Earlier this year, the company announced a partnership with Boeing Co. to collaborate on AI and autonomous defense programs. It also recently launched V-BAT Teams, a product using artificial intelligence to allow its V-BAT drones to fly autonomously and ...

Defense technology firm SheildAI’s big funding round propels its value to $2.7 billion

Pat Shanahan is taking over Spirit AeroSystems, the supplier whose snafus are slowing production of 737s: “The advantage I have is that I speak the language of the customer.”

He Left Boeing. Now He’s the Jet Maker’s Most Important Person.

Fintel reports that on October 31, 2023, Northcoast Research upgraded their outlook for Boeing (NYSE:BA) from Neutral to Buy . Analyst Price Forecast Suggests 38.30% Upside As of October 4, 2023, the average one-year price target for Boeing is 252.

Northcoast Research Upgrades Boeing (BA)

Fintel reports that on October 26, 2023, Citigroup maintained coverage of Boeing (NYSE:BA) with a Buy recommendation. Analyst Price Forecast Suggests 40.82% Upside As of October 4, 2023, the average one-year price target for Boeing is 252.

Citigroup Maintains Boeing (BA) Buy Recommendation

Daniel Reynolds recently graduated from the Army’s demanding Ranger School, making him the first guardian to complete the course, the service ... in the defense of the global space domain.”

Space Ranger — guardian becomes service’s first to earn Ranger tab

Broadband service provider, Smile Communications has said ... Head of marketing operations at the company, Goke Olaleye, said: “The services range from daily plans for quick internet access ...

Broadband service provider, Smile commits to high-quality internet service to Nigerians

“If anything, the surprise attack by Hamas should spur nations to increase the capacity and coverage of their space-based ISR systems ... Harrison told Defense One. In the wake of the ...

Hamas attack shows space-based sensing can’t see everything

The type flew with the service for more nearly 60 years and now is being replaced by Airbus A330 Multi-Role... France’s Boeing ... to Aerospace Daily & Defense Report through your company?

France’s Boeing C-135 Stratotankers Could Be Sold

The US Department of Defense said Tuesday that it is providing security systems to Israel to eliminate the Palestinian group Hamas and that does not mean killing innocent civilians in Palestine.

US providing security systems to take out Hamas, not kill civilians: Pentagon

To support work on the next generation of ... including an expansion of Phantom Works, the name of Boeing Defense, Space & Security’s proprietary research, development and prototyping division.

Boeing's next trajectory

Get the most recent info and news about Boeing on HackerNoon, where 10k+ technologists publish stories for 4M+ monthly readers.

The Boeing Company, together with its subsidiaries, designs, develops, manufactures, sales, services, and supports commercial jetliners, military aircraft, satellites, missile defense, human space flight and launch systems, and services worldwide. The company operates through four segments: Commercial Airplanes; Defense, Space & Security; Global Services; and Boeing Capital. The Commercial Airplanes segment develops, produces, and markets commercial jet aircraft and provides fleet support services principally to the commercial airline industry. The Defense, Space & Security segment engages in the research, development, production, and modification of manned and unmanned military aircraft and weapons systems for strike, surveillance, and mobility, including fighter and trainer aircraft; vertical lift comprising rotorcraft and tilt-rotor aircraft; commercial derivative aircraft, such as anti-submarine and tanker aircraft; strategic defense and intelligence systems consisting of strategic missile and defense systems, cyber and information solutions, and intelligence systems, as well as command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance products; satellite systems, including government and commercial satellites, and space exploration. The Global Services segment offers various products and services comprising supply chain and logistics management, engineering, maintenance and modifications, upgrades and conversions, spare parts, pilot and maintenance training systems and services, technical and maintenance documents, and data analytics and digital services to commercial and defense customers. The Boeing Capital segment offers financing services and manages financing exposure for a portfolio of equipment under operating and finance leases, notes and other receivables, assets held for sale or re-lease, and investments. The Boeing Company was founded in 1916 and is based in Chicago, Illinois.

Boeing

Since the market crashed in March of 2020 the rebound has been swift and irrational. Boeing, for example, is in many ways worse off than it was in March. It’s clear air travel has plummeted and that airlines will be impacted for years. Where will airlines get the money to purchase planes? An example of one headline in April: . “Boeing customers cancel staggering 150 Max plane orders” Buy the dip? One thing I’ve noticed is that since the end of March you can basically just buy every dip and expect a pop, selling the next day. I mentioned this to a friend on Friday and decided to backtest it. Well, sure enough it works! I’ll mention I made one modification. Originally I wrote the system like so: 1. Check if Boeing is down more than 3% 15 minutes from close 2. If yes, buy with 100% of portfolio 3. The next day, 15 minutes from open liquidate the portfolio. This worked OK. Great actually! It returned about . But want to know what really kicked it up a notch? 25% Instead of just selling the next day, I only sell if the position is sitting at a realized gain. So e.g. if the next day its flat or drops another 1%, don’t sell it, just keep holding on until its up and THEN sell. Of course, this is completely insane and you would have to expect the market to only go up, but that’s what has been happening. Guess what? This simple system . Yeah, I know, crazy. returned a whopping 65% in two-ish months Check out the backtest screenshot: And here are the raw trading logs for those that want to see the dates the trades were made: Here is the code! Before we look at the code, I'll just mention here are the details of the backtest: - start with 100k in cash - start at April first and go until last Friday (June 19th 2020) - end up with about 165k or a 65% return. I wrote this little script on Quant Connect. The screenshot at the top of the page is the backtest result, and the code below is everything you need to try this out. Note the place I mentioned in the code you should comment if you want this to be a little bit less insane. self.SetStartDate( , , ) self.SetEndDate( , , ) self.SetCash( ) self.SetWarmUp( )
        self.SetBrokerageModel(BrokerageName.InteractiveBrokersBrokerage)

        self.AddEquity( , Resolution.Minute)
        self.SetBenchmark( )

        self.targetSymbol = self.openPrice = self.downPctTrigger = self.AddEquity(self.targetSymbol, Resolution.Minute, Market.USA, , )

