Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Hyperborian's commentslogin

> How do they store their data?

SQL.

> How do their different applications talk to each other?

Proprietary APIs.

> How do they scale their systems to work for millions of users?

T H E C L O U D

> How do they keep them secure?

They just... don't.

> How do they make sure nothing goes wrong?

They just... don't.

> What are APIs, webhooks and client libraries, when you really get down to it?

Easily outsourced to India.


That last point is so painful and true. I work with a product that has dozens if not hundreds of “connectors” to interface with other systems and you can tell that most of them were farmed out to the lowest bidder.


Oh god... you're not under the impression that bittorrent is a secure or anonymous protocol, are you?


No but all they see is parts identified by hashes. How are they supposed to know whether is a Linux distro or a movie?


Because, quite frankly, parts identified by hashes is not all they see.

If you're monitoring and logging the traffic then it's trivial to not only determine the filename of a bittorrent download, but also everything you need to connect to the torrent yourself and download it to verify that it's what the filename says, if that's what you wish to do.

And, personally, I'd expect someone to at least check the filename before accusing me of committing a crime. :(


The torrent file is downloaded over a secure connection that you can’t monitor. Can you please tell me which messages in the BitTorrent protocol contain the filenames?


Can't you just look up the hash on DHT? Since hash is the only mandatory field in a Magnet URI.


Of course but connecting to a peer to peer network and looking it up doesn’t sound ‘trivial’ to me.


Clients can obfuscate traffic though?


How much can they obfuscate it if other clients need to be able to download it?


The obfuscation is just to disguise the traffic so providers can’t easily implement blanket bans on all BitTorrent traffic


Because the pickup truck form factor is the most efficient and inexpensive one there is. No really, hear me out! I see this asked all the time, but you're actually asking the wrong question.

I mean, think about it, what's the most minimal, lightest, cheapest form a motor vehicle could possibly take? It would have wheels, of course, some sort of frame to attach everything to, somewhere to put the engine, and somewhere to put the driver. That's it! A cab up front to house the engine and driver on a frame with wheels. Add some simple low sides to the frame to keep stuff in and that basically describes a pickup truck.

The truth is, for any particular load carrying and/or towing capacity, a pickup truck is the most efficient and least expensive common consumer option. Adding a cover over the back, additional seating, and other amenities just adds weight and cost. A tiny subcompact pickup truck version of even the smallest little hatchback can be cheaper and lighter then the hatchback can ever be simply because it's the same thing but made with less stuff.

I suspect the real question you want to ask, is this: why are such high cargo/towing capacity vehicles so popular? In other words, why do we buy such huge vehicles?


I think you're implicitly talking about a classic style 2-door pickup truck, but most consumer trucks these days seem to have four doors.

Small two door pickup trucks are even more extinct, at least in the US. I remember seeing a new Mazda pickup truck in the showroom, probably a B-series circa 1995, and it was tiny, had steel wheels, a relatively long bed, and probably a manual transmission. Price was maybe half what trucks today cost, adjusted for inflation. It's been a long time since there was a market for those.


> I think you're implicitly talking about a classic style 2-door pickup truck, but most consumer trucks these days seem to have four doors.

Replace the shortened bed in the back with a cover and a third row of seating, though, and you have an SUV that's still going to be even heavier and more expensive.

> Small two door pickup trucks are even more extinct, at least in the US.

Very true, and as a small pickup lover that makes me sad. :(

> It's been a long time since there was a market for those.

Indeed, which leads back to the question I posed above... why do we prefer such large vehicles?


Well, I would say there isn't a huge penalty for the benefits, and it's nice to have 110% of your maximum expected needs covered rather than 80%. And big vehicles keep getting better and better fuel economy, plus scaled down versions aren't significantly cheaper.

I think a major issue is that most of the cost of a car is not in the quantity of metal used to make the body/frame. So you aren't going to cut manufacturing costs much by making it smaller. This is probably why nobody can make small cars at a profit in the US. Any additional amount a customer will pay for a larger vehicle goes disproportionately to profit, so it's a win-win for the manufacturer and customer.


> ...and it's nice to have 110% of your maximum expected needs covered rather than 80%.

That depends very much on the person. For someone with no kids and that needs to move very large cargo every once in a while, it may be the pickup truck that's the 110% and the SUV that's the 80%.


I mean, think about it, what's the most minimal, lightest, cheapest form a motor vehicle could possibly take? It would have wheels, of course, some sort of frame to attach everything to, somewhere to put the engine, and somewhere to put the driver. That's it!

You appear to be describing a motorbike.


Ha! I didn't even think of that. :)

We're talking about a vehicle that's not really even relevant to the question of why different countries prefer different four-wheeled vehicles, though. People looking for a four-wheeled car or truck are generally not looking for a motorcycle, and vice versa.


Interesting perspective. If we control for size and stick with basic principles, does converting a hatchback to a pickup provide more gain from the lower weight than losses from inferior aerodynamics? I'm not convinced it does.


Depends on the speed you most commonly drive. For urban drivers, they spend a lot of time at slower speeds where aerodynamics is less critical. Also, even pickup trucks are designed to be much more aerodynamic and efficient then they used to be these days.

For rural drivers, they probably have other reasons to want a pickup truck besides simple cost effectiveness. They're usually the ones who actually do need the carrying capacity.


Lots of people, including far too many families with children.


I'm just a few pages in to the tutorial and I already want to try it out myself... but how? Where's the link?

Is this not available to the public yet?


I'm pretty sure Labview has a free version and works better.


Iirc it has never been publically available.


Almost the exact same situation here, except that it was closer to 28 years ago. :)


Almost exact same situation here, except it was ~2004 and my library's copy of "QBASIC for Dummies"


He's being downvoted because there has never been any evidence for any significant amount of voter fraud whatsoever, though many have looked carefully for it. It's not just thought not to be a problem, but KNOWN not to be a problem. The idea that large amounts of illegals are voting fraudulently is pure right-wing propaganda made up to justify minority disenfranchisement efforts.


Has that always been? Were the first engineers regulated and licensed? By whom?

Perhaps we're just looking at a category of engineering that is not yet at that level of maturity.


Even a broken clock is right twice a day.


Not if the hands have fallen off.


They've not fallen off, they're just really small.


> How can we possibly create a healthy food-replacement system if we don't fully understand what makes food healthy?

Well, in order to finally achieve that understanding, what are we going to need to do?

Basically, attempt something like Soylent and see if it works, adjusting it as we learn... which is what they seem to be doing.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: