Jamie Lord on LinkedIn: ‘We should have better answers by now’: climate scientists baffled by… (2024)

Phishing's still king of the cyber underworld, and it's evolving faster than our defences. Multi-channel attacks are the new norm, exploiting our fragmented digital lives across email, SMS, and collaboration tools.Cloudflare's recent blog post highlights a stark reality: 90% of cybersecurity incidents stem from phishing. It's not just about dodgy emails anymore. Attackers are craftily combining legitimate services like Google Forms with WhatsApp to sidestep traditional security measures.The idea that we can rely solely on email security is dangerously outdated. We need a holistic approach that covers all channels and integrates seamlessly with our workflows. But here's the rub: cobbling together solutions from multiple vendors is a recipe for disaster. It's expensive, complex, and leaves gaping holes in our defences.Is the cybersecurity industry failing us by pushing fragmented solutions? Are we inadvertently making the attackers' job easier by complicating our own security stack?It's time for a radical rethink of our approach to phishing protection. We need solutions that are as agile and interconnected as the threats we face.What's your experience with multi-channel phishing attacks? How are you adapting your security strategy to keep pace?https://lnkd.in/ehBKBTzB#CyberSecurity #PhishingAttacks #TechInnovation

The UK's new £22m military spy satellite, Tyche, is a curious mix of innovation and outdated thinking. With a resolution of just 90cm, it's barely better than commercial options available for years. This project smacks more of post-Brexit posturing than genuine military advancement.In an era of swarm satellites and sophisticated anti-satellite weapons, a single washing machine-sized sat seems woefully vulnerable. It's likely to be neutralised swiftly in any serious conflict.However, credit where it's due - the water-based propulsion system is genuinely innovative. By superheating water into steam for thrust, it's both efficient and environmentally friendly. 10 litres providing 5-7 years of station-keeping is impressive engineering for a small satellite.Yet, this clever propulsion can't mask the broader strategic shortsightedness. The MoD seems stuck in a 1960s mindset, chasing outdated capabilities while ignoring modern space warfare realities. For true resilience, they should be investing in distributed networks of small sats that could actually survive in a contested space environment.As the only G8 nation without sovereign satellite imaging, the UK is desperately trying to play catch-up. But is this really the best use of our defence budget? What strategic advantage does this actually provide over existing commercial and allied capabilities?If this is the start of Britain's journey to becoming a "meaningful space power by 2030", we're in for a bumpy ride. The innovation is there, but the strategy seems light-years behind.https://lnkd.in/ewSNJxgH#SpaceDefence #MilitarySatellites #UKMilitary

The Silicon Valley "broligarchs" are at it again, this time with a brazen display of political flip-flopping that would make even the most seasoned Westminster politician blush. Once critical of Trump, tech moguls like Musk and Andreessen are now championing him. It's a stark reminder that we're already living in a world where a handful of tech overlords wield outsized influence over our lives.These billionaires, drunk on their own success, fancy themselves above trivial matters like national laws or social responsibility. They're perfectly happy to exploit public infrastructure and an educated workforce, but Heaven forbid they should have to pay their fair share in taxes or submit to regulatory oversight.This isn't just about tax havens or dodging regulations. It's a fundamental rejection of the social contract. These chaps believe their ideas should reign supreme, regardless of what the unwashed masses might want. They're not calling for anarchy - they still want laws to protect their vast fortunes. They just don't think those pesky rules should apply to them.The hypocrisy is staggering. The very system that allowed them to amass unimaginable wealth is now seen as an inconvenience. They've conveniently forgotten that a functional democracy, with robust institutions and a healthy middle class, is what allows their businesses to flourish in the first place.This myopic power grab threatens the foundations of our economic and political systems on both sides of the pond. We're witnessing the birth of a new techno-feudalism, where our lives are increasingly dictated by the whims of a few Silicon Valley kingpins.We should recognise this threat for what it is. The broligarchs may think they can insulate themselves from the consequences of their actions, but history has a way of catching up with those who hoard power and wealth.The question is: are we content to let a cabal of tech billionaires run roughshod over our democracies? Or will we demand a system that works for the many, not just the privileged few?https://lnkd.in/eBdPEnyc#TechOligarchy #WealthInequality #DemocracyAtRisk

