Does Axiom support the ability to use network request data as a condition? I often test analytics integrations, and it's pretty repetitive to look at the query parameters or browser extensions for each one. It'd be helpful to automate tests based on whether a pageview generates a request to domain.com with param x=0, etc.
We actually do look at network requests, but we only do this to assess page-load. Assessing this is a surprisingly hard-problem.
I don't think our UI Testing tools monitor network traffic though. I can see how that might recur - if you email a test scenario to (my HN name) AT axiom.ai, we may be able to whip up some JS, that could be turned into a no-code block, for you and others to use.
That's definitely a real concern for some countries, but Zimbabwe has only used other currencies for years. When I went 5 years ago, you could pay for your entrance visa in either USD, GBP, or EUR. All large grocery stores had that day's exchange rates posted near the entrance in USD, ZAR, and at least one other currency (GBP, EUR, or Botswana pula are the ones I remember).
Things have changed in the 5 years - Zimbabwe now has a (quasi)currency - the "Bond notes" which are officially 1:1 with the USD. Getting access to cash in this quasi-currency is hard, getting it in USD is well-neigh impossible^w^w expensive.
I used to use Linode for some projects, and really appreciated their speed and server quality, which seemed better than Digital Ocean at the time.
But after using them for 12-18 months, and losing several days of data due to the 2015 DDoS, and reading about more and more security issues, I switched back to DO and haven't looked back. The performance differences aren't noticeable to me, and I'd rather have my hosting through a company with a better security record than Linode.
DO isn't any better, just hasn't been targeted by any serious attackers yet.
until very recently, they didn't allow using a custom kernel (except via kexec hackaround) and were quite slow updating their kernel for security patches. they repeatedly gave random dates for implementation, then repeatedly pushed them back, then eventually just ignored users on this issue for years.
their images were also poorly sanitized, leading to the well-known problem of SSH host key duplication, which was the case for years.
> just hasn't been targeted by any serious attackers yet.
Source? Just because they haven't announced any successful security breaches, doesn't mean they haven't been seriously targeted.
In fact, considering the amount of times my random dedicated server instance (not hosted at DO) gets hit with random attacks, I'm sure a large provider like DO has had numerous serious, targeted attacks against their network/servers/control panel/etc.
> Source? Just because they haven't announced any successful security breaches, doesn't mean they haven't been seriously targeted.
True, and in fact the only basis for my statement is that they have historically taken security so not-seriously that it would be surprising if they were in fact able to withstand advanced attacks, given that even the most secure organizations are often unable to do so. (see: every talk at Black Hat)
> In fact, considering the amount of times my random dedicated server instance (not hosted at DO) gets hit with random attacks, I'm sure a large provider like DO has had numerous serious, targeted attacks against their network/servers/control panel/etc.
this statement is just as baseless as mine. perhaps even moreso, since the two numbers seem to have nothing to do with each other. one could just as well say "my server gets lots of bogus SSH attempts, so banks get robbed a lot".
In addition to that, they even had security issues where people could use testdisk or any other file recovery tools to recover files which would often belong to another customer.
We moved >1K$ hosting per month from them to StormOnDemand because of the lack of transparency on security issues, particularly the PagerDuty incident.
This was heartbreaking because Linode's value (performance, reliability, support, price) is almost impossible to match if your requirements fit their VM configurations.
But in the end, we did not want to risk another security or DDoS fiasco. We estimated that the risk was high that they would be targeted again, we could not believe their promises to get better at face value considering previous transparency issues, and we did not want to tell our customers that a company that had experienced security issues for the past three years had suffered from another attack[1].
They seem to have invested quite a lot in their networking infrastructure (kudos!), but I believe they still use their old coldfusion applications.
[1] Non-technical customers often ask us why we are not hosting on Amazon because they heard it's where serious companies host their servers (!). We used to explain why Linode was a more cost-effective choice, but Linode was not a nice name to google in early 2016.
I think they're aiming to enable people to buy from ads without ever leaving Facebook. Reduces friction for the buyer and has the potential to be a major source of revenue from ecommerce companies.
I'm sure they realize how much money Google is printing with their shopping campaigns, and FB ads haven't proven to be very rewarding for ecommerce outside of fashion/lifestyle. Adding a major feature like that would be enormous in grabbing some of that market.
User-to-user is just one piece of the puzzle. Facebook has faced a REAL uphill battle convincing advertisers of the value they add in the path to conversion. Anyone who is familiar with cross-channel attribution knows this all to well. Many of FB's recent updates have been big slaps in the face to many advertisers, but this could be a huge win.
It would in essence enable them to go from being what is typically one of the first points in the "generating awareness" stage to being a last touch success. Most advertisers are not savvy to things like attribution (hence one of the reasons AdWords still focuses on last click in their main UI), so being able to say to businesses "here is how much money you earned directly and immediately from your ad" is a huge win for proving the value they add.
Any PMs or engineers at FB--would love to chat with you about this and how it ties into the attribution picture. Seriously--it's a huge problem for you right now.
What about sites involving religion? I imagine there is a need or will be a need for minority groups (whether pro or anti-religion) in various developing nations, but it's not mentioned on the project page at all.
