Show HN: A set of tools to distribute, collect and asses programming assignments - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/mapio/tristo-mietitore <comment><AUTHOR> Tristo mietitore is part of a suite of tools I wrote ([https://github.com/mapio/see-you](https://github.com/mapio/see-you), and [https://github.com/mapio/see-you-viewer](https://github.com/mapio/see-you- viewer)) that can be used to setup and run a programming class in which students get (almost) realtime automatic evaluations of their solutions to exercises.

Give a look at my today's lecture results [https://santini.di.unimi.it/tmp/labprog/laboratorio_01/resul...](https://santini.di.unimi.it/tmp/labprog/laboratorio_01/results/)

Using this software the teacher can have a valuable feedback on what exercises the students find easy, or difficult and, on the other hand, students become very competitive and get more productive than usual!

[The exercises texts, unfortunately in Italian only, are available here [https://github.com/mapio/labprog-infomus](https://github.com/mapio/labprog- infomus)]</comment>


Show HN: DeployJS – deploying single page applications as a service - <AUTHOR> http://www.deploy-js.com <comment><AUTHOR> Hey all! The (open source) package behind this all is [https://github.com/deployjs/deployjs- cli](https://github.com/deployjs/deployjs-cli), based on Ember CLI Deploy.

Coming from Ember & Angular, I am pretty sure the React experience isn't as good, looking forward to feedback!

</comment><comment><USER2> Aren't these things too personalized for each project/developer to be worth hardcoded patterns?

<comment><AUTHOR> They aren't hardcoded, they are generated per project - if you mean the deployment target, that is.

As for the actual environments (deploy to S3, or Azure Tables, or have index.html in Redis), yes, those are slightly more personalized. There's a list of options to choose from though that cover most cases: [http://ember- cli-deploy.com/plugins/](http://ember-cli-deploy.com/plugins/)</comment></comment>


Why Fred Wilson is wrong – files aren't dead - <AUTHOR> http://blog.zamzar.com/2015/01/02/why-fred-wilson-is-wrong-files-arent-dead/

<comment><USER2> The commoditization (sp?) of _your_ data is what the walled gardens are all about. So it's in the interest of companies like Apple, Google, Yahoo, Dropbox, Microsoft and so on to remove as many of your files from your control as they can get away and to package them in a non-file metaphor so they can sell you your own data back, either directly through access fees or indirectly by selling you advertising right along your own data.

I wished more people would see the endgame in situations like these: you're going to be paying through the nose for something that was already yours. Hosting your own data is trivial, the only case where I can see your data moving to the cloud is for backup purposes, off-site is better than on-site in case of disaster recovery.

So, have a good and long look at that firewall that protects you from the big bad cyber terrorists out there. That same firewall that stops the bad guys from coming in (and your ISP by blocking access to port 80 and a couple of others) are what keeps the peer-to-peer potential of the web from being realized.

So when VCs start trumpeting the 'end of files' make sure you realize what you're giving up.

<comment><USER3> Not worried about them selling me my own data, so much as they want to get rid of the concept of "buy once and own it forever". The Internet megacorps have become addicted to the idea of lifetime rental. Rent MS Office. Rent this movie. Rent this song. They're getting rid of the concept of software and media ownership for the sake of profit.

<comment><USER4> > Rent MS Office

You can buy MS office just the same as you can before, but consumers _want_ to rent it. I balk at shelling out hundreds and hundreds for a fully featured copy of Office which will be out of date by the next release. Paying £50 a year or so for an always up to date copy (with a bunch of extras like Skype credit) is a much more attractive alternative.

> Rent this movie

Yeah, because when has that ever been a thing?

> Rent this song

And when will this ever be a thing (Renting a song is not the same as renting access to a library of thousands of songs).

<comment><USER3> Oh you can now. But at what point will that stop? The concept of owning software is going away. In 5 years, you won't be able to buy Office or Photoshop. Just rent.

Same for movies and music. Yes, you've always been able to rent them. But in the future, you won't be able to own them forever.

<comment><USER5> > Same for movies and music. Yes, you've always been able to rent them. But in > the future, you won't be able to own them forever.

What makes you say that?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I can't imagine getting rid of files and going all cloud in my creative visual art projects - just one second of a 14-bit RAW YUV 4:4:4 5k movie takes gigabytes, even the latest M.2 PCIe SSDs have trouble playing it back realtime, not mentioning "slow" 1Gbit Internet connection at best, though definitely not for upload.

I have a feeling we are getting backwards from the efficiency point of view and am thinking this won't be a sustainable way forward - even in distributed/parallel algorithms you try to keep locality to improve performance and save resources, not to transfer everything back and forth via some middle man just because some business guy came up with some "genial" idea how to milk money.

Internet companies have a few chances to earn money, subscription being one of them, but massive push into useless cloud for their particular business cases like in the case of Adobe CC or Microsoft Office just leaves bad aftertaste. Also, Dropbox/GDrive don't allow incremental update API calls for 3rd party apps, which wastes precious upload bandwidth, and in addition end to end encryption fully controlled by user is not provided which would justify full uploads. All of this just screams of artificial constraints which do not benefit anyone, in the long term not even to those companies.

<comment> k-mcgrady >> "I can't imagine getting rid of files and going all cloud in my creative visual art projects - just one second of a 14-bit RAW YUV 4:4:4 5k movie takes gigabytes, even the latest M.2 PCIe SSDs have trouble playing it back realtime"

How many people have this or a similar problem though? I would guess that most people deal with word documents, jpegs, and mp3's on a daily basis and rarely encounter much else.

<comment><USER7> The "bitL problem" is part of a big industry, so a lot of people/companies have this problem. We can say that ~100% of the filmmakers should deal with this all the time.

Probably this is why YC funded companies such as [http://www.wireover.com/](http://www.wireover.com/)

<comment><USER6> Until transfer over Internet is faster than sending a harddrive via FedEx, there is not much hope.

You need 4k+ camera for acceptable quality 1080p final result, 16k+ camera for good 4k, 32k+ for 8k, and this just brings to their knees the most powerful Intel processors or storage devices, not mentioning network... :-(

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> The author starts by tearing down a straw-man. Fred Wilson wasn't predicting the end of "file systems". He was saying people go to the cloud to consume content (Netflix, Youtube, Spotify) and go to the cloud to create content (Google Drive, Office 360, Soundcloud, etc). And they don't need to concern themselves with files.

Fred Wilson is a smart guy, and knows that even iOS, Android, etc run on file systems.

I disagree files are dead too. But file systems is clearly not what he was talking about.

<comment><USER8> He does go on to admit this, more or less, in the article. So Fred Wilson remains right, and there's not much to see here, IMO.

<comment><USER3> I agree. But the headline is "Why Fred Wilson is wrong". And the main argument is not something he said.

<comment><AUTHOR> Author here - I tried to keep "on topic" and constrain myself to files, but you're right I did drift into filesystems too which probably wasn't helpful.

I think the core argument still holds though - which is that some people (Fred included ?) see files dying out as inevitable, whereas I'm not sure that's true (for the various reasons I cite).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Author here - would love to hear your comments, as I think this is an interesting area of debate, especially with digital obsolescence waiting to bite us all.

<comment><USER9> The main problem is that of data ownership (which implies, having the data local, and processing it locally).

Subsidiarily, having control over one own data sets, means that you can process them with various tools, and therefore that those data sets are independent from the tools. (I'm pointing the finger at you, iOS and Android).

How this data is refered to, organized, and stored is irrelevant.

The classic notions of file, hierachical directory, file systems are very useful and practical, because they promote full data set ownership and processability by user controled programs.

Other kinds of systems may provide other notions (such as that of catalogs of objects, in capability based operating systems). But as long as the user has control over his own data, and can process it orthogonaly with his own programs, it doesn't matter much how it's stored.

The problem indeed is when corporations lure users into giving up control of their data and processing with convenience. Users should be better educated.

[https://my.fsf.org/donate/](https://my.fsf.org/donate/)

Oh, and developer should also try to provide convenience while preserving user ownership and control.

(Unfortunately, it's very hard to do on platforms like iOS and Android, notably thru their app stores).

<comment><USER10> > The main problem is that of data ownership (which implies, having the data > local, and processing it locally).

I think that your concept of data ownership can be broken down into two related but independent concepts: access and control. Access means the ability to read; control means the ability to delete. Right now, if I upload content to almost any cloud provider I give access and control of my data to that provider: using G+ gives Google the ability to view every photo I upload, and to delete them all at a whim.

In a hypothetical cloud provider which enabled me to encrypt data locally, they would have no access to my data, but would still be able to delete it.

I would actually like the ability to grant control over a copy of my data without granting access to it; the two should be independent.

I've had a vague idea for some time of system which enabled me to store encrypted data and share the keys with my friends but not with the storage provider. There's been some interesting work in indexing encrypted data which could be pertinent to this, enabling a storage provider to offer search capability while still being unable to read the data itself.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I found it odd that he used Dropbox as the argument for the death of files. While Dropbox does enable apps to sync data relatively seamlessly, the vast majority of Dropbox users I've encountered use it to store individual files or folders of individual files.

