I own a cybertruck and completely love it. It’s wacky and fun and it gives me all the tech I wanted, plus I can use it like a truck when needed. I actually think it’s opposite, once people drive it they realize it’s really compelling. It does have some minor build issues that are fixed for free under warranty. Then again so does my gmc.
Same with Cybertruck, Font size is wrong, tpms light doesn't stay on if you power cycle the truck, a mirror camera opens slowly all minor software fixes, which leaves "used the wrong glue" twice, inverter problem, and windscreen motor overheating.
Point is ever car has loads of recalls, some don't get clicks so aren't reported much
Also while I’m getting down voted by a bunch of folks that have never driven one… Supervised FSD is getting very very good. I use it most days to drive and very rarely have to disengage. It is significantly better than the other driver assistance systems that I’ve driven. It’s come a long way
I have seen this. A cybertuck was pulling a small trailer for a landscaping company. It wasn't that interesting because it was a trailer that could have been pulled by most passenger cars, but I saw it.
I will acknowledge this, thought its not exactly what I had in mind.
If Cybertruck marketing claims it to be a truck - I’d like to see it perform in said capacity like a truck would. My F250 tows 8,000 lbs travel trailer as an example. I am yet to see one towed by Cybertruck.
I think two things are true, the government needs to cut expenses drastically and also that Elon should spend way more time at Tesla and spacex.
I didn’t buy my truck because of Elon, I bought it because I needed a truck and all the other truck manufacturers are completely brain dead when it comes to software.
I definitely wish Elon would shut up often, but he’s clearly not a nazi. That’s all nonsense.
His work at doge has been underwhelming so far, I had higher hopes. But it seems like most would rather have the status quo of major deficit spending and debt. Overall I would prefer drastic reduction in spending and waste with an actual plan and less chaos.
None of what Elon does makes me regret my car purchase. Why in the world would I make a personal decision like a car based on some billionaire I’ll never meet? I didn’t buy the truck as any kind of virtue signal. I bought it because I like it despite how dumb and crazy it looks.
Musk: homeless are "violent drug zombies with eyes devoid of life"[2]
Musk: people making use of federal programs are part of "parasite class"[3]
Musk: testifying against the president is "treason" and the witness should be executed[4]
Musk: the AfD is great, Hitler was a communist[5], and public sector employees caused the Holocaust[6]
Musk: racist staffers are more than welcome in DOGE[7]
Musk: George Floyd's killer ought to be pardoned[8]
Musk: empathy is causing the destruction of Western civilization[9]
Musk: doxxing for me[10], but not for thee[11]
Musk: war veteran who visited Ukraine is a "traitor"[12]
I mean, if this was just some idiot schlub ranting on social media, perhaps I'd consider buying their products if it was a life or death situation. But this guy sits next to the president of the United States and evidently has the power to enact his fucked up policies. Personally, I see any action that gives him an iota of additional power as deeply unethical.
We use metabase heavily at work. However where it seems like all these tools fall down is organization around the hundreds of dashboards and questions. I wish it had like a built wiki or something to build out more navigation. Anyone know of any good ways to do that?
Maybe take a look at https://datahubproject.io/integrations ? I only heard about it today, but it looks pretty promising. Spun out of LinkedIn, open source, lots of integrations, including Metabase
So apparently a local Birmingham, Al BBS originally had the name America Online. Steve case purchased the name from him for 10k and that BBS became known as the matrix.
"The combined effect of better architecture and Elixir saved Pinterest..." I appreciate that they also call out better architecture here. People often read these kinds of headlines and think "Oh Elixir is better than python" or whatever.
I remember when twitter had fail whales constantly and they rewrote it from ruby to java I think. At the time everyone assumed it was all ruby's fault, and that might be partly true. But it's also true that the engineers who rebuilt it understood the problem much better now, and knew the major pain points. They also completely changed the architecture to be better suited to the problem. I submit that a lot of rewrites could happen in the same language and still have major gains.
All that being said Elixir is great, and particularly well suited to these kinds of problems.
One thing that sometimes gets lost is site owners that use cloudflare have sort of global options for how paranoid they want to be, then they can make specific WAF rules that can be as granular and aggressive as they want. So at least in some cases, cloudflare gets blamed for website owners setting really aggressive rules. The effect on the end user usually looks exactly the same.
