This search en­gine is­n’t par­tic­u­larly well equipped to an­swer­ing queries posed like ques­tions, in­stead try to imag­ine some text that might ap­pear in the web­site you are look­ing for, and search for that.

A con­crete ex­am­ple: will prob­a­bly not be help­ful, or will give bet­ter re­sults.

Don’t be afraid to scroll down in the search re­sults, un­like in many other search en­gines, de­pend­ing on what you are look­ing for, you may find the best re­sults in the mid­dle of the list­ing.

Search re­sults are not ex­haus­tive. You can eke out more re­sults by tweak­ing your query.

The search en­gine does­n’t use syn­onyms. If you don’t find any­thing with , try , , or .

The search en­gine now has lim­ited sup­port for se­quences of words. , for ex­am­ple, will re­turn fewer re­sults per­tain­ing to trai­tor­ous apos­tles than will in­quir­ing af­ter  .

New! You can now look up dic­tio­nary de­f­i­n­i­tions for words. If you for ex­am­ple don’t know what the de­f­i­n­i­tion of is is, you can in­quire thus: .

New! Convenience func­tions have been added, and the search en­gine can now per­form sim­ple cal­cu­la­tions and unit con­ver­sions. Try , or . This func­tion­al­ity is still un­der de­vel­op­ment, be pa­tient if it does­n’t work.

Refer to the Change Log for more de­tails.

Sir Clive Sinclair, the in­ven­tor and en­tre­pre­neur who was in­stru­men­tal in bring­ing home com­put­ers to the masses, has died at the age of 81.

His daugh­ter, Belinda, said he died at home in London on Thursday morn­ing af­ter a long ill­ness. Sinclair in­vented the pocket cal­cu­la­tor but was best known for pop­u­lar­is­ing the home com­puter, bring­ing it to British high-street stores at rel­a­tively af­ford­able prices.

Many mod­ern-day ti­tans of the games in­dus­try got their start on one of his ZX mod­els. For a cer­tain gen­er­a­tion of gamer, the com­puter of choice was ei­ther the ZX Spectrum 48K or its ri­val, the Commodore 64.

Elon Musk, the Tesla and SpaceX chief, com­mented on Twitter on an ar­ti­cle call­ing Sir Clive the fa­ther of the ZX Spectrum: “RIP, Sir Sinclair. I loved that com­puter.”

Belinda Sinclair, 57, told the Guardian: “He was a rather amaz­ing per­son. Of course, he was so clever and he was al­ways in­ter­ested in every­thing. My daugh­ter and her hus­band are en­gi­neers so he’d be chat­ting en­gi­neer­ing with them.”

He left school at 17 and worked for four years as a tech­ni­cal jour­nal­ist to raise funds to found Sinclair Radionics.

In the early 1970s he de­signed a se­ries of cal­cu­la­tors de­signed to be small and light enough to fit in the pocket at a time when most ex­ist­ing mod­els were the size of an old-fash­ioned shop till. “He wanted to make things small and cheap so peo­ple could ac­cess them,” his daugh­ter said.

His first home com­puter, the ZX80, named af­ter the year it ap­peared, rev­o­lu­tionised the mar­ket, al­though it was a far cry from to­day’s mod­els. At £79.95 in kit form and £99.95 as­sem­bled, it was about one-fifth of the price of other home com­put­ers at the time. It sold 50,000, units while its suc­ces­sor, the ZX81, which re­placed it, cost £69.95 and sold 250,000. Many games in­dus­try vet­er­ans got their start typ­ing pro­grams into its touch-based key­board and be­came hooked on games such as as 3D Monster Maze and Mazogs. The ZX80 and ZX81 made him very rich: in 2010 Sinclair told the Guardian: “Within two or three years, we made £14m profit in a year.”

The busi­ness mogul Lord Sugar paid trib­ute to his “good friend and com­peti­tor” on Twitter, writ­ing: “What a guy he kick­started con­sumer elec­tron­ics in the UK with his am­pli­fier kits then cal­cu­la­tors, watches mini TV and of course the Sinclair ZX. Not to for­get his quirky elec­tric car. R. I.P Friend.”

In 1982, he re­leased the ZX Spectrum 48K. Its rub­ber keys, strange clash­ing vi­su­als and tinny sound did not pre­vent it be­ing piv­otal in the de­vel­op­ment of the British games in­dus­try. Much-loved games — now in colour — that in­spired a gen­er­a­tion in­cluded Jet Set Willy, Horace Goes Skiing, Chuckie Egg, Saboteur, Knight Lore and Lords of Midnight.

