Yeah, I remember our high school IT teacher buying a 486sx25 with 8MB and a CDROM ostensibly to explore multimedia in education but mostly to play Myst.
No kidding - you can't even delete a design system, draft or otherwise. Research Preview is accurate, it can do some things (but every system I've tried building it has resorted to the "hero text with key word in a different color" trope, however I try different prompts), but there's a lot missing (and when you ask Claude Design how to delete a design system it gives you an absolutely inaccurate and hallucinated answer and you say fine, here's the project ID, do it for me, "Sorry, can't, only you can").
Yup. I worked for Flock for a bit. During recruitment and onboarding, it was all big on ethics and morality and slippery slopes and responsible data stewardship.
After HR pats you on the back and you met with your team and org? Mask off.
"No, we won't build controls that allow us to block [data sharing that is illegal for agencies in state] for those agencies. That's not our concern. Oh, they want training on how to do that data sharing? Sure."
Garrett would talk regularly at all hands about a very Minority Report-esque future that was driven and made possible by Flock, and he was very clear it wasn't exaggerated for example or aspirational but an organizational goal.
Anyone who stayed there more than a few months knows exactly what they're doing.
> Not everyone who works at Meta has a better, more ethical option.
Come on now. Software engineers at Meta are not trapped with Meta on their resume (whatever you may think of the company itself). Most of the FAANG, for engineering, just having that name on your resume, opens up doors.
You might get less than $700K TC as an E6 but that's also not "trapped" unless you've chosen to outspend your income.
Exactly. Working at Meta means you studied for 4 weeks for the leetcode interviews. That type of dedication means you could very easily get any job anywhere else.
And please don't compare someone making 800k$ with someone scanning a ticket for Ticketmaster.
How am I doing that? I'm talking about people who have very valid options elsewhere.
"I'm stuck at Meta, making $800K, I have no other options". We're talking about software engineers who created much of the things they're complaining about.
I'm not talking about say, cafeteria or custodial staff.
And I despise Meta, and you can say whatever you want about Leetcode (and I tend to agree) but don't pretend that there are many many rungs of "software engineering calibers" in jobs that wouldn't see Meta, or Netflix and say "we have to interview this person".
Interesting, I’ve found job postings at Meta that pay under $100k for data center jobs in Ohio. There are also network engineering jobs in South Carolina that start at $105k.
Do you think people in Bowling Green, OH are flooded with employment options? They can just walk down the street to go work at Google or Apple right?
If I’m in Huntsville, Alabama and I’m a mechanic should I turn down this job because Meta isn’t ethical?
And where should I go work instead in Alabama? For the super duper ethical local car dealership?
I would also point out that many of Meta’s departments like hardware engineering have a much smaller US job pool than software engineering. If you’re in the US and your profession is electrical engineering you you can’t just work remote anywhere or find a bank or insurance company in practically any city in the US to get a job with.
A lot of your job prospects as a hardware engineer are also with the military and defense contractors.
Meta is also one of the few companies that has job postings for PhD researcher type folks that only otherwise employable as professors at universities at relatively low salaries. If you’re a scientist in certain fields it’s a similar situation: try to become a professor, work for the government, or find the rare company like Meta that performs cutting edge research.
I've had two disputes that materially ignored the facts of the dispute, in one case where even the buyer said he didn't and wouldn't do as agreed, and still won, costing me $700+.
You can't say "I've had a few disputes that were handled fairly, so when other people say there's weren't, that's not the standard eBay experience".
> You can't say "I've had a few disputes that were handled fairly, so when other people say there's weren't, that's not the standard eBay experience"
I did not say that. I specifically said I know some people have bad experiences, but that I don't. Please don't fake-quote things that someone didn't say.
I acknowledge that some people have bad experiences and some people (like you) can be extra unlucky, but I wouldn't say that your bad experiences are the standard eBay experience. Logically, if everyone was losing money like that all over the platform nobody would be selling there any more.
If getting scammed is the standard eBay seller experience, surely you'd have heard about it before deciding to sell? I've been selling on ebay for years and I've never had a dispute. Having very few, high value sales is sort of a red flag for scams. If you don't have a lot of prior positive feedback maybe that's why you lost your disputes?
I've sold on eBay for over 20 years and millions of dollars. I would like to know more about your experience as a seller where you had disputes handled poorly, especially one that cost you $700?
I'm not the commenter, but about 20 years ago when ebay owned paypal still, I sold 26 iPod nanos in a big sale on ebay. Everyone received theirs except one guy, and the tracking showed the shipper lost it, in that the package just stopped being scanned in the USPS system halfway through. He complained, completely understandable! eBay froze my account, froze the payments for all 26, and I never saw the money ever again.
They wouldn't let me just refund the one customer. I had to prove the other 25 were delivered, so I did that. Then I had to prove they actually got iPods, so I linked them to the reviewed transactions that showed people were happy with the iPods. So then I had to prove my identity to eBay. They wanted my license, so I did that. Then a utility so I sent my light bill. Then my phone bill. Then my natural gas bill. Then my lease. Then they asked for my passport, which I did not have at that time. Suddenly nothing could be done without the passport, and they'd keep the money for 180 days and then mail me a check. Except then they said they were keeping the money anyway because I didn't provide a passport. Five grand, gone.
From that day on I'd have multiple eBay accounts at all times, spread things out around them so that when (not if, when) they would freeze an account for a review, I'd just cancel everything, refund whatever purchase was in review, and never use that account again. I learned that the review process is just a delay process to make you think there was progress when you'd already been banned but since you thought there was a chance, you'd keep busy in the no-go queue for however long you interacted with the bot before you gave up rather than calling support.