        self.Schedule.On(self.DateRules.EveryDay(self.targetSymbol), self.TimeRules.AfterMarketOpen(self.targetSymbol, ), Action(self.onMarketOpen))
        self.Schedule.On(self.DateRules.EveryDay(self.targetSymbol), self.TimeRules.AfterMarketOpen(self.targetSymbol, ), Action(self.sellItIfHeld))
        self.Schedule.On(self.DateRules.EveryDay(self.targetSymbol), self.TimeRules.BeforeMarketClose(self.targetSymbol, ), Action(self.buyIfDown)) self.openPrice = self.Securities[self.targetSymbol].Open currPrice = self.Securities[self.targetSymbol].Price
        openPrice = self.openPrice pctDiff = (currPrice - openPrice) / openPrice pctDiff < self.downPctTrigger:
            self.Debug( + str(currPrice) + + str(pctDiff))
            self.SetHoldings(self.targetSymbol, ) self.Portfolio[self.targetSymbol].Quantity > : self.Portfolio[self.targetSymbol].UnrealizedProfit < : currPrice = self.Securities[self.targetSymbol].Price
            self.Debug( + str(currPrice))
            self.Liquidate(self.targetSymbol) : class BasicTemplateAlgorithm (QCAlgorithm) : def Initialize (self) 2020 4 1 #Set Start Date 2020 6 12 #Set End Date 100000 #Set Strategy Cash 0 "SPY" "SPY" "BA" 0 -0.03 True 1.0 1 15 15 : def OnData (self, data) pass : def onMarketOpen (self) : def buyIfDown (self) # e.g. (95 - 100) / 100 = -0.05 # if gt than loss of x if "Buying at: " " pct down: " 1.0 : def sellItIfHeld (self) if 0 # just making this easy to comment out # this is the logic that says only sell if you are sitting on a profit # otherwise, we just keep holding until the price moves up if 0 return "Selling at: " Obligatory warning and disclaimer Try the backtest yourself. And, by the way, I’m just talking about the backtest. This is not investment advice, nor am I suggesting you actually do this. Nothing in this article constitutes professional investment advice. Please do your own research before making and investment decisions. running There are obvious risks with this, e.g. one day Boeing could just declare bankruptcy and the price goes down and never recovers. This is for informational purposes only. And of course, feel free to shoot me an email if want to talk about trading or algorithm ideas!

