Does it matter if the response is tone deaf or simply misguided? I am a bit nihilistic here, but in one week absolutely nobody will be talking about this. Are the affected individuals going to abandon instagram? Are people going to reduce their usage out of concern for the safety of their accounts? Nothing will happen, hence there is no need for actual humans writing a good, well intended response.
> in one week absolutely nobody will be talking about this.
In news media, sure. But in IT teams around the world people will be referring to this (the exploit opening stupidity) for years as how NOT to do things. :)
Everyone has a limit to how much bullshit they'll put up with. This could be the last straw for some people to finally quit Instagram. I quit Instagram, Facebook and all other Meta properties in 2025, after complaining about various problems for years. Other people may quit temporarily and then return, but any time they spend away from Instagram may give them experience that will help them quit permanently later.
> Does it matter if the response is tone deaf or simply misguided?
I agree with you that in a week nobody will be talking any more, but I'm pretty sure it's a GDPR data breach, and they can have some trouble within EU.
Yeah, they probably don't give a fu.. about EU, but if the response doesn't matter at all why did they spend time on it?
Interesting. Can you please elaborate more? Is it due to the combination of popular foundation (js) and the addition of strong typing? The runtime environment differences? The ease of integration with other languages / tools?
* Most applications run on the web nowadays. With TypeScript, you can write both the front end and the back end.
* TypeScript shares many syntactic-sugar ideas with Python, but it is also statically typed. Whether that is good or bad is a hot topic, but it gives you a lot of confidence through compile-time checks.
* Running Node for system tasks is as easy as running the Python interpreter. However, Python is still slightly ahead there.
I would like to say I agree with the proposition of your post and your arguments, but as a web dev please don't mix the state of the web with what the median web dev considers a good UI/UX. We don't make the Jira tickets and if you have worked in a corporate environment you know very well that arguments like "but the UX/accessibility" hold very very little value in the context of most decisions.
I know, don't shoot the messenger. Orders are orders. I was kind to bosses except for the four times I left summarily, with a few choice words, or not. They were grasping at straws, a massive ego trip, their boss's ass, or just a move from engineering to (mis)management.
But I ramble. Most stuff ain't worth arguing over.
I believe there is a middle ground here. Quick calls can definitely mess with your flow in your day to day work, but ruining multiple hours of “in the state” is either an overstatement or the author may be best suited for a different role that demands less communication.
On the other hand modern application of agile methodology is borderline ruinous for team productivity and most of the time exists for a specific stakeholder to feel less anxious rather than for a team member to raise a blocker or a dependency.
I work in a fairly big company and there is the notion of extracting people from their agile teams to have them work uninterrupted on large tech initiatives. Which is in my opinion a subtle way to signal that if you know what you want to build, agile methodology at least in the perverted way most companies apply it doesn’t work.
For people like him who probably already have enough money it’s probably just chasing the opportunity to work at the bedding edge of the field he loves. And maybe get to be the father of AGI.
Only issue is what happens when the company that owns the search and has a dominant share of the browser market flags your site with the good old "warning: potential risk ahead" when people try to reach it directly? And buries the "I know the risk let me through" deep in the browser settings. Advocate for different browsers? Google is pushing web attestation in one form or the other. I wish the future would look bleak, because right now it's looking blue, red, yellow and green and it's worse.
> Only issue is what happens when the company that owns the search and has a dominant share of the browser market flags your site with the good old "warning: potential risk ahead" when people try to reach it directly?
My target market is more technical then that so likely, nothing would change for me. Again, I recognize the impact of Google's dominance for some, but if the "attestation" isn't helpful and only hinders using services that people have come to rely on, there will be push back.
I also have been advocating for years for everyone in my circle to avoid using Chrome. A homogenized browser market is a risk, and Chrome is the new IE. I hope you are also a part of the effort to advocate for browser diversity.
Don't forget that other browsers also just use googles web good boy list and if you report false positives point you towards google and cover their ears.
You're allowed to exist on the web. The alternative is you are pushed out, your site is not indexed and google / chrome labels it as a security risk when people are trying to reach it directly. The mandate is clear: give up the data or give up the spot.
Is it expected to be hard? Meta currently employees a lot of people who are willing to be there for any number of reasons. If 2 years down the line Meta announces a hiring push offering the same or better compensation packages with the ones offering now I am sure people will flock to be there.
I think we should put behind us any discourse about companies risking their hiring pool by being hostile to the society or their own employees. People will definitely try to be hired at $company if it means six figure pay, doesn't matter the sector. We have plenty of examples for this.
Like any market, they will not be the only ones in it. People remember how you treat them - especially in times like these. They will be paying premium prices for a demoralized workforce. They put themselves in a real tough position here.
You're describing the deal from three years ago: pay premium for premium talent that's willing to go above and beyond. I'm telling you about the new deal they have: premium prices for mediocre demoralized talent. They're dead in the water. "Things change" is a platitude that cuts both ways.
I doubt AI can educate the masses simply because the masses would have to prompt it to educate them. Almost no one in my social circle knows, let alone understands Google’s recent work on pushing web attestation, or any other tech company’s power plays enforced on us. They are people blindly hitting accept all in every banner that pops up in their online journeys or use chat apps that blatantly spy on them.
They don’t know what they could have or why the new captcha is funny, thus they can never come up with a prompt that leads to them being educated on the matter. They would have to know that they don’t know and since there is no public discourse for such matters in their Facebook timelines, their thinly right wing digital news outlets and their Viber and what’s app chats they will never know that they don’t know.
reply