<comment><USER2> I wrote this a while ago, and it's too long for a comment here anyway:

[http://jacquesmattheij.com/the+dropbox+endgame](http://jacquesmattheij.com/the+dropbox+endgame)

<comment><USER11> Certainly possible. Comes down to how much control content creators are willing to give-up, and what partnerships Dropbox forges with software developers. For example, will Adobe want a user's entire photo library synced with Dropbox? What's in it for them? How do they handle the transitional period where some users want that and others don't?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> As people have already pointed out, Fred Wilson is mostly talking about an abstraction layer so most users think about applications, which provide an interface layer to files they use.

I think that devices with a relatively small amount of SSD storage contribute to cloud and web service providers getting more control of people's data. Selective sync in services like OneCloud, Google Drive, and Dropbox allow users to just keep local copies of files they need in the near future. At least I do this.

</comment><comment><USER13> I think the author is missing the point of the original article. The point was not that files are going away. It's just that the concept of file is not that important for the majority in 2014. Non-tech people go to Spotify to listen to music, open Netflix to watch a movie, work with documents on Google Drive and our Grannies don't have to learn what a file is to use their phones (for something more than just calling us).

<comment><USER14> He didn't miss the point. He says exactly that later in the article. He just expands on the distinction a bit is all.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> The upward trends for downloading SoundCloud, Netflix and YouTube stuff are most likely due to their rise in popularity so not sure if it's relevant at all.</comment>


Firesheep developer: Facebook ignoring huge security problem - <AUTHOR> http://www.komonews.com/news/local/107360348.html

<comment><USER2> After having eric go through the trouble of reworking an older tool into a couple thousand lines of javascript and css and making sure every teenager got a copy, I think it's only rational that he be indignant that facebook hasn't held a press conference to thank him and changed over a fundamental part of their infrastructure in the last week and a half.</comment>


Google Code University - <AUTHOR> http://code.google.com/edu/courses.html

<comment><USER2> I don't get it. GCU's course list has been submitted here many times before.

<comment><USER3> I've never seen it before. Pretty cool stuff. But like everything else Google does (other than search) it seems 75% done.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> So I should learn all of these before I apply right?</comment>


Tech-Savvy Teens Remain Fans of Print Books - <AUTHOR> http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2014/dont-judge-a-book-by-its-cover-tech-savvy-teens-remain-fans-of-print-books.html <comment><USER2> Although not mentioned, the elephant in the room is that teens dropping the TV for the Internet. I have three cousins, all between 13 and 17, none watch any tv. Why watch something when you have no choice the the programming. YouTube killed the television star.

<comment><USER3> You know I'm 36 and I don't have TV either.

It's now 10 years since I live without any TV and I can't say I miss the constant ads (unfortunately no adblock on TV) and poor programs.</comment></comment>


Why I no longer contribute to StackOverflow - <AUTHOR> http://michael.richter.name/blogs/why-i-no-longer-contribute-to-stackoverflow <comment><USER2> The blog post contains a contradiction.

The author says many questions are simple and could be answered by a simple web search.

The author then complains that easy questions get very many upvotes.

But those upvotes come from people doing a simple web search.

That's one of the aims of StackExchange - to create a website that has good quality answers for questions, and to have those answers show high in search engine results.

EDIT: " This is not the way a community of mature users acts." Well, it is, because it clearly happens on any site that has mature users and voting. It happens on SE; it happens on HN; it happens on Reddit (event the sub-reddits that have older readers). It's probably not useful to think about what an ideal adult will do with vote buttons.

</comment><comment><USER3> If there is a pointing system there will be people who abuse it. You can't create a "perfect" pointing system (at least it never worked out). Look at impact factors in science, page rank or anything else.

Having said that I really like StackOverflow. I didn't contribute to them ever but whenever I google some difficult question it's really often that a StackOverflow link is the first or second result. It may not be perfect but it is really a step forward compared to tech forums.

 _Nvm, I fixed it_

 _I sent the solution in pm_

 _Download this script from megaupload_

Thread derailed / answers one or multiple different questions

etc.

 _edit:_

[http://xkcd.com/979/](http://xkcd.com/979/)

<comment><USER2> Further to the XKCD is when there is an answer to that post, saying JFGI.

<comment><USER4> Or simply "use the search function" in every thread that posted this question...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I don't do SO any more because of the attitude of the moderators. Time and time again, there is the 'This is not a suitable question and so we are closing it.' statement on questions.

If somebody has a query, they need an answer. There is an old saying "There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers." I evaluate 'This is not a suitable question' as a stupid answer.

At one point all the scores and accounts were lost due to poor backups, mine included. I never bothered to rejoin.

<comment><USER6> This isn't entirely accurate. The "not a suitable question" response is generally "This is not a suitable question _for Stack Overflow_ ".

Stack Overflow is unashamedly narrow in the questions it permits. If it's for a different topic, there are probably other Stack Exchange sites that cover that topic. If it's not a question _with a possible definitive answer_ , then it's just not suited to this format. Stack Overflow is _not_ the place to have technical discussions with smart people, despite the fact that your question will have a smart audience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This blog post is painfully stupid. His point #1 is that posting answers to trivial questions one could easily answer themselves with a Google search is detrimental to good pedagogy. He then goes on to claim that most of his points came from doing this very thing. What's the logic here? Behaviour x is bad, I do x on StackOverflow, therefore StackOverflow is bad? No, SO in itself is not the problem, the author of that post is the problem, and judging by his score, one of the biggest contributors to said problem.

His second point is on the poor reward system. There is no reward system, there are only fake Internet points (and maybe a few things like additional posting or moderation privileges, but nothing of any consequence). Any "reward" system you feel there to be is what your imagination makes of the fake Internet points. The gripe about the "cool kids table" just demonstrates a basic ignorance of supply and demand. The complaint that he's scored many points after being inactive on the site is just as inane; if your "work" has value to people even years after producing it, why should you not be "rewarded" for it?

Last is his prediction that his 14k reputation would be diminished by the "petty children" who make up the SO community, presumably after they read and became angry with his blog post. Well, his reputation is now over 19k, so... I suppose it's possible that his current score is actually the work of petty children up-voting his questions and answers out of spite for him and his prediction.

</comment><comment><USER8> SO heavily rewards:

\- asking questions that on the spike of industry interest;

\- answering those kind of questions good enough but very quick and then expanding the answer.

Example (please don't up-vote):

[http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24003918/does-swift- have-...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24003918/does-swift-have-access- modifiers)

</comment><comment><USER9> The post is over a year old. Previous discussion[0].

[0]: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6990570](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6990570)

</comment><comment><USER10> He does have a point about difficult/time consuming questions not being worth the effort but only if you are just looking to increase your SO score.

</comment><comment><USER11> it's a 'don't hate the player, hate the game' scenario. Sure, I've been on the receiving end of school corridor 'where's your tie?' antics but as a source for finding out how x can do y, it's the best we've got. Remember experts exchange?</comment>


What killed Smalltalk and could it kill Ruby? - <AUTHOR> http://litanyagainstfear.com/blog/2009/05/06/railsconf-2009-robert-martin-keynote/ <comment><USER2> I'm not familiar with Smalltalk, but I find it interesting that the author's concern for the future of Ruby code is that it is 'just too easy to make a mess'. This seems to be the common argument as to why Ruby is better than PHP.</comment>


Rlint: a static code analysis tool and linter for Ruby - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/yorickpeterse/rlint

<comment><AUTHOR> This Reddit comment explains a bit more about the project in case anybody is interested: [http://www.reddit.com/r/ruby/comments/133bsi/rlint_a_static_...](http://www.reddit.com/r/ruby/comments/133bsi/rlint_a_static_code_analysis_tool_and_linter_for/c70flpw)</comment>


Ask HN: Is Tor Browser unsafe? - <AUTHOR>

Upon posting a Tor Browser link on Facebook (https://www.torproject.org/download/download-easy.html), a Security Check prompted me that the link might be "unsafe" (http://i.imgur.com/QNLOCci.png).<p>Why would linking to the Tor Browser be considered "unsafe"? <comment><USER2> Because facebook doesn't want people using a browser that is hard to track.

</comment><comment><USER3> Facebook blocks plenty of legit things. To be honest, if you don't know what you are doing tor can be pretty unsafe.

Think about the general population who uses facebook. They wouldn't have a good time browsing the onions</comment>


Windows 10: Microsoft launches intrusive full-screen upgrade reminder - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/04/microsoft-windows-10-full-screen-upgrade-notification-pop-up-reminder <comment><USER2> My dad called me recently to tell me that while in the middle of using his computer, it rebooted and installed Windows 10 without giving him any way to cancel. I figured that he may have accidentally clicked to schedule the upgrade. But when I looked into it more, I discovered that Microsoft had changed the upgrade popup to default to install (my dad had become used to just clicking the X to close the window after numerous times).

This article mentions that this behavior is being replaced by the full-screen upgrade reminder, which I guess is an improvement. However, I have to admit that for me Microsoft's actions with Windows 10 have destroyed all the good will that they had earned through their open source efforts. Obviously Microsoft's actions with open source have some profit motive, but previously I had also believed that maybe the company had experienced a change of heart.