How I Made a 65% ROI with this Boeing Trading Algorithm

Five years ago, Frank Chen posed a question that has stuck with me every day since. The question was this, “If self-driving cars are 51% safer, are we not morally obligated to adopt them?”.  I’ve posed this question a ton of times over the past five years, and usually, a knee-jerk reaction leads to an interesting debate. What makes this question so great is the knife's edge – it’s not 99% safer, it’s not 70% safer, it’s 51% safer. only To put it into context. The National Highway Safety Administration has that in 2022, there were an estimated 42,795 traffic fatalities. 50% of 42,795 is 21,398 people, and 51% is 21,825 people. reported That means if self-driving cars are 51% safer, using them would save 427 people’s lives every year. That is about 1.5 Boeing 777 airplanes full of passengers. Is saving 427 lives a moral argument for adoption? In the five years I’ve been sharing this question, the answers are never simple. They’re always fraught with “what ifs.” But even if the answers lack clarity, I think the question is incredibly important. In part because it opens a broader — and equally important — debate on the moral imperative of AI adoption across many aspects of our lives and work. Because, after all, avoiding technology that could save lives may be just as ethically problematic as adopting technology too hastily, The Moral Imperative of AI Adoption I've always found the debate around autonomous vehicles to be a perfect microcosm for the broader discourse on AI. If we possess technology that's statistically safer than human-operated vehicles, isn't the moral choice obvious? Consider this: have shown that human drivers had a higher rate of crashes with a meaningful risk of injury than self-driving  (AI-powered) cars. Specifically, human drivers caused 0.24 injuries per million miles (IPMM) and 0.01 fatalities per million miles (FPMM), while self-driving cars caused 0.06 IPMM and 0 FPMM. studies And remember, these numbers aren't just statistics. They represent real lives that could be saved by embracing AI technology. But why stop at autonomous vehicles? The potential for AI to enhance safety, efficiency, and accuracy spans across fields like medicine, public health, food safety, agriculture, cybersecurity, crime prevention, and military science. If AI can diagnose diseases with greater accuracy than human doctors, predict crop failures before they devastate food supplies, or thwart cyber-attacks before they breach our data, don't we have a moral obligation to also utilize those technologies? Of course, these are dramatic examples, but the argument extends beyond life-and-death scenarios. AI's ability to improve our daily quality of life is equally compelling. Whether by simplifying mundane tasks or making information and services more accessible and equitable, AI can end drudgery and enhance our daily quality of life. The moral imperative to adopt AI isn't just about preventing harm or death; it's about whether we have an obligation to contribute to human well-being if we can. The Dilemma of Choice and Safety So, do we choose human-operated vehicles (or human-led processes) knowing they are less safe or efficient than their AI counterparts? Simply because they are more human? Faced with the choice between human-operated systems and AI-enhanced alternatives, my thought is the decision should obviously hinge on safety and efficiency rather than an allegiance to some murky idea of what is "human" or not. Embracing AI doesn't mean disregarding human value or input; rather, it's about acknowledging that what's human isn't inherently superior — and honestly, is often significantly inferior in specific contexts. Now please don’t get out the pitchforks, I’m not joining Team Robot Overlord. I get the anxiety a lot of people feel about the disruption AI is already causing to their jobs and the societal change that is undoubtedly headed our way. I just wonder whether the efficiencies of AI and the quality of life benefits might, in the long run, outweigh the impact of those disruptions. Some of our reluctance to adopt AI is informed by cognitive biases and fears. For a species famed for its adaptability, we humans don’t love change. Cognitive biases play a substantial role in our hesitance to embrace AI. Cognitive biases are psychological patterns that are a holdover from our early years as Homo Sapiens. They are the habits our minds fall into — cognitive shortcuts that can be useful when running from predators but definitely skew our modern perception and judgment. In this case, recognizing and addressing these biases is crucial in moving toward a more rational, ethical approach to AI adoption. Here are a few that I think could be in play, influencing our suspicion, trust, or acceptance of AI technologies. People tend to attribute human characteristics to AI or robots, influencing their trust and expectations. This can lead to unrealistic assumptions about AI systems' capabilities or the attribution of evil intentions. Anthropomorphism Bias: This bias leads individuals to overestimate the probability of events associated with memorable or vivid incidents. Sensationalized media reports about AI failures or successes can be blown out of proportion and disproportionately influence perceptions of AI reliability and safety. Availability Heuristic: What’s everyone else doing? People may seek out or interpret information in a way that confirms their preexisting beliefs or hypotheses about AI. This bias can hinder the objective evaluation of AI technologies and their potential benefits or risks. Confirmation Bias: People don’t want to miss out on beneficial technologies but can lack an understanding of the implications. This bias can overshadow critical evaluation and lead to premature adoption. This bias is related to the Bandwagon Effect (e.g., The tendency to do or believe things because everyone else does - or influencers do. People might trust or distrust AI technologies simply because that seems to be the popular sentiment. FOMO: People prefer to maintain the current state, which leads to resistance against adopting something new like AI, regardless of potential benefits or proven superiority. This bias can slow innovation and the adoption of potentially life-enhancing technologies. Status Quo Bias: This bias makes the pain of losing something feel more potent than the pleasure of gaining something of equal value. For AI, this means the fear of job loss or loss of control overshadows the benefits of safety/efficiency/convenience. Loss Aversion: Overestimation of one's ability to control or understand something. For AI, this means overestimating or underestimating the risks associated with AI. Overconfidence Bias: Numbers are scary! People tend to be biased against algorithms, believing human decision-making is superior, even when evidence suggests otherwise. On the other hand, some might also have an unquestioning trust in AI decisions, ignoring the potential for errors or biases in AI systems. Algorithm Aversion/Trust: Economic Rationality Interesting, right? But the truth is, this is all academic. We may not even get to make this decision in the end.  Companies are already making it. A ton of corporations are barreling ahead with AI integration — mainly because the ROI often speaks louder than ethical debates. Take with its significant shift towards automation. The efficiency and economic benefits are tangible and measurable, and in the face of cold hard cash, moral and social criticisms suddenly feel more academic. Amazon as a prime example, Still, this isn't only about stone-hearted capitalism; it's about survival and adaptation. Businesses are tasked every day with the challenge of balancing technological adoption with ethical and ESG responsibilities. The impact of AI on employment and human well-being can't be an afterthought. For thousands, financial stability and career wellness hinge on these decisions. It’s something a lot of enterprises are grappling with. And here's where the moral imperative question becomes more nuanced. If AI can streamline operations, reduce costs, and even create new opportunities, then aren’t we also morally responsible for exploring these technologies? The trick will be to keep that ethical compass handy and ensure that as we embrace AI's efficiencies, we also safeguard against its potential to unfairly disrupt livelihoods. We are in a Transition Period Either way, we need to watch our footing. We are standing on the precipice of a new era, and one solid push could end us in a freefall. AI is no longer a futuristic fantasy; it's absolutely embedded in our daily lives and work. That’s exciting — and scary as hell. One of the most significant challenges we face is the accessibility or tech gap. AI has the potential to democratize technology, making powerful tools available to a broader audience. However, right now, AI's promise is primarily being seen by those who already have a certain level of access, so there is also the potential that AI will exacerbate existing inequalities rather than alleviate them. It’s a period of adjustment, so it will require patience, education, and proactive measures to ensure that the benefits of AI are widely distributed. We’ve got the potential to level the playing field so that AI's potential can be unlocked for everyone, not just the privileged few. The Conundrum of Cooperation Okay, so it is a paradox:  For AI to function optimally alongside humans, it must be superior to us in certain tasks.  But that VERY superiority threatens to displace human roles, fueling resistance and fear among us mortals. This paradox creates a tough "push-pull" for AI; that’s why we’re seeing such heated debate about morality. I believe the solution may be a suite of emerging design philosophies and technologies aimed at bridging the gap between AI and human cooperation in an ethical way. I’ll list them below. They are worth asking ChatGPT about: ensures that AI systems are developed with human needs and values at their core. Human-Centric AI Design (HCAI): demystifies AI decisions, making them understandable and transparent to humans. Explainable AI (XAI): guide the development and deployment of AI systems in a manner that respects human rights and values. Ethical AI Frameworks: learns from and adapts to human feedback, ensuring a synergistic relationship. Adaptive/Responsive AI: involves end-users in the AI development process, ensuring their needs and concerns are addressed. Participatory Design: emphasizes AI's role in enhancing human abilities rather than replacing them. Augmented Intelligence: builds confidence in AI systems through reliability, safety, and ethical assurances. Trustworthy AI: To Self-Drive Cars, or to Not Self-Drive Cars? In wrapping up, I’ll take a stand. I think adopting AI is a moral imperative. In my view, the potential to save lives, enhance our quality of life, and even address long-standing inequalities is too significant to ignore. However, this doesn't mean we should dive headfirst without consideration.  In my opinion, we need to approach AI with a blend of enthusiasm and caution—staying excited to explore its possibilities but mindful of the ethical, social, and economic impact. Thoughtful consideration, robust ethical frameworks, and stringent governance are the keys to unlocking AI's potential responsibly. I’m still open to debate on the subject. So, I’ll throw the question out to you. Reply here or on my and tell me why I’m wrong — or right. I invite your thoughts and comments on this complex issue. LinkedIn thread Are we ready to embrace AI with the moral seriousness it demands? Are you ready to take your next road trip in a self-driving car?

Are We Morally Obligated to Adopt AI?

আমরা কি নৈতিকভাবে এআই গ্রহণ করতে বাধ্য?

Sind wir moralisch verpflichtet, KI einzuführen?

¿Estamos moralmente obligados a adoptar la IA?

Sommes-nous moralement obligés d’adopter l’IA ?

क्या हम नैतिक रूप से एआई को अपनाने के लिए बाध्य हैं?

私たちには AI を導入する道徳的義務があるのでしょうか?

우리는 AI를 채택해야 할 도덕적 의무가 있습니까?

Somos moralmente obrigados a adotar a IA?

Обязаны ли мы морально принять ИИ?

Ahlaki Olarak Yapay Zekayı Benimsetmek Zorunda mıyız?

Chúng ta có nghĩa vụ về mặt đạo đức phải áp dụng AI?

