very nice, thanks for sharing! Is the source available somewhere? Do you want contributions?

I've once built something similar for myself (still at https://github.com/fdw/timelines/), but not half as polished as yours. I like yours better ;)