It continues to surprise me why Backblaze still trades at a fraction of its peak COVID share price. A well-managed company with solid fundamentals, strong IP and growing.
Because they are bleeding money and they must sell stock to stay in business. Cool product, but I personally don’t want to buy something that doesn’t turn a profit and has negative free cash flow.
I feel very confident that in 30 years AWS, Azure and Google Cloud will still be operating and profitable.
I think there's a very small chance that Backblaze will be.
Nothing against them, but it's virtually impossible to compete long-term with the economies of scale, bundling and network effects of the major cloud providers.
Cloud providers AWS in particular uses storage and transfer pricing as means of lock-in to other products , they can never be cost competitive to Backblaze , they has a thriving prosumer business .
I suspect it’s more some threshold of vouching required, because I know for a fact some of the other dead submissions got vouched.
Still, this apparently completely undocumented standard behaviour seems a little bit troubling? It’s not like 404media is a spam content mill (and I doubt it is the ability to bypass the paywall - those methods don’t work on 404?)
No. Although I may not have the exact reason the domain was banned, I've been around long enough to observe that everytime a 404media.co article is posted and gets traction, the comments unanimously complain about the paywall and it gets flagkilled.
Vouching is intended as a corrective check on things that shouldn't be automatically killed.
Shadowbanned means "in the sense that the server sees the domain and automatically flags the post," as you said, which is the behavior described in my original comment.
> Although I may not have the exact reason the domain was banned, I've been around long enough to observe that everytime a 404media.co article is posted and gets traction, the comments unanimously complain about the paywall and it gets flagkilled.
So I thought this is what you meant by shadowbanned.
I did some page speed comparison tests with Webpagetest, GTMetrix, Page Speed Insights and FastOrSlow tools for my Wordpress blog https://community.centminmod.com/threads/cloudflare-wordpres... using Cloudflare Automatic Platform Optimizations versus without APO (with my own custom Cloudflare Worker cache + Origin PHP-FPM fastcgi_cache cache setup). Results are very close so you get a lot of bang for your buck with CF APO 1 click toggle button if you're not well versed in page speed optimisations.
However, CF APO seems to have a few teething issues to sort out
For US$5/month CF APO, has a lot of value if you don't want to go down the rabbit hole for page speed optimisations and rolling out your own Cloudflare Worker cache configuration.
"
One of the reasons why you need www or some other subdomain has to do with a quirk of DNS and the CNAME record.
Suppose for the purposes of this example that you are running a big site and contract out hosting to a CDN (Content Distribution Network) such as Akamai. What you typically do is set up the DNS record for your site as a CNAME to some akamai.com address. This gives the CDN the opportunity to supply an IP address that is close to the browser (in geographic or network terms). If you used an A record on your site, then you would not be able to offer this flexibility.
The quirk of the DNS is that if you have a CNAME record for a host name, you cannot have any other records for that same host. However, your top level domain example.com usually must have an NS and SOA record. Therefore, you cannot also add a CNAME record for example.com.
The use of www.example.com gives you the opportunity to use a CNAME for www that points to your CDN, while leaving the required NS and SOA records on example.com. The example.com record will usually also have an A record to point to a host that will redirect to www.example.com using an HTTP redirect."
A lot of DNS providers these days will give you a pseudo-cname on apex... basically having the dns resolver do a lookup of another dns name and return that as an A record for the apex.
CloudFlare calls this CNAME flattening, right? [0][1] Personally, I always enjoy engineering solution that mean we're not stuck with old decisions forever. I chose the non-www as a teenager, and I'm glad 10+ years later I could add email to my domain no problem.
I wish there was a standard way to do the same thing. Route 53 is nice when I can use it, but it causes me pain on a regular basis because not all the domains I deal with are on Route 53.
> The quirk of the DNS is that if you have a CNAME record for a host name, you cannot have any other records for that same host. However, your top level domain example.com usually must have an NS and SOA record. Therefore, you cannot also add a CNAME record for example.com.
I discovered this when using a CNAME for a root-level domain and then wondering why I had spotty mail delivery. Turns out, quite a few mail systems and/or DNS resolvers handle this fine - but there are still quite a lot that don't.
Curious how expensive. Obviously I realize I have to colocate or provision at least two servers, but beyond that...
- do I own the IP address(es), and BGP-route them to the machines in question?
- can I use any provider (who is willing to do the required configuration)? As a specific example, could I run anycast between two boxes purchased through Hetzner auction? (Translation: considering that I'm going fishing around in the auctions as opposed to other options, would I even be listened to? heh)
- who am I actually paying, and for what? (besides power, bandwidth, and possibly the server itself)
- ...how does anycast actually work _within the context of using it for hosting_? :/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anycast is... distinctly not contextually-scoped to my intentions.
"the most..." what? Is that an add-your-own-ending quote for reflecting on personal philosophy? :).
(Also, this is a plot point in Bostrom's "The Fable of the Dragon-Tyrant" - the last people to die will really be mourned, and people will then start asking if, maybe, they could have started working on the problem sooner...)
Immortality will probably never work for those that die from getting hit by a train and the like. This will make their death so much worse for their loved ones.
Yep, this incident shows deeper problems. As an outsider, I now question their security team, their devops, their entire company and internal policies.