Sinclair be­came a house­hold name as his prod­ucts flew off the shelves and was awarded a knight­hood in 1983. But he would also be­come syn­ony­mous with one of his less suc­cess­ful in­ven­tions — the Sinclair C5 — which would cost him fi­nan­cially. The C5, a bat­tery-pow­ered elec­tric trike, was launched in January 1985, with Sinclair pre­dict­ing sales of 100,000 in the first year.

But it flopped, and Sinclair Vehicles found it­self in re­ceiver­ship by October of the same year. Reviews ex­pressed con­cerns about the safety of dri­ving a ve­hi­cle be­low the sight line of other mo­torists, as well as ex­po­sure to the el­e­ments. The fol­low­ing year, Sinclair sold his com­puter busi­ness to Amstrad.

The Sinclair TV80, a pocket TV, was an­other de­vice, like the C5, that did not catch on, al­though peo­ple now reg­u­larly view pro­grammes on their mo­bile phones. And al­though they do not look like the Sinclair C5, which later ac­quired cult sta­tus, elec­tric ve­hi­cles are, of course, all the rage to­day.

Belinda Sinclair said: “It was the ideas, the chal­lenge, that he found ex­cit­ing. He’d come up with an idea and say, ‘There’s no point in ask­ing if some­one wants it, be­cause they can’t imag­ine it.’”

But he did not make per­sonal use of his own in­ven­tions. His daugh­ter said he never had a pocket cal­cu­la­tor as far as she knew, in­stead car­ry­ing a slide-rule around with him at all times. And he told in­ter­view­ers he used nei­ther a com­puter nor email.

Outside in­vent­ing, his in­ter­ests in­cluded po­etry, run­ning marathons and poker. He ap­peared in the first three sea­sons of the Late Night Poker tele­vi­sion se­ries and won the first sea­son fi­nal of the Celebrity Poker Club spin­off, de­feat­ing Keith Allen.

He is sur­vived by Belinda, his sons Crispin and Bartholomew, aged 55 and 52 re­spec­tively, five grand­chil­dren and two great-grand­chil­dren.

This ar­ti­cle was amended on 17 September 2021. A ref­er­ence in an ear­lier ver­sion to Sinclair hav­ing “invented” a se­ries of small cal­cu­la­tors was changed to “designed”.