It's a shame because I'm sure the teams behind things like TypeScript and Visual Studio Code are great people who have nothing to do with this mess. But after growing up with the Microsoft of the late 90s and early 2000s, dealing with MSIE 6 and the antitrust lawsuits, and now seeing this stupid behavior with Windows 10, I feel that I just can't trust this company at all.

I understand that my reaction here may be overly emotional and unfair to the non-Windows divisions of MS that are doing good open source work. But I feel that the company as a whole will only take notice if they are punished as a whole. We in tech should consider this whenever we use MS products, whether they are free (in the temporarily free Windows 10 sense) or open source.

<comment><USER3> To be fair, if Microsoft had taken the same stance towards upgrading old IE users as they are with old Windows users, web development might have been a lot less annoying.

I still don't really get why people would not want to upgrade. As far as my experience goes, Windows 10 is superior to 7 and 8 in almost every conceivable way.

<comment><USER4> Apple manages to get quick and extensive uptake on their updates without resorting to this sort of nonsense. If it's really better then all you have to do is show that to people and they'll upgrade willingly.

<comment><USER5> Really? My iPhone bothers me _every single day_ about upgrading the iOS version. I should've never upgraded any major version since it is now quite unusable (iPhone 4S). But I get an intrusive and annoying popup every day when new upgrade comes. And it is the same thing: install now? no! schedule an upgrade maybe? no! stfu apple!

<comment><USER6> What you're saying is: you wish to stay with the original iOS 5.0? With hundreds of vulnerabilities unpatched?

<comment><USER7> I'm on iOS 7 and I get the same constant nag-screens. And I'd say if those hundreds of vulnerabilities are unpatched on iOS 7 too, that's a problem in itself.

<comment><USER6> That's the reality today. Everything is vulnerable. Your choice is to upgrade, stay vulnerable, or buy a different product.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's hard to believe that the same company putting out such awesome stuff as the fully open-source .NET Core is also displaying nagware popups with "OK" buttons that can easily be accidentally clicked. Talk about dark patterns...

Even more amusing: My wife has an older Dell Precision laptop that, according to Dell's own website (and my own experience trying to upgrade it) cannot be upgraded to Windows 10. Yet, the upgrade icon is in the system tray. I've warned my wife to be aware of this nagware popup and to be careful about accidentally accepting the upgrade.

To Microsoft: Remove your invasive, difficult-if-not-impossible-to-disable telemetry and data-gathering services and you will eliminate perhaps the biggest reason to remain unupgraded. Until then, this nagware screen just throws fuel on the fire.

<comment><USER9> The telemetry is what gets me about Windows 10... why do they need so damn much of it?

In days gone by it was a purely opt-in process for various applications at install time and their applications seem to have benefited from it (SQL, Visual Studio and so on) so why do they need to monitor the living daylights out of everything now? And why can it not just be opt-in?

I had been using Windows 7/8.1 for several years and decided to try 10... in the whole time I used 7/8.1 on my computer I had no issues at all. No crashes and everything just worked.

I had Windows 10 for 1 month and I had 3 blue screens. This was around Feb this year.

Uninstall!

Back to 8.1 with Stardock and cannot see any reason to upgrade.

I have "fixed" my neighbours's computers and my parents several times now with the Windows 10 stuff.

It's malware/adware plain and simple.

<comment><USER10> Compared to web apps which have this * 1000000? Have you seen how many xhr tracking calls a SaaS product does to often dozens of different services?

<comment><USER9> I use NoScript and UBlock so I see that $hit all the time unfortunately but I have come to expect that with cloud-related stuff but we are talking about a stand alone product here... not some cloud-based scheduling app.

It should be my call whether I want to "improve" their product.

<comment><USER10> Block it on your firewall then? What's the difference?

<comment><USER9> Really? Is this what you have to do nowadays in order to just use your computer?

You sound like this is acceptable to you but what about my parents and neighbours and so on... should I tweak their firewalls?

What is M$ changes the URLS/IPs!

I am not in a position to boycott them and I don't know what the answer is except to not use Windows 10 but I know I can't use Windows 8.1 forever.

<comment><USER11> You don't have to disable it to use your computer.

You have to disable it if you don't want to be tracked.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> These tactics kind of remind me of the Uber/Lyft vote in Austin: it reached the point where people didn't even care _what_ the companies wanted because the _way_ they were over-spamming and aggressively campaigning was leaving a poor taste in everyone's mouths.

At what point do people start auto-hating solely because of the _way_ Windows 10 is being advertised: not wanting to upgrade, not wanting to learn more but simply wanting to make it all stop?

<comment><USER13> I still receive those spammy emails. And Sendgrid is fully in bed with them.

Forwarded spam to Sendgrid and they said they will follow up with Uber (so apparently they are Uber's customer support at this point - great!)

The spamming practice never changed or stopped despite Sendgrid telling me they will send my email to them (!!) to unsubscribe me from their list, when I didn't even subscribe in the first place.

As I received more Uber spam I kept updating Sendgrid ticked (zendesk). Eventually some 2 weeks later they closed it as "resolved" and never replied to my emails again. I still get Uber Spam from Sendgrid. Stay away from that piece of shit as long as you can!! (both Uber and Sendgrid)

PS. As of Uber, I copied all my emails and forwarded them to FCC. In short telephone conversation I was told I'm not the only one and as they have reached over 1,000 complaints in short period of time, they will be investigating both into Uber practices and also Sendgrid as an accomplice to their alleged crime.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN- SPAM_Act_of_2003](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN-SPAM_Act_of_2003)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> The media is going far too easy on Microsoft. MS isn't just resorting to "adware tactics." This is adware.

<comment><USER15> We all go far too easy on companies doing shitty anti-customer things like this!

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> What the hell is wrong with Microsoft? It's like they have lost their mind with Windows 10.

<comment><USER17> Microsoft are determined to reduce fragmentation of the Windows install base and to get Windows 10 widely adopted, and will do whatever it takes to get there.

Their customers have few alternatives, and there's no future Windows versions, so Microsoft don't have to play fair.

<comment><USER18> The sheer aggression and fervor suggests ulterior motivations.

More so if you view them as a company that is normally less hostile (these days). Though I suspect these decisions are being made by a separate silo from the developer-friendly "new Microsoft" groups.

<comment><USER17> Why do they need an ulterior motive? They want a single, non-fragmented userbase running the latest software, so there's a simple platform for third- party developers and for Microsoft themselves. That's more than reason enough.

<comment><USER19> They can wish all they want for a unicorn; that doesn't mean they will get it. There will _always_ be different versions of Windows in use (the same is true for browsers).

Anybody that thinks that fragmentation will ever go away needs to spend some time in the real world, which doesn't conform to a nice and simple abstraction.

<comment><USER17> That was the case, but it won't be now. Microsoft are not making a Windows 11. Slowly, but surely, Windows 10 will win, and it is an evergreen operating system.

Businesses get a special deal, they get to use the "current build for business". But the future of Windows is like the versioning of Firefox and Chrome, not Internet Explorer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Contrary to others here I like the upgrade reminder:

\- it looks good

\- you can disable the update (the text in the left lower corner really is not hard to find)

\- standardizing to up-to-date OS is a good thing (if the product is good, which, imho, Win10 is)

\- it's not different to what my Mac or Chrome does

\- (telemetrie etc. ... well, compared to what google and facebook gather, this is peanuts (and can be disabled))

<comment><USER21> > (telemetrie etc. ... well, compared to what google and facebook gather, this > is peanuts (and can be disabled))

Only some can be disabled. The rest happens whether you want it to or not.

You can block it with a third party firewall though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> The screenshot their provide clearly shows there's a "Don't remind me again" option in the bottom corner. Put down the pitchforks.

<comment><USER23> That button actually installs Windows 10. So there is no need to remind you again. /joke

<comment><USER24> So, do we have evidence that we can actually joke about it and this is really not what that link does? That does sound very much like something they would do...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Meanwhile apple attempt to force me to upgrade by popping up my passcode screen when I unlock my phone to authorise an iOS upgrade to be performed overnight, and I don't see people complaining about that.

</comment><comment><USER26> This is quite pathetic. In their desperate attempt to reach the 1 Billion mark to remain relevant they've started to emulate malware tactics. They should have learned by now that if people wanted Windows 10 they would have "downgraded" to it by now.

</comment><comment><USER23> What are they going to do after the deadline? They'll still be dying for users to upgrade. No more nagging and a $95 charge, I doubt it.

<comment><USER27> ... hence this push. They want people to get on board while it's still possible to convince them.

<comment><USER24> Well, yeah, or they'll announce that due to customer feedback, they have decided to allow upgrading for free for some more time.

Or the nagware to upgrade for free will turn into nagware to upgrade for money.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> This won't happen if one has unchecked the "Give me recommended updates the same way I receive important updates" box, right?

