I'm not the person you responded to, but I did also recently make a transition from an individual contributor role into a management role and can share some experiences.
In addition to taking on more leadership roles in engineering projects, I began finding and taking on opportunities on the side that have a managerial element to them, for instance recruiting (sourcing, behavioral interviews, selling candidates, redesigning our interviewing processes), mentoring/coaching people, driving our company's internship program, etc. I found that I enjoyed that sort of nontechnical work. In particular, I liked thinking about how to grow other people and help them be effective.
I vaguely started thinking that I wanted to just switch into management, and I advertised that fact (mostly to managers). I wasn't too urgent about it, and an opportunity showed up [after a few months] and the management team thought of me first as someone who could be a good fit. Part of what made it a good fit was that the team was not 'on fire' or anything, so if I were to do a bad job or realize I didn't like management and thus needed to switch back, the company wouldn't be in a particularly bad situation.
The fact here isn't quite right. (I'm an employee at Dropbox)
Primarily, until 2 years ago we did lean on S3 for all block storage, but most of the rest of the infrastructure (metadata storage, etc) ran in our own datacenters.
Your point I think you're getting at sounds like something I'd agree with though -- you can wait a bit the cost efficiency starts to be what is important/impactful to work on before shifting your usage away from some of these providers.
I think a few visits to a therapist may help you discover more about yourself. (Though I do think some people associate 'going to therapy' as 'having problems', I see it also just as a resource for guiding introspection. There probably is not any "problem" you need to "fix"... it can just be a way to discover yourself.)
In your case, topics like emotional attachment style come to mind. Some people just grow up learning to condition their emotions become more numb... though in some cases it also becomes harder to become excited about things.
This is not to say that this is how you are... since it's not like I actually know you or your childhood, etc. But this is certainly a topic that I'm reminded of when I hear your example, and something like therapy can be an interesting way to dive into this.
I would recommend trying to learn whatever tools they use, so that when you start you can focus your mind on the projects and less so on the environment. Once you start, you will be less overwhelmed, and you'll consciously feel good about how much pain you saved yourself. Just ship your future team an email and ask them what they think would be useful to know.
That's only in regard to a phishing attack, but two factor authentication protects you in the case that you lose your password to an adversary who tries to log in themselves.
If said adversary can steal your password through other means (for example, you use the same password over multiple sites, and the adversary happens to run one of them), they still would have to coerce you into giving the Allow on your phone.
Hashing passwords for storage is standard practice in all systems that involve password based authentication.
Even then, the password must reside in memory at some point in order to compute the hash of your password [using bycrypt or whatever scheme], which is necessary for both generating the hash the first time AND generating the hash for authentication attempts. This is the issue described in the given link.
If you're interested becoming afraid around your cars, some of my security friends at the University of Washington have been busting up cars for research: http://www.autosec.org/faq.html
Of course, their exploits are a bit more complex and involve various side channels and hardware vulnerabilities, while the keypad issue can be executed by someone just typing in numbers with their fingers.
We do something [that I consider] interesting here to staff TAs for courses, which is hire undergraduate teaching assistants. Generally, a course will have one head TA who is a grad student, and multiple undergraduate TAs. I've TA'd for a while as an undergraduate, and it's been a really great experience for my career.
Especially in the intro courses and lower level courses, I don't think that it's necessary to hire computer science gurus -- it's actually easier to find undergraduates who are capable and passionate for teaching than it is to find graduate students (partly because there are more undergraduates).
Some documents produced by one of the lecturers who I work for as a TA.
Brown has been doing this from the start of its CS department in the 80s (this probably developed because we don't have very many graduate students), as far as I can tell. The only difference is that the undergraduate Head TAs are typically "higher" in the food chain of responsibility than the Graduate TAs (who are more responsible for course development). This worked incredibly well: in 2011, one of our three intro sequences (the one meant for people who knew they wanted to do CS, but don't have the background in it) went from an enrollment of 70 students to 200. We managed by scaling the undergraduate TA group from 11 to 20 (with two, instead of one, HTA), and assigning a good number of those TAs to work on better automation for things like grading.
I've been a TA for three years now, and I've probably gotten more from it than from my actual classes. And because we see what the class needs to teach, as well as what the class has taught in the past, we're actually a lot better (IMHO) than grad students (and even many professors) at figuring out how to change the course to push students further.
As our professor last year put it:
"I am the Pope of CS17. The head TAs are the Roman Curia, the TAs are the dedicated priests, and the students are the Faithful."
University of Virginia does this, too, although they often just work under the professor that teaches the class. It's a great experience, all told, since you get really fluent in the class material, and great at debugging if you're in a lower class where the TAs help with that. The pay is comparable to most other on campus jobs, but it's much more engaging than working a gym desk.
However, even that hasn't completely met the needs of the current enrollment deluge: I'm glad I got my requirements out of the way early on, because there are an absurd number of CS enrollments. They recently capped one of the major tracks (the BA) because there were simply too many students.
Edit: Undergraduate at UVA. Also, I think undergrads are possibly a better option than grad students: since we have actually taken the course, unlike most grad students.
This model requires two things - a very competent Director of Studies who herds the TAs, and is also requires sufficiently competent undergrads. One would think that at Yale this will be less of a problem, but at lesser institutions, where half of the incoming class has problems with mathematics at the level that is required there will be problems. And that is why the Director of Studies needs to be given some authority to throw out incapable TAs, or else there will be a case of blind leading the blind.
I was a TA as CS undergrad in Australia, as were many of my friends. I am obviously biased, but I think we were at least as good as half a grad student, if not a full one.
This is sort of interesting because the Math department at UChicago has had undergraduate TAs for a long time for at least the first year courses, and I believe a couple of the second year courses, but it seems only recently has the CS department done the same for its first year courses.
An additional thought on this is that not only my own time went into games, but my competitive spirit did too. After dropping games, my hunger for being competitive and becoming more skilled did go into computer science, and my rate of improvement and excitement shot up with it.
Playing videogames, I used to have thoughts like, "It'd be cool you could level up like this in the real world to become uber powerful by just training a lot like this". It turns out you can [in our industry].
I still do enjoy videogames a bit, but not with any sorts of long term thinking with it. It acts as the chill-out activity now.
Most of the mainstream tech companies that the other students are going after don't ask for GPA. The only company who did go out of their way to ask for it is Google. I don't list my GPA on my resume at all, and it's worked out pretty well (as long as you can fill the space with side projects or other experiences). I tend to apply solely to those companies and startups, so I definitely can't say anything about the whole field.
In addition to taking on more leadership roles in engineering projects, I began finding and taking on opportunities on the side that have a managerial element to them, for instance recruiting (sourcing, behavioral interviews, selling candidates, redesigning our interviewing processes), mentoring/coaching people, driving our company's internship program, etc. I found that I enjoyed that sort of nontechnical work. In particular, I liked thinking about how to grow other people and help them be effective.
I vaguely started thinking that I wanted to just switch into management, and I advertised that fact (mostly to managers). I wasn't too urgent about it, and an opportunity showed up [after a few months] and the management team thought of me first as someone who could be a good fit. Part of what made it a good fit was that the team was not 'on fire' or anything, so if I were to do a bad job or realize I didn't like management and thus needed to switch back, the company wouldn't be in a particularly bad situation.