abarrettwilsdon

All of these are standard terms.

Establishing a (standard sized) ESOP is good for the company long term.

If you would like better/different terms, you'll need at least one other firm to offer you a term sheet as leverage.

This is not an accurate speculation.

They try to predict flu strains because it is prohibitive to identify and produce vaccines for every strain in time for flu season each year.

By your assertion, the entire notion of yearly flu shots would be irrelevant.

I use Vantage and it's definitely a good product and all but the real value is every hour you don't have to spend using AWS directly.

I would pay _so_ much money to never have to use Cloudwatch and AWS Cost Management again. Thankfully, I qualify for the vantage free tier for quite a while longer.

I caution against trying to monetize it; Facebook will waste your time with constant cat and mouse changes to the HTML and will bully you with their vast legal resources

Ah yes, 'where no SaaS has gone before', rolling their own CI/CD.

Never mind Github, Gitlab, Pivotal Labs, Netflix, and Yahoo/Verizon

and they're not even open sourcing it, they're just bragging about it

why is this on HN at all

Pretty disappointed to see both authors pitch their products and not discuss:

* data modeling

* warehousing, ETL, monitoring, observability

* the BD necessary to make a standard actually standard

* what aspects to compromise on, if necessary

* network effects

* regulatory moats

ed: the original "DaaS Bible" post is quite a bit more useful

I built something similar to this last year and wow this is just much... better

I find the choice of Flask + Zappa a little weird - I much prefer serverless.com for infra as code - but it makes sense after staring at it long enough

I was prepared to buy this and then I sorta stumbled across the Builder Book

They look very similar? But they're different? According to the docs this one is more focused on advanced patterns? Does a person need to buy the first to get value from the second?

Very confusing UX IMO

Yea, almost all existing Dorking content is around either SEO or offensive/defensive security scanning.

The broader OSINT has used dorking for a decade plus (e.g. exploit-db.com goes back to 2003).

The goal in writing this was to democratize access beyond those who use it regularly for work

When I run that query, it returns

`No results found for "the SERP should stay the same".`

Then defaults to providing the SERP for the fallback query:

`Results for the SERP should stay the same (without quotes):`

That SERP should change when this HN thread is indexed though

Hmm, I'm seeing the same now.

You can more or less replicate the functionality with intext:specific.url/subsite

Will update and credit you.

If it's specific enough, the SERP should stay the same until someone else publishes the same thing

e.g. the search of another article "set up Google Sheets APIs (and treat Sheets like a database)"

turns up my site and a couple Twitter threads talking about it (plus a phishing site which has scraped and republished it). I presume that will stay the same b/c it's such a specific title phrase (but not because searches are necessarily deterministic)