Quote for the day:
“Wisdom equals knowledge plus courage. You have to not only know what to do and when to do it, but you have to also be brave enough to follow through.” -- Jarod Kintz
The Hidden Data Cost: Why Developer Soft Skills Matter More Than You Think
The logic is simple but under-discussed: developers who struggle to communicate
with product owners, translate goals into architecture, or anticipate
system-wide tradeoffs are more likely to build the wrong thing, need more
rework, or get stuck in cycles of iteration that waste time and resources. These
are not theoretical risks, they’re quantifiable cost drivers. According to
Lumenalta’s findings, organizations that invest in well-rounded senior
developers, including soft skill development, see fewer errors, faster time to
delivery, and stronger alignment between technical execution and business value.
... The irony? Most organizations already have technically proficient talent
in-house. What they lack is the environment to develop those skills that drive
high-impact outcomes. Senior developers who think like “chess masters”—a term
Lumenalta uses for those who anticipate several moves ahead—can drastically
reduce a project’s TCO by mentoring junior talent, catching architecture risks
early, and building systems that adapt rather than break under pressure. ... As
AI reshapes every layer of tech, developers who can bridge business goals and
algorithmic capabilities will become increasingly valuable. It’s not just about
knowing how to fine-tune a model, it’s about knowing when not to.Why AV is an overlooked cybersecurity risk
As cyber attackers become more sophisticated, they’re shifting their attention
to overlooked entry points like AV infrastructure. A good example is YouTuber
Jim Browning’s infiltration of a scam call center, where he used unsecured CCTV
systems to monitor and expose criminals in real time. This highlights the
potential for AV vulnerabilities to be exploited for intelligence gathering. To
counter these risks, organizations must adopt a more proactive approach.
Simulated social engineering and phishing attacks can help assess user awareness
and expose vulnerabilities in behavior. These simulations should be backed by
ongoing training that equips staff to recognize manipulation tactics and
understand the value of security hygiene. ... To mitigate the risks posed by
vulnerable AV systems, organizations should take a proactive and layered
approach to security. This includes regularly updating device firmware and
underlying software packages, which are often left outdated even when new
versions are available. Strong password policies should be enforced,
particularly on devices running webservers, with security practices aligned to
standards like the OWASP Top 10. Physical access to AV infrastructure must also
be tightly controlled to prevent unauthorized LAN connections. EU Presses for Quantum-Safe Encryption by 2030 as Risks Grow
The push comes amid growing concern about the long-term viability of
conventional encryption techniques. Current security protocols rely on complex
mathematical problems — such as factoring large numbers — that would take
today’s classical computers thousands of years to solve. But quantum computers
could potentially crack these systems in a fraction of the time, opening the
door to what cybersecurity experts refer to as “store now, decrypt later”
attacks. In these attacks, hackers collect encrypted data today with the
intention of breaking the encryption once quantum technology matures. Germany’s
Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) estimates that conventional
encryption could remain secure for another 10 to 20 years in the absence of
sudden breakthroughs, The Munich Eye reports. Europol has echoed that forecast,
suggesting a 15-year window before current systems might be compromised. While
the timeline is uncertain, European authorities agree that proactive planning is
essential. PQC is designed to resist attacks from both classical and quantum
computers by using algorithms based on different kinds of hard mathematical
problems. These newer algorithms are more complex and require different
computational strategies than those used in today’s standards like RSA and
ECC.
MongoDB Doubles Down on India's Database Boom
Chawla says MongoDB is helping Indian enterprises move beyond legacy systems through two distinct approaches. "The first one is when customers decide to build a completely new modern application, gradually sunsetting the old legacy application," he explains. "We work closely with them to build these modern systems." ... Despite this fast-paced growth, Chawla points out several lingering myths in India. "A lot of customers still haven't realised that if you want to build a modern application especially one that's AI-driven you can't build it on a relational structure," he explains. "Most of the data today is unstructured and messy. So you need a database that can scale, can handle different types of data, and support modern workloads." ... Even those trying to move away from traditional databases often fall into the trap of viewing PostgreSQL as a modern alternative. "PostgreSQL is still relational in nature. It has the same row-and-column limitations and scalability issues." He also adds that if companies want to build a future-proof application especially one that infuses AI capabilities they need something that can handle all data types and offers native support for features like full-text search, hybrid search, and vector search. Other NoSQL players such as Redis and Apache Cassandra also have significant traction in India.AI only works if the infrastructure is right
The successful implementation of artificial intelligence is therefore closely
linked to the underlying infrastructure. But how you define that AI
infrastructure is open to debate. An AI infrastructure always consists of
different components, which is clearly reflected in the diverse backgrounds of
the participating parties. As a customer, how can you best assess such an AI
infrastructure? ... For companies looking to get started with AI infrastructure,
a phased approach is crucial. Start small with a pilot, clearly define what you
want to achieve, and expand step by step. The infrastructure must grow with the
ambitions, not the other way around. A practical approach must be based on the
objectives. Then the software, middleware, and hardware will be available. For
virtually every use case, you can choose from the necessary and desired
components. ... At the same time, the AI landscape requires a high degree of
flexibility. Technological developments are rapid, models change, and business
requirements can shift from quarter to quarter. It is therefore essential to
establish an infrastructure that is not only scalable but also adaptable to new
insights or shifting objectives. Consider the possibility of dynamically scaling
computing capacity up or down, compressing models where necessary, and deploying
tooling that adapts to the requirements of the use case.