Case in point, I set a waf rule that blocked all non verified bot traffic from several big datacenters (Google cloud, OVH, digital ocean, etc). That turned out to be a mistake because a lot of corporations were routing their traffic through those ASNs for some reason. Now they’re blocked. They could have gotten pissed out cloudflare, the error page looks the same, but it was really misconfiguring it.
I love cloudflare, but honestly I assumed they WERE the CIA/FBI not just compromised by them. It would be the perfect front company for the government.
If adamgamble's speculation were the case, I'd go to jail for things I'd have illegally signed in our SEC disclosures attesting to the sources of our revenue and any government contracts. Suffice it to say, I like not being in jail. It's really, really hard for public companies to be part of some grand conspiracy for so many different reasons. So… once we went public I kind of thought this silly speculation would end. But guess not.
Beyond that, if you think about it, it's a way better business to run Cloudflare and serve the world than serve some US intelligence entity. That's just per se true. So if that's the case why would we ever do anything that would remotely compromise the trust necessary to, you know, be Cloudflare?
Lastly, here's a funny story. Early in our history one of our investors suggested that we talk to In-Q-Tel. Here's how naive Michelle and I were: we had no idea it was the CIA's venture capital arm. So we showed up in their office on Sand Hill Road. It was weirdly austere compared with other VCs we'd visited. And lots of security cameras. The partner at some point came out and greeted us. As he was walking us back he looked back right before we crossed the threshold back to the inner offices, "You're both American citizens, right?"
"No," Michelle said. "I'm Canadian."
"Oh." the VC said. Then you can't come back here.”
"I'm not going back there without her," I said.
"Ok, well, I guess we'll have to do the meeting in the reception area," decided the In-Q-Tel VC.
We had a very cordial meeting and then left. As we were driving away Michelle said, "Those guys were weird." And that was the end of that. Never talked to In-Q-Tel again.
But maybe it's the Canadian equivalent of the CIA/FBI/NSA we're beholden to??! ;-)
> So… once we went public I kind of thought this silly speculation would end. But guess not.
In fairness, there are quite a number of public companies that turned out to be operating partially as fronts for spying agencies (AT&T is the shining example here). So simply being a public company could not be expected to serve as some kind of proof of independence.
Immunity from prosecution seems like a marvellous way to destroy rule of law. Crazy that that and royal^H^H^H^H^H presidential pardons exist. Recipe for corruption of the state and then the justice system.
As the purpose of Presidential pardons is to provide the opportunity to right significant miscarriages of justice in system that is almost impossible to get perfect, and that is the way they were typically used, it does not seem crazy that they exist.
What IS crazy is that they exist with very little consideration of a corrupt POTUS, judiciary, and/or congress. Seems the writings of the founders did worry about that significantly in later years, but evidently not in time to enshrine many guardrails in the US Constitution, not even a clear prohibition against self-pardon. Seems such a thing was considered so obviously wrong and corrupt that it didn't need to be mentioned. so here we are two and a half centuries later with people arguing that it should be possible.
I think that it does seem crazy that they exist. To give a single politician the power to simply override our justice system is dangerous and crazy. If that's really necessary in order to ovoid miscarriages of justice, then we need to fix the real problem, not introduce a new one.
Why is the pardon ability a problem? Because it's the judgement not just of one person, but of a person who is a political animal. There is no way that power will be used in a way that is impartial, and there is no single person who is so wise that they should be entrusted with such decisions. That it's a politician making the decisions all but guarantees that the decisions will be made out of political interest, not some interest in actual justice.
All the pardon power does is to increase the potential for corruption.
> It's really, really hard for public companies to be part of some grand conspiracy for so many different reasons.
As difficult as it was to keep PRISM and the many other overt and covert arrangements (public, private but leaked, and private but not yet leaked) between backbones, carriers, CDNs, hosting providers, ISPs, etc., and the agencies leveraging them, out of each firm's public filings?
Because evidence is it's not difficult at all, considering the whole of the 30 years since the Internet went commercial.
