标签：#car

I've been a die-hard Computer Science fan for as long as I can remember. Right after my 10th standard, I picked up C — that was four years ago. Around the same time, GitHub pulled me in before I even understood what was happening there. I couldn't parse a single line of what people were building, but I could tell something big was going on. That curiosity eventually pulled me into web development, and from there, into almost every corner of tech over the next few years — AI included. Diploma: The Real Lessons Weren't in the Syllabus I just finished a 3-year Diploma in Computer Engineering. Looking back, the biggest lessons weren't in the coursework. They were in hallway conversations — friends and teachers talking about where technology and the market are headed, instead of the usual teenage small talk. Watching how an organization actually runs, what really happens day to day — that taught me more than most subjects did. A Habit I Used to See as a Flaw Here's a pattern about how I work: everything I start, I start from zero — and I don't always go deep. I finish with the basics, then move on. For a long time I saw that as a bad habit. Three years and almost every major technology later, I've changed my mind — it was the fastest way to find out that "a little bit of everything" isn't who I am. What I actually need is to dig into a system until I find the reason it works. Until I do, I can't let it go. Where That Instinct Pointed Me: Cybersecurity That same need to dig eventually pointed me toward something equal parts fun and dangerous — cybersecurity. I'm about three months into this path now, and I'm moving slowly. Not because it's too hard, but because I won't move to the next topic until every dot is connected. Loose ends don't let me sleep. What I've Learned So Far This is still the floor, not the ceiling, but it's real and hands-on: Web authentication attacks — 2FA bypass, broken password-reset logic, username enumeration through timing differences, account lo

Lend him the opening. Lure him in. Cut his support. Trap him where there is no way out. To take the...

At a private, closed-door event in Austin, Texas today, Tesla officially launched its gilded car of the future. It's a huge milestone for Elon Musk, who has been hyping the imminent arrival of driverless cars for years and has bet the future of his company on AI, autonomous vehicles, and humanoid robots. It was an […]

MLH AI Roadshow Bengaluru Hey Everyone! I am Sanidhya Goel, a new MLH Hackathon Community...

Open YouTube to learn automation and you get n8n, Make, Zapier. The enterprise-market tools from the last piece (Boomi, Workato, UiPath) are almost nowhere. The job ads clearly want them; the content layer barely mentions them. The easy answer is views: beginners are the audience, so beginner tools win. That's half of it; the other half is where the money comes from. Follow who pays the teacher. The first money: affiliate commissions n8n runs an affiliate program for creators : 30% of referred cloud-subscription revenue, for twelve months. Every viewer who signs up through a creator's link becomes recurring income for that creator, and Make runs a similar program . Zapier has no affiliate program open to ordinary creators ; it holds the same shelf space through search dominance instead. Enterprise vendors don't pay creators this kind of commission. There is no per-signup commission open to individuals. Workato and UiPath do run partner revenue programs, but the money arrives after a partner agreement and a closed enterprise deal. A video can't collect on that, so a YouTuber teaching Workato has effectively nobody to collect from. Which means a creator's menu was set before the first video went up. The second money: the community business The monetization point in automation education now sits below the videos, on Skool, a community platform. The two biggest automation communities there, AI Automation Agency Hub (330,000+ members) and AI Automation Society (440,000+), are both free. The free tier brings people in, and what's sold behind it differs by operator. AI Automation Society sells a $129-a-month membership to its 440,000 free members; the AAA Hub side sells an accelerator priced above $5,000 to its 330,000 (pricing disclosed only on a sales call; that figure comes from student accounts). Where the published numbers allow an estimate, at AI Automation Society, the paid share sits under 1%: 447,000 free vs 3,700 paid is 0.8%. Strictly a paid-to-free count taken

There is a strange contradiction happening in software engineering right now. A lot of developers are worried that AI is going to make them obsolete. At the same time, the people building the most capable AI coding tools are demonstrating something that should probably make us rethink what being a software engineer actually means. I don't think the future is one where nobody understands software anymore. I think it is one where writing the software becomes dramatically cheaper. And if that happens, the thing that makes an engineer valuable has to move. That is what I mean by career safety. Career safety isn't about making yourself impossible to replace. It is about making your value portable. We've always resisted giving up the code Developers have a long history of being suspicious of abstractions that take work away from us. We went from machine code to assembly, from assembly to higher-level languages, from manually managing memory to garbage collection, from building everything ourselves to libraries and frameworks, and from text editors to IDEs. We even had entire categories of tools, such as CASE tools, designed to automate parts of software development. And every time, there was resistance. Because programmers don't just use code. We build our identities around it. John Carmack captured this unusually well when he wrote: “Coding” was never the source of value, and people shouldn’t get overly attached to it. — John Carmack He followed that with the more important point: Problem solving is the core skill. — John Carmack That is a difficult idea for developers to internalize because coding is tangible. You can point at the repository. You can point at the pull request. You can count the commits. You can say, "I wrote this." But the business doesn't ultimately pay you for the number of lines you wrote. It pays you for what those lines accomplish. The business never really bought the code A company doesn't wake up in the morning thinking: "We need 14,000 more line