<comment><USER29> Not sure, but I wouldn't count on it based on what I heard so far. I used a third party tool to remove any installers since I am far less confident than Microsoft that Windows 10 will run on my ancient, underpowered netbook.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Even though I don't approve these tactics I can predict that in a month's time when the free upgrade will no longer be available we'll be seeing the opposite news from people who "missed the free upgrade boat".

<comment><USER31> On that subject, wondering whether to upgrade mine, it seems if you upgrade to 10 and then revert to the old system, your license for 10 remains so you can upgrade again free anytime. I think.

<comment><USER30> thats true. if you update once and revert you can upgrade at any point later. I upgraded 6 PCs and none faced any issues I also have a PC on Insider builds and the changes in the update are very positive. Now I also have a colleague who upgraded his 2 year old laptop and his WiFi adaptor no longer works so he had to revert back. It its a gamble.</comment></comment></comment>


CVE-2017-0889: Paperclip ruby gem version 3.1.4 and later - <AUTHOR> https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2017-0889 <comment><AUTHOR> I'm sure I'm not the only one to get a warning from Github about this..</comment>


US drops 'largest non-nuclear bomb' in Afghanistan - <AUTHOR> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/gbu-43b-mother-of-all-bombs-massive-ordnance-air-blast-afghanistan-isis-a7682996.html <comment><USER2> The title is inaccurate. This is known as the Mother-of-all-bombs (MOAB unofficially, or GBU 43/B officially). For people who like comparisons, Russia tested the Father-of-all-Bombs in 2007, which is believed to be 4x more powerful. The FOAB is a thermobaric explosive that offers certain advantages over common explosives.

More info here: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_of_All_Bombs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_of_All_Bombs)

<comment><USER3> Perhaps should include "in the US' arsenal", or "ever dropped"

<comment><USER4> Or just " _their_ largest..."

I don't think it's so inaccurate it should be flagged. It's implicit. Why would the US be dropping Russia's bombs?

<comment><USER5> I seriously doubt that's why HN posters flagged this article.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> You know they're not going to say, oh there was also a village there with about only 250 mountain people living in it. Hey sorry buddy, you, your children, your goats all die today cause the man in the suit said so. Because they want to push this narrative of ISIS being the really bad guys that need to be killed so you guys be scared of them, we'll take them out for you. These politicians are incapable and uninterested in solving real problems so you take the easy way make deamons and keep fighting them -- war is good money, the politicians can look good fighting the bad guys while not doing anything really and the peoples minds are occupied by this conflict so they don't question you too much. I hate ISIS as much as the next guy, but that doesn't mean these guys are the good guys.

Just replace the name of Afghanistan with with Australia, America or any other country you can think of. Better yet, Saudi Arabia cause that will easily fit with some peoples world view. The first question that I get in my head is. How is this even legal? other than the fact that.. Yea We've got the money and the resources and you poor fella wont be able to hit us back in your dreams, ever. So take that!

I just get a feeling that somehow, non-english speaking, non-white people are not as equal as others and for some people the're doing a favor to them treating them as humans. This is not in the philosophical debaty sense, but in the real tactical sense. You want to throw a bomb at Hiroshima, yea kill a million people and end the war. Today lets drop bombs on some third world country. The great leader is always doing something worthy of praise. How is this different from some crazy north Korean dictator other than more savvy and politically correct propoganda on one side and not on the other. Just cause the US is a democracy this is valid? Cause they are so powerful they can do this and no one will question them... What if some other "Bad" guy did it. What if Putin is doing this kind of stuff. Killing of people is killing of people. This is like taking a shotgun to kill a rat. Sure you'll kill it but you're probably insane.

Just imagine the US as one person and Afghanistan as another person. The first guy goes like here dude, take a punch on the face, there was a fly sitting there I was just trying to kill it. Also, I'll keep punching you to kill flies whether you're sleeping or awake, whether you like it or not.

</comment><comment><USER7> What goes through the minds of the people at the Pentagon who release such info? Do they see this as some achievement?

<comment><USER8> What makes you think taking out ISIS is not an achievement?

<comment><USER9> They got all of ISIS with one bomb? Good job, promotions all around.

<comment><USER8> Semantics...

<comment><USER10> I'm ALL for taking out ISIS. But, with carpet bombing huge areas, the likelihood of unintended collateral damage is very high. Which brings us to the general attitude of the U.S. in war - "When it comes to innocent lives, only U.S. lives matter!!"

There's ZERO chance that the U.S. would tolerate collateral damage on it's own citizens in the name of getting ISIS, so why accept the possibility of non- American causalities?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Seems it was an isolated mountain tunnel system only inhabited by ISIS. No real objections to me from that.

<comment><USER12> 1\. "Only inhabited by ISIS" \- Really? Says who? There were no villages or civilians within the kill perimeter?

2\. What's the aftermath of a 21,000 pound munition on the environment and resources of the region. Do a google search for the impact of bombing in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc on local cancer rates.

Maybe you still don't object...but at least we can be clearer on the true impact of the bombing.

<comment><USER13> I would think it would be pretty easy to verify the absence of villages within a mile. And this isn't the type of weapon that causes cancer.

<comment><USER14> How would you verify it then? Do you have the coordinates for where the bomb dropped and recent maps of the area? A year ago we said that all ISIL soldiers had been removed from the area, verification seems tricky.

You don't think blowing bits of a building in a twenty mile radius would cause cancer?

<comment><USER15> Do you think letting ISIS operate freely in the region is better than the speculative notion that building debris will cause cancer someday? Do you think the US should merely inform the local governments and hope they will do something?

Regardless, I agree that the US should never get involved in the Middle East militarily. There is NO way to prevent civilian deaths, there is no way to prevent people on the Left from reducing ALL military action to American imperialism.

<comment><USER14> I didn't realize dropping this bomb or doing nothing were the only possible options, the whole 26 day campaign with two wounded US soldiers they did last year led me to believe there may be more options.

What reason is there for a war of aggression beyond imperialism?

<comment><USER13> I don't think it's reasonable to characterize the war in Afghanistan as "imperialism".

<comment><USER14> So what do you call a war who's aim is to install a friendly government and take over some amount of the nation's sovereignty?

<comment><USER13> I suppose I would call it that if that were the aim of the war.

<comment><USER14> Our goal was removing the Taliban, and taking the right to police residents of the country, particularly Bin Laden, without the need of jurisprudence. Set up a friendly government, take over sovereign right. What am I missing here?

<comment><USER13> Okay. What does that have to do with "war of aggression" and "imperialism". We weren't there on a lark.

<comment><USER14> Starting the war for those aims is a war of aggression, removing the Taliban is setting up a friendly government, removing their right to police is a removal of sovereignty.

Really confused what you're going on about, you keep saying I'm wrong but don't try to say why.

<comment><USER13> >Starting the war for those aims is a war of aggression...

No it isn't. That's not at all true.

<comment><USER14> Yeah, it is. There's millennia of precedent here and I'm not going any further to argue against "nuh-uh."

<comment><USER13> Precedent? This isn't a court case. I begin to see the problem here: You're misapplying a historical template. This isn't 19th Century British Empire - the US had an iron-clad _casus belli_ in Afghanistan, and to ignore that is to completely mischaracterize the situation.

<comment><USER14> "This isn't a court case, they had an iron-clad case for war." The only point of a cassus belli is to justify your war of aggression, if someone declares war on you the case for it is clear.

And no, the cassus belli was not iron-clad. There are only three legal ones under current law. Defense, defense of an ally, and a UN approval. First two don't work, Afghanistan hadn't declared any wars, and the third never happened.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Various sources are reporting a $16M unit cost for this bomb (excluding R&D costs). That's more than half the unit cost of the C-130 aircraft that delivers it.

<comment><USER17> It's also about 600 times as much as the cost for a Daisy Cutter, which it sorta replaces. (According to [1] those cost $27,000)

[1] [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/07/afghanistan.te...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/07/afghanistan.terrorism6)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I wonder what is the environmental impact of such a bomb.

<comment><USER12> The cancer rates in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc have skyrocketed in the past decades. Some believe it's tied to the relentless bombings:

[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/dec/14/iraq.military](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/dec/14/iraq.military)

<comment><USER19> Cancer screening has also skyrocketed and cancer is up in lots of places without active conflict.

I don't mean to minimize the actual destructive effects of war. But the evidence for cancer as being among them is far from conclusive.

<comment><USER12> Cancer screening skyrocketing doesn't account for a skyrocketing rate of cancer...it would simply capture more of the absolute number.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Towards the end of WW2, Britain's 617 Squadron ("Dambusters") used 10-ton Grand Slam bombs against massive concrete fortifications, such as U-boat pens, and structures, such as bridges, that could be destabilized by underground explosions. Because they were designed to penetrate concrete, they probably had more steel and less explosive than this bomb.

</comment><comment><USER10> Because, when it comes to civilian lives or collateral damage, only U.S. lives matter!!!

</comment><comment><USER8> OP why did you leave out the rest of the title?

> US drops 'largest non-nuclear bomb' in Afghanistan in area populated by Isis > members

Kind of leaving a very important detail out here.