#Shitlassian - story about how Atlassian fired me be­cause my wife had can­cer, who is char­ac­ter­ized for his fre­quent ten­dency to lie, which causes his nose to grow. This is a real story about how Atlassian turned the life of Software Engineer into a night­mare, and how they ter­mi­nated me while I was tak­ing care of my wife who is fight­ing can­cer. This story is about lies, vi­o­la­tions of the law, about how des­per­ate and dis­pos­able peo­ple are in this neo-feu­dal­ist or­ga­ni­za­tion - Atlassian, and about WHY YOU SHOULD NEVER JOIN ATLASSIAN, AVOID AT ALL COSTS, NEVER USE THEIR SOFTWARE AND RECONSIDER THEM IF YOU’RE ALREADY USING THEIR SOFTWARE.Interesting fact 1: Atlassian is the only com­pany that has words “shit” and “fuck” in their core val­ues.In­ter­est­ing fact 2: While every­day work in Atlassian might look nor­mal, the re­al­ity is that when you’re in times of strug­gle, you’ll get screwed by their toxic man­agers, HRs, PeopleOps, and founders. In Atlassian you’re dis­pos­able. Even if you feel fine in the com­pany you should se­ri­ously con­sider other op­por­tu­ni­ties. Read my story to learn moreI joined Atlassian in the be­gin­ning 2019 as a Senior Software Engineer (P5) in United States, San Francisco lo­ca­tion. Life and work were nor­mal. I did a lot for the com­pany, re­ceived recog­ni­tion from man­agers, HR, and my peers. My man­ager and team mates were happy with the work I do. I even found my per­for­mance was some­what above av­er­age: I re­mem­ber days when I was de­liv­er­ing ~10 points of work (1 points rep­re­sents 1/2 day).The first 🚩 red flag was when my man­ager said mul­ti­ple times that my salary was high. I did re­ally well in in­ter­views, and al­ready had RSUs from the pre­vi­ous, very well known and much older com­pany, so they agreed to pay me what I want.Long-term it turned out to be NOT a good move, since I re­ceived no pro­mo­tion or salary in­crease in 2.5 years. See be­low “Have chil­dren? No pro­mo­tion”The next 🚩 red flag. After be­ing in the com­pany for more than a year I had found that folks with chil­dren are less likely to get a pro­mo­tion. I had no ev­i­dence, it was a feel­ing. Since I had a 6 year old child, I ap­proached my man­ager with this ques­tion, and asked him:- Is it true that en­gi­neers with chil­dren are less likely to get a pro­mo­tion?It was a silly ques­tion, I sure that this be­hav­ior ex­ists in Atlassian, but no­body likes to talk about that. In Atlassian it’s no sur­prise and my man­ager said “yes, it’s true”. Just like that, ex­pos­ing the com­pany to li­a­bil­ity.At the time I did­n’t take it se­ri­ously. I later raised this ques­tion to my next man­ager, he did­n’t even bother to es­ca­late this up, it was so ob­vi­ous. I raised this ques­tion with HR and the head of peo­ple ops. No re­sponse.At later point of time I dis­cov­ered that other folks also ex­pe­ri­enced that in Atlassian. Below is screen­shots from Blind where some­body failed get­ting pro­mo­tion from P4 to P5 be­cause of parental leave:It all looks like ac­tion class law­suit, of­fi­cials should se­ri­ously look into Atlassian and in­ves­ti­gate what’s go­ing on there. The ev­i­dence is scream­ing, and the com­pany is not play­ing a fair game. I’m ready to give my tes­ti­mony.Les­son learned: never join Atlassian or ex­pect pro­mo­tion when you have chil­dren. They don’t like it.At the be­gin­ning of this year my wife got the bad news:You are a 43-year-old woman who was re­cently di­ag­nosed with rec­tal can­cer. After pre­sent­ing with sev­eral months of pro­gres­sive con­sti­pa­tion, you had a colonoscopy per­formed which re­vealed a can­cer­ous mass in your rec­tum. A biopsy of this mass con­firmed that it was a form of rec­tal can­cer known as colon ade­no­car­ci­no­maI would note that there is a ris­ing rate of new col­orec­tal can­cer di­ag­noses in pa­tients younger than 50-years-old in the United States. The rea­sons for this rise are not clear.Can­cer is the new re­al­ity. While every­one was en­joy­ing their Christmas and the New Year, we were cry­ing. The stress was so high, I was wak­ing up in the morn­ing with pain in all of my teeth.My wife was dev­as­tated, but we quickly get on our feet and started think­ing about what to do. I re­mem­ber the good vibe Atlassian pro­moted every­where, in their world-wide all hands, on so­cial net­works like LinkedIn. They promised un­lim­ited sick days (spoiler: never able to get what they even promised), I felt that the com­pany is so strong, and my con­tri­bu­tion def­i­nitely has been great, so I had no doubts they gonna help me. As my pre­vi­ous com­pany would.Here is an ex­am­ple of how Atlassian pro­mot­ing its un­lim­ited sick days. from LinkedIn leads to a link where you can find more info: “best 2021 com­pany” pro­file looks like:I started work­ing in 2019, at the time they were ad­ver­tis­ing un­lim­ited sick days in their job post­ings (at least on Stackoverflow where I found them), and ac­tu­ally dur­ing the in­ter­view, my fu­ture man­ager con­firmed that.How­ever, it turned out that they lied. They tricked me into join­ing the or­ga­ni­za­tion by their false promises and I changed my em­ploy­ment from a well-es­tab­lished com­pany to Atlassian, where lies pow­ers every­thing.Les­son learned: Atlassian does­n’t hes­i­tate to lie. They promise perks that do not even ex­ist. They lie at all lev­els: man­agers, HRs, founders.At­lass­ian is re­ally into (along with “unlimited sick days” scam). While “unlimited PTO” is scam by it­self, in Atlassian they’re tak­ing it to the whole new level. Here is how it works:They ad­ver­tise “unlimited PTO” in their job post­ings, LinkedIn, etc, pretty much every­where. Their re­cruiters sell it, but they never men­tion it’s up to their man­agers to de­cide whether or not they al­low you to take your PTO.When I joined, my man­ager told me ex­actly how many days I have: “federal hol­i­days + 20 days”, which is con­sid­ered “quite gen­er­ous for the US” (exact quotes), but don’t get tricked, be­cause…It’s only when your man­ager ap­proves that. My ex­pe­ri­ence shows that they do not ap­prove PTOs, and it’s only a lure they use to at­tract work­force.

