Yes. Or more general:
work hard to get something. Even if you will never reach it, you might still improve enough in general, to be ready to do and get something else instead.
Unless you have broken software and hardware since the 1990s or 1980s, and then gotten a degree in management or engineering, my path is hard to replicate.
But I certainly can offer some advice:
1. Be hardcore and really interested in security. Read everything. Deep diving into networks, software, vulnerability, risk management.
2. Get a CISSP certifiaction, then maybe an ISO 27001 cert and then also something juicy from SANS (I have none of these).
3. Get an AWS or a public cloud of your choice certification
Also
* Cia triad
* Mitre attack framework
* Cis controls
* Nist framework
* Ise 62443
* Zero trust framework from NIST
Get work experience, projects, situations, grow and evolve
They're disproportionately requirements for the worst, lowest-status jobs in cybersecurity, and many of the best known and "highest placed" practitioners in the industry (not just in vuln research and xdev but also in management) don't have one.
To be fair: this is, like, a 2010 acronym, and I'm dating myself just by using it; I just have a dry-eye thing going today that's making screen time annoying and didn't want to type the words out. :)
No, we haven't. We disagree about something, but there was never a premise that we would agree. It's fine for us to disagree! We're two different data points, nothing more or less. An "impasse" implies there was a further destination for us to reach, if only we found common ground. Not so!
I think we sometimes look past how valuable it is to just have two clearly stated, conflicting views on an issue, without a day long effort to unify or persuade them.
Anything that comes from an academic (.edu / .ac.uk / your local equivalent) domain, Youtube channels of academic institutions (the less professionally recorded the video, the better), the Wikipedia references for a particular topic.
You mean "customers in the aisles means shorter lines at checkout"? That would be true if you're optimizing for short lines at checkout, but what a business is really optimizing for is sales over time, and so you want as many people to come in, buy their stuff, and leave in as short a period as you can. The more people you can get in and out of your store, the more money you make.
The more time they spend wandering the aisles (or browsing your site), the more opportunity for them to say "I can get this somewhere else faster/easier/cheaper." Every second they aren't punching in payment details is a moment for the baby to cry, for someone to call, for the boss to give them an assignment, for a bathroom break. Any of those things can totally break the moment and cause the customer to abandon their cart and leave.
Solution? Don't let them hang around. Get them to their goal as fast as possible and keep the total transaction time -- from landing on the site to checking out -- as short as you possibly can.
To put a more concrete example, imagine a company like Instacart. If it takes you more than an hour to fill up your cart on the site -- for whatever reason! whether bad organization, slow response times, whatever -- then you might as well just go to your local grocery store yourself! You can almost certainly be in and out of your local store in less than an hour.
The value prop that Instacart has is "you never have to go to the grocery store again, because it's easier to order from home." But if it's harder to order from home, then what's the value of Instacart? (Again, I'm oversimplifying here, but this is the gist of the value prop. Instacart doesn't sell groceries -- it sells TIME. It sells that hour of your life back so you can spend it with your family or playing video games or arguing with me on HN.)
And so in terms of scalability, Instacart wants you to land on the site, add everything to your cart, and get the order placed as fast as possible. And to do that, everything needs to be fast. The category pages need to load fast, the product detail pages need to load fast, your cart needs to load fast, the checkout pages need to load fast. The faster everything is, the quicker -- and better! -- your experience is.
There are numerous studies out there that show that as little as 500ms latency can cost millions of dollars for a company. It's really important to keep everything fast!
I have more thoughts about this, but this is the gist of the answer to your question: because the goal isn't short queues, but rather faster total trips.
Our hardware engineering partner subcontracted the design to a team of industrial designers they'd worked with in the past. We ordered prototypes of the design from both China and vendors in the US. The Chinese versions were better by leaps and bounds.[0]
We iterated a few times from there and eventually landed on a design we liked and worked with the Chinese vendor to produce the first few thousand. The Chinese vendor kept running into issues, though, so they were producing them at about 50% the speed they quoted, which was just barely enough to keep up with our sales.
When we switched to the contract manufacturer, they took over manufacturing the cases in Vietnam. They had trouble getting started as well, but they got the hang of it after a couple of months and can produce cases much faster than we consume them.
Was wondering about this is you don’t mind. The post states disappointment with the US manufacturer but for a prototype. Maybe it could have been improved if you’d asked? Perhaps they didn’t know they were in a horse race.
I tend to think of a prototype as a rough sketch. Unless of course they told me it was a demo to win the job.
The impression I got was that they really weren't interested in working with me. Most of the sheet metal vendors I reached out to didn't even return my calls.
The one vendor that called back accepted the job, but when it was done, they just handed me the prototype and asked for my money. They never asked whether I was satisfied or if there were things they could improve if given the opportunity.
I take this as a warning to carefully consider ANY medical treatment (especially novel ones) where some corporation stands to benefit hugely.
Scientists, just like politicians, can be corrupted.
Science, particularly “expedited” science, can be manipulated to demonstrate whatever policymakers (and thus lobbyists) want it to show.
There’s one thing that cannot be corrupted - a healthy human body that I keep free of novel interventions.
If I’m on my deathbed and there’s a novel form of immunotherapy that was patented yesterday, then fine, I will try it.
But if I’m healthy, and and I’m offered a novel form of vaccine of an entirely new technology I will question it. Especially if it causes my own healthy cells (including heart, lung, brain and reproductive cells) to express a protein that leads them to be destroyed by my NK cells and cytotoxic T cells.
Now I’m sure there will be a authoritarian minority that will jump on this post and try to remove it, and who will try to remove me from HN. I’m sure you think you’re doing society a good deed. But bear in mind, the suppression of critique of novel technology can also contribute to widespread suspicion about that technology and the people pushing it.
No as it's almost impossible to attribute these effect to porn as porn is too widely spread among women and men, and most of the "porn behavior" existed before that porn was universally consumed. Strangely most of these studies talked about men behavior when women consume a lot of porn.
This is the same kind of things you hear about gay, role playing games, metal music, video games, rap music that are all rotting the brain of young people.
I understand the censorship argument also, and to be honest expecting also people defending their right to watch porn, the addiction is real.
Porn is like a thought virus, if you watch it enough you will start to think about all these things you see visually about the women in your life and people around you. Many people might not want to admit this, and will just spew out silly comments defending porn, maybe they are addicted to it and like to watch it.
Then go ahead, I'm not saying you should not be able to watch porn.
I'm saying _by default_, things like porn should be more harder to find and access.
