What do you expect about the new solution that will be better?
Genuine question, btw. While I see how kubernetes can feel overcomplicated, it has always felt as a consequence of how complicated it is to run such a large number of workloads in a scalable and robust manner.
Would people really be willing to use this to expose their services to the internet?
Given it’s small and focused on home users, I’d be afraid of any potential security issues. I’d much rather use tools that get a lot more frequent security scanning (like nginx)
I've cobbled together my own assortment of services that achieves a similar suite of functionality Zoraxy appears to offer. Everything is hosted and accessible (ACLs permitting) via my Tailscale network – nothing gets exposed publicly.
This looks very cool and if it's able to integrate with Tailscale I'd try it in a heartbeat!
Nginx is written in C. It's not the worst offender of the species, but there's been enough RCE-level CVEs over the years that I would assume some remain in its current version.
Something written in e.g. Go at least gives you a fighting chance.
I follow this best practice, there’s a few reasons why I do this. It doesn’t have to do with using a guessed primary ID for some sort of privilege escalation, though. It has more to do with not leaking any company information.
When I worked for an e-commerce company, one of our biggest competitors used an auto-incrementing integer as primary key on their “orders” table. Yeah… You can figure out how this was used. Not very smart by them, extremely useful for my employer. Neither of these will allow security holes or leak customer info/payment info, but you’d still rather not leak this.
I've been in these shoes before, and finding this information doesn't help you as an executive or leader make any better decisions than you could have before you had the data. No important decision is going to be swayed by something like this, and any decision that is probably wasn't important.
Knowing how many orders is placed isn't so useful without average order value or items per cart, and the same is true for many other kinds of data gleamed from this method.
That’s not correct. Not every market is the same in it’s dynamics.
Yes, most of the time that information was purely insightful and was simply monitored. However, at some moments it definitely drove important decisions.
What's going to change how a team develops (physical) products? What's a merchandiser or buyer going to learn that influences how they spend millions of dollars or deal with X weeks-on-hand of existing inventory? What's an operations manager going to learn that improves their ability to warehouse and ship product? How's marketing going to change their strategy around segmentation or channel distribution? What's a CEO going to learn that changes what departments or activities they want to invest in?
At best you get a few little tidbits of data you can include in presentations or board decks, but nothing that's going to influence critical decisions on how money is getting spent to get the job done or how time is getting allocated to projects. Worst case you have a inexperienced CEO that's chasing rather than leading, and just end up copying superficial aspects of your competitors without the context or understanding of why they did what they did.
I've called up execs at competitors and had friendly chats that revealed more about their business in 30 minutes than you could possibly find out through this "method".
As mentioned in the article, this operator uses CNPG and adds easy plugin management (Nice!) and Stacks (prebuilt optimized deployments, although I’m unsure what this does exactly. It just sounds like containers with optimized settings)
Stacks[1] are basically recipes for deploying Postgres for specific use cases. This includes extensions, Postgres configs and application deployments (example: PostgREST)
Postgres + containers + package management for extensions + stacks
For example re: extensions, you can add postgres extensions to your spec and the operator will handle getting the extensions installing extensions from pgt.dev into your Postgres instance.
Hah, this reminds me of my C++ professor requiring a max line width of 80 characters. My first question was “why not more!?” aswell.
He would have the homework submissions compiled to LaTeX and printed out - then he would write comments by hand. 80 characters was what would fit on a line. If you had more characters, lines wrapped wrongly and you’d get incorrect looking code - so he refused to grade.
I’ve since warmed up to the max line width idea. It’s nice to be able to read code on a small width window (I’ll rarely have a single full screen window with just code) and ensure each line is a valid syntax (and not unreadable due to softwrap in the editor). But I still think 80 chars is a bit extreme. 120 is nicer in my opinion.
80 char limits used to be very common in school and business, I’m old enough that most of my professors preferred it, and most students actually did too. My first programming jobs required it as well. There were a few students who felt limited, or had fun intentionally acting flippant or incredulous about these limits when their screens were more than 80 chars wide.
The rule is slightly anachronistic now, and originally came from the time when CRT terminals (and printers) were 80 columns of text, and there was no graphical window manager. The rule was primarily about making code comfortable to read for everyone involved, to meet the minimum display with of anyone in the group. If you have a wide display but I don’t then it sucks for me. Plus I’m pretty sure that when I first started programming, a lot of printers and text editors and a lot of software wasn’t very good at handling long lines and characters would get mugged or discarded. Almost everything today will just wrap and display reasonably, but that wasn’t always the case back in the days of ed/edlin and earlier.
