TL is lining you up for PIP/termination. The other guy on the team is likely his buddy. Come review time, you will be shown as an IC that struggles to deliver, and the other guy will get all the credit.
Been there, seen that. Start looking for other teams internally ASAP.
I've been the other guy in this scenario before.. because it's a deprecated tool, this is a low risk way to demonstrate some reliability improvements, and a way for the TL to 'scratch the itch' of reducing risk. The other guy's improvements will be built into the new tool.
The article misses the obvious. You don't become a technical co-founder to make bank with the equity or salary. You'll get diluted, replaced and kicked out the moment traction starts gaining.
You become a technical co-founder to trade in your technical skills, learn about a new domain, figure out where the pain points are, and eventually jump ship and become a captain of your own vessel.
Also, the article is an obvious pitch in the likes of "don't get a co-founder, order an MVP from me instead".
> You'll get diluted, replaced and kicked out the moment traction starts gaining.
This is just straight up wrong. You don't HAVE to enter the VC cycle of endless raising, and if they're wanting to replace/kick you out, what are you doing wrong?
> eventually jump ship and become a captain of your own vessel.
That's literally what being a co-founder is. You might be even split with someone, but you are still very much the captain.
> You become a technical co-founder to trade in your technical skills, learn about a new domain, figure out where the pain points are, and eventually jump ship and become a captain of your own vessel.
Is this what people commonly think about technical co-founder?
Or are you recommending a less-common way to think about it?
> You don't become a technical co-founder to make bank with the equity or salary. [...] and eventually jump ship and become a captain of your own vessel.
So by your logic, only the CEO gets to make bank from a startup and everyone else, CTO included, are to get screwed and accept this?
By my logic, to make bank from a startup, you need to be a master negotiator constantly watching your back, parsing poker faces in meetings, reading fine print in agreements, and trying to bust other people's schemes, while scheming on your own. You won't have any time left for the technical side.
A CTO, in theory, is supposed to be shielded from all the political screwery, and focus on delivering the product. In practice, it makes the CTO's equity one of the easiest targets for those willing to play games.
So, unless the CEO/CTO relationship is decades long and is worth to both sides more than a short-term gain, CTO gets screwed.
The company issues new shares for the investors and new hires.
So, you might start with 100,000 shares and 10% of the company, but by IPO, there could be 100,000,000 shares, giving you 0.1% of the company.
(These numbers are completely made up, though if the company ipo’s for $1B, that’s $10/share which is a plausible price per share. Companies often grant additional shares to early employees.)
Exactly. And then the board votes on who gets extra shares to compensate for the dilution, and the CTO is suddenly not on the list. Because the CEO spent months playing political chess with the board members, negotiating who gets what, and before that spent years playing political chess with investors to see who gets into the board. CTO is usually not involved in these games, and has no pull beyond the CEO's goodwill.
With sufficient data points, you can do A/B and see that all affected systems run a specific version of Linux distro, and eventually track it down to a particular package.
Unless you're the bad actor, you have no way to trigger the exploit, so you can't really do an a/b test. You can only confirm which versions of which distros are vulnerable. And that assumes you have sufficient instrumentation in place to know the exploit has been triggered.
Even then, who actually has a massive fleet of publicly exposed servers all running a mix of distros/versions? You might run a small handful of distros, but I suspect anyone running a fleet large enough to actually collect a substantial amount of data probably also has tools to upgrade the whole fleet (or at least large swaths) in one go. Certainly there are companies where updates are the wild west, but the odds that they're all accessible to and controllable by a single motivated individual who can detect the exploit is essentially zero.
Not necessarily. A frustrated developer posts about it, it catches attention of someone who knows how to use Ghidra et al, and it gets dug out quite fast.
Except, with closed-source software maintained by a for-profit company, suck cockup would mean a huge reputational hit, with billions of dollars of lost market cap. So, there are very high incentives for companies to vet their devs, have proper code reviews, etc.
But with open-source, anyone can be a contributor, everyone is a friend, and nobody is reliably real-world-identifiable. So, carrying out such attacks is easier by orders magnitude.
> So, there are very high incentives for companies to vet their devs, have proper code reviews, etc.
I'm not sure about that. It takes a few leetcode interviews to get in major tech companies. As for the review process, it's not always thorough (if it looks legit and the tests pass...). However, employees are identifiable and would take huge risk to be caught doing anything fishy.
We witnessed Juniper generating their VPN keys with Dual EC DRGB, and then the generator constants subverted with Juniper claiming of now knowing how did it happen.
I don’t think it affected Juniper firewall business in any significant way.
Freedom of speech works as a mechanism to maintain decentralized power. If there are multiple sources of power interested in preserving their own shares of power, they end up agreeing on fair mechanisms of resolving conflicts. Like arguing your case in a court vs. sending an assassin, or discussing different viewpoints in a civilized manner rather than waiting than the party-chosen one goes into the extreme, and evokes an equally extreme counteraction.