The modern tech interview is a charade, a dance of deception where both parties engage in mutual BS. Candidates rehearse canned responses to "tell me about a time when..." questions, while companies spout empty platitudes about their "amazing culture." It's time we cut through this nonsense.Instead of asking vapid questions about company values, probe for the real issues: How often do critical production incidents occur? What's the average tenure of engineers on the team? How many hours of meetings are developers subjected to each week?The dirty truth is that most tech jobs are soul-crushing affairs of legacy code, micromanagement, and death by a thousand Jira tickets. Companies don't want to admit this, so they sell a fantasy of ping pong tables and free snacks.As candidates, we must be more cynical. Assume the rosy picture painted in interviews is false. Look for tells - the hesitation when asked about work-life balance, the forced smile when discussing growth opportunities. Read between the lines.The power dynamic in tech hiring is broken. Until we demand radical transparency from employers, we'll continue to be sold a bill of goods. It's time to flip the script and treat interviews as the adversarial encounters they truly are.What hard-hitting questions do you ask to uncover the skeletons in a company's closet? How do you cut through the corporate doublespeak?https://lnkd.in/ehYu6-jC#TechCareers #SoftwareEngineering #CorporateCulture

4

1 Comment

Microsoft Authenticator's design flaw exposes a critical vulnerability in our digital security ecosystem. Here's the crux: when users scan a QR code to add a new account, the app can overwrite existing accounts that share the same username—typically an email address.This isn't just poor UX; it's a security nightmare. Imagine losing access to your bank account because you added your email service to the authenticator. The app provides no clear warning about this overwrite "feature", leaving users in the dark until it's too late.The real shocker? Microsoft claims this is intentional. They argue that websites should include unique identifiers in their QR codes. This shifts blame onto other companies and users, ignoring the fact that every other major authenticator app manages to avoid this issue.This flaw undermines the very purpose of multi-factor authentication. Instead of enhancing security, it introduces a new vector for account lockouts and potential social engineering attacks. An attacker could potentially exploit this to deliberately overwrite a target's authentication for critical services.The broader implications are troubling. How many other "features" in our security tools are actually ticking time bombs? This incident highlights the dangers of closed-source security solutions and the need for rigorous, independent auditing of authentication systems.It also raises questions about the competence and priorities of big tech when it comes to user security. Are they more concerned with locking users into their ecosystem than providing robust, user-friendly security?What other critical flaws might we be overlooking in our daily tools?https://lnkd.in/eMd25cS4#InfoSec #AuthenticationFail #TechAccountability

3

X's apparent decision to remove authentication requirements for viewing posts has reignited the debate around open access to social media content. While this move appears to benefit users by restoring functionality to alternative frontends like Nitter, it's merely a superficial fix for a fundamentally broken platform.The real issue lies in X's capricious approach to user experience and data access. One day they erect walls, the next they tear them down—leaving developers and users in a constant state of uncertainty. This volatility is untenable for any serious information ecosystem.We must ask ourselves: why are we still clinging to a platform that consistently prioritises engagement metrics over genuine user value? The ensh*ttification of X is not a bug; it's a feature of its business model.It's high time the tech community leads the charge in migrating to more open, federated alternatives. The Fediverse offers a promising path forward, free from the whims of billionaire egos and shareholder demands.For those who argue that network effects are insurmountable, I say: rubbish. Every mass exodus begins with a trickle. By actively promoting and building upon open protocols, we can create a more resilient and user-centric social web.The future of online discourse is too important to leave in the hands of a single corporation. Are you ready to make the switch, or will you continue to be held hostage by X's algorithmic whims?#SocialMedia #DigitalRights #Fediverse #TechEthics

