> Lookout’s forensic analysis of two Pinduoduo APK app samples released prior to March 5 ... has determined that both contain malicious code that exploits CVE-2023-20963, the Android privilege-escalation vulnerability that wouldn’t become public until March 6 and wouldn’t be patched in user devices for up to two weeks later.
Though it says it was exploited before Google's disclosure (not sure if disclosure is referring to the timing of the patch, but the linked Google post is from 6th March).
> This privilege-escalation flaw, which was exploited prior to Google’s disclosure
AFAIK 23andme and Ancestry are competitors. This would makes sense why they asked Ancestry what they do and doesn’t use that to make the argument as each company may treat sharing differently.
I'm not sure I'd call them competitors. Yes they both take your spit and process it, yes they both allow you to see potential extended family but that's about the only similarities.
Ancestry added it as an extension of their genealogical services while 23andme was originally for personal medical discovery before the FDA came down on them and they had to change tactics.
If you scroll down a little further you'll see there are a few sections where they're organized by hue; once in a bar chart and once around a circle.
Let me know if you still can't find it and I'll try to explain more thoroughly or send you a screenshot.
Someone else mentioned they'd like to see the colors sorted by hue in the area where they're broken out by site. Maybe I'll update that section to be less random.
A house starts falling apart as soon as it's put together... and it keeps falling it apart, and you have to keep putting it back together. The distribution of expenses is lumpier with a house than with a condo, but it's certanly an ongoing cash outflow.
Toronto is mostly made up of 100-year-old brick houses, so the maintenance is mostly soft stuff like painting, gardening, etc. unless you do major renovations.
My last house I did, essentially, zero maintenance over a 10-year span except for a drain replacement ($2K). Every other expense was month to month expenses like heating and electrical.
When I finally decided to sell, I replaced the crappy carpet, painted the walls beige and made a 5x profit.
The experience we've had with hiring people from these bootcamps has been about 50/50. 50% of the people are completely unable to engineer and instead just know a language. 50% of them are hard workers and eventually learn how to be an engineer. 100% of them ask for outrageous salaries for not actually having any professional experience. I think the bootcamps spend a decent amount of their time setting high expectations and how to ask for a large amount of money.
It's the "get high-paying jobs on graduation" aspect of these programs that's never quite gelled for me. I can think of very few jobs I'd be solidly qualified for after a few months of training, no matter how intense the training. Engineering seems no different, and maybe even harder than most. People should be enrolling in bootcamps to learn the basics, not to get some sort of shortcut to a theoretically sexy job -- the true sexiness of which is entirely unknown unless and until they've actually tried it.
If these programs were/are feeding internships, awesome. That's a different story. And on that note, I see no reason why big tech companies can't create their own coding academies, or partner with bootcamps on more structured working internships and externships. The bootcamp --> full-time job connection doesn't make a ton of sense. But bootcamp --> internship --> job makes more sense.
There are a lot of smart, hard-working people out there who, for one reason or another, just never got a deep exposure to computers in childhood, high school, or college. (Reliable childhood access to a decent-quality computer, much less programming resources, is not as common as we might expect.) Giving them a shot at learning is a noble and justifiable endeavor. Not all of them will enjoy it, and not all of them will make it through. But a lot of them might. They need to be going into it with the right expectations, though.
Legal internships require you to be in a degree program, so it's not a good path for those of us who are older and looking for a career change.
I have the aptitude and experience to do well in an internship, if I could get one. Having to go from bootcamp to internship would cut off the only structured path available to land a programming job, short of going back into a degree program which is both undesirable and financially not feasible.
I'm in a bootcamp right now that I don't entirely need, but I'm building up my GitHub account and looking at following up with something like thoughtbot's Apprentice.io or (if I'm crazy lucky) getting into ThoughtWorks' junior developer program rather than trying to get a job with a large salary. I want to learn the ropes in this industry by consulting.
Edit: Also, if anyone reading this is looking to hire someone junior (and degreeless) and is committed to training, we should talk. Relocation is not a problem and neither is making an extended commitment on my end (as far as time and/or compensation). I do have a tech background, just not in dev. (Sorry, I gotta hustle! :D)
"Legal internships require you to be in a degree program"
Fair point, so let's take this a step further and make it something other than an internship. A training program, perhaps. An apprenticeship program, wherein you're paired up with a recognized master/mentor on a team, working on an actual product that will actually ship.
Seems to me that the biggest hurdles are the regulations surrounding what an "internship" requires. So let's hack internships.
The two companies that I mentioned are doing a good job at that but they're surely outliers. Also, only making $12/hr for 3 months in New York City is a big hardship, but not as big as paying for a bootcamp.
I think the biggest problem is most selection processes will merely maintain the demographic status quo for the industry. How do you rank older people pivoting careers and folks with the aptitude but no degree or industry experience where they'll be on a fair footing with all of the new CS grads who will be applying who could otherwise land a job anyway?