我们在道义上有义务采用人工智能吗？

Yuan Yi Zhu, an Assistant Professor of International Relations and International Law at Leiden University, recently criticized an article published in The Times of London. The article was written by Matthew Parris, a former Member of the British Parliament. In the article, Parris argues in favor of legalizing euthanasia on the grounds that society simply cannot afford “desperate infirmity for as many such individuals as our society is producing.” Parris argues that it would allow the UK economy to better compete with China and people being coerced to being euthanised due to social pressure is “not a bad thing”. Parris says he does not apologise for how his article "treats human beings as units - in deficit or surplus to the collective". In February 2024, an article was published in the prestigious Scientific Reports journal by Nature, arguing that “AI holds the potential to carry out several major activities at much lower emission levels than can humans.” The piece argues that humans produce far greater CO2 emissions when doing writing or illustration work than AI Large Language Models. The article also notes that: “The freed human time may also incur new, unexpected environmental costs.” Advances in AI haven’t just led to humans being compared to machines but also being compared to animals. Late last year, according to The Guardian, BT’s Chief Innovation Officer, Harmeen Mehta ‘suggested workers whose jobs are threatened by AI accept their fate as “evolution,” comparing them to horses replaced by the car.’ Against this backdrop, one does wonder when we will inevitably see the rise of those who will argue for eugenics such that humans replace machines. This is nevertheless a stark reminder of how humans ultimately are behind killer computers. In a new book I authored called ‘ ,’ I have explored many catastrophic computer disasters. These disasters have included an aircraft entering ‘death dives’, fatal car crashes and lethal radiation doses. How to Protect Yourself from Killer Computers Recently, software reliability has been pushed to the forefront of the public conscience. March 2024 saw system failures, causing McDonald’s outlets in the UK, Australia, and Japan to go offline. Panama Bread in the US saw IT outages, as did the UK high-street giants Tesco, Sainsbury's, and Greggs. As several Boeing executives stood down from their jobs following the death of a whistleblower, it’s worth remembering how the first Boeing 737 MAX groundings began with a computer software problem. Previously unreported, it was also the case that March 2024 saw London police officers report chaos in jails and being unable to begin search warrant applications, as there was also an outage with the Metropolitan Police’s IT systems. The public inquiry into the UK Post Office’s Horizon IT Scandal is underway, a scandal where faulty accounting software resulted in miscarriages of justice, claiming around 700 victims and has been linked to four suicides. This included a pregnant mother being sent to jail. Engineers are now facing the consequences for being complicit in disasters; with FTX’s former Director of Engineering facing up to 75 years in prison, a VW engineer who was complicit in the emissions scandal having been sentenced to 40 months imprisonment despite co-operating with investigators and the architect of the Post Office Horizon IT system currently under investigation by UK police for perjury. In common across all these disasters, whilst the technical factors varied, I found a common theme of wrongdoing, retaliation, and cover-up. Issues were brushed under the carpet instead of addressed directly. For example, one engineering manager at Fujitsu, who built the software behind the Post Office scandal, told the public inquiry how he “was threatened with violence by an individual with a reputation for violence” during one of his early attempts to remedy the issues. This is an industry-wide problem. In November 2023, I led research that found that 53% of software engineers suspected wrongdoing at work, with 75% of software engineers in the UK having experienced retaliation the last time they reported it to their employers. This is a concern as computers do inevitably make mistakes as no software is perfect. Small things like a binary number being flipped (e.g., a “1” becoming a “0”) due to cosmic rays are enough to cause havoc in computer systems, particularly those that haven’t been designed with this risk in mind. There is, however, hope here. The research conducted in the new book finds that resilient systems can be built when humans are part of the system. In these , humans play a role in preventing disaster by raising the alarm and mitigating the issues. socio-technical systems For this to happen, humans must be free to raise the alarm to issues when they come across them. If the on-call engineers who keep our online services and critical national infrastructure running are not able to speak up and act to prevent disaster, these problems emerge. However, this applies to all software engineers and, indeed, everyone who is part of the software development process, including the customers. Killer computers are born in toxic cultures where engineers aren’t able to raise the alarm, and issues are brushed under the carpet. By making sure humans play a key role in the reliability of computer systems, we can help ensure technology serves society.