3

Recent reports of families being poisoned after relying on AI-generated mushroom guides are deeply concerning. While the specific incidents may be questionable, they highlight a broader issue: the proliferation of AI-generated content in domains where expertise is literally a matter of life and death.Proponents argue that AI can democratise knowledge and make niche expertise more accessible. But when it comes to identifying potentially lethal fungi, can we really trust algorithms trained on internet data to replace decades of human experience?The real danger here isn't just bad information - it's plausible misinformation. AI-generated content can appear authoritative while being dangerously wrong. And unlike human authors, AI systems have no concept of the real-world consequences of their outputs.Perhaps we should treat powerful AI models more like dangerous machinery, with strict regulations on their use in high-stakes domains. After all, we don't let just anyone operate heavy industrial equipment - why should generating potentially life-threatening advice be any different?Or is this an overreaction? Should the onus be on consumers to verify information, regardless of its source? Are we at risk of stifling innovation in a misguided attempt to protect people from their own poor judgement?Is AI-generated content in sensitive domains a public health crisis waiting to happen, or just the latest moral panic around new technology?https://lnkd.in/eNKZPWdw#ArtificialIntelligence #PublicSafety #TechEthics #AIRegulation

1

Everyone's banging on about GPT-5 and the next big leap, but let's face facts: we're years away from another seismic shift. OpenAI's own people are hinting at late 2025 for the next major breakthrough. That's an eternity in tech time.So what are we doing? Building products that don't quite work, hoping some magical future model will save us? It's a mug's game.Here's the uncomfortable truth: if your AI product isn't viable with today's models, you're likely building vapourware. The "we'll be ready when the next big thing drops" mentality is a crutch for poor product-market fit.Yes, incremental improvements are coming. But betting your company on a quantum leap is foolish. Remember, OpenAI isn't the only player anymore. The field is crowded, and progress is unpredictable.Stop obsessing over what might be. Build something useful now, with what we have. If you can't, maybe it's time to admit your idea just isn't that good.Thoughts? Agree or disagree?https://lnkd.in/emcWFFWj#ArtificialIntelligence #ProductDevelopment #TechInnovation

As a seasoned developer, I've watched with growing concern as microfrontends have become a darling of the tech world. But let's strip away the hype and look at the reality.Microfrontends promise independence and scalability, but they often deliver a distributed monolith - all the complexity of microservices with none of the benefits. We're seeing teams struggle with dependency hell, performance issues from duplicated libraries, and the nightmare of debugging across multiple repositories.The irony? Most organisations adopting microfrontends haven't even mastered modularisation in a monolith. They're using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, hoping technology will solve what are fundamentally organisational issues.Here's a hard truth: if you can't build a well-structured monolith, you won't be able to build good microfrontends. The skills required - clear domain boundaries, well-defined interfaces, disciplined dependency management - are the same. Microfrontends don't magically grant these abilities; they just make your mistakes more distributed and harder to fix.Before you jump on the microfrontend bandwagon, consider this:1. Have you truly exhausted the possibilities of a modular monolith?2. Are your deployment bottlenecks actually caused by frontend coupling, or is it a process issue?3. Can your teams handle the additional complexity of cross-repository dependencies and runtime integration?Remember, Netflix and Amazon use microfrontends because they have hundreds of teams working on a single product. Unless you're at that scale, you're probably introducing complexity you don't need and can't handle.So, next time someone suggests microfrontends as the solution to your frontend woes, ask them to prove it. Make them demonstrate how it solves real problems you're facing, not hypothetical issues you might have in some imagined future.What's your experience? Have microfrontends delivered on their promises, or have they just added more layers to your tech debt?https://lnkd.in/eMYgBU7t#SoftwareArchitecture #FrontendDevelopment #TechStrategy

1