These days I hardly ever hear about width limits anymore, though it does come up every once in a while when people have to work a lot in terminal or ssh sessions. I do have to drop into Linux non-graphical mode all the time, and even edits files and build code sometimes, and code that’s wider than the display is less fun to wade through. People still like having a reasonable limit, like we’d definitely get complaints if we start writing code that’s 500 characters on a line, right? :P
Independent of the origins of the 80 character line lenght rule. Some say it originated on punch cards. It is a useful rule. Classical news papers also have narrow columns. Why? Because it helps reading.
On my docked laptop with a quad-split 43” 4K, I am definitely in the camp of wider is better.
Then I pull out my 13” Air and remind myself that there are reasons for limits. For Python, I just default to black, which is 88 chars. Easier to not argue with people that way. Plus, I’m free to write it with super wide columns if I want, and then let my precommit hook fix it.
I feel like this is too hard to just assume without actual calculations.
If it went to a grocery store, it would go from the farm to a central location (which is who knows how many hundreds of km away), to some distribution center (again, who knows how far away), to then go to a local supermarket. I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s less efficient than shipping it to a local market!
Aside from that, where do the products in a local supermarkt come from? Depending on your country, I’d be surprised if those bananas didn’t arrive on some freight ship. Talk about inefficiency! In my case, even tomatoes are often from a different country and then we export our own tomatoes to other countries too. It’s crazy.
Next to that, I’m not sure about the other points. At least in my country it’s cheaper (everything is in season), fresher and simply way better.
Regarding choice, it depends. I won’t find any locally grown bananas. But I will have more choice in vegetables and fruits that actually grow in my area. Personally I like that, since I care more about efficient and sustainable produce than shipping something halfway across the world for my pleasure.
> In my case, even tomatoes are often from a different country and then we export our own tomatoes to other countries too.
This can make a lot of sense as the seasons shift. Eating local is only efficient and sustainable if you're sticking to what's in season or keeps well. Long term refrigerated storage, water-sourcing and indoor growing to extend seasons can outweigh the costs of freighting.
In Canada you can find domestic bananas, but I can't imagine replicating the necessary growing conditions with woodfired greenhouses is better than freighting from the tropics (but I'll get some sparingly): https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/meet-the-farmers-growing-banan...
Wow, that’s cool! I checked for The Netherlands aswell and it turns out we’re also growing our own bananas [0] with the first harvest being two years ago! It seems to be a research initiative to find new ways to cultivate bananas that are not susceptible to soil molds.
> Eating local is only efficient and sustainable if you're sticking to what's in season or keeps well. Long term refrigerated storage, water-sourcing and indoor growing to extend seasons can outweigh the costs of freighting.
Agreed! I think that’s why it’s so hard to just call farmers markets inefficient, though. Atleast, without research into how efficient they are. There’s so many arguments that can make it sound logical that they’re either more or less efficient than a grocery store. It could go either way.
[0]: https://nederbanaan.nl/ (I hate what they’re doing with their font. Double letters being some extremely elongated version of the single letter?)
I expect it's an issue where the value added for the consumer is within some externality of each business, but not of the market on a whole.
This would mean that if any farmer decides that financial profit is the main form of value they optimize for, that farmers markets become indistinguishable from other grocery sources, punishing the consumer.
But if most vendors either quantify non-financial outcomes or leave them as intangible then these consumer friendly qualities are unlikely to be optimized out.
Yes, definitely! However, bananas will need refrigerated containers. I unfortunately can’t find clear numbers on the freight shipping emissions itself but transporation accounts to up to 70% of emissions. [0]
Does it actually consume the documentation? You could (haven’t tried in a while) also have ChatGPT tell you anything you wanted aslong as you stated “It’s been posted on Wikipedia after your last consumed date”.
I feel like telling it that it’s wrong and linking documentation is the same as referring to Wikipedia?
What do you expect about the new solution that will be better?
Genuine question, btw. While I see how kubernetes can feel overcomplicated, it has always felt as a consequence of how complicated it is to run such a large number of workloads in a scalable and robust manner.
reply