It's your typical IT position, just clearly defined. I have no intentions of applying (comfortable where I am, TYVM), but if I were looking for an IT position, I would not dismiss this one just for their honesty.
I would say it was the point, but not for the shady reason you think. Rather, it ensures that people applying know what they are getting into immediately. Quite a good pre-filter.
For business purposes, chopping up templates gets the job done. I personally have accepted the fact I do not have the "aesthetic eye" for design.
If I wanted to get that "eye" I guess I would look at successful websites, learn about design and what catches/pleases readers. How readers see websites in general and what is appealing, then just try things.
I cant recommend taking my advice but that's what I would do if I wanted to increase my design knowledge.
Congratulations on the release. I am currently a deep shade of green as I am a devops engineer who has a pipe dream of creating and releasing a game really just for the pleasure of just doing it and learning a language (and hopefully a personally successful future as a freelance dev). I have been looking at C# and Unity. I started digging into c# but I am a weak python guy so it's frustrating :)
You are a great motivator! Your work is appreciated. Congrats again.
Thank you for your appreciation. Coming from Java, adapting to c# was easier for me since syntax-wise these are very similar languages. I am now learning Objective C and I can understand and relate to your frustation about moving to a new language altogether :)
For reference, I graduated HS in 2005 so my childhood was mid to late 90s. My friends and I used to tell our parents were were all going to each others houses and then ride our bikes all around town, through construction sites, abandoned factories, down highways, etc. None of us were abducted, died, injuries happen but who doesn't fall off their bike now and then ;)
The only times cops were involved were when someone called them. Cops would show up, talk to us, then leave once they knew we weren't making trouble and were safe. Never followed up on us or our parents. The only scary situation is once we were playing paintball and someone said a bunch of kids with guns are running around, cops showed up, searched us then went home laughing.
I think the difference today is all related to liability and the helicopter culture it created. Maybe the cops are just CYAing themselves by involving CPS. Maybe the cops didn't like the parents attitude and involved CPS. There is a huge stigma today about being up your kids ass and if you're not, you're a bad parent. Politicians and the media bank big time on pushing these "morals" and punishing anyone who thinks differently. It's not something that will be fixed tomorrow.
I look at the kids in my neighborhood and I feel sad for them. They wont have the experience I had. I am sure everyone feels that way though, the only difference is 15 years ago no one was going to jail or losing their kids over politics.
My comment is a little all-over-the-place but my point is, raising a kid in America is too dangerous of a risk for me and it's a sad thing to think about. The cultural fixes are all very obvious but then what will the news talk about? What will politicians campaign about? How can our leaders show they are "tough on the issues" unless they are relentlessly hammering insanity?
I always think of a quote from The Other Guys when topics like this come up because the solution is so obviously simple but so obviously never going to happen...
Gamble: What about nine million socially-conscious and unified citizens, all just stepping up and doing their part?
I used to ride my bike out of the county when I was in Elementary school. The worst thing that ever happened was that some redneck threw a beer bottle at me and knocked me off my bike. I got his license plate number and phoned the police. In the semi-rural area I had managed to bike to (about ten miles from my house) the police could care less about why I was biking, They thanked me for the info, made sure I was ok, and sent me on my way. Phoned my mother later (i borrowed her cell phone so I could call home while biking) to tell her that they caught the guy and were charging him with assault of a minor and DWI. I just had to speak to an officer on the phone for about 10 minutes and that was the end of that.
Now we apparently are considering taking children away from their parents because they were allowed to be 1/2 mile from their homes unattended? Was I born in the last decade where one could experience childhood?
Thinking about the answer to this hurts my brain. Ultimately, with the amount of money and resources available to the "bad guys", I can't imagine something as truly uncrackable.
But I am just a lowely infrastructure guy that builds VPNs, lots of smart folks out there :)
I'm always surprised how few network guys are on HN.
Every device in infrastructure should have a management address. This int is routed differently than the data interface. In a datacenter, management will be a separate physical int but telecom can't go running 2 cables into a house so it's a logical management int in that case. Comcast remotes into my modem all the time for management purposes (service magically goes out) and I doubt they login via my DHCP address from them. It's just good practice to manage a device from a management int and in a consumer environment this should be hidden from the user. Everyone in infrastructure knows, the less the user knows the better.
Tinfoil hat time - funny cowinkydink they chose a DoD subnet. Why wouldn't they use 10.0.0.0/8 like the rest of the world? Could be them being different, could be something more. Convenient for the DoD to own the management subnet, just saying.
Less chances to overlap with the RFC1918 address in a home network ? (a silent assumption here is that the CPEs are user-configurable in any way).
Or just that they had historically some 10/8 space already used elsewhere in the network ?
Note that they're not the only ones camping on DoD address space, I know a couple more folks who had to do it out of necessity at some point, under the assumption (flawed, sure) that DoD probably will never advertise them.
The best way to solve it is to go IPv6-only in management, and for those folks who are lucky enough to have had public IPv4 space for management purposes, that is one of the big drivers.
Out of the box these home routers all come with the same subnet (every linksys out of box runs 192.168.1.0/24 in the US ). Private addressing behind the box is meaningless in the telecom cloud. It's all NAT.
Could be 10/8 used elsewhere for some other network but us infrastructure guys are lazy. NAT that shit. I've never known an ISP to be a monument to best practices.
I've yet to come across any 30/8 subnets in my career. RFC1918 gives one a shit-ton of address space to work with. Bleeding into the 30/8 for necessity seems like something is wrong somewhere.
The fact ipv6 isnt more widely adopted reiterates my point above, engineers are lazy and NAT works. I've only known one company to use public ipv4 space for managment and they were a mess. I'd love to say using 30/8 is out of necessity or out of laziness but it's just oddly convenient.
"Out of the box these home routers all come with the same subnet" - if the customer has any way to change the router LAN subnet, this does not matter. Someone will put it to 10.x.x.x. My cable modem came from ISP with a default login from the LAN side which allows me to change pretty much anything I wish - if in BT setup they do not allow login, then that argument of mine would not make sense.
"NAT that" - sure, if you say so. Unless someone years ago already made that choice for you and you already have that management network.
And let me put a tinfoil hat on and ask: if I were to spy on the home routers and wanted to keep the whole affair in secret, would not assignment of less "hot" chunk of addressing space (like, for example, RFC1918), and then getting the access to the system that can use that range within this network keep me much lower under the radar ?
I worked for a company that was using some addresses in the 99/8 range (I don't remember what the narrower range was) internally. This occasionally caused issues when some ISPs started doling out those addresses.
I'm honestly really surprised that someone on HN would assume HoneyPot was anything but a reference to the "technical" honeypot. Guy deserves a downvote.
My initial thought was it was a link to some sort of sting operation also, as I did not know what Kippo was. I could definitely see sting operations as being interesting to the segment of this crowd with more anti-government leanings.
Downvotes are not for disagreeing or disliking a comment. Only if it doesn't add to the discussion. At least thats how it used to be, before HN traffic exploded and became redditized a while back. This should be communicated better.
I can only paraphrase PG because I don't want to spend any time digging for the actual comment, but he's basically said:
People can use downvotes however they want.
There is no guideline to communicate.
I can personally see the pros and cons of this stance. The cons are pretty obvious, but the big pro is that there shouldn't be discussions like you and I are having now.
The type of person who is attracted to this position will be a very unique person, to say the least.