Hi, kind of hijacking this conversation but as Cloudflare is unfortunately routing the majority of websites I visit I have to ask this:
Can you guarantee my Firefox browser will keep on working on 'the open internet' now Chrome moves towards "Web Environment Integrity" and Safari towards "Private Access Tokens" and Cloudflare is supporting and implementing such technologies on scale?
I intent to not participate in these DRM APIs with my Firefox browser and would like to keep browsing the internet.
"will you be supporting WEI and PAT in your captcha/ddos protection services" is a VERY different question to "can you guarantee my Firefox browser will continue to work on the open web"
That usually happens when I'm faking my user agent to use the most popular (windows + Chrome). Once I go back to the default (Linux + Firefox) then CloudFlare seems to allow it.
Your response really shows a disconnect with the user and what was said
Not many users who encounter your service while trying to connect to a website will know _anything_ about your company, let alone knows its public or read disclosures.
Cloudflare has a public perception and sentiment problem and dismissing it as you have will lead to an inevitably negative outcome.
Not an attack but certainly a person in the middle.
IAAL and advise on data protection and privacy.
Anecdotally I can tell you that the MitM aspect of Cloudflare and other similar providers is not well understood.
My impression is that a lot of people use these services without really understanding the implications.
For example, when you look at some of the risks that privacy laws are trying to protect against, especially access to data by foreign actors (including government agencies) without due process, use of these types of services changes the game.
Sometimes the benefits might outweigh the risks, but the decision to use these types of services should not be taken trivially.
That said, I routinely use Cloudflare for my personal projects.
And AWS has control of all of your servers and everything stored on them. If it's part of your systems architecture and how it's intended to work it isn't being attacked.
>They literally decrypt all the traffic to your website, do some stuff, then re-encrypt and send it on to your server.
That doesn't mean they are an attack. That is just how a CDN works.
You're being needlessly pedantic. It might not be an attack in the usual sense, but it's a MITM "access point" and agencies like CIA/NSA/FBI would definitely have that kind of access. This access transforms Cloudflare's role into a de facto MITM "attack" on their customers and end users who didn't intend to share unencrypted data with 3-letter agencies.
I don’t think I’m being pedantic. In practical, the parent comment’s description is not that of MITM attack, but how a proxy works. Proxy is everywhere, useful, and voluntary.
I just don’t understand how a voluntary use of proxy can be called MITM attack.
I’m not saying I like the fact that CF is part of so much of the Internet, or that CF isn’t on some level a security risk. But that has nothing to do with being an MITM attack.
It’s always the website’s choice what infrastructure is used to serve the website, including whether a proxy is used. You don’t have a chance to say no if the website owner wants a proxy in front of their site. The web owner has a say in how they want their server to be connected.
In the same way, you can use a proxy to access sites, and the server cannot bypass that, either.
I know. I understand the tech and the business decisions behind all of this. I understand the value of a CDN.
It's still a MitM. It's a centralised entity that sees a huge share of the global Internet's traffic, unencrypted. I doubt most people are aware of that.
Someone in another comment mentioned AWS is one as well, and they're right. AWS, GCP and Azure all have TLS-terminating gateways of some kind.
Take Cloudflare, AWS, GCP and Azure, all USA companies bound by the CLOUD act, and nearly all Internet traffic is immediately accessible by US authorities, unencrypted.
Makes the whole "think of the children" rhetoric being spun to pass anti-E2EE laws tame in comparison.
It's worse. You can't just start Mitm'ing regular encrypted internet traffic without compromised infrastructure. With Cloudflare everything is already in place.
Although I haven’t used these monitors, my experience with high dpi on windows and Linux has been a nightmare compared to OSX. It’s surprising me the non Mac world hasn’t made this a bigger priority.
I actually think Windows does it better than OS X (and Gnome, Wayland, and anything that does not support true fractional scaling). OS X just scales the entire surface and as result it always look blurry.
> OS X just scales the entire surface and as result it always look blurry.
I genuinely have zero idea what you are talking about. Typing this from my macbook connected to a 5k LG ultrawide monitor, and it is as crystal sharp as it can get. As opposed to my windows 10 desktop (connected to the same monitor) having some occasional application windows render fairly blurry and inconsistently (one of the main offenders of this is, ironically, task manager). And don't even get me started on font rendering in general.