When I re­quested my PTO, the man­ager just said “no”. Not be­cause I took too much PTO in the past - I haven’t taken any for quite some time. It’s just “no” be­cause they can. He did­n’t ex­plain too much, just sent me a link to their pol­icy, where they say how ex­actly it is “unlimited” - it’s quite lim­ited.The first time I asked my man­ager about us­ing my PTO to take care of my spouse: - Can I take some of my PTO, I should have plenty, to take care of my wife? - I said. - No, it’s not even a ques­tion, be­cause you won’t be us­ing it as a va­ca­tion, right? Technically you won’t be on PTO, so take a med­ical leave.It sounds very touch­ing, but I did­n’t rec­og­nize the trick here. They wanted me to use my med­ical leave, be­cause they did­n’t want to pay for the PTO I earned.I was able to get only 10 days of PTO in 1.5 years. I was re­quest­ing it for 2 months. Clarification as of 9/17 - I was not re­quest­ing 2 months of PTO, I wanted to take at least some­thing, and it took me 2 months to get 10 days ap­proved. I was ask­ing for this PTO for more than 2 months, send­ing emails back and forth, fil­ing tick­ets, and at­tend­ing meet­ings with peo­ple ops, man­agers, man­ager of my man­ager. They de­nied any­thing be­yond 10 days (which was su­per hard to get). Imagine like hit­ting the wall every time you ask for it. And you’re get­ting a link “here is our pol­icy”, in­stead of PTO:There is a lot you can say from this email:they say “is more gen­er­ous”. It’s so gen­er­ous, you can only re­quest 10 days in 1.5 years”how­ever you man­ager may need to deny your re­quest” - this is how it’s gonna work for you in Atlassian, for “business rea­sons”, which are (of course) more im­por­tant that a hu­man life”team short on re­sources, in­clud­ing R.” - that guy was a man­ager, who did­n’t let me use my hard-earned va­ca­tion, took him­self 1 month of PTO, came back and gave his no­tice. He left the com­pany, and S., who is the man­ager of my man­ager R., ap­proved that. But did­n’t ap­prove va­ca­tion I earned. “being out of the of­fice” - po­lite way to say “your man­ager is on PTO, he took one month with no prob­lem to en­joy time with the fam­ily, while you try to do harder to get 10 days ap­proved out of one year and a half, oh and good luck fight­ing can­cer”.Les­son learned: there is a lot of fa­voritism in the com­pany. If you make good jokes with your man­ager, you’ll get your va­ca­tion ap­proved. If you’re tak­ing care of your loved one, you’re fucked.Let’s be hon­est, Covid has been a chal­leng­ing time for all of us with no ex­cep­tion. It’s no sur­prise en­gi­neers from tech com­pa­nies try to find ways to over­come de­pres­sion and burnout. Below is the only one ex­am­ple of out­cry among mul­ti­tude oth­ers you can find on Blind:

