Not to be pedantic about the topic but SOC 2 is an auditing standard, not a security framework. It defines what you’ll be assessed against but it doesn’t tell you how to build your security program. You’ll find the prescriptive controls in real frameworks like ISO 27001, NIST CSF, or CIS Controls which do give you a structure for implementing security.
According to some online sources his total wealth is under $3B. Hardly ‘unfathomable wealth’ IMO. Sure, billionaire territory but nowhere near the ultra-wealthy.
It’s entry-level billionaires club. The top 10 each hold $100B–$300B+, so the wealth distribution is extraordinarily skewed even within billionaires themselves. Musk is hundreds of times richer. Hardly obscenely rich.
Quick, without doing any kind of Googling or calculation: if I asked you to count 3B grains of rice by hand, how long would that take you? How big would that pile of rice be? How long would it take you to eat it?
A billion is already unfathomably large. If you think it isn't, you just haven't tried imagining what a billion of anything would be like.
The problem with this exercise is that I have a few million in wealth and I cannot actually visualize a few million grains of rice but I am fully aware of my total capacity to allocate capital to problems.
Neither $3b nor $300b are realistically unfathomable to me. I find them easy to consider in terms of the projects I can build if I achieved each of these amounts.
As an example I’d have to allocate somewhere between $50m to $250m to get people to vote on a California proposition. I’d need to spend $1.5b to create a wing of a major hospital. I’d need between $100m and half a billion to create a new K-12 school in my city.
These are large sums of money and are currently out of my reach so if AI doesn’t destabilize everything my best bet is to take the same approach each of my ancestors did. Move my children one level up the wealth ladder and hopefully give them the values that help them prioritize these actions and the optimal way of getting there. I think that involves some amount of compounding and then some amount of spending.
The point is that you’re deluding yourself if you think that there is any difference in terms of relative “unfathomability” between 3 billion and 300 billion.
3 billion generates more in interest per day than 99.99% of people make in a year. That’s unfathomable volumes of wealth for even the very rich.
This comment left me speechless... There are just a bit over 3000 billionaires in the world, 900 in the USA. If $3B isn't "unfathomable wealth" I don't know what is.
Ehm sorry but no. CRM stands for Customer Relationship Management so … a support ticket is, by definition, a customer relationship event.
Salesforce spending millions to conflate “CRM” with “sales pipeline” was just marketing.
Also, Zendesk calls itself a CRM. Freshdesk’s parent is literally named Freshworks CRM. Gartner and Forrester have always put support under the CRM umbrella.
In countries that phased out lead later, even early Millennials faced similar or worse childhood exposure. It’s a global generational story, just with different timelines by country. As a personal example, Romania only phased out leaded gasoline at the end of 2004.
Lead poisoning was discovered in a year that is denoted with "B.C.E".
It wasn't news when the additive was invented for gasoline in the 20s, and it wasn't news all through the 70s.
Of course blame it on the corporations. On GM specifically, who also lobbied for jay-walking to become illegal so their cars would stop getting bad press for killing people.
In a kinetic warfare or authoritarian context, this is rather a life safety vulnerability. In the industry, we call this the crossover from Information Security (InfoSec) to Operational Security (OpSec), where a digital flaw becomes a Kinetic Threat.
Right, but if a country being at war or in a authoritarian regime is a precondition for the vulnerability to pose a threat, it's not really a scenario that would warrant a high scoring in some vulnerability scoring system. For sure it's a weakness and would score higher if the purpose of the technology were military.
But since this is a civilian application and not military, it doesn't seem sensible to rate vulnerabilities according to military use. The intended scope of the application makes a huge difference legally and operationally and should be triaged accordingly.
And part of the Corp's profits fund the Foundation, not the other way around. We get a discussion about this every few months in the HN comments, in case anyone wants to look it up.
The main text is black yes, but anything that's bold is light grey as per the CSS, which is near unreadable (even if you're not as colourblind as me I suspect)
There's a bit of a mix-up here. The “Search History Data – Not Linked with You” label you see on the App Store refers only to the searches you perform within the Home Connect app—not your full Google search history. Given that iOS apps run in a sandboxed environment, there's no way for the app to access your Google account. It’s a standard practice among smart home devices to enhance functionality, not to spy on your entire digital life.
reply