<comment><USER21> Because for the US, all areas of Afghanistan bombed are populated by ISIS.</comment></comment>


AWS DevOps for free - <AUTHOR> I'm experienced DevOps engineer with strong SysAdmin background, actively participating in Open Source projects, I'm doing it for a living with great success, I'm doing it as a hobby with passion (hence Open Source involvement) and I take pride in my work. I've worked and have experience with wide range of technologies, including all sorts of virtualization technologies (AWS, XEN, containers, Open Stack), operating systems (RHEL, Ubuntu and FreeBSD), programming languages (Python, Shell and little bit of Go), automation (Ansible and Puppet), distributed systems (Elastic Search, Zookeeper, ETCD) and everything else around it (databases, monitoring, log gathering stacks).
Since I've decided to get AWS certified, I thought the best way to do it would be to dust off my AWS skills, and the best way to do that is to actually work with the technology. As my current work doesnt involve AWS I thought I'd offer some of my free time to any charity, non profit foundation or organization, or company fighting a good cause that is in need of part time DevOps resource to help them with their AWS projects/infrastructure, entirely for free. That's right, there's no catch here, its not a sales pitch, its simply a form of donation that would benefit both sides, I hope! :)
Obviously, I am more than happy to undergo any security checks, reveal my identity, provide references to my clients, Open Source projects and my publicly available DevOps related work, and will sign any paperwork required.
So, if you are such charity or know one, let me know (PM me or leave contact details in comments), let them know, spread the word (I'll be posting this on Hacker News and Reddit), and lets talk! <comment><AUTHOR> Feel free to leave your contact details in comments, or get in touch directly via devops4free -at- gmail -com- :)

<comment><USER2> Great initiative dude, keep up the good work, karma will award you for your good will. :))</comment></comment>


AWS services explained in one line each - <AUTHOR> https://adayinthelifeof.nl/2020/05/20/aws.html <comment><USER9> I made this list for my buddy a while back. It's meant to be more humorous than exactly correct

Route 53 - Holy shit! It's NSD

WAF - Holy shit! It's modsecurity

SES - Holy shit! It's Postfix

Inspector - Holy shit! It's OSSEC

GuardDuty - Holy shit! It's Snort

Data Pipeline - Holy shit! It's Cron and Bash

Athena - Holy shit! It's Prestodb

Glue - Holy shit! It's Hive Metastore and Spark

OpsWorks - Holy shit! It's Chef

VPC - Holy shit! It's a VLAN

Snowball - Holy shit! It's a truck full of hard drives

CloudWatch - Holy shit! It's syslogd

Neptune - Holy shit! It's Neo4j

ElastiCache - Holy shit! It's Redis

DynamoDB - Holy shit! It's MongoDB

S3 Glacier - Holy shit! It's DVD backup

EFS - Holy shit! It's NFS

Elastic Block Store - Holy shit! It's a SAN

Elastic Beanstalk - Holy shit! It's Apache Tomcat

EMR - Holy shit! It's Apache Hadoop

Elastic Cloud Compute - Holy shit! It's a virtual machine

Kinesis - Holy shit! It's Apache Kafka

QuickSight - Holy shit! It's Tableau

<comment><USER10> I'm not sure if the sarcastic tone is meant to imply AWS is just a rehash of existing tools, but that's obviously not the case.

A list of actual competing software/products/services would be pretty useful.

<comment><USER11> Especially since "EC2" is not just a VM. There are dozen services at least that come under EC2.

Also if you start trying to use DynamoDB like you would Mongo, you're going to be really upset. The use cases, design considerations and performance considerations of DynamoDB compared to Mongo is night and day.

<comment><USER12> Actually DynamoDB unlike MongoDB is truly a distributed store, and it actually is closer to Cassandra, Riak (RIP), Aerospike maybe some others.

<comment><USER11> Yes. But DynamoDB basically requires you to know your access patterns up front and isn't that flexible when it comes to querying - yes I've watched all of the reInvent videos about how to properly model your DDB tables.

That being said, if I needed the flexibility and wanted to stay in the AWS ecosystem, I would use DocumentDB with Mongo compatibility. It uses the same storage engine as Aurora, it's much more flexible and it doesn't have any of the well known downsides of Mongo.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Consider that your typical enterprise software project will use quite a lot of these, and that you pay for them all separately, and sometimes pay twice for them (e.g. S3 you pay for storage and for outbound bandwidth).

It's quite a tour de force how Amazon have taken "separation of concerns", applied it to web services and used it to create complex and difficult to understand or predict pricing to print money. Bravo.

<comment><USER14> Have you ever used AWS? There's a whole suite of tools they provide around pricing and budgeting.

> It's quite a tour de force how Amazon have taken "separation of concerns", > applied it to web services and used it to create complex and difficult to > understand or predict pricing to print money.

Is applying separation of concerns to web services really that bad? Look, if you're a small company with a simple product, you can just put your stuff on a few EC2 boxes and pay the monthly bill for that. At that size, your infra costs are going to be dwarfed by your other costs of doing business anyway. If you're a big business, you can literally pay people to keep track of this stuff. You've got the extra money, because now you don't employ data center architects, server engineers, etc. AWS is able to "print money" because it brings a lot of value to many businesses.

<comment><USER15> > There's a whole suite of tools they provide around pricing and budgeting.

It could be there are such tools. But they are impossible to find, setup or understand for someone who is not already an AWS expert. I recently got a $500 bill from AWS. It was impossible for me to find out which S3 buckets (or even specific files) caused these costs. I looked at this for half an hour and have used AWS before. They just don't tell you how to obtain this information. Or maybe they do, and it is so well hidden that it might as well not exist. This was a horrible user experience. As a customer, I want to know what I'm being charged for. The fact that AWS make it so difficult make me never want to use them again.

<comment><USER11> You can get cost breakdown on a more granular level by taking advantage of tagging. You can tag your resources logically and get a break down by tag.

The biggest mistake I see is that people jump into AWS whole hog without doing the research or if they are large enough, hiring someone who knows what they are doing.

[https://docs.aws.amazon.com/awsaccountbilling/latest/aboutv2...](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/awsaccountbilling/latest/aboutv2/cost- alloc-tags.html)

<comment><USER15> I don't understand why I even need to do manual things such as "tagging" (besides learning what that even means in AWS) to find out something as simple as why I'm being charged as much as I'm being charged. I'm sorry. It's inexcusable.

<comment><USER11> And large organizations would complain about why they couldn't group their resources like they want to. Having individual bucket costs would be of very little use for cost allocation and to tie back to something like a department. For instance, we tag every resource created with the same CloudFormation template with the same tag. We can get billing based on an "application" and all of its related resources.

Just like AWS is not understandable to someone new, I feel the modern front end ecosystem is royal cluster but yet and still thousands of people understand it after a 12 week boot camp.

<comment><USER15> You could have both. Let advanced users tag. But give less sophisticated users insight into what they're being charged for - without having to go through a 12 week boot camp.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Similar to [https://expeditedsecurity.com/aws-in-plain- english/](https://expeditedsecurity.com/aws-in-plain-english/)

Why does AWS use such convoluted language? Is it because they're dominant and it adds friction to moving to another provider?

<comment><USER17> I think it's because naming things is hard, that link proves it by coming up with worse names for almost everything they tried to rename, and often far, far worse.

Imagine the confusion if S3 were called "Amazon Unlimited FTP Server." That gets every word wrong, except that "Amazon" is merely redundant. It's not unlimited (having to pay for a thing is a limit), it's not using FTP, and it's a service, not a server.

Or if VPC was "Amazon Virtual Colocated Rack". A "colocated rack" means your computer in their datacenter. They actually have this service, it's called Direct Connect, because you can actually

Lambda does require you've got some vague notion of what lambda notation is. But "AWS App Scripts" suggests it's for mobile "apps", but it is not specific to those. And it suggests it's only for scripts, but you can run an entire application on Lambda just fine.

Or even DynamoDB. They recommend "Amazon NoSQL." They're not offering many NoSQL databases, just their proprietary one: DynamoDB. They have a service that offers many relational databases and that _is_ called Relational Database Service.

<comment><USER18> Oracle Cloud Infrastructure has been trying really hard to make sure things are named in as straightforward a way as possible. It was a very early decision pre-launch, and unsurprisingly not that hard to stick to. Marketing people didn't argue, either, but maybe that's a difference between the marketing team backgrounds? Enterprise company CIOs etc. don't want to have a translation guide when it comes to making purchasing decisions.

Some of the "WTF, how did they come up with that name" with AWS comes entirely down to the public name being the internal project name, e.g. Snowball. Various engineers and managers have facepalmed hard when marketing decided to go with the easiest option and use that name rather than come up with something meaningful.

<comment><USER19> It does help, there are some early decisions that were made pretty well (the first or second time, at least).

Oracle's EC2 is called "compute instances", S3 "object storage", SES "email delivery", Lambda "functions" etc.

And object storage could have been Casper, load balancer Flamingo, or data transfer Rhino.

<comment><USER11> And then I'm stuck with the 4th (?) place cloud provider with a horrible reputation. Choosing Oracle definitely would violate the CYA rule - "No one ever got fired for choosing $what_everyone_else_chooses". I would be safer choosing Azure or even GCP.