Founders cul­ti­vate fake car­ing com­pany cul­ture. You see these lies every­where. Mike (one of the founders) says “No Atlassian [employee] should hes­i­tate to put their well-be­ing on us”. Covid it­self was a strug­gle for lots of peo­ple. For me cir­cum­stances were much more chal­leng­ing:At­lass­ian forced me to move to a new team, with new lan­guage and tech­nol­ogy I had no ex­pe­ri­ence with, blocked the ways for me go­ing back (I tried and was said “nobody likes those who jump the ship”)All of the above hap­pened at the same time­And the “caring com­pany cul­ture” for me turned out in em­ploy­ment ter­mi­na­tion be­cause I did­n’t de­liver enough points while I was tak­ing care of my spouse who was barely mov­ing and re­cov­er­ing at home af­ter the surgery­Les­son learned: lies are mas­sive. Founders do not hes­i­tate to lie. How they can promise (exact quote) “No Atlassian [employee] should hes­i­tate their well-be­ing on us”, while they ter­mi­nate em­ploy­ees who strug­gle with deadly dis­ease? I per­formed over 100 tech­ni­cal in­ter­views in Atlassian, was rec­og­nized by HR team as one of the best in­ter­view­ers, got their ku­dos, in­clud­ing mon­e­tary recog­ni­tion at the time my man­ager al­ready said that he’s not happy with my per­for­mance at work. Personally, I like do­ing in­ter­views and al­ways cared about the can­di­date ex­pe­ri­ence. At least I tried to make peo­ple en­joy the process.How­ever, I stopped do­ing any in­ter­views, and one of the rea­sons is hir­ing law vi­o­la­tions in Atlassian. For ex­am­ple, we were hir­ing one lady for a P4 role. Everyone in in­ter­view de­brief pro­vided pos­i­tive tech­ni­cal feed­back.How­ever, at the end of the in­ter­view man­ager said: We have just started hir­ing, and this is one of the first can­di­dates we’re in­ter­view­ing. I don’t want to hire the first per­son out there, just kinda want to com­pare”. She passed all the tech­ni­cal rounds, every­one said she is strong enough to be a P4 en­gi­neer, but they said she’s not a good fit! The co­or­di­na­tor quickly jumped in and say­ing that the lady “is prob­a­bly not a good fit­not the right timewe will en­cour­age her to ap­ply the next time­Les­son learned: Atlassian man­agers and HR don’t hes­i­tate to vi­o­late the law, they don’t care about em­ploy­ees and can­di­dates. Managers and HRs are cov­er­ing each other. They’re the kings and queens in this org. ICs and small lit­tle peo­ple are dis­pos­able.They will gaslight you all the way. One of the ex­am­ples of what my man­ager said:- What is your plan to be back se­nior en­gi­neer on the team again?They did­n’t de­mote me, and I was still em­ployed as Senior Software Engineer. Actually, it even was in the mid­dle of our treat­ment, be­tween chemo and ra­di­a­tion, which made things more cruel. They asked this ques­tion mul­ti­ple times.At the same time my man­ager said about the PTO I earned and can­not use:- I can’t give you PTO, it needs to be ap­proved, we just lost one se­nior en­gi­neer, we can’t af­ford to lose an­other one, we have dead­li­nes­Note that he does­n’t chal­lenge the fact that I have PTO, which kinda con­firms my point that I had those PTOs earned. He says that they’ve lost se­nior en­gi­neer, and they want me to work with­out PTO, and pretty much em­pha­sized that their dead­lines are more im­por­tant that deadly dis­ease we were deal­ing with.“Dead­lines” point is bull­shit by it­self, be­cause the same man­ager who did­n’t ap­prove the use of va­ca­tion I earned got him­self one month of PTO and left the or­ga­ni­za­tion right af­ter that. Lesson learned: yes, they know you earned your va­ca­tion. They are well-aware of their 20 days per-year pol­icy they promised. They just don’t let you use it. They gaslight you like you do not be­long to the place you call work any­more, re­gard­less of your achieve­ments in the past.Fuck you, peo­ple of color in AtlassianMe and my wife are from Slavic com­mu­nity, and by some or­ga­ni­za­tions as peo­ple of color. We’re im­mi­grants, my spouse speaks very ba­sic English and needs a trans­la­tor al­most every time she goes to the hos­pi­tal. We have no par­ents or any other rel­a­tives liv­ing in the United States at all. I’m the only one who works in the fam­ily, and we have a child.Yes, Atlassian pushed us to the brink of ex­is­tence. We rent and are tak­ing money out of our emer­gency fund to cover our ba­sic needs now. The place we rent is ba­si­cally the only one home we have. We have nowhere to go, the only des­ti­na­tion is un­der the bridge.We live in HCOL area, be­cause we’re kinda locked with our hos­pi­tals, sur­geons, and other doc­tors at the mo­ment. It’s go­ing to be more harsh over time, since Atlassian made us pay for the health in­sur­ance out of the pocket. In case of a new em­ploy­ment we’ll need to pay new “max out of pocket per year”.Even if you’re soft­ware en­gi­neer in Atlassian, the chances for you to end up un­der the bridge