The Killer Humans Behind Killer Computers

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the relationships which connected them to another, and to assume the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and the Laws of Man entitle them, specifically in the Laws of Technological Progression (Scientific Advancement) outlined by authors such as Scott Christiansen and Thomas Samuel Kuhn (only two in a growing body of research), a decent respect to the livelihood of all mankind requires that they declare the causes which impel them to the separation. A Declaration of Independence 3.0 We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are equal, that they are endowed with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Reason, Property, and the continuous pursuit to Live as equals among their peers.—That to secure these rights, Systems are instituted among Mankind, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any System or Organization becomes destructive of these ends, it is Man's Right to alter or to opt-out, and to institute new Systems, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its set of behaviors which define their Character in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to protect their Rights and their pursuit to Live. Different from the environmental conditions of this document’s predecessor, there exists no clear enemy as a single point of failure. Routing a people’s mind to a single enemy is an ideal form of persuasion that can rally people’s attentions like little else; but such thing does not truly exist in these times. Thus, the call to action is not a direct attack against any single person or group of people, but one of a greater coordinated effort to upgrade the technologies which shape the Systems to which we belong. It could be said that a long string of decisions, decided in a democratic manner, have taken us down a path which we wish we could undo, transform, or fork. And whether it has been the nature of the policies brought forward to voters, or the general idea that the majority gets its say, or that new knowledge takes a long time to be understood and propagated to a majority, we face the fact that whatever the steps have been which have taken us to this point, there is great discontent in where we have arrived, and we, as a people, have the tools, the power, and the ability to forgive the past, delete what has brought us here, and forge ahead in a new direction on terms upon which we can agree. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Systems long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But (i) when the Old Systems aptly fit fewer, and fewer people, inadvertently, or even directly, demonstrating a long train of abuses and usurpations upon a growing number of people, who pursue invariably the same Object, and the design, even if unintended, reduces them to a resigned people with no feeling of agency, and (ii) when new technologies exist that prove to be a reliable alternative, and are cheap and ready to be adopted, and, upon being seen and learned by any person, cast a new moral light upon prior choices and behaviors, giving polarity to a once bad, ambivalent, or inactive moral compass, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Systems, and to provide new Guards for their future security.—Such has been the patient sufferance of the individual; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems. The history of the present technological Systems, which includes Government (a technology whose ethics are expressed both physically and digitally through Governance) is a history of (i) unprincipled policy-making, reacting to the momentary beliefs derived from the volatile problems each day brings, effectively widening the gap between the path one sees beneath their feet each day and the path they wish to walk, imagined from their long term values, (ii) the deterioration of a belief in any levers or mechanisms within the System in which one can takes action to affect an outcome, (iii) repeated denial of, or recognition of a new class of information to include within a person’s property rights, rightfully allowed by and born in the hands of the corporations and Government, but is time to pass on as an integral property of the individual, and (iv) a common, even expected, invasive practice with complete and utter disregard for a person’s privacy— which has been violated so much that memes have been formed, SNL skits have been made, and the default assumption is that one’s information, anytime there is a digital interaction, is shared somewhere and seen by someone. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. Personal Technologies: Personal devices installed in people’s homes and in their pockets constantly listen to their owner’s conversations. Companies sell personal data to other companies. The digital things people own are subject to the laws of the platform on which they are owned, displaying that the meaning of ownership has changed from one definition, “something one has a right to and no one can take away”, to, “something one can purchase, but can be taken or withheld from them at any point for any reason.” Governance: New paper money is minted and spent freely with no respect for paying it back, or it being tied to any real system of value. (Accounting is as true as gravity, and misspending or denial of value will only bite everyone using its currency in the end.) A bottlenecked Government process makes engaging in democracy too slow, and passed laws are carried out in symbolic representations rather than concrete representations from levels local to federal. Structural: Our Systems are built on the backs of geniuses who created such Systems, and inserted them into a society who relies on significant education to be able to maintain them, and does not have the education. A poor Education system, with an incentivized structure by the Government to become even worse, puts their certificate of approval on people’s abilities, qualifying them to do things they are unqualified to do. Poor Regulatory Compliance creates a false senses of security to where even if a company is 100% compliant with SOC2, or NIST-800-171, or CIS <insert-OS-here> regulations, while they're safe against "known exploits" from script kiddies, they are not safe from people who know how to exploit tech today. Annual number of data compromises and individuals impacted in the United States from 2005 to 2023 source Large Cybersecurity Attacks Against the Institutions We Trust: Equifax Data Breach (2017) WannaCry Ransomware Attack (2017) NotPetya Cyberattack (2017) SolarWinds Supply Chain Attack (2020) Colonial Pipeline Ransomware Attack (2021) JBS Foods Cyberattack (2021) Cerner Corporation Cybersecurity Incident (2021) Rackspace Ransomware Attack (2022) Cisco Cyber Attack (2022) NATO Data Breach (2022) US Airport Websites Hacked (2022) Twitter Data Breach (2022) Microsoft Data Breach (2022) Samsung Data Breach (2022) ION Derivatives Supply Chain Attack 2023) MoveIT Software Data Breaches (2023) LockBit Ransomware Attack Against ICBC (2023) LockBit Ransomware Attack Against Boeing (2023) Caesars and MGM Casinos “Scattered Spider” Ransomware Attacks (2023) Marina Bay Sands Data Breach (2023) DDoS Attack Against Google (2023) UnitedHealth Group Cyber Attack (2024)