Software abstraction: The missing link in commercially viable quantum computing
Quantum Infrastructure Software delivers this essential abstraction, turning bare-metal QPUs into useful devices, much the way data center providers integrate virtualization software for their conventional systems. Current offerings cover all of the functions typically associated with the classical BIOS up through virtual machine Hypervisors, extending to developer tools at the application level. Software-driven abstraction of quantum complexity away from the end users lets anyone, irrespective of their quantum expertise, leverage quantum computing for the problems that matter most to them. ... With a finely tuned quantum computer accessible, a user must still execute many tasks to extract useful answers from the QPU, in analogy with the need for careful memory management required to gain practical acceleration with GPUs. Most importantly, in executing a real workload, they must convert high-level “assembly-language” logical definitions of quantum applications into hardware-specific “machine-language” instructions that account for the details of the QPU in use, and deploy countermeasures where errors might leak in. These are typically tasks that can only be handled by (expensive!) specialists in quantum-device operation.Guest Post: Why AI Regulation Won’t Work for Quantum
Artificial intelligence regulation has been in the regulatory spotlight for the
past seven to ten years and there is no shortage of governments and global
institutions, as well as corporations and think tanks, putting forth regulatory
frameworks in response to this widely buzzy tech. AI makes decisions in a “black
box,” creating a need for “explainability” in order to fully understand how
determinations by these systems affect the public. With the democratization of
AI systems, there is the potential for bad actors to create harm in a
decentralized ecosystem. ... Because quantum systems do not learn on their own,
evolve over time, or make decisions based on training data, they do not pose the
same kind of existential or social threats that AI does. Whereas the
implications of quantum breakthroughs will no doubt be profound, especially in
cryptography, defense, drug development, and material science, the core risks
are tied to who controls the technology and for what purpose. Regulating who
controls technology and ensuring bad actors are disincentivized from using
technology in harmful ways is the stuff of traditional regulation across many
sectors, so regulating quantum should prove somewhat less challenging than
current AI regulatory debates would suggest.Validation is an Increasingly Critical Element of Cloud Security
Security engineers simply don’t have the time or resources to familiarize
themselves with the vast number of cloud services available today. In the past,
security engineers primarily needed to understand Windows and Linux internals,
Active Directory (AD) domain basics, networks and some databases and storage
solutions. Today, they need to be familiar with hundreds of cloud services, from
virtual machines (VMs) to serverless functions and containers at different
levels of abstraction. ... It’s also important to note that cloud environments
are particularly susceptible to misconfigurations. Security teams often
primarily focus on assessing the performance of their preventative security
controls, searching for weaknesses in their ability to detect attack activity.
But this overlooks the danger posed by misconfigurations, which are not caused
by bad code, software bugs, or malicious activity. That means they don’t fall
within the definition of “vulnerabilities” that organizations typically test
for—but they still pose a significant danger. ... Securing the cloud isn’t
just about having the right solutions in place — it’s about determining whether
they are functioning correctly. But it’s also about making sure attackers don’t
have other, less obvious ways into your network.
Build and Deploy Scalable Technical Architecture a Bit Easier
A critical challenge when transforming proof-of-concept systems into
production-ready architecture is balancing rapid development with future
scalability. At one organization, I inherited a monolithic Python application
that was initially built as a lead distribution system. The prototype performed
adequately in controlled environments but struggled when processing real-world
address data, which, by their nature, contain inconsistencies and edge cases.
... Database performance often becomes the primary bottleneck in scaling
systems. Domain-Driven Design (DDD) has proven particularly valuable for
creating loosely coupled microservices, with its strategic phase ensuring that
the design architecture properly encapsulates business capabilities, and the
tactical phase allowing the creation of domain models using effective design
patterns. ... For systems with data retention policies, table partitioning
proved particularly effective, turning one table into several while maintaining
the appearance of a single table to the application. This allowed us to
implement retention simply by dropping entire partition tables rather than
performing targeted deletions, which prevented database bloat. These
optimizations reduced average query times from seconds to milliseconds, enabling
support for much higher user loads on the same infrastructure.
What AI Policy Can Learn From Cyber: Design for Threats, Not in Spite of Them
The narrative that constraints kill innovation is both lazy and false. In
cybersecurity, we’ve seen the opposite. Federal mandates like the Federal
Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA), which forced agencies to map
their systems, rate data risks, and monitor security continuously, and
state-level laws like California’s data breach notification statute created the
pressure and incentives that moved security from afterthought to design
priority. ... The irony is that the people who build AI, like their
cybersecurity peers, are more than capable of innovating within meaningful
boundaries. We’ve both worked alongside engineers and product leaders in
government and industry who rise to meet constraints as creative challenges.
They want clear rules, not endless ambiguity. They want the chance to build
secure, equitable, high-performing systems — not just fast ones. The real risk
isn’t that smart policy will stifle the next breakthrough. The real risk is that
our failure to govern in real time will lock in systems that are flawed by
design and unfit for purpose. Cybersecurity found its footing by designing for
uncertainty and codifying best practices into adaptable standards. AI can do the
same if we stop pretending that the absence of rules is a virtue.