Most engineers who stall at a level have the skill. What they don't have is anyone willing to explain the machine they're inside. The explanation you get from your manager is partial by design. They know their part of the process and not the committee's, so what comes back is "keep doing what you're doing, you're close." Which is true, and useless, and then you're close again next cycle. So here is the machine, reconstructed from what the four big companies publish, what their engineers write up afterward, and what levelling aggregators have pieced together. None of it is your company's internal doc. Check the specifics with your own manager. The ladders don't line up Stage Google Meta Amazon Microsoft Apple Typical YOE Entry L3 E3 L4 (SDE I) 59–60 ICT2 0–2 Mid L4 E4 L5 (SDE II) 61–62 ICT3 2–5 Senior L5 E5 L6 (SDE III) 63–64 ICT4 5–8+ Staff L6 E6 L7 (Principal) 65–66 ICT5 8–12+ Senior staff L7 E7 L8 67 ICT6 12+ Principal / Distinguished L8–L9 E8–E9 L10 68–69 Distinguished rare Google's L5 is a senior engineer. Amazon's L5 is a mid-level SDE II. Recruiters map between them and the map is approximate, so the year ranges are typical rather than required. Two things here matter more than the numbers. The gap between adjacent levels is not constant. Entry to mid is mostly about becoming reliable. Mid to senior is about becoming independent. Then senior to staff, which is where the ladder stops behaving like a ladder: it's a change of job, and the things that earned you the last promotion only partly transfer. And every company has a level it considers a perfectly good place to spend a career. Google's L5, Meta's E5, Amazon's SDE II or III depending on who you ask, Microsoft's 63 or 64. Below that level there is an expectation you keep climbing, and at some companies a clock. Above it, promotion is optional and much harder, and nobody will chase you about it. What actually happens in the room The four processes differ enough that optimizing for the wrong one wastes a year

Most EM interview prep fails the same way. You pick three strong stories, polish them until they're tight, run them past a friend, and walk in confident. Then somebody asks how you'd handle a high performer who's difficult to work with, and none of your three stories touch it. That isn't a depth problem. It's a coverage problem, and it's the thing that makes the EM loop different from every IC loop you've done. An IC loop samples from a narrow surface. Systems, code, a couple of behavioural questions that mostly serve as tiebreakers. You can prepare for it by going deep on a small number of technical narratives. An EM loop samples from a wide one. Nine areas, roughly, and you can be excellent at seven of them and still lose the loop on the two you never thought about. The nine areas Team building and hiring Performance management and difficult conversations Conflict and difficult relationships Delivery, prioritization and ambiguity Cross-functional partnership Growth, coaching and career development Technical judgment and architecture Values, culture and self-awareness Vision and scaling Look at that list and be honest about which two are thin for you. For most people coming from a senior IC role it's 2 and 3, because those are the parts of the job you've watched from the outside rather than done. What the questions are actually checking Underneath the surface wording, almost every behavioural question in an EM loop is checking one of four things. Did you run a real process, or improvise? "I had a conversation with them" is an improvisation. "I named the specific pattern with dates, we agreed a 30-day plan, I checked in weekly" is a process. Can you name a specific tradeoff you made, and why? Not that tradeoffs existed. Which one you picked, what it cost, and what you got. Do you own outcomes without deflecting or over-apologizing? Both failure modes read badly. Blaming the org is worse, but flagellating yourself for four minutes over a bad hire is not much better.

Uber beat out Waymo in launching a commercial robotaxi service in London, the city's first. The vehicles use autonomous driving tech developed by Wayve, a UK-based startup, and will initially feature safety drivers behind the wheel. The launch is a milestone for Uber, which has been plotting a UK launch with Wayve for several years. […]

The Comfort Zone Trap Most developers hit a point where they know enough to be productive, and then... stop growing. You can build features, fix bugs, ship code — and still be standing still. The comfort zone doesn't feel like stagnation. It feels like competence. This is one of the sneakiest traps in a dev career. Early on, growth is forced on you — every new project throws unfamiliar problems your way, and you have no choice but to learn. But once you've built a solid mental toolkit (a stack you're comfortable in, a set of patterns that "just work"), it becomes very easy to keep reaching for the same tools on every new problem. You're productive. You're shipping. And you're not actually getting better. The danger is that this plateau is invisible from the inside. Nobody sends you a notification saying "you've stopped growing." You just keep doing what you know, at the same level, for years — until you compare yourself to someone who deliberately kept pushing, and the gap feels much bigger than it should. Why "Just Keep Coding" Doesn't Work The common advice is to just build more projects. But volume without friction doesn't teach you much — repeating the same patterns on new ideas just reinforces what you already know. Growth comes from deliberately picking problems slightly outside your current skill ceiling, not from doing more of what's comfortable. Think about it like weightlifting. If you lift the same weight every session, you get very good at lifting that exact weight — and nothing more. Progressive overload works because you're constantly pushing slightly past your current limit. Coding is the same. If every project you build uses the same stack, the same architecture patterns, and the same problem shapes, you're doing bicep curls with the same 10kg dumbbell for five years straight. The fix isn't "build more" — it's "build harder." Pick a project that forces you to learn a new paradigm (functional if you're used to OOP, distributed systems if you've only b