are quite high. They don’t care who you are - your color, age, fam­ily, health, cir­cum­stances don’t mat­ter. They will do dam­age to your men­tal health by ly­ing to you about ben­e­fits they have. There is a lot of gaslight­ing, fa­voritism. Managers take va­ca­tion with no ques­tions asked. Employees who strug­gle with life and death is­sues get kicked.So don’t get tricked, if you’re still em­ployed - look for other op­por­tu­ni­ties. If I would only have known they lie about pretty much every­thing that your life de­pends on, I would have left them im­me­di­ately.When they ter­mi­nate you, they locked you out every­where right away. They put me in awk­ward po­si­tion, and my cowork­ers think that I’ve been slack­ing off for quite some time for no rea­son. I had no chance to say bye and ex­plain what was go­ing on.The rea­son for lock­ing out my ac­count is to pre­vent this in­for­ma­tion to be spread across the or­ga­ni­za­tion. They don’t want you to see the truth. Also, re­mem­ber what our doc­tor said:I would note that there is a ris­ing rate of new col­orec­tal can­cer di­ag­noses in pa­tients younger than 50-years-old in the United States. The rea­sons for this rise are not clear.If you’re em­ployed in Atlassian now, you’re vul­ner­a­ble.Em­ploy­ment ter­mi­na­tion can hap­pen to any­one, your friend, your loved ones, even child. And it will hap­pen at the time you’re the most vul­ner­a­ble. “No Atlassian should hes­i­tate to put their well-be­ing on us” is only one of their lies. They cul­ti­vate fake car­ing com­pany cul­ture.You should con­sider look­ing for other com­pa­nies who are very known for tak­ing care of em­ploy­ees dur­ing their hard times. Atlassian is sim­ply not the right place for a ca­reer. One of my man­agers (who is/​was prob­a­bly one of your man­agers) said that “you’re right, in Atlassian they talk the talk, but don’t walk the walk­For every­one out there - I had no chance to say good­bye, so if you’re okay to burn some bridges with this toxic or­ga­ni­za­tion, do not hes­i­tate to share the link to this web­site on your last day. And who­ever is leav­ing last, please shut off the lights.Here is what Atlassian em­ploy­ees think about the com­pany:Les­son learned: your em­ploy­ment ter­mi­na­tion will hap­pen at the time you’re the most vul­ner­a­ble, when you or your loved one is be­tween surg­eries, fight­ing can­cer, you ran out of money, and have no­body to ask for help.Bonus pay­ment for ref­er­enc­ing my friend in the or­ga­ni­za­tion - bonus not paid as of the mo­ment of writ­ing.Bonus pay­ment for the pre­vi­ous fi­nan­cial year. Everyone who made it to the end of August if el­i­gi­ble. Payment for un­used va­ca­tion. I’m go­ing to fight them in the court. They said I have 20 days, they said it to every­one on our team. We gonna in­vite you folks, es­pe­cially those of you who were in Statuspage team to the court, you will tes­tify and con­firm that. We’ll no­tify you on class ac­tion law­suit. For know, while (and if) you are em­ployed, col­lect the ev­i­dence. More is bet­ter. See con­tact in­for­ma­tion be­low.My em­ploy­ment - they ter­mi­nated me at the time when I could use the va­ca­tion I earned, at the time when I could use “30 days no ques­tions asked” leave they say em­ploy­ees have, un­lim­ited sick days they ad­ver­tise em­ploy­ees have. They forced me into “working” while not ap­prov­ing va­ca­tion and other leaves.How the real help looks like when you’re deal­ing with can­cer in AtlassianI took FMLA, which is paid from my taxes. Atlassian can’t pre­vent you from tak­ing FMLA, it’s il­le­gal in United States.Atlassian put me on 6-week Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) right af­ter I got back from FMLA. They fired me be­ing two weeks into PIP.The only help I re­ceived from Atlassian is 10 days of PTO ap­proval in one and a half years.Les­son learned: no, they don’t help at all. Nothing. Like lit­er­ally N-O-T-H-I-N-G. Only par­tial PTO ap­proval of 10 days was their “help”. Am I sup­posed to be grate­ful for the 10 days of PTO ap­proval while in re­al­ity I had earned 20+ days?At­lass­ian of­fered me 6 weeks of sev­er­ance with con­di­tions that 1) I don’t sue them and 2) I will not share the truth about what had hap­pened. You can imag­ine how fam­i­lies are des­per­ate in Atlassian, and can take that money, while neo-feu­dals like Mike and Scott take ad­van­tage of their cir­cum­stances and si­lence them.Les­son learned: Atlassian founders Mike and Scott build fake car­ing com­pany cul­ture while in re­al­ity they fail, try to hide it, and of­fer sev­er­ance pack­ages to si­lence peo­ple.Is­sues I’m deal­ing with be­cause of AtlassianIf I only knew I don’t have ben­e­fits of PTO and Unlimited Sick Days as they ad­ver­tised pretty much every­where, I would have taken un­paid leave, or left the com­pany, or most prob­a­bly would have left the com­pany well in ad­vance be­fore it all even started. The is­sue with them