johngunderman

I think the point is supposed to be that "following the practices and procedures that limit their liability" = "doing their due diligence to reduce risk in accordance with their credentialing body".

We generally don't hold people liable for acts of God or random chance failures. For example, malpractice suits generally need to prove that a doctor was intentionally negligent on their responsibility.

Everything in real life has quantifiable risk, and part of why we have governing bodies for many things is because we can improve our processes to reduce the risk.

It's not just following orders :) it's recognizing that the solution to risks isn't to punish the actor but to improve the system.

While I can't speak for Knuth, I have been reflecting on the fact that developing with a modern LLM seems to be an evolution of the concept of Literate Programming that Knuth has long been a proponent of.

What is the rationale behind the assertion that Knuth would be so fundamentally opposed to the use of LLMs in development?

I interpret this comment as talking about prioritization across a broader org. A senior engineer should be able to prioritize inside of their team and adjacent teams. But there is a reason why there are levels of engineer beyond senior - beyond just increased technical judgement, there is increased influence in orgs spanning hundreds or even thousands of engineers.

There is always opportunity for growth in this dimension. For example even the CEO has to build the right skills to convince the board of their priorities.

The article seems to focus too much on the consumer side of the bandwidth equation. I think the real win for Netflix is the aggregate egress bandwidth savings from their DCs. If Netflix can halve their bandwidth (as the article seems to claim) without any appreciable loss in quality, they've just saved substantially in the infrastructure and peering contracts needed to deliver their content. I have no idea how much money Netflix currently spends on bandwidth/CDN, but I'd guess it's certainly in the 100s of millions. I can imagine that Amazon and Apple would be very interested in emulating those savings.

While this is a good idea to prevent folks from brute-forcing their way into your machine, the article is talking about DDoS attacks. If you have 150G pointed at your network the issue isn't going to be your servers. It's going to be congestion at your network links. Your SSH settings and Fail2Ban won't help at all in this case. You'll need something like CloudFlare's DDoS protection to identify and block DDoS requests from ever reaching your network.

EDIT: Oops, just saw that the article does talk about SSH brute-forcing. Your point is quite valid.

This is all client-side. You can just save the page if you want it locally.

If you don't mind me asking, what country did you move too that has better personal rights? I know that Canada and most of the EU have a worse track record than the US when it comes to this.

IMHO moving out of the US just avoids the problem, instead of solving it. We need to put more support behind advocacy groups like the EFF who's mission statement is to fight against the infringement of personal rights.

MySQL, though written in C++, reads more like C with classes. Even then, a large portion of the code is procedural instead of OO. They are slowly moving towards an OO style, but it will take a while before a reasonable percentage of the code base has been re-written.

How is this "beyond astonishing"? 27 years is minuscule on in a geologic time scale. Climate trends are measured in hundreds and thousands of years, if not more.

The site appears to be down. Does anyone have a mirror?

I would disagree with this article. Most posts through third-party applications will have a motivation to reach the largest possible audience. This will lead to an excessive amount of public posts. Not only will this defeat the purpose of "circles", it will also flood G+ search with noise. This will destroy much of the usefulness of the network.