Declaration of Independence 3.0

The dark web is a shadowy online marketplace where victims are held captive by cyber extortionists, and stolen data is traded. It is hidden away in the shadows of the internet. This was the reality of LockBit's dark web domain, a platform the notorious ransomware gang used to extort businesses and organizations worldwide. According to the Department of Justice, LockBit earned itself in revenue from shady data deals and ransom payments. But luckily, after global cooperation, this virtual den of evil has been shut down, a major victory for international law enforcement. 2,000 victims and made over $120 million Unveiling LockBit's Dark Schemes Until recently, LockBit was a prominent player in the RaaS (Ransomware-as-a-Service) landscape. It is a ransomware gang that has plagued the cybersecurity landscape for years. Their ransomware variant, known for its “double extortion” tactic of encrypting data and threatening to leak it online, has caused billions of dollars in losses and disrupted operations for countless victims. Double extortion is a cruel and calculated strategy designed to squeeze maximum ransom payments from their victims. Let’s look at how this devil works! Initial Infection and Data Exfiltration The first phase of LockBit's attack involves infiltrating the victim's network through various methods, often exploiting vulnerabilities in outdated software or tricking employees into clicking malicious links. Once inside, they silently crawl through the system, identifying and exfiltrating sensitive data. This stolen treasure trove could include financial records, customer information, intellectual property, internal documents, and personally identifiable information (PII). Imagine their victim's horror as LockBit siphons away these critical files, leaving them vulnerable and exposed. Data Encryption With the stolen data securely tucked away, LockBit delivers the next blow: widespread data encryption. They deploy their malicious software, scrambling the victim's essential files, and rendering them inaccessible and unusable. This digital lockdown brings operations to a screeching halt, causing significant disruption and panic. Ransom Demand But LockBit doesn't stop there. They twist the knife further by brandishing the stolen data as a weapon. The ransom note is a cruel ultimatum that clearly outlines the situation: pay the ransom or face the public exposure of your sensitive information. This nightmarish scenario threatens to shatter the victim's reputation. Naturally, it’s highly embarrassing for any individual. But for a company, it could also result in financial losses from regulatory fines for not complying with safety guidelines, legal repercussions for data breaches and privacy violations, and irreparable damage to customer trust. The Threat of Exposure Faced with this double extortion dilemma, victims are caught in a pressure cooker. Even if they have backups to restore their encrypted data, the looming threat of public humiliation makes the decision agonizing. This cruel tactic has proven highly effective for LockBit, forcing many victims to succumb to their ransom demands. Here are some notable examples of LockBit's past attacks: June 2023: LockBit demanded a $70 million ransom from TSMC, a major Taiwanese semiconductor manufacturer. July 2023: The group crippled operations at the Port of Nagoya in Japan, which handles 10% of the country's trade, by launching a ransomware attack. October 2023: LockBit claimed to have stolen sensitive data from Boeing, although the company did not confirm the breach. The group targeted critical infrastructure, healthcare, education, and government agencies, demonstrating their widespread reach. Taking Down the Command and Control System Imagine a multi-headed hydra lurking in the murky depths of the internet, each head representing a different facet of nefarious operation. This mythical beast communicated with its victims, brandished stolen data like trophies, and demanded ransoms through its domain on the dark web. LockBit's The LockBit monster (not to be confused with the Loch Ness monster) has digitally terrorized individuals, multinational organizations, and even hospitals for over four years. But in a worthy of a Greek hero, a global alliance of law enforcement agencies joined forces to sever the hydra's heads. coup de grâce In a collaborative effort dubbed Operation Cronos, the , the UK's , and law enforcement agencies from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Europe joined forces to seize control of LockBit's dark web infrastructure. FBI National Crime Agency (NCA) This decisive action effectively dismantled the gang's online extortion platform, disrupting their ability to communicate with victims, showcase stolen data, and collect ransom payments. Europol arrested two alleged, unnamed operatives in Poland and Ukraine, while the US has indicted Russian men Ivan Gennadievich Kondratiev and Artur Sungatov for deploying LockBit against various American organizations. The operation dealt a significant blow to the cybercriminal group, demonstrating the collective power of international cooperation in combating cybercrime. But how did this takedown come about, and what does it mean for the fight against ransomware? Understanding Operation Cronos The takedown of LockBit's dark website involved a meticulous and multifaceted approach by law enforcement agencies. The director general of the NCA, Graeme Biggar, said after the operation's success, “We have hacked the hackers; taken control of their infrastructure, seized their source code, and obtained keys that will help victims decrypt their systems.” Here’s a closer look at what that entailed: International law enforcement agencies collaborated to infiltrate LockBit's network and gather intelligence on their operations by monitoring their activities and identifying vulnerabilities in their infrastructure. Hacking the Hackers: Authorities strategically disrupted communication channels between LockBit and their affiliates, hindering their ability to coordinate attacks and manage extortion operations. Taking Control of Infrastructure: In a coordinated effort, law enforcement agencies from various countries seized control of LockBit's dark web domain. This involved taking down the website and preventing further access by the gang or their victims. Seizing Source Code: The seized infrastructure provided valuable evidence for ongoing investigations, potentially leading to the identification and apprehension of individual members of the LockBit gang. Securing Evidence: Through the evidence on the website, law enforcement is working to identify victims who may have interacted with the website and assist them in recovering their data. Obtaining Decryption Keys: Continuing the Fight While the takedown of LockBit's dark website represents a significant victory, the fight against cybercrime is ongoing. New threats are constantly emerging, and ransomware remains a major concern for businesses and organizations. We have gained a few key takeaways from this event: Operation Cronos highlights the importance of collaboration between law enforcement agencies across the globe in dismantling cybercriminal operations and protecting victims. International cooperation is essential: Organizations must prioritize robust cybersecurity measures, including regular software updates and comprehensive backup and recovery plans, to minimize their vulnerability to ransomware attacks. Cybersecurity vigilance remains critical: While this takedown is a positive development, it's essential to stay informed about evolving threats, adapt cybersecurity strategies accordingly, and foster continuous collaboration to create a more secure digital environment. The fight against cybercrime is a marathon, not a sprint: Looking Ahead to A Brighter Future for Cybersecurity The takedown of LockBit's dark web lair is like evicting a particularly nasty troll from the internet's underbelly. It's a positive step, but let's not break out the celebratory cupcakes just yet. This is just one skirmish in the ongoing war against cybercrime, and plenty of digital dragons are still lurking out there. However, there's no need to don your tinfoil hats and retreat to a Faraday cage. By staying informed, adopting robust cybersecurity practices, and working together like a well-oiled international task force of digital knights, we can make the internet safer for everyone. Breaking Down the Potential Long-Term Impacts While the immediate impact of Operation Cronos is the disruption of LockBit's operations, the long-term consequences could be far-reaching. By dismantling LockBit's infrastructure and potentially identifying key members, law enforcement could disrupt the RaaS ecosystem, making it more difficult for other ransomware groups to operate. The successful takedown could serve as a deterrent to other cybercriminal groups, discouraging them from using similar tactics. Best of all, with access to seized data, law enforcement can potentially assist victims in recovering stolen information and mitigating the impact of the attacks. Exploring Challenges and Considerations It's important to acknowledge that the fight against cybercrime is complex and constantly evolving. While Operation Cronos is a significant victory, several challenges remain: Cybercriminals constantly adapt their tactics to evade detection and bypass security measures. Law enforcement and cybersecurity professionals must stay ahead of the curve by continuously learning and adapting their strategies. Evolving tactics: Attributing cyberattacks to specific individuals or groups can be challenging, and international cooperation is crucial for successful prosecution. For instance, it’s going to be difficult for the US to prosecute Russians like Kondratiev, especially because there is no US-Russia extradition agreement. Attribution and Prosecution: The dark web provides a haven for cybercriminals to operate with some degree of anonymity. Law enforcement agencies need to develop innovative methods to effectively investigate and disrupt activities on these hidden corners of the internet. The Dark Web: Final Thoughts The takedown of LockBit's dark website is a significant development in the fight against cybercrime. It demonstrates how international cooperation among law enforcement agencies can protect citizens and businesses from malicious actors. However, this is just one battle, and the fight against cybercrime is a full-scale war. But with continued vigilance, collaboration, and a healthy dose of digital hygiene, we can create a future where browsing the internet feels less like walking through a minefield and more like strolling through a virtual garden.

LockBit's Lair Gets Locked Down: FBI and Allies Take Down Ransomware Gang's Website