is that they lie so much, you never know where is the truth.So now we have to deal with the sec­ond surgery at the end of the month. Probably some­thing else is go­ing to come up, short hos­pi­tal stay, or nurse vis­it­ing us at home like it was be­fore, and I will def­i­nitely need to buy COBRA. In case of a new em­ploy­ment and in­sur­ance I’ll have to pay the sec­ond fam­ily max out of pocket in a year.It’s about money, maybe not too much for Mike and Scott, but when you’re deal­ing with can­cer you pay well above your in­sur­ance pays. Food sup­plies, for ex­am­ple, aren’t cov­ered. Uber for 30 days to the hos­pi­tal while you’re on ra­di­a­tion and back be­cause you can­not drive. Extra colostomy bags so you can change them more fre­quently.At­lass­ian in­tro­duced lots of lev­els of un­cer­tainty and com­pli­ca­tions to our treat­ment, Atlassian the worst em­ployer ever, be­cause they’re un­pre­dictable. You never know what to ex­pect.Good news is that the prog­no­sis is op­ti­mistic and we’re re­cov­er­ing. I’m just blam­ing my­self for be­ing dumb enough to lis­ten to what Mike says “No Atlassian should hes­i­tate to put their well-be­ing on us”, dumb enough to trust their fake car­ing cul­ture. Don’t trust them.Com­mu­ni­ca­tion in Atlassian and about the only com­pany val­ueThey are ag­gres­sive while talk­ing to you. Literally, they raise their voice, and use every chance to push you to the brink. For ex­am­ple, their man­ager S., said “” - ex­act quote, when I was ask­ing for PTO for mul­ti­ple months, the PTO I earned. I think this is the real com­pany value - “Atlassian owes you noth­ing”.When I tried to ex­plain him what’s go­ing on, he said “this is not the an­swer, say yes or no, will you be able to be at work at all times?”. I don’t know where they found these in­ter­rog­a­tive tech­niques, they’re def­i­nitely not ed­u­cated and there is ZERO re­spect to em­ploy­ees, they do what they want and feel above the law.Be sure that Atlassian top man­age­ment is well aware of every­thing men­tioned here. They peo­ple ops, top man­age­ment knew all of that well in ad­vance. They had op­por­tu­nity to es­tab­lish a healthy di­a­log. I put a lot of ef­fort into ex­plain­ing what’s go­ing on. I asked for their un­der­stand­ing, em­pa­thy, and com­pas­sion mul­ti­ple times, in mul­ti­ple meet­ings.They just pre­fer the other way - in­tim­i­date, si­lence, raise their voice, dis­re­spect, lie, and dis­pose you.What other peo­ple thinkIf you ask Atlassian ex­ec­u­tives and raise the ques­tion about non-ex­ist­ing ben­e­fits, they might want to play this off and claim some­thing like “this em­ployee did­n’t want to take ad­van­tage of op­tions pro­vided to him”, or “refused to take the leave we have”, or “has long his­tory of un­der-de­liv­er­ing”. This is not true, don’t trust them. If you’re will­ing to hear the sec­ond side of the story, you can al­ways reach out to me by email spec­i­fied in the “Contact” sec­tion be­low. You are en­cour­aged to con­tact with what they say, and will hon­estly ex­plain if it’s true or false.Ev­i­dence shows that there is plenty of law vi­o­la­tions in all coun­tries. While you’re in, col­lect the in­for­ma­tion that can be used in class ac­tion law­suit. You need screen­shots, notes af­ter meet­ings with your man­agers, record­ings (consult your lawyer first, record­ings might be il­le­gal, like in California, for ex­am­ple), emails. I’m happy to share the in­for­ma­tion I have with your lawyer and ready to co­op­er­ate. See con­tact in­for­ma­tion be­low.At­lass­ian thinks they’re above the law. However, ev­i­dence is cream­ing, and they will pay a big price for their con­sec­u­tive and de­lib­er­ate law vi­o­la­tions.At­lass­ian will never change un­less we take ac­tion. As of to­day there is no apol­ogy, man­agers are still em­ployed in the org, prac­tices are all the same, noth­ing changed. Have your story? Don’t hide it. It can be pub­lished right here, on this web­site. See con­tact in­for­ma­tion be­low. Please use throw-away email ac­count if you want to re­main anony­mous.You are not alone, share your story and we’ll make them ac­count­able for their ac­tions, law vi­o­la­tions, and ir­re­versible dam­age they made to us and to our fam­i­lies., ex-At­lass­ian man­ager with a child, em­ploy­ment was ter­mi­nated with the pos­i­tive feed­back re­ceived, con­firm­ing it is sys­temic is­sue. The doc­u­ment also re­veals Atlassian man­age­ment prac­tices, like push­ing peo­ple into Off Year so they can’t leave a team - see here Another ex-At­lass­ian says “I joined Atlassian in 2016 and re­signed this year…” - story is com­ing soon­Some folks say the ar­ti­cle should be read with grain of salt. It should­n’t. So I de­cided to put Q&As to clar­ify some points. Atlassian fella says:mean­ing me - au­thor of this story] for­get to men­tion the 30 odd days of “no ques­tions asked” spe­cial leave we got over the past 2 years.