<comment><USER19> Er, I'd argue that aiming for safety and/or following the crowd aren't really the ingredients of a sound decision making process. On that basis no challenger would ever stand a chance.

<comment><USER11> That's not my problem. Everyone looks out for their own self interest. Let's say that OCI and AWS both statistically had the same uptime. If AWS went down for a day no one is going to question you as CTO for choosing AWS, besides you're in the same boat as everyone else. If Oracle Cloud went down, everyone is going to be questioning your decision.

But, the saying initially was about IBM. The CTOs in the 60s and 70s who chose IBM instead of one of their competitors in hindsight made a good decision. You can still buy hardware from IBM today that can run COBOL programs written thirty to forty years ago. All of IBMs competitors are long dead.

From a recruitment standpoint, you can easily find someone who knows or wants to learn AWS or Azure - Oracle Cloud - not so much.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> This is a 100 x better than their website. I've actively walked away from Amazon products because I could barely make out what it really was and if I could use it for the application at hand. Many thanks!

<comment><USER21> "Redshift: Warehousing. Store lots of data that can be processed through streams."

Not sure what that second sentence means...

<comment><USER20> The counterpart to stream processing is batch processing. With batch processing you run a job every hour or so and calculate a result, with stream processing you immediately calculate the result you want as the data is coming in.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> > Lightsail: Amazon's hosting provider (vps, dns, storage)

Doesn't feel like accurate description for Lightsail, nor a useful one. Maybe something like "simplified deployment and billing for some AWS resources, including VPS, databases, DNS, and load balancers"

(listing "storage" as something Lightsail does is kind of weird; of course, it does instance-attached block storage, you couldn't have a VPS without that. critically, it has no S3-like blob storage product, and I think that's what most people would associate the general word "storage" with, but maybe I'm wrong about that).

<comment><USER23> Sometimes I feel it is easier described by saying what its main competitor is.

Lightsail is basically AWS' version of Heroku and App Engine.

(i.e. a PAAS)

I wish Google would also do this. Many times on GCP's website or at Google Next you try to decipher what the product is that they are talking about, then you realise "ah, it is their version of S3, CloudFormation etc". If they just had said that at the start...

Of course, no company will do this, unfortunately.

<comment><USER24> Your statement made me wonder if someone else had done this, and sure enough I found something -- [https://www.cloudcomparisontool.com/](https://www.cloudcomparisontool.com/)

Look for "Object Storange" for instance and in the row will be links to all the competing services, so you could pretty easily do this to learn about competitors through the one you know... At least for the big players.

<comment><USER25> Isn't this wrong? At Google's Storage options, it says Google doesn't have Backup or Disaster Recovery options.

As long as I know, aren't those types into Cloud Storage - nearline and coldline object storage types?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> You are missing one of the really amazing services: Snowmobile ([https://aws.amazon.com/snowmobile/](https://aws.amazon.com/snowmobile/)). It is a real truck, that connects to your data center, copies up to 100 PB of data and drives back to one of the AWS data centers and dumps the data there...

<comment><USER27> "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a truck full of hard-drives driving down the highway" or however the saying goes. Latency is extremely long, but the bandwidth is crazy once it's arrive!

Edit: Original quote (seems I accidentally modernized it a bit):

> Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling > down the highway – Andrew Tanenbaum, 1981

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> There's an open guide[1] that's pretty useful. Amazon also publishes (at least some) documentation on Github[2].

[1] [https://github.com/open-guides/og-aws](https://github.com/open-guides/og- aws)

[2] [https://github.com/awsdocs](https://github.com/awsdocs)

</comment><comment><USER29> Here's the Google Cloud equivalent: [https://github.com/gregsramblings/google- cloud-4-words](https://github.com/gregsramblings/google-cloud-4-words)

<comment><USER25> I came here with the hopes of finding something similar to GCP. Thank you!

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> This can be a good cheat-sheet and no wonder there have been so many attempts at this(1).

Maybe we're better off making this as github page where users can send pull requests and add/rewrite to these.

(1) [https://netrixllc.com/blog/aws-services-in-simple- terms/](https://netrixllc.com/blog/aws-services-in-simple-terms/) (2) [https://expeditedsecurity.com/aws-in-plain- english/](https://expeditedsecurity.com/aws-in-plain-english/)

<comment><USER31> I'd prefer to see this integrated into the AWS UX.

For an external crowd-sourced version, I'd like to see something like this with a column for maturity, and whether it actually works.

The classic AWS services are rock-solid, and perfectly sufficient to build a business on. Many of the newer ones are.... much less so. A green checkmark, yellow question mark, and red land mine icon would go a long way towards letting me know what I should and shouldn't use.

<comment><USER32> > integrated into the AWS UX

Sure, it should be right in the headline of the service's "about" page. The fact that people need this at all is UX problem.

If people are reading your "about" page and nobody understands what the hell your thing does, maybe your marketing, faux-tech, word salad is pointless.

<comment><USER33> >The fact that people need this at all is UX problem.

Is it a UX problem or is it intentional deep branding to further promote vendor lock-in? This is one reason I've been opposed to AWS since the early phases--I don't want to learn all of their stupid branded vendor-specific nomenclature.

<comment><USER11> If you are any sort of real business, you already "locked in" to more than likely a dozen or more third party services. I worked at a company whose entire workflow was tightly integrated into Workday via APIs, not to mention SalesForce.

If you have ever worked in healthcare, the level of "lock-in" that they have to their EHR/EMR and various other third party services. would make you cry.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> > _Lightsail - Amazon's hosting provider (vps, dns, storage)_

> _Kinesis - Collect massive amount of data so you can do analytics (like > ELK?)_

Based on some of these that I'm already familiar with, I don't think I would rely on these descriptions for the ones I'm not already familiar with.

<comment><USER35> Couldn't agree more.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Some corrections: AWS Outposts: Run Amazon services in your own datacenter (not on your own hardware)

Storage Gateway: Virtual appliance to couple on-premises applications to storage in the cloud.

(So it's no iSCSI (block) to S3 (object) but Block(iSCSI to EBS), File (SMB/NFS/S3 to S3), or Tape (iSCSI VTL))

Addition:

VMware Cloud on AWS: Bare-metal, automatically deployed VMware clusters on AWS hardware.

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks. Fixed the first one. About storage gateway: as far as I could see (haven't tested it) you get a iscsi path which you can connect to from your own device. It uses S3 as the backend store for files from and to this device. Will try and take some more time to look into it (never used this myself)

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Similar to "Amazon Web Services In Plain English":

[https://expeditedsecurity.com/aws-in-plain- english](https://expeditedsecurity.com/aws-in-plain-english)

Seen on HN (2015): [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10202286](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10202286)

</comment><comment><USER38> I see that AWS IoT Greengrass is missing. [https://aws.amazon.com/greengrass/](https://aws.amazon.com/greengrass/)

I may be wrong but from what I understood, it's more or less a way to manage AWS Lambda functions (cgi-bin scripts), Docker, and a MQTT client connected to AWS on your GNU/Linux devices (raspbian on a raspberry pi for example, or a x86 pc).

However you still need Ansible or similar to manage the device so the actual value is kinda low because if you have a setup to manage the device, it's not much more work to manage docker and a mqtt client yourself. About running AWS Lambda functions on a the device, I think it makes sense for AWS to check the box "IoT edge computing with AWS Lambda" but unless you have a huge codebase in AWS lambda, it seems to be a bad idea.

In one sentence : "vendor locked half baked IoT platform".

<comment><AUTHOR> The whole lot of IOT services are pretty confusing. Mostly because I have no experience with IOT/MQTT in general and it took a few days to actually figure out how to create and connect things (emulated). I actually bought some IOT devices (lamps, sensors) to try it out, but this turned out to be vendor- locked without any possibilities for MQTT. I reckon somebody with more experience in the IOT field could provide more insight in these things.

<comment> jon-wood I'll give it a go:

IoT Core: Managed MQTT broker, and state management for devices with intermittent connectivity

FreeRTOS: RTOS operating system for microcontrollers to automatically connect to IOT-Core or greengrass.

IoT 1-Click: Manage 1-click buttons that can be connected to other systems like Lambda

IoT Analytics: Clean up and save messages from topics into a data-store for analytics

IoT Device Defender: Automated detection of misbehaving devices

IoT Device Management: Firmware release management

IoT Events: Visually build automation rules based on device data

IoT Greengrass: Run Lambda functions on remote devices, and manage release of new versions.

IoT SiteWise: Turnkey industrial automation platform

IoT Things Graph: Represent IoT devices in terms of connectivity - for example a door sensors connects to a hub, which has an internet connection.

And one bonus definition:

AWS Sumerian - A 3D game engine integrated with AWS services.

<comment><USER39> This is a great list. I'd add a few things:

IoT Greengrass - Edge computing that can run Lambda functions and ML models on prem.

IoT Core - Managed MQTT broker, state management and rules engine for devices with intermittent connectivity

I'm not sure I'd call SiteWise a "automation platform" I think it's more of a data collection and visualization platform?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> It's sad that this is so necessary, but I'm still confused by the very first two lines of this list.

