A forward proxy is good for:
1️⃣ Protect clients
2️⃣ Avoid browsing restrictions
3️⃣ Block access to certain content
/1 Why is Nginx called a “𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞” proxy?
The diagram below shows the differences between a 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐱𝐲 and a 𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐱𝐲.
A forward proxy is good for:
1️⃣ Protect clients
2️⃣ Avoid browsing restrictions
3️⃣ Block access to certain content
1️⃣ Protect servers
2️⃣ Load balancing
3️⃣ Cache static contents
4️⃣ Encrypt and decrypt SSL communications
Good read: https://t.co/bNbDjTmain
Follow me @alexxubyte for more.
Like/Retweet the first tweet below if you can: https://t.co/1tAHc2EqDT
/1 Why is Nginx called a \u201c\U0001d42b\U0001d41e\U0001d42f\U0001d41e\U0001d42b\U0001d42c\U0001d41e\u201d proxy?
— Alex Xu (@alexxubyte) September 29, 2022
The diagram below shows the differences between a \U0001d41f\U0001d428\U0001d42b\U0001d430\U0001d41a\U0001d42b\U0001d41d \U0001d429\U0001d42b\U0001d428\U0001d431\U0001d432 and a \U0001d42b\U0001d41e\U0001d42f\U0001d41e\U0001d42b\U0001d42c\U0001d41e \U0001d429\U0001d42b\U0001d428\U0001d431\U0001d432. pic.twitter.com/k8xQwBVgW2
More from All
You May Also Like
1/OK, data mystery time.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.
So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.
The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.
This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.
The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."
This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
If everyone was holding bitcoin on the old x86 in their parents basement, we would be finding a price bottom. The problem is the risk is all pooled at a few brokerages and a network of rotten exchanges with counter party risk that makes AIG circa 2008 look like a good credit.
— Greg Wester (@gwestr) November 25, 2018
The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.
This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.
The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."
This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