I think automakers are finally getting the memo. Rather than try to reinvent the wheel with its new electric vehicle, Range Rover just made one that looks nearly identical to its lineup of gas-powered SUVs. They didn't try to pass off some sleek, spaceship-looking pod as a Range Rover. Sometimes familiar designs are the way […]

Ever Wondered How Netflix Never Seems to Go Down? Think about this for a second. Netflix has over 260 million subscribers worldwide. People are watching shows in Tokyo, London, Lagos, and New York — all at the same time. And yet, when was the last time Netflix crashed on you? Now think about your favourite food delivery app. You open it, order food, track your driver in real time, and get a notification the moment your burger arrives. All of that happens in seconds. Behind all of this is a way of working called DevOps. And by the end of this article, you'll understand exactly what it is — no jargon, no complicated diagrams, just plain English. The Old Way (And Why It Was a Nightmare) To understand DevOps, we first need to understand the problem it solved. Imagine a software company in the early 2000s. They had two completely separate teams: The Developers — the people who wrote the code and built new features The Operations team — the people who managed the servers and kept everything running These two teams barely talked to each other. Developers would spend months building new features, then hand over a massive pile of code to the operations team and say "here you go, make it work." The operations team would panic. They hadn't been involved in building it, had no idea what it did, and now they had to deploy it to millions of users without breaking anything. The result? Deployments took weeks. Bugs slipped through. Systems crashed. Customers complained. And the two teams blamed each other. Sound stressful? It was. So What is DevOps? DevOps is simply the practice of bringing developers and operations teams together to build, test, and release software faster and more reliably. The name itself is a combination of Dev (Development) and Ops (Operations). Instead of two teams working in silos, they work as one team with shared goals, shared tools, and shared responsibility. Think of it like a restaurant kitchen. In a badly run kitchen, the chefs cook the food and just s

Rather pretend not to know than pretend to know and act on it. Stay still. Hide the move. Wait like thunder gathering in the clouds. — The 36 Stratagems, Feign madness but keep your balance Previously on this series: #8: Alex Watched an AI Dashboard Take Over. He Kept the Keys Under the Table. — Alex found the unnamed dashboard hiding in the background. He never turned it off. His probe and his record-keeping habits started that day. #20: Alex Felt the AI Collector Slow Down. He Knew Someone Else Had Made a Move. — His probe had caught the silence of a TTL 247 gateway. He knew what "quiet" looked like. #23: Alex Counted the AI's Hands. Lena Set the Bait. — The honeypot in the MediSys sandbox was touched twice. Alex kept the scan source's behavior shadow in his hidden panel: traversal order, exclusion patterns, the 4.2-second jitter cycle. #25: Derek Changed the Delay. The AI Didn't Flinch. — Derek moved the middle layer's latency from 200 ms to 800 ms, then called Alex to watch. The scan source never retried. Never adjusted. After the Call Just past midnight. The MedTech office. Alex's desk. The call had just ended. He put the phone down, face down. The voice was still in his ear: "I changed a parameter. The middle layer's latency just went from 200 to 800. Watch it on your side, tell me if anything looks off." "Changed the latency?" Alex said. "Fine. I'll keep an eye on it from here. I'll shout if something moves." He opened three windows. The first, the middle layer mirror, the one Derek had asked him to watch. The second, his own probe view, hung upstream of the collector path, to see how often it came and from which direction. The third hid in the background, no name, never showing up in the taskbar. He didn't sit down right away. First, he ran an environment check: probe session count, log rotation policy, whether the ssh authorization on this jump box was still alive. All three checked out. Then he pulled the chair closer. At this hour, any extra connection wo

Believe it or not, the Tesla Cybercab is coming. Nearly two years after Elon Musk first unveiled the gold-tinted, gull-wing door sporting, steering wheel-free two-seaters as the future of Tesla's autonomy efforts, the company is finally putting them into operation as part of its robotaxi service in Austin, Texas. Public rides are here, and as […]

The electric-auto maker will officially debut its steering-wheel-free robotaxi on Thursday. But building the vehicle is the easy part.