> EC2 Virtual Private Servers > Lightsail Amazon's hosting provider (vps, dns, > storage)

Both of these are VPS? EC2 has no storage?

Absolutely not a criticism of your list, more a comment on how baffling AWS is these days. I stopped using AWS once they hit the point where I couldn't reasonably be expected to remember what all the three letter acronyms were. I still occasionally have to use it for S3, Route53 and IAM - but every time I log into the console I find that they've removed them from my "pinned" services in the menu bar and I have to pin them again. Even this tiny detail is enough to make me not want to have to deal with that * 1000 by taking up more of the services.

<comment><USER41> I think pinned items are on a browser basis - because I logged into another account on the same browser and it had the same pins as my other account, without me setting them.

<comment><USER40> I only use Safari for any actual browsing, I've not noticed this happening, just that whatever I pin is gone next time I log in. Maybe it's short lived cookie.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Reminded me of these similar threads I read a while earlier:

Azure: [https://web.archive.org/web/20190321175020/https://www.exped...](https://web.archive.org/web/20190321175020/https://www.expeditedssl.com/azure- in-plain-english)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13442597](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13442597)

AWS: [https://expeditedsecurity.com/aws-in-plain- english/](https://expeditedsecurity.com/aws-in-plain-english/)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10202286](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10202286)

<comment><USER43> Any update to the Azure list anyone has seen? 2017 is a long time ago.

<comment><USER44> New Azure services tend to have names like "Cognitive Services Speech" or "Cognitive Services Image Recognition" or "Azure Stateful Functions"... There's not a lot to riff on.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Sometimes it pays to be boring. One of the hardest parts of using AWS is learning all their silly names for everything. I know it's tempting to be cute when naming things, but everyone else wishes you would just be clear and descriptive. I've seen this play out at startups that love to name servers after galaxies or cartoon characters. It's all fine until your new employee onboarding guide comes with a massive memorization test before you can be productive. Yes, db-master and db-slave are way more boring names than Saturn and Uranus, but do everyone a favor and express your creativity somewhere else.

<comment><USER46> I worked at a company that had names for all the conference and meeting rooms based on various science fiction names and other "nerdy" stuff instead of some sort of building-floor-room_number scheme. It was neat at first, but quickly became agonizing trying to remember what _building_ a conference room was in much less where in that building. It added an extra few minutes to every meeting for me where I had to either look it up on the internal wiki or go ask someone at the front desk where I was supposed to go or make sure at least one person nearby attending the meeting already knew where we were going. It took months to get the hang of for even the more routine rooms.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> Very nice!

I was surprised by 2 descriptions:

Opsworks: I thought it was using Chef under the hood. Is it really Ansible?

CloudWatch: it's actually so much more than logging, as it also provides timeseries, alerting and even scheduling. Not sure how to summarize this, though.

<comment><USER48> Everything I've seen about OpsWorks is chef/puppet based. Ansible is not mentioned in the opsworks documentation at all. I think that's just wrong.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> a bit tangential: I think a lot of AWS customers would actually benefit by hosting on their own machines in a data-center. The tools (and hardware) out there have become so good that there's minimal benefit to hosting on AWS for more than 4x the price. A lot of DCs also accept shipments so that even makes things easier. The trouble is that we've been conditioned, as an industry, not to think for ourselves or dare question certain accepted norms/practices. AWS/Azure/GCloud is great for some but I suspect it's for a much smaller subset that we want to accept.

<comment><USER50> That's what we (mid/small-sized company) with couple dozen machines. It is probably 10% the cost of AWS - but you do need to have at least one person that can handle the servers when/if there are issues.

That one person only needs to devote maybe 2-5% of their time to it (once the systems are setup), so it's still a net gain.

<comment><USER51> Yeah, we use a mix of AWS and self hosted machines. We've had up to 40 servers with this method and devoted similarly trivial amounts of time to it. If you want it to be long term sustainable, you probably want at least 2 people that can handle it, so they can go on vacation.

If your goal is to be the next billion dollar company, it probably doesn't matter that much. But if you're self-funding and need a sustainable business model from the beginning, there's a huge growth phase (mid-sized) where the cost savings from doing this sort of thing can be large enough to be worthwhile.

I'm not sure why so many developers seem afraid of hardware. Back in the early 2000s it definitely felt more commonplace for developers to be able to deal with it. Maybe it's because we grew up having to deal with our own in the form of desktops. Nowadays it seems like lots of people just use a macbook. And that's their only exposure to hardware

<comment><USER11> _If you want it to be long term sustainable, you probably want at least 2 people that can handle it, so they can go on vacation._

The fully allocated cost of two ops people in my neck of the woods is a little over $300K. That can buy a lot from AWS.

 _I 'm not sure why so many developers seem afraid of hardware_

I want to _develop_. Yes I've been around long before AWS was a thing, I had to manage servers, load balancers, and even an elevated "server" room with a SAN with whopping 3TBs of storage back in the early 2000s. But in my old age, my time is valuable. I've done the on call thing before where our database server went down in the middle of the night when the night operations crew was working.

I won't work for a company that is not on a cloud provider and doesn't have a dedicated ops team.

But, if you are a small company. Why are you spending a lot on AWS? Two EC2 instances behind a load balancer and a hosted database shouldn't cost you over $500 a month and that includes a decent amount of traffic and miscellaneous other charges. Heck if you are that small, just use Lightsail and when you grow, peer your Lightsail VPC that you probably didn't know existed to a real VPC.

<comment><USER50> ...but they aren't fully allocated. They're allocated at about 5% - <USER2> less.

I manage a couple dozen servers and it's a small minority of my job.

<comment><USER52> What are those two ops-focused folks doing with the other 95% of their time? Are we talking about two developers who are willing to spend 5-10% time on non-promotable server chores--while yet being on the hook in the event of a hardware disaster--or people who consider operations their vocation and aren't interested in software development?

I agree that it's possible to do that kind of work on a 5-10% basis, but it requires just the right set of circumstances for sustainability. Like, maybe it is your own startup or family business, or one is not particular good at sysop'ing and wants to learn more.

<comment><USER11> When I first started working at my current company, my manager wanted a highly available SFTP solution that would automatically sync with S3. I designed a relatively straightforward solution on paper involving a network load balancer, autoscaling group [1] with two instances and a SMB share ([https://docs.aws.amazon.com/storagegateway/latest/userguide/...](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/storagegateway/latest/userguide/CreatingAnSMBFileShare.html)) and gave him an estimated cost.

He said okay go for it.

But then I said, or we can just throw some money at AWS and use the more expensive (on paper excluding babysitting time), AWS SFTP service. I gave him both solutions as a test to see where his head was at.

He chose AWS SFTP. We are a small high margin B2B company and sign long term contracts that are worth yearly in the six figures. We are very much focused on outsourcing the "undifferentiated heavy lifting" so we can focus on development and sales.

[1] Autoscaling would not have been used to scale on demand. We set a min/max of two so if one server fails a health check, another instance will be brought up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> Sometimes I sit back and wonder if Amazon makes these names so complicated on purpose. Hmm, now that I think about it more, maybe they had to come up with these weird names so they could trademark them?

</comment><comment><USER54> Although AWS Braket is just in preview it's pretty safe to say it is a Quantum Computer as a Service bundled with a framework to write you algorithm in (a la IBM Q and qiskit). The nice thing about it is that you have a choice between three hardware vendor, all featuring different architectures giving the ability to test superconducting, ion trap and annealing systems from the same place.

I have no affiliation with this other than being a Physics/CS graduate with only one Quantum Computing course under my belt.

</comment><comment><USER55> > Kinesis Collect massive amount of data so you can do analytics (like ELK?)

I would say a better description is something like "pay per use Kafka".

</comment><comment><USER56> Is there something similar for Apache projects?

<comment><USER57> Ha good luck explaining in one sentance the difference between Flume, Spark, Storm, NiFi, Camel, Apex, Flink, Beam.....

<comment><USER58> I'll try. Heres what u should know from these:

Fast, Reliable, Stream Processing - <USER3>

Data Science on Big Data - <USER4>

Reliable Distributed Log Aggregation - <USER5>

Low Code Data Flows w/ GUI - <USER6>

Zapier for Enterprise Software - <USER7>

A Single API for Batch and Stream Jobs. Execute on Spark, Flink, managed services etc. - <USER8>

Never heard of anyone use Apex over Flink. Storm community has branched off into Flink, Spark Streaming, Heron and Cloud Dataflow.

Explaining Spark vs Flink is quite hard tho.

<comment><USER59> From the little I know,

Spark was built as a Batch job solution. Flink was built as a Streaming solution. Since Spark needed to adapt, they leveraged micro-batching to operate as a streaming solution.

They are very similar today. _Maybe_ some remnants of the original design make Spark "slightly less appropriate" for pure streaming usecases, or possibly less able to iterate on future features/optimizations, but so-far that line of reasoning has been only speculation.

<comment><USER58> So Flink differentiates in stream processing in two major ways:

\- Flink guarantees exactly once stream processing through a barrier checkpointing system.