When I used a 5k LG, on the lowest scaling above 100%, I would get shimmering effects when I moved windows. You could see the same art/glyph rendered differently depending on if it was on an even or odd line; move the window 1 pixel and the text totally changed. If you only ever run at integer scaling, this wouldn't be apparent.
Windows does a Much better job with non-integer scaling because hairlines are 1px no matter what the scaling and text is rendered with pixel-hinting instead of macOS's new, lame strategy of super sampling.
Surprisingly, macs can’t actually scale the UI like Windows. All you can do is simulate higher or lower resolutions. Which is fine if your DPI is sky-high, but a real pain in the arse if you’re working with a QHD 24”for example, and just want everything to be a bit bigger
OS X not only uses a lame hack to scale, it completely muddles the issue by introducing the concept of "HiDPI" UI elements. Somehow I can set my 4K monitor to use "native resolution" at 3840 x 2160, and yet the UI and fonts look fuzzy! Absolutely terrible, and a complete embarrassment for Apple imo since they are supposedly the UI kings. You only don't notice the issue because you're using a 27" 5k display, which has been "blessed" by Apple as the "correct" DPI to match native screens. For those of us with 4k screens (95% of the market), I guess we're just supposed to enjoy a subpar experience. Even X11 looks better.
For me, I only closed the book on the issue after finding BetterDisplay [0]. Basically a 3rd party program that gives you complete control over resolution, display density, and a ton of other options on MacOS. It has a trial mode but it is well well worth the money. With that + the CLI tweak to set font smoothing to 0, the 4K experience on MacOS looks decent. You can even decrease the effective scale of the native screen past "More Space", so those of us with good eyes can actually take advantage of the screen real estate.
Also, if you're curious to explore this issue beyond my subjective thoughts here, these [1] [2] blog posts do a great job diving into what is so bad about MacOS scaling, why 4K 27" or 32" screens end up looking bad, and why 5K 27" look okay.
macOS will render at the next highest integer scale factor and then downscale to fit the resolution of your monitor instead of just rendering at the fractional scale in the first place
There are several scenarios where it clearly doesn't look that good, and where Windows objectively does a much better job.
Most people (and companies) aren't willing to spend $1600 on Apple's 5K monitor, so they get a good 27" UHD monitor instead, and they soon realize macOS either gives you pixel perfect rendering at a 2x scale factor which corresponds to a ridiculously small 1920x1080 viewport, or a blurry 2560x1440 equivalent.
The 2560x1440 equivalent looks tack sharp on macOS. It renders at 5120x2880 and scales it down to native, as I said it’s effectively supersampling. I used this for years and never experienced a blurry image. I now run a 5k2k monitor, also at a fractional scale and again it looks excellent.
Modern Linux DPI support is a nightmare. It's a shame, since if you just run and old-school software stack (X11; minimal window manager; xrandr to adjust DPI if you hotplug a monitor), then it has much nicer font rendering than Mac OS.
This is particularly frustrating since I've been using high DPI displays since the CRT days. Everything horribly regressed about a decade ago, and still isn't back to 1999 standards.
IDK, high DPI worked fine for me under Linux. I just set the desired DPI in Xfce settings, and everything scales properly. (Except Firefox, which has its own DPI setting! But it works equally painlessly.)
Where things go haywire is mixed resolution. It's best avoided :-\ Hence now I have a 28" 4k external screen which is exactly like four 14" FHD screens of my laptop, so the DPI stays strictly the same.
I'm actually not sure what your complaint is at this point. I've long been using 3 mixed dpi displays on windows 10 for gaming as well as normal desktop stuff. Any relatively modern software scales fine to high dpi. Some old software using old APIs has to be upscaled by the OS and is blurry, but that's stuff like... Winamp.
I guess you've not used VMWare, VirtualBox, DaVinci Resolve or most anything written in Java. There's more, but that's off the top of my head. There's plenty of software out there with unusably small text/displays even with just one display.
At high DPI the difference in font rendering between ClearType, Freetype and macOS diminish greatly, it's mostly a matter of taste, and at least Microsoft hasn't crippled low DPI rendering in recent Windows versions like Apple did with macOS.
I'd guess gaming is at least partially responsible. For anything more than 2k you need a high end/expensive video card, which just aren't that common. Just look at the steam stats right now.. 62% of users have 1080p.