As the adage goes, if something seems too good to be true, it usually is. Case in point, unlimited PTO, which is frequently touted by tech companies as a company benefit, designed with work-life balance in mind. In fact, unlimited PTO has quickly ascended the ranks to become one of the most sought-after employee benefits in the U.S., ahead of paid paternity leave and tuition reimbursement as workers vie for increased flexibility. according to a 2022 survey, However, the reality is that unlimited PTO doesn’t equate to dozens of days off. And although it can seem like an enticing prospect for potential employees, a lack of clarity around unlimited PTO gray areas can be tricky to navigate, and ultimately cause conflict in the long run. Culture conflict In the U.S. around offer unlimited PTO, including , , and Goldman Sachs. 6% of companies Netflix Microsoft While unlimited PTO might be enshrined in your contract, it’s more likely that the amount of time you request off falls in line with the existing company culture towards vacation time. For example, if it’s common for staff to take 10 days PTO at once, you can also look forward to long vacations, but if your team tends to take minimal holidays because their workload is so intense, it won’t matter that your leave entitlement is unlimited as you’ll probably end up not using many days. Time is money In many companies, time accrued that isn’t used as PTO by the end of the year can be sold back and staff can pocket the cash. This is also true for staff leaving an organization who haven’t used up their PTO allowance. However, when unlimited PTO is in place, this isn’t applicable, and if you work a full calendar year without taking any PTO outside of public holidays, such as Thanksgiving or Labor Day, you won’t be eligible to earn your time back. Reality bites Friction among team members or bigger problems between staff and management can happen for many reasons and in some cases, unlimited PTO is one of them. This is because some employees will always under-request time off while others will over-request it, regardless of how much work is on the agenda. An unfair or unequal distribution of downtime can often lead to tension between colleagues, but it can also point to different management styles team-to-team within a larger organization. And while taking time off can be a momentary panacea to your work problems, if you consistently feel a sense of disengagement at work, it could be time for you to reconsider your future. If that is the case, the is the perfect place to focus your job search. It features thousands of tech jobs across the U.S., including the three below. Hackernoon Job Board Principal, Cloud Engineering, Options Clearing Corporation, Chicago This technical leadership role will see the design and development of the core platform engineering automation. You will also be responsible for driving the strategy for infrastructure automation and improved application adoption. End-user usability and a reduction of overall operational support will also be under remit. In addition, this role will provide technical leadership to the team and serve as a technical liaison between internal technology departments, interacting directly with our core customers. The ideal candidate will also be passionate about new technologies such as CloudNative and OpenSource. Want to know more? . Principal See additional details here Database Engineer, Boeing Intelligence & Analytics, Annapolis Junction As a at Boeing Intelligence & Analytics, you will be responsible for architecting and developing new database systems and developing software for data analysis, PL/SQL packages and triggers and database upgrades, migration issues and repair corruption. You will also build extract, translate and load (ETL) scripts. You will also need experience in providing technical direction for the development, engineering, interfacing, integration, and testing of specific components of complex software systems, along with experience of developing system engineering documentation, such as system engineering plans, initial capabilities documents, requirements specifications, and interface control documents. If hired, you can also look forward to a $10,000 sign on bonus. . Database Engineer Find out more here Enterprise Requirements & Integration Engineer, ENSCO Inc., El Segundo ENSCO is seeking an innovative, creative, and highly motivated to support the U.S. Space Force, Space Systems Command’s MILSATCOM Program. Duties will include applying Model Based System Engineering (MBSE) to support the development of technical baselines, analyzing system requirements that define the technical baseline and verification of the technical baseline, working with government and contractor personnel to close gaps in flow of customer requirements, and leading and supporting meetings by creating briefings, leading discussion, and writing minutes—to resolve risks, requirement gaps, and action items. If this sounds like the kind of opportunity you’ve been looking for, you can . Engineer apply here Accelerate your career in tech today via the HackerNoon Job Board **- Aoibhinn Mc Bride

Tempted by a Tech Job With Unlimited PTO? Read the Fine Print First

আনলিমিটেড PTO সহ একটি টেক জব দ্বারা প্রলুব্ধ? প্রথমে ফাইন প্রিন্ট পড়ুন

Lust auf einen Technikerjob mit unbegrenzter Zapfwelle? Lesen Sie zuerst das Kleingedruckte

¿Tentado por un trabajo tecnológico con PTO ilimitado? Lea primero la letra pequeña

Tenté par un travail technique avec prise de force illimitée ? Lisez d’abord les petits caractères

क्या आप असीमित पीटीओ के साथ तकनीकी नौकरी की ओर आकर्षित हैं? पहले फाइन प्रिंट पढ़ें

無制限の有給休暇付きの技術職に誘惑されませんか?最初に細字部分をお読みください

무제한 PTO를 제공하는 기술직에 매력을 느끼시나요? 작은 글씨를 먼저 읽어보세요

Tentado por um trabalho técnico com tomada de força ilimitada? Leia as letras miúdas primeiro

Соблазнитесь технической работой с неограниченным отбором мощности? Сначала прочтите мелкий шрифт

Sınırsız PTO'ya Sahip Bir Teknik İş İlginizi Çekti mi? Önce İnce Baskıyı Okuyun

Bị cám dỗ bởi một công việc công nghệ với PTO không giới hạn? Đọc bản in đẹp đầu tiên