"How do you rank older people pivoting careers and folks with the aptitude but no degree or industry experience where they'll be on a fair footing with all of the new CS grads who will be applying who could otherwise land a job anyway?"
I think that's why the internship structure is crucial. Or maybe it's an externship. Or a part-time thing. Generally speaking, I would not put undergrad CS students at top universities into the same internships as I'd put recent grads of crash-course bootcamps. Bootcampers go into a different pool, in different roles, unless and until they graduate to better positions of more responsibility. If a bootcamper kicks serious ass and demonstrates him/herself just as good as a CS-trained graduate, then awesome, he/she can get fast-tracked into the regular job pool.
The goal of these programs should be to create runways for the career switchers and experience-deprived folks who show a decent aptitude for the profession. This would be a supplement to traditional recruiting pathways, rather than a conflict with or cannibalization thereof.
>>And on that note, I see no reason why big tech companies can't create their own coding academies, or partner with bootcamps on more structured working internships and externships.
You mean actually train people? Don't be ridiculous. Why do that when you can just fire and replace? /s
> 100% of them ask for outrageous salaries for not actually having any professional experience. I think the bootcamps spend a decent amount of their time setting high expectations and how to ask for a large amount of money.
Yep. That's a higher percentage than what I'd expect, but it still seems pretty natural. Bootcamps literally sell the idea.
This, incidentally, is part of the reason why there's regulation.
Schools within the big expensive areas (NYC, SF) seem to boast an average salary of around $75+K...this is for graduates who may have not done any programming before they started the session.
And then there are the intensive programs that say they can get you $100K when you graduate. But these involve students who have already programmed (either through school or professionally) but in another language. IMO, a seasoned Python or Java developer who spends 10 weeks intensively learning Rails/iOS (and going beyond the curriculum, if the curriculum is also aimed at beginners) is probably worth $100K in the NY/SF area.
$75k is about what the typical new college graduate with no industry experience gets as a salary for any major CS company in the bay area.
For a program that does 9-6 PM 5 days a week for 10 weeks, that's ~8 hours (not including lunch) x 5 days x 10 weeks = 400 total hours. That's about the equivalent class time to 8 semester-long CS courses.
Realistically, in terms of what they actually cover and what projects students have produced by the end of them, these programs are the equivalent of about 3 semester-long CS courses, in the best case. At best they are equivalent to around 10-15% of a degree.
> these programs are the equivalent of about 3 semester-long CS courses
I currently study at a top-5 CS school and previously attended a bootcamp. This comparison feels awkward to me, because they have neither equivalent structures nor goals.
The aims of most bootcamps, if I am to generalize, is to teach a relatively specific skillset applicable to industry. The most reasonable comparison would then be CS / ECE courses that aim to do the same (e.g. java & j2ee, web application development, java for android, etc.).
In this particular respect I would consider a bootcamp to be the equivalent of at least 4-5 "CS" courses, if not more. For one thing, the student teacher ratio is almost orders of magnitude better, and the material is often more relevant to current industry needs. I would also go as far as to say the quality of instructors at "bootcamps" teaching this material (at least, the one I attended) is superior.
On the other hand, there are more than a few individual semester long courses that are easily as grueling as a bootcamp. The courses I'm thinking of are traditional CS & ECE fare : compiler design & OS being prime examples. These are topics the bootcamp I attended (and, I assume all bootcamps) barely touch on, if at all - and all individually require almost as many hours as an entire 3 month bootcamp [1].
However, effort is pretty much also the only metric that can be used to compare the latter with "bootcamps". Since there is virtually 0 overlap [2] in material, it really is a matter of apples and oranges.
[1] For anyone but the exceedingly gifted, these courses require a minimum of 50 hrs a week.
[2] this lack of overlap also extends to classes on data structures & algorithms. This is material that's only taught obliquely (albeit somewhat effectively) at coding camps.
> a seasoned Python or Java developer who spends 10 weeks intensively learning Rails/iOS (and going beyond the curriculum, if the curriculum is also aimed at beginners) is probably worth $100K in the NY/SF area.
That's it?
Man, I'm suddenly feeling better about my higher salary in relatively less expensive LA.
I think that's a bit low. I'm a seasoned programmer with no CS degree, but an advanced degree "in a related field", live and work in the Bay Area (not SF) and my salary is closer to the mid-$100's per year.
A Rails "developer" might be worth just $100k, but that's because there are so many hipster/naive fresh graduates in the area willing to work for (relative) peanuts on social web app fluff.
So we've had a couple ask for $130k that went to HackReactor. Found it interesting that they both asked for the exact same number. We also had a couple from 2 different Chicago bootcamps asking for nearly 100k.
I do not live in Silicon Valley or NYC or Chicago. I live in Utah. Average household income is under $60k.
Average household income is a poor way to look at it, since tech jobs typically command much more than the average household income, even/especially in SF. (Average household income is 72k there).
Obviously they are different markets though, so I think your point stands.
Then why doesn't this device heat the water