\- Flink has very detailed APIs for handling state and doing stateful stream processing.

Additionally, Flink has one of the most active communities in the Apache Software Foundation: [https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache- softwar...](https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-software- foundation-announces55)

In situations where you want to create a streaming application with persistent state you might choose Flink over spark streaming.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> _" Large & scalable non-relational database (but not really a NoSQL system)"_

 _triggered_

<comment><USER61> Ha, that caught my eye too. I'd say DynamoDb is kind of the poster child of the whole NoSQL thing.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, you are right. I was thinking more about it not being a document-store like Mongo or couchdb. But I agree it's NoSQL.. will update

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> Love it! Does anyone know if something similar for competitors? More specifically azure?

<comment><USER63> I had this one bookmarked, I think it's originally from 2017.

[https://web.archive.org/web/20190508145128/https://www.exped...](https://web.archive.org/web/20190508145128/https://www.expeditedssl.com/azure- in-plain-english)

<comment><USER62> Awesome!!!!!!! Thank you

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> Cool list!

But I would just name "Lightsail" "Amazon's digital ocean"

</comment><comment><USER65> Useful and interesting but some of them are either blank or, well:

> After reading it over and over again, i still have no idea what it does.

> Some quantum thing. It's in preview so I have no idea what it is.

> in preview so no idea.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes.. some of them I have absolutely no clue on what it does. They might serve some edgecase specific for that domain. There are a few services in preview which I cannot see for myself what it does.

I will try to update and correct services as soon as I have more info (or somebody can provide it to me)

<comment><USER66> Hey, dev here for Robomaker. Most relevant line from our overview page is probably "AWS RoboMaker is the most complete cloud solution for robotic developers to simulate, test and securely deploy robotic applications at scale."

The main feature is the on-demand cloud hosted version of the robotics simulator gazebo ( [http://gazebosim.org/](http://gazebosim.org/) ) that allows you to run your robot's code in a 3d physics environment. You can then take that tested/verified code and deploy it over the air via our fleet management features to your actual robot.

<comment><AUTHOR> THanks.. will update this

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER67> > Amazon Connect AWS version of ZenDesk

Wrong. That should be "Amazon's Cloud-based Contact Center"

> Pinpoint Create transactional emails based on templates.

Pinpoint can do SMS and voice too.

<comment><AUTHOR> Isn't that what ZenDesk is too?

Yes, pinpoint can do more.. Will update

<comment><USER68> ZenDesk is a CRM/ticketing system. Amazon Connect integrates with ZenDesk CRM.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> I built this [https://moca.computingarchitectures.com/en/vendors/aws/](https://moca.computingarchitectures.com/en/vendors/aws/)

as well as visual representation [https://moca.computingarchitectures.com/en/~hello- world/](https://moca.computingarchitectures.com/en/~hello-world/)

</comment><comment><USER70> I'll bite. At the very least I would describe S3 as an object store (object semantics) and EFS as POSIX file semantics with an NFS interface.

</comment><comment><USER71> This is really well done! I might tweak the Lambda one a little to mention what they run in response to or to even drop in the serverless buzzword.

</comment><comment><USER72> Is there a list of all the AWS services and what the counterpart it may be for a self hosted open source solution?

Seems many of the actual services may have one.

</comment><comment><USER73> It seems there is a a lot of back and forth on this thread about AWS good/bad. On the one side, people seem offended people use AWS at all Which common it serves a need and generally does what it's supposed to. On the other side it's like Stockholm syndrome, do people seriously believe AWS is there for you and hasn't trapped you in dependency of their services?

</comment><comment><USER74> Most sound about right except for Global Accelerator, which isn't a way to run your apps on edges, it's a way to route all your network traffic through the AWS edges. Make it a bit more reliable and faster, and has really cool load balancing and routing options.

</comment><comment><USER75> Someone do this for Oracle and SAP's products list too please. It's a mess of marketing speak and no one has a clue. With SAP you dont even get to see the product in most cases. It's just marketing you have to make your buying decision on.

</comment><comment><USER76> That's kinda useful I guess? But I still don't know whether I need EC2 or Elastic Beanstalk. And do I need still need Batch if I have one of the other two? Still, it's much clearer than Amazon's own pages about this.

<comment><USER77> Agreed, a concise description of "why" and "when" would be more useful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER78> It'd be nice to include "year introduced" data as well. My AWS knowledge peaked sometime in 2012 after DynamoDB came out. I know a bit about newer things (like Lambda) but there's a lot of catching up to do...

</comment><comment><USER79> Tested Sumerian and it's a barebones 3D web tool (modeled after Unity but more akin to ThreeJS editor) that can be controlled via script by other services. One example is being able to do some tasks like in-browser AR.

</comment><comment><USER80> Soon we will all be back to hosting everything ourselves.

The complexity of pricing and so much different technology, which we absolutely don't really need, will eventually lead to we start hosting things ourselves.

Oh yeah, and privacy of course :)

</comment><comment><USER81> Thank you so much :-). I have no ideia about some services, even reading the doc.

</comment><comment><USER82> The title should have been a computer science introduction to marketing terms

</comment><comment><USER83> Useful, but it contains factual errors: >S3 File storage. Not directly used for mounting, but you can directly download files from HTTP.

You most certainly can mount S3 buckets, and its done frequently in data pipelines throughout the industry[0].

>S3 Glacier Low cost storage system for backups and archives and such

Sure but it would be good to include why there is a tradeoff in price, why is it low cost? For Glacier its intention is to provide storage, but rarely fetch data, as it is very slow.

[0] [https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse](https://github.com/s3fs- fuse/s3fs-fuse)

<comment><USER84> How is that a factual error? It didn't say that mounting was impossible, just that it isn't directly used for mounting. How did you conclude that it's done frequently throughout the industry? What percentage of S3 customers do you think does this? If I would have to guess I'd say less than 1%. But I am happy to learn I am wrong.

<comment><USER85> You are totally right, and your explanation is perfect. No need to bother.

You could also mount gmail accounts as a filesystem.

<comment><USER83> I beg to differ.

I have already argumented against it, and provided evidence for my statement [0].

My argument is logically airtight.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER86> > S3: File storage. Not directly used for mounting, but you can directly > download files from HTTP.

S3 is an object store, not a file system.

</comment><comment><USER87> Excellent! We need this for esoterically named Javascript frameworks too.

</comment><comment><USER88> mediaconnect - to transport live video mediapackage - package live/on demand video content mediastore - store video assets for live/on demand video content

</comment><comment><USER89> Does anybody know if we have something similar for Azure?

</comment><comment><USER90> Really loved Amazon Braket's explanation

</comment><comment><USER91> Route 53 is too generalized

</comment><comment><USER92> somebody please make something like this for azure please

</comment><comment><USER93> Would be really awesome if each row also included the open source equivalents.

</comment><comment><USER94> Where's EBS?

<comment><AUTHOR> EBS is actually part of the EC2 service. It's not listed explicitly in the console service menu. So I did not add it. (same goes with loadbalancing, security groups etc)

<comment><USER94> Aha, I see.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER95> Nice

</comment><comment><USER96> basically, AWS is an ESB sold for parts. understanding this, is the first step in building a competing service.

</comment><comment><USER97> This is useful.

</comment><comment><USER98> Ah I was hoping this was going to pithy/comedic.

</comment><comment><USER99> All AWS services explained in one line:

Overpriced, unnecessary or both.

</comment><comment><USER100> Out of curiosity, as a solo developer, what would it take me to do on premisis server at home?

I mean in terms of hardware and software stack.

</comment><comment><USER101> AWS sounds like a good idea until you start calculating the cost of the setup with any kind of clustering and moderate data traffic.

<comment> pg-gadfly The compute is really a negligible part and one that you can severely effect.

Outbound bandwidth is the real killer, going at ~$90/TB

<comment><USER102> So you give them your data for free then you need to pay the ransom money to get it back?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER103> > VPC Create your own VPCs within AWS

Not particularly helpful if you have no idea what a VPC is! Of course it takes 2 seconds to search this for yourself, but still.

<comment><USER104> Isn't VPC a wel known term? I guess the author just included that definition to make the list complete.

<comment><AUTHOR> I've updated it to "virtual private network" instead.

<comment><USER103> I think just expanding it would be more helpful. I had seen the term before and knew exactly what a Virtual Private Cloud was once being reminded what VPC actually stood for.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER105> How to waste money in just one line each...

Simplifying AWS like this only serves to normalize wasteful spending on the "cloud".

This works when the economy is great....not so much when businesses are looking to trim costs.

<comment><USER11> Yes I'm sure you know every single vertical and business model well enough to know whether it's a "waste of money".

</comment></comment><comment><USER106> Well this was really useful.

I didn't knew cloudfront was an Amazon product. I wonder what cloudflare people think of that.

<comment><USER107> > _I wonder what cloudflare people think of that._

Because of the name? Cloudfront is older then Cloudflare afaik.

<comment><USER106> Didn't knew that.

Given the discussion few months back, I thought maybe this was one of those lets-copy-our-costumers-business we-already-know-everthing-he-does things.</comment></comment></comment>