One proposal I came across actually suggested breaking up a perfectly fine monolith into a dozen microservices to reduce compile times (at the cost of cumulative CI costs going up).

When the alternative is massively rearchitecting your systems, Zig and Go begin to look really nice by comparison.

I had a client that was contracting with a very large bank and there were only something like four zones globally that we could possibly deploy in to.

Google also is unlike AWS in that their zone abstraction is very virtual, and two zones might be in the same physical building. If you have requirements that your deployment zones be physically separated by some minimal distance then it can make things pretty challenging.

If this is endorsed and thus malicious, they should be ground into dust by the law.

If this is accidental and due to incompetence, they should be ground into dust by the law.

I've secured many, many far less important and impactful systems substantially better than even the best sandbox environment that we're aware of being used by these labs.

There's simply no reason to let these things interact with the internet at large. We can already rapidly copy existing tools and services (albeit questionably) using these models, why not simply run in a fully virtualized, air gapped environment?

Because they don't care.

This is incredibly blatant intentionally malignant behavior. The fact that so many people question this is frankly stunning.

They're getting away with it simply because they can point at the other guy and say "see? they're doing it too!"

It's ridiculous and they should all be litigated into a fine residue.

We take biological lab leaks seriously, how is this substantially different?

It worked exceptionally well because then the other employees were unable to individually bother team members. The team name in the HR directory was something vague and reported to the skip level, so unless you were in the know, we were totally invisible to the rest of the org. For some context we were keeping many millions of dollars of daily transactions afloat and it was not unusual to receive death threats from business folks when they couldn't do their jobs.

I don't miss it remotely, but I sometimes miss being a member of an invisible force with superuser privileges, with the blessing to unfuck anything we saw fit.

Raising a Series D is an attempt to permanently increase the velocity of their enterprise. The change in the cap table is negligible if they succeed.

Raising debt right now would be a massive unforced error given they were able to shore up half a billion dollars in funding. If the funding well were dry then it'd be a different story, but that's not the case.

Can you imagine if they raised $445M of debt?

They're profitable, they are going to get the best terms possible at this moment.

Frankly I would never want to operate gvisor with customer defined workloads.

For one, performance isn't native, which makes it hard to determine workload characteristics. Second, it has a pretty long list of limitations that make it difficult to deploy transparently: cgroups aren't fully supported, no io_uring, etc.

They claim they test a wide array of workloads but there are still compatibility issues that take years to iron out. I once had a workload that was probably buggy, and crashed only on arm64 under gvisor, but as I lacked source access there was no viable path forward.

I hope I am wrong, I'd love to see gvisor really take off. I think finishing the macOS port would be wild: run Linux binaries on macOS without a VM! But I'm not confident.

Flash-lite is pretty capable and getting that entirely for free is not a bad deal at all.

It was always obvious Google couldn't keep letting non-paying users use Flash and Pro.

I'm not a fan of how they bundled their plans but they're not too bad especially when shared with a family. I think I've got almost 1TB of Google Photos at this point.

This is a much better page than TFA: https://support.google.com/gemini/answer/17004136

Have you ever gambled over a game of Dominion? I wouldn't.

Have you ever played Hold'em without gambling? I wouldn't either.

Regardless, if there is a political movement to stop building data centers, but they're still getting built, either not enough people care, or the people permitting these builds are not appropriately accountable, or they will be held accountable at an appointed day and time (most likely elections).

The core problem as I see it is a combination of:

- not enough people who should care do, but probably will when it's too late

- there is insufficient regulation and regulation is too slow to keep up with the pace of development, and doesn't show signs of improving

- there's no good recourse after the fact. It's not like you can easily say "oops actually this megastructure is inconvenient begone" when there are hundreds of millions of dollars on the line, or more.

And lastly, I think Amazon is being treated unfairly due to the actions of other. All things considered I'd rather have an Amazon data center than practically anyone else. If I were Amazon I'd be pushing for more regulation. They can certainly afford to raise the floor of what passes as "environmentally friendly" or whatever. Historically they don't even want anyone to really know where they are. They'd rather be invisible.

The average DC corp you've never heard of? I'm much more skeptical.

It really sucks that the FO could not intervene further as he clearly identified the problem and articulated the solution.

I certainly doubt there will be a satisfying ending to this one.

I don't think Dominion is a good game. It's good if you maybe think cubing is good. And it can be a lot of fun!

But as a game? It's not good. If you have no idea what you are doing and are totally unfamiliar, you can even win pretty easily with some luck. But you won't understand why you won, or rather why others lost.

There are many, many games where everyone can read the rules together and be, more or less, on even footing. Dominion can sometimes be that way, but it can pretty easily be extremely opposite of that.

It's getting shitty, I agree, but still feels like a net improvement to where we were over a decade ago.

You can always create a new identity, I don't think anything has changed there. If you don't want your new identity connected to your old identity, then don't.

The right to be forgotten is whole separate problem. The only hope here, really, is that entropy takes care of it for you. I don't see how a chain of trust system can fundamentally be compatible with the right to be forgotten unless you relax the rules a bit.

Actual real content negotiation in 2026. Never thought I'd live to see the day.

I had an old colleague who in a previous life worked on an incredibly accurate positioning system that was effectively a brief case that knew where it was at all times. The story he told was the DoD made them an offer they couldn't refuse, and everything became secret. I'm pretty sure the company in question is still in business.

I'm not trying to say it's not legal but it might not exactly be legal?

Since it isn't obvious to your, Docker and friends also have an entire content management system (pulling, pushing, tagging images and layers) as well as a build system.

It isn't obvious to me what this does that we haven't been able to do for some time now.