Cyber Security and Cloud Computing are consistently named among the top-paying, highest-demand IT career tracks for 2026 — and they’re also deeply connected, which is exactly what makes choosing between them confusing for freshers. Most cloud roles require security awareness, and most modern security roles require solid cloud knowledge. So the real question isn’t “which field is better” — it’s which one should be your primary specialization, with the other as a supporting skill. Here’s a practical roadmap to help you decide. What Each Field Actually Involves Day to Day Cloud Computing professionals design, deploy, and manage infrastructure on platforms like AWS, Azure, or Google Cloud. Day-to-day work includes provisioning servers, managing storage and networking, setting up CI/CD pipelines, and optimizing costs and performance. It’s closely tied to DevOps practices — automation, containers (Docker, Kubernetes), and infrastructure-as-code. Cyber Security professionals protect systems, networks, and data from unauthorized access and attacks. Entry-level work often starts in a Security Operations Center (SOC), monitoring alerts, investigating incidents, and managing tools like firewalls, SIEM platforms, and vulnerability scanners. It branches later into specializations like penetration testing, cloud security, or governance and compliance. Skill Overlap vs Skill Divergence They share a foundation: networking fundamentals, operating systems (especially Linux), and increasingly, cloud platform basics — since most organizations now run infrastructure on AWS, Azure, or GCP rather than fully on-premises. Where they diverge: Cloud Computing leans toward building and automating — you’re constructing and scaling systems. Cyber Security leans toward defending and investigating — you’re protecting what’s already built and reacting to threats against it. If you enjoy building things and seeing systems run efficiently, cloud tends to be the more natural fit. If you enjoy problem-

Every time I tried to explain technical debt to a business leader early in my career, I watched their eyes glaze over at roughly the same word. I would talk about coupling, legacy modules, and refactoring, and they would hear a developer asking for time to tidy up code that already worked. From where they sat, it sounded like a hobby. The system ran, customers paid, revenue arrived. Why would anyone spend money making invisible internals prettier when there were features to ship and deadlines to hit? The breakthrough, for me, was to stop explaining the engineering and start describing the finance, because technical debt is a loan whether anyone chose to take it or not. Every time we shipped a shortcut to hit a date, we borrowed speed today against effort tomorrow. That is often a completely rational trade. Getting to market fast can be worth far more than a clean design nobody ever sees. The problem is not the borrowing. The problem is that this loan accrues interest silently, and the business had been making payments for years without ever seeing the statement. That interest shows up in ways leaders actually feel, once you connect the dots for them. It is why a feature that used to take a week now takes a month. It is why every change risks breaking something unrelated, so nothing ships without a nervous weekend. It is why new hires take half a year to become productive in a codebase that only its veterans can navigate. None of that reads as "debt" on any report, but it is the compounding cost of shortcuts taken long ago, paid daily by everyone who touches the system. Framed that way, the conversation finally changes. I stop asking for permission to clean things up and start presenting a financial choice. We can keep paying this interest indefinitely and watch our delivery speed keep bleeding out, or we can pay down some principal now and get that velocity back. Sometimes the honest answer is to keep carrying the debt, and that is fine. What is not fine is carrying

Have you ever read a job posting and your heart just sings the song of "HIRE ME PLEASE!!!", yeah,...

What’s up everyone. My name is Theodore Ochsen, founder of DaemonCore. I’ve been a developer for well over a decade, and my background goes back to running three PC repair shops before eventually moving heavily into software development, cybersecurity and building applications with my team. My road here has been anything but normal. A serious auto accident in 2015 basically nuked the life I had built. I lost the shops, lost my ability to walk and spent almost three years in rehab learning to walk again. Eventually I lost my marriage, my home and ended up in a wheelchair with pretty much one thing I could still do: code. I used to park myself at Barnes & Noble and read programming books for hours because I couldnt afford to buy all the damn things. Then I'd go back and try what I learned. I just kept building. In 2022 I went back to school for Forensic Psychology with a focus on cybercrime, and I graduate with my BA next month. At the same time, DaemonCore has grown into a team building software, security tools and some weird shit that occasionally starts as “what if we tried this?” and somehow becomes an actual product. One of our newest projects is DaemonCore Academy, which we started building last September and finally launched publicly about a week ago. The concept is pretty simple: cybersecurity education should be hands-on and the knowledge should be free. No three lessons followed by a credit-card screen. We start with fundamentals and work toward hands-on drills and environments where people can actually experiment, break things legally, understand WHY they broke, reset and try again. I'm joining DEV because I dont just want to drop links and disappear. I want to talk development. Architecture, Android, React, databases, security, stupid bugs that steal six hours of your life, things we've learned the hard way, and probably a few things we'll get completely fucking wrong and learn from publicly. I’ve spent enough years doing this to know one thing for certain

333 miles of real-world range with uncompromised comfort and off-road ability.