I've lost count how many "cloud-native application deployed on Azure" at my job have turned out to be this. Installed by random contractors who have since left of course.
It's easy to deploy grief and call it a day if you aren't the one cleaning up afterwards. On the other hand the blaming mentality never led anyone anywhere so I'm not really sure how one is to address this.
My guess would be the cause is unreasonable corporate pressure for productivity, so if this is the case the natural answer would be to give people more time to think about architecture, create incentives for group studies and laboratories and remove incentives that lead to the so called "résumé-driven development"
Every time I hear a story of "horrible abuses in UK where people get arrested for talking on the internet" it turns our they intimidated or scammed or bullied someone.
99.9% of the time I see this claim, it's right-wing Americans or bots trying to make the UK look like a hell-hole. They completely ignore the context surrounding it, and simply prefer to believe the claim.
No point even arguing with them, it's a lost cause.
> 99.9% of the time I see this claim, it's right-wing Americans or bots trying to make the UK look like a hell-hole.
Given you got the nationality wrong 2/3 times in this comment section and they weren't bot accounts either, you might want to adjust that number.
You got the political lean wrong at least once as well. This might be the time to adjust your worldview. Empirically it doesn't seem to mesh with reality.
I've seen the posts myself now and there wasn't any intimidation.
What seems to happen on these stories that anything that might be construed as a threat will be, to pretend there isn't a problem with the speech and online laws in the UK.
It very tiring to have people like those on this thread pretend there isn't a huge problem.
This is very much true. I have met some if the coolest people in CCCs but also some of the worst people. I miss the atmosphere but I don't miss the selfimportant assholes everywhere.
I just wish I could get Floral Mate here, the Tschunk is not the same without it.
ETA: it was actually the Russian invasion of Ukraine that broke my perception of German people and thus CCC for me. But that's a different story.
> it was actually the Russian invasion of Ukraine that broke my perception of German people and thus CCC for me.
Wdym?
I'm German and kinda wanna know.
My personal view on the matter is that Germany should not have - in any way - participated. There was no treatment with Ukraine. The Russian invasion was unconscionable, but ultimately doesn't matter if you hadn't entered into a defense contract before the event.
From my perspective this whole thing is like someone not paying their insurance premium and then having a random assortment of insurers offer options to them. Simply because theyre geographically close.
And it's not like the massive amount of money being thrown at them is actually being appreciated either. Yes I know they're supposedly only borrowing the money, but anyone with half a brain knows that Ukraine will default as soon as the war ends, effectively wiping the slate.
I hold the same position for any other initiatives that the German politicians throw money around for outside of its own borders
We don‘t support Ukraine because we‘re very good and selfless people. We support Ukraine (still too little!) because we don‘t want the Red Army at the Rhine.
That's a fair point, but kinda moot from my perspective considering the currently polling party results.
Both the Left part and AFD are essentially just going to sell Germany out to Russia, and the remaining parties are seemingly too inept to change the trajectory.
Most Europeans think we aren't doing nearly enough to support Ukraine, and here you are counting your pennies. Wow. One of the worst things I've read all week.
I wholeheartedly support actually finally starting proper support instead of this slow trickle.
Isn't Ukraine basically just bearing the brunt of whatever would've happened to Germany if Ukraine didn't happen to be in the way. If you think this is only about Ukraine you're wrong.
It sounds insanely entitled to just talk about "money", you know how many Ukrainians have died and suffered so you can safely sit in Germany on your nice computer and whine about money?
Looking at Bucha and all the other atrocities Russians did and saying "but what about my monies" is not a view I can relate to at all. You feel alien and inhuman to me. There is nothing to gain in us interacting at all.
Ukraine did notably send its army into Iraq, as one of its overtures towards NATO. There have been plenty of attempts from Ukraine to get closer and participate in the collective security arrangement.
Frankly unfair for a German to judge Ukraine for not being part of the western alliance, when it was largely Germany in the first place that was preventing it from joining.
Completely made up BS, as so often in those discussions.
NATO is the USA. If they actually wanted to allow Ukraine to join, they could've.
And Ukraine never even attempted to join until AFTER the invasion in 22.
And it was not Germany in particular that spoke out against the idea of Ukraine joining NATO back in 2008. Basically every member said it would unnecessarily aggrevate Russia. Blaming that on Germany is disingenuous to a stupid level.
> I hold the same position for any other initiatives that the German politicians throw money around for outside of its own borders
Before the Russian invasion in 2022 Germany imported on average US$25 billions worth of goods from Russia each year. Dominated by crude oil and natural gas.
At the time it was seen as good business, because the prices were good and German economy enjoyed the benefit of cheap energy for decades. But Putin was just waiting for the real payment and the real payment is Ukraine.
It would be unfair to blame it only on Germany, because whole Europe was importing a lot of fossil fuels from Russia and financing Russian economy and Russian army, but Germany had the biggest share and biggest hope that the invasion will be quickly over.
I have absolutely no connection to CCC whatsoever and yet whenever I wanted to go to a CCC event (3 Camps and 2 Congresses so far, the first time in 2015), I could and when I wanted to take my partner with me, I could do that too. You just have to be fast to get the tickets before they're sold out, that's pretty much all there is to it.
Depends on when it was. Congress was less popular in the past so you could get a ticket.
Nowadays, most tickets go to hackerspaces and volunteers but the open sale sells out in seconds.
Camps are much easier to get to.
I did get my tickets volunteering for like a decade but last year I gave up - volunteering the whole event so I get a chance to go to the next event ... where I would volunteer the while event. That's not a good time.
Especially when there's more and more volunteers competing for work so they get a voucher - while the oldschoolers have no need for any of that because they can always get a ticket through backchannels.
Funny how CCC managed to recreate the worst aspects of capitalism as part of their leftist conference.
> Depends on when it was. (...) Nowadays, most tickets go to hackerspaces and volunteers but the open sale sells out in seconds.
2016 and 2019. That's how it was back then as well and that's what I meant by "you have to be fast" - fortunately the ordering system is reasonable and you don't have to type your data in within seconds, all you need is to be there in time. Back then there were three open sale rounds (but I see there were just two last year), I got my tickets in the second round for 33C3 and in the first one for 36C3.
> “we designed this to be anonymous and specifically intend/expect for it to be used in any way regardless of legality and are okay with it.”
That is also what Signal does. Or absolutely any end-to-end encrypted communication service at all - these are explicitly designed not to retain details of communication.
They're saying the difference is that Signal doesn't say it. If you ask Signal about their support of terrorist groups, they'll say Signal doesn't allow terrorism on its platform (even though it obviously does since it has no way to know). Those are the Right Words. If you ask A/I, they said they didn't care if someone was a terrorist. Those are the Wrong Words. There's a social game being played at the highest levels that A/I have forfeited.
I think the difference they alluded to is that they manually vetoed new users, presumably based on their self-declared goals and ideology, whereas Signal etc are neutral platforms.
How do you know what the A/I vetting consisted of or what standards they held? They don't seem to have published any detailed description of the process, and by their own account they destroyed all records of the vetting after approval.
Again, I'm working off of the only actual information I'm aware of, A/I's self-description of how the process works. If someone has more information they should provide it rather than relying on maybes! The existence of an intake form, to be clear, doesn't really suggest that form is the extent of the process or that any reasonable answers are accepted.
reply