Power in the West has been centralizing for decades now. Information society and low interest rates have been catalyzing this even more. It is inevitable than hard-fought-for freedoms will fall, followed by an economic collapse, splintering, and a slow crystallization of new sources of power over the courses of centuries. Empires fall. History repeats. Humans are humans...
Because a whole generation doesn't care about their financial well-being, affording kids, retirement, or any kind of future plans. They are happy, as long as they have a petty emotion-driven control over what others will be allowed to say or think. And the government is happy to deliver...
I'm surprised you're being downvoted when almost all the lack of infrastructure for the future of Canadian youth doesn't just hint at what you're expressing, but instead screams it. Almost all politicians in Canada are landlords, multiple property holders, and have decided that what's best for Canada is increasing immigration, where young-born Canadians are having their wages suppressed because of it. Additionally, they are locked into living with their parents because rent has skyrocketed to absurd levels for just a small studio apartment. All for the benefit of the existing established boomer generation.
I'm confused, are you arguing the constraints on their finances and upward mobility due to everything outside their control hints that their circumstances are due to their own vacuity (or whatever parent was on about)?
I'd argue it's not worth trying to acquire the things boomers, and subsequently gen-xers and older millennials sought, but it's worth finding a way to secure some other kind of financial security in whatever way that's feasible.
It's not worth listening to politicians of any sort who say they'll be able to bring that down to earth in the next 5 years.
Wyze cameras can actually be used very securely, as long as you bother to jump through some hoops.
First of all, google "Wyze RTSP firmware". It's the official firmware from the vendor that enables the RTSP protocol. Now you can enable RTSP via the app and give the camera a fixed IP address in your DHCP server.
RTSP is a pretty standard protocol, so you can now view the feed via VNC player, record it 24/7 via ffmpeg, use tools like motion, etc.
The camera will still try to connect to cloud, but you can move it to a local-only Wi-Fi network, or outright block it from reaching the outer world on the router side.
And if you want advanced stuff (multiple streams, organized recording, etc), there is a plethora of free/open-source security camera tools (iSpy for instance). It all takes time to learn and configure, but you can have your own fully closed-circuit surveillance network, while still using the Wyze's rather cheap hardware.
Instead of patching, you can also just use PoE cameras that are designed for this use case (local RTSP) and are only a little more expensive than Wyze. I’ve installed an Amcrest doorbell that works well with Scrypted and HomeKit, and plan on adding some Amcrest cameras like these soon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B083G9KT4C
> Wyze Update 04/05/2022: RTSP was considered a beta feature and we are currently assessing the path forward as the firmware versions have aged quite a bit. Wyze has removed the firmware files for these versions for now and will update the pages when plans are finalized. Please note that firmware files take a while to work on and test so you may not see an update in the near future. Wyze apologizes for the inconvenience.
Nah, the purpose of propaganda is to control which subset of infinitely complex reality will get remembered.
Make enough people associate Orwell's works with the dark pages of his past, and the focus will shift from the ideas of the works to the identity of the writer. Then use it to attack those who still dare to bring up those ideas, and you have driven them off the public's attention span for good.
Learned what? When it's zero interest rates, funding from desperate investors would dwarf any possible profits you could make, and the bigger headcount makes raising money easier.
It's the policymakers and society in general that should learn. A decade of low interest rates together with outsourcing of everything that can be outsourced created hordes of useless people that add little value and feel entitled to their salary. As you get more and more of those, the value of money decreases, and inflation starts piling up (COVID accelerated it nicely, but things like housing, educational and medical were off the charts for a long while).
The hangover from those rates will last longer than most expect.
Kind of a dark pattern to hide the license price (last line in the AppStore page -> in-app purchases). Should be really prominently shown on the "buy now" page.
Also the features page is garbage. Wall of text with fairly generic stuff while it's still unclear: Can it run Windows? Can it run Linux? Arm64, x64 or both? MacOS?
Your main competition is VMWare Fusion and Parallels. See what features they advertise, make sure you are better and cheaper. Currently it looks like a university project rather than a real product.
It is a webpage that was quickly put together. We are a small company and our focus has been on the product. You can run Linux and macOS currently. That is listed on the features page as well as the app store product listing.
There is no dark pattern, it is actually a problem with the way Apple allows developers to sell software on the Mac App Store. We don't have proper control over the process and thus end up with this convoluted purchasing system that is more geared towards subscriptions - which are the real dark pattern nowadays. We sell without any subscriptions - at a very fair price that is extremely competitive with other products. The old upgrade pricing model was a lot more fair to both developers and users and we are sticking to it. This is the only way to offer a free trial on the App Store without requiring a separate installation, which would be inconvenient for everyone.
Far from a university project - but your opinion is yours to keep. It is a shame you are so negative, as it really is a labour of love and a quality Mac app. In fact we have a lot of firsts here, no one has really done a lot of these things (snapshots, suspend & resume, proper dynamic resolution with retina support) with the new Apple framework yet.
Been there, seen that. Start looking for other teams internally ASAP.