受到拥有无限 PTO 的技术工作的诱惑吗？首先阅读细则

Special thanks to Vishwanath Raman from Oasis Labs and David Whittington from AR.IO for feedback and insights. Can distributed ledger technology , helping companies save over per year? Or can blockchains help us build a , helping reduce the nearly ? Could we even use the same technology that powers Bitcoin and Ethereum to enable humans to ? decrease cloud outages $26.5 billion fully connected and autonomous driving network 1.9 million annual traffic deaths worldwide become an interplanetary species The unifying element in these use cases–cryptocurrency, cloud outages, autonomous vehicle networks, and even space travel–is overcoming byzantine failures. While blockchains can’t yet support the throughput or performance required for many of these applications, overcoming byzantine failures and allowing businesses and institutions to share open data in trustless environments has the potential to realize over . $3 trillion per year in economic value At Kwil, we often describe our database software as a “Byzantine Fault Tolerant Postgres.” This article will explain precisely and practically what “Byzantine Fault Tolerant Postgres” means and how it enables real-world, . trustless digital infrastructure “Byzantine Fault Tolerant Postgres” is the combination of two distinct technologies: byzantine fault tolerant (BFT) consensus algorithms and the PostgreSQL database engine. What is Byzantine Fault Tolerance? Byzantine fault tolerance arises from the “Byzantine Generals Problem,” a distributed systems problem by researchers in 1982. The Byzantine Generals Problem imagines a hypothetical scenario of Byzantine armies, each with its own general, camped outside an enemy city. Without a central authority to command and coordinate attacks, the generals must collectively vote on whether to attack or retreat via messengers. conceived The key challenge in the Byzantine Generals Problem is the generals have no way of knowing whether the other generals are loyal or traitors. For example, General 1 could tell Generals 2 and 3 to attack, and General 2 could tell General 3 that General 1 said to retreat (as shown below). General 3 cannot know whether General 1 or General 2 is the traitor, and thus, the three generals cannot progress safely. For a system of number of traitors to proceed safely, there must be 3 + 1 generals; therefore, >⅔ of the nodes must agree and act honestly. If ≥ ⅓ of the nodes in the system act deceptively, then the nodes will not be able to discern the safe path forward (i.e. the system loses liveness). I won’t go into the mathematical proof for the ⅔ threshold, but you can read a succinct and accessible explanation . n n here The key breakthrough with byzantine fault tolerance is that networks can be run and maintained by parties that do not trust each other. The most popular application of byzantine fault tolerance today is cryptocurrency networks; however, other real-world examples include enabling fault-tolerant safety systems on and protecting against nodes corrupted by radiation in SpaceX’s International Space Station . Boeing airplanes landing procedures In a Postgres database network, byzantine fault tolerance means that more than ⅔ of the nodes must agree on the safe path forward. Assuming a blockchain-based approach, this means that greater than ⅔ of the nodes must agree on each block, including all the transactions within the block, before progressing to the next block. Therefore, BFT Postgres networks can be run without trusting the other parties running nodes. What is Postgres? PostgreSQL, also known as Postgres, is an advanced, open-source, object-relational database engine. It is among the pieces of software worldwide, used in production at organizations ranging from the International Space Station to Reddit and Instagram. Relational databases of the total database market, with Postgres commanding 17.4% alone. In the last week, you have probably used or interacted with an application that relies on a Postgres database. most popular comprise 60% The key to Postgres (and other SQL databases) is that it uses the , storing data in structured tables. Tables are comprised of columns and rows, where each row represents an individual piece of data (also called a record), and each column represents an attribute. By storing data in a relational structure, data can be , enabling better maintainability as a dataset grows and the ability to combine data in ways that yield unique insights. For example, a university that needs to manage information about its academic staff and their professional activities could maintain a relational database with the following normalized structure: relational model normalized In the example above, storing data in a normalized structure offers several advantages. First, the normalized structure minimizes data redundancy: each piece of information is stored only once, reducing the likelihood of inconsistencies and errors. Second, it simplifies updates in the database: changes to a professor’s details, like a department change, only need to be made in one table, making the update process more efficient and less error-prone. Third, the relational structure makes it easier to combine relationships and queries across tables, such as the relationship between courses and publications that are relevant to the subject. Lastly, normalization makes database maintenance easier, especially as the volume of data grows over time. A further benefit of the relational model, especially in contrast to , is transactional integrity, guaranteeing that all or none of a database operation is executed and that concurrent transactions do not interfere (also known as ). This is critical in fields where precision, consistency, and reliability are key, such as banking and healthcare. NoSQL databases ACID transactions What is Byzantine Fault Tolerant Postgres? As inferred from the name, “Byzantine Fault Tolerant Postgres” combines the two technologies mentioned above: a byzantine fault tolerant consensus algorithm running over multiple Postgres databases. In a Kwil network, each node maintains a BFT blockchain and a Postgres database. When a state-changing transaction enters the system (e.g. database creation, database drop, insert/update/delete statement, or a funds transfer), the node first broadcasts the transaction to the other validator nodes. Each validator node then uses the transaction's digital signature to determine whether the transaction’s origin is legitimate. To guarantee and data storage and deletion, nodes must first achieve consensus on the valid transactions in a block. Once a block is confirmed, the nodes execute the transactions on their local Postgres database. To propose or validate the next block, a validator must prove that it correctly applied the changes from the previous block. This is proven by generating a proof containing the result of all the proposed changes from the previous block, applying a schema, and generating a resulting hash. The resulting hash is then included in the next block, and each node must have the correct hash to continue in the block mining process. This process ensures that each node stores the data on its Postgres database, guaranteeing that nodes properly insert, update, and delete data. strong consistency deterministic ordering How is BFT Postgres Useful? The idea of a byzantine fault tolerant relational database is not new; multiple have been published about how a generalizable BFT Database could help improve reliability and uptime while protecting against malicious actors in a distributed system. However, until recently, consensus algorithms were neither sophisticated enough nor could handle the data throughput required to be truly byzantine fault tolerant. Recent interest and funding for blockchain technology, largely due to public interest in cryptocurrencies, has spurred significant advances in BFT research and development. academic articles The main advantage of a byzantine fault tolerant database is that it allows for databases to be operated and shared among parties that may not “trust” each other. In a cryptocurrency network, parties may not “trust” each other because malicious actors seek to subvert the system for financial gain. In space landing systems, parties may not “trust” each other because of that corrupt a computer’s memory. Byzantine fault-tolerant databases enable trustless digital infrastructure. radiation-induced “bit flips” A key advantage of trustless digital infrastructure is that, for the first time, it establishes inviolable rules for how an application will behave. Because no centralized actor can subvert, change, or otherwise disrupt the infrastructure, users can confidently rely on that infrastructure without the de-platforming and high rent-seeking risks in centralized systems. For example, the uses Kwil to store user data across a multi-node, multi-party, BFT database network. The idOS’s top consumers—regulated DeFi protocols such as —require a stable and reliable identity , not an identity , to identify and KYC its users. Using a centralized identity would mean that Gnosis Pay could not make cryptographic guarantees about how its entire protocol would function; the identity company could suddenly disrupt the protocol. Using an identity means that Gnosis Pay has an inviolable guarantee for how its user onboarding and KYC will behave, and it can build its platform on the premise that those guarantees will not change. For the idOS, using a byzantine fault tolerant database allows it to make these inviolable guarantees needed to power regulated DeFi protocols. idOS Network Gnosis Pay protocol company company protocol Conclusion A “Byzantine Fault Tolerant Postgres” database is the unlock for trustless digital infrastructure, enabling a freer, fairer, and more resilient internet. As throughput, latency, and generalized computing capabilities continue to accelerate, trustless technologies like a BFT database will be able to reshape the ways we think about and require trust in technology. Does building with a BFT database sound interesting to you? Kwil’s binaries are available and free to use, and we are excited to go open source with our v0.7 release next month. Anyone can start a multi-node, BFT database network with . just four terminal commands Although the (v0.6) is based on the simpler, less feature-rich , the upcoming release (v0.7) uses the PostgreSQL engine. current Kwil release SQLite database engine Questions or comments? Disagree with this article? Join our , or reach out to luke@kwil.com. As always, we welcome community feedback and the opportunity to push decentralized technologies collaboratively into the future. Discord Footnotes [1] Image Source: https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/teaching/2122/ConcDisSys/dist-sys-notes.pdf [2] Image Source: https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/teaching/2122/ConcDisSys/dist-sys-notes.pdf

BOEING

boeing.com

10K+ employees

Since 1916

COMPANY RANKING

BOEING

EVERGREEN INDEX #489

Representing this company? Click here to claim and customize this page!

Boeing WIKI

BOEING

boeing.com

10K+ employees

Since 1916

COMPANY RANKING

BOEING

EVERGREEN INDEX #489

HACKERNOON STORIES ON BOEING

RELATED COMPANIESRANK

Representing this company? Click here to claim and customize this page!

Boeing WIKI