Ok. I've been through that, though it is a function of Paypal. You can absolutely recover the funds from a limited account. 20 years later, I would still pursue this. In fact, if you aren't able to log in I would check with the unclaimed property division of the state your account was registered in when you had the account. PayPal and eBay are publicly traded fully audited companies, there is no, we just get to keep the money scenario.
I sold a Mavic 2 Pro drone with 5 batteries. The whole process was a mess. Scammer initially complained that it didn't come with a CrystalSky tablet that was in one picture (that was only added AFTER after he had bid already and asked to see Flight Logs, and was explicitly disclaimed as not being a part of the package, nor was it in the receipts I sent the buyer). After pointing out those details, silence.
Then, three weeks later:
"The batteries don't work. I want a refund."
"Batteries? Any of them? All of them?"
"All of them, none work. I want a refund."
Note that two of the batteries were less than 4 months old, still in warranty.
He then stated he wanted a refund of $800. For five brand-new batteries, that would only be $670.
No evidence was shown, despite multiple requests (like a video of a battery on a charger, or on the drone, failing to power up). I stated I'd like to get the original batteries back, as at least I'd be able to get them replaced under warranty or possibly repaired and recoup some of my money (I was skeptical there was -any- issue, but still, good faith). He "happily" agreed. I asked him to send me a message on eBay (so it was tracked and not avoiding their system) acknowledging that offering a partial refund was contingent on his sending me the batteries back and that he accepts me disputing the refund if not.
He sends a message indicating all of the above.
Refund is sent (for about $700, to include his return shipping costs).
Thirty-five minutes later, I get a message, "USPS says they don't ship damaged batteries, so I will not be returning them". (35 minutes? So what, you were just sitting around waiting for the refund, and then the very moment I sent the money, you jumped in your car, got to the post office, had this discussion, got home, and were able to send me this message? When your home address shows you about 15 minutes from the nearest post office?)
I then suggest we meet in person to exchange them (I live a few hours away, not convenient, but still, $700...). He umms and ahhs, "How will I be able to prove that I gave them to you in person?". I suggest we do it in a police station and point out that his local PD even welcomes people to use their lobby for CL, etc. on their website. More umms and ahhs. "I need to contact eBay support to see if they allow this." I point him to eBay's specific FAQ page describing exactly this and how they recommend doing in person sales, and refunds, documentation thereof, and how they support it. But he ignores that and says, "I never heard back from eBay support, so I'm not sure what to do". I point this page out again, and he goes silent.
I opened a dispute. No evidence was provided for damage or faulty goods, referenced the multiple requests for video, or of anything.) Multiple instances of the buyer trying to show something was problematic with the listing, not abiding by the agreement and refusing/avoiding any method of returning damaged items.
Overnight, no further inquiries.
"We have closed your dispute. Based on our review, the buyer is entitled to keep the partial refund for damage. He is also not required to return the damaged items".
So he ended up with a Mavic 2 Pro, with less than 20 hours flight time, 5 batteries, for in the order of $950, all told.
Sorry that happened, scammers are the worst. Yeah unfortunately here the refund being sent proactively was the issue and eBay isn't really able to recoup those funds. Ex: the buyer used a credit card, you refund and it goes back to his card on the original authorization. Your dispute can't go anywhere because eBay isn't able to just reauthorize the buyers card without their consent.
All my vibe coded projects (personal) are Go backend services, with Typescript/React frontend. And my thoughts were based on similar things. Like why I wouldn't use PHP for that, either.
That 18 USC 2 and 371 apply to the CFAA, too. What are those? Accomplice liability, which has been considered to include aiding and abetting. Hosting (and protecting, by virtue of your product) computer crime organizations could quite plausibly be rolled into accomplice liability.
cloudflare has no knowledge that <random site> is linked to <random attack on a completely different company, originating from random places on the internet> and they have no way of gaining that knowledge unless presented with a lawful order stating such.
if what you were saying was at all a plausible legal interpretation, it would have been brought to light over the last 16 years of lawsuits cloudflare has been involved in. or it would have been brought up by their literal room full of (actual) on-staff lawyers.
aiding and abetting requires knowledge of the crime and intent to facilitate it. cloudflare has neither.
Wait, the webpage hosted by cloudflare, as you say. So yes, they're not hosting the infrastructure doing the actual attacks, they're "just" hosting the infrastructure for the site advertising the attacks.
"You may not use the services to attack our infrastructure. You may use the services to advertise and charge for attacking our infrastructure".
correct, you should be able to host any lawful website you want.
if a police investigation turns up that X DDoS is linked to Y advertising site, the police should then submit a lawful takedown request, which cloudflare will oblige.
Or just outright avoiding it. When Michael Reinhoel was shot in Lacey, WA, a few minutes away from me (and I was actually a paramedic at the time, on duty, but not dispatched to this), by the US Marshals, there was a distinct oddity that no-one really picked up on.
> A U.S. Marshals Service spokesperson said the task force attempted to arrest Reinoehl, and officers shot him after he produced a gun and fled on foot. The team included officers from the Pierce County Sheriff's Department
Wait, Pierce County? That County's border is miles away from unincorporated Lacey, and the "center" is effectively 30 miles (Lacey is a tri-city with Olympia and Tumwater, and Pierce County's seat is Tacoma). Why PCSO, and not Thurston County SO?
Well, the other agencies involved (like the WA DOC, which was an odd inclusion) don't (or didn't, this was 2020) wear bodycams. TCSO... does. PCSO... doesn't.
There was already a belief that he would not survive an encounter with LE, but without commenting on that, it's odd that you'd choose not to involve the agency who would ordinarily be responsible for that geographic area, just to use one from the next county.
So no bodycam footage of his final moments exists.
Public high schools in Georgia were still holding segregated proms no more than 10 years ago.
reply