^ This leave is a lie, I was never given an op­tion of tak­ing these 30 days of “no ques­tions asked” spe­cial leave. It’s a lie lie lie. I can’t em­pha­size it more, it sim­ply does­n’t ex­ist. Maybe it’s some­where in Confluence or (c). There is just no such leave, I checked it for you, and now I’m out. I had would­n’t get ter­mi­nated if Atlassian has such a leave. Some de­tails from my setup are:End of FMLA - right be­fore the first surgery (used my last days of FMLA)If I only could have this 30 days of “no ques­tions asked” leave ap­proved, I would­n’t have got ter­mi­nated at all. I’m adding this com­ment on 9/17, as you can see it’s much less than 30 days.This is a kind of lie you deal with in Atlassian. They say they have PTOs, Unlimited Sick Days, some kind of 30 days “no ques­tions asked” leave. But in re­al­ity it’s up to their ap­proval. If they say it’s there, you should know it for sure - prob­a­bly it just does­n’t ex­ist. It’s a lie.The ques­tion you should ask your­self - if they ad­ver­tise “unlimited sick days” and “unlimited PTO”, why do they have “30 days of no ques­tions leave” at all? They in­tro­duce these ab­surd perks to show fake love and trick folks into switch­ing jobs and work for Atlassian.If this leave ex­ists, re­sume my em­ploy­ment right now, be­cause my ter­mi­na­tion was wrong­ful. And if you’re read­ing this text, my dear friend, my em­ploy­ment has­n’t been re­sumed, and no­body even apol­o­gized.Why did­n’t you sim­ply quit when you found Atlassian does­n’t treat you right?You never know what to ex­pect - they promised Unlimited sick days, they promised Unlimited PTO, they promised “30 days no ques­tions asked” leave, but when you re­quest a leave, your man­ager says “I will check with HR what we can do”, and it turns out that we don’t have it. This ex­act man­ager says that “Atlassian talk the talk, but don’t walk the walk”. I have con­fi­dence the man­ager will have no prob­lem con­firm­ing that in a court, since ly­ing in a court is a crim­i­nal of­fense. And not ly­ing is just tes­ti­fy­ing against the com­pany with no con­se­quences. Also, you hear how Atlassian ad­ver­tise their cool­ness every­where, in­ter­nally and ex­ter­nally. See LinkedIn screen­shots above, links are still ac­tive - you can check it your­self. Employees are sure the com­pany will sup­port them, but they’re wrong about the com­pany.There are com­pa­nies who sup­port their em­ploy­ees, but Atlassian is not that com­pany. I checked that for you. You can imag­ine how I re­gret join­ing Atlassian, and re­gret I was lured into the job by their false promises. My pre­vi­ous com­pany is one of the com­pa­nies who ac­tu­ally sup­port peo­ple, and by shar­ing the story I hope the next per­son out there will make a right choice and will not join.This dude did­n’t tell the other side of the story, the en­tire thing looks con­fus­ing­How am I sup­posed to tell the side? They tried to si­lence me for a rea­son with a sev­er­ance pack­age know­ing that in my crit­i­cal cir­cum­stances I’d ac­cept that. As for other side, we can hear it only from the other side. Also, I’m work­ing on de­tails of the story, so you have time­line and other info that will make things a lit­tle bit more clear. I had to put this web­site real quick to fight back. It’s go­ing to be bet­ter over the time, we’ll hope­fully hear the other side, and I will have a chance to com­ment.I know all the peo­ple in­volved in this story and can tell you this is not a very fair ac­count of what hap­pened… the story as told is far from com­pleteI un­der­stand that the story which is pre­sented here is in­com­plete to some de­gree. I high­lighted crit­i­cal points that are most im­por­tant for folks who are in Atlassian and still be­lieve their b/​s, and who are out­side of Atlassian and con­sid­er­ing to join.In 3 days (the do­main reg­is­tered 3 days ago) it’s al­most im­pos­si­ble for a sin­gle per­son to or­ga­nize nine months of bat­tling can­cer, work­ing and deal­ing with toxic man­agers, peo­pleops, HRs in the com­pany. If you’re will­ing more com­plete­ness, I will tell you what you feel when you deal with can­cer.One day, be­cause of ag­gres­sive med­ica­tion, half of the face of my beloved wife got par­a­lyzed. You can imag­ine what feel­ings a woman can ex­pe­ri­ence look­ing at the mir­ror.The other day my wife said “It’s so nice when you don’t have nau­sea. So nice to have ap­petite again. It’s like com­ing back to life again. I just love these days”. She said that on Saturday, be­cause she does­n’t take any med­ica­tion on week­ends.An­other day one of the man­agers was say­ing how I am prob­a­bly “taking ad­van­tage of the com­pany”. That night my spouse was vom­it­ing all night, and I had no sleep, and had to work and fight again and again to get my PTOs ap­proved.Did you know that we were strug­gling with a weight loss, and could­n’t af­ford to lose more than 5 pounds, be­cause for us it would mean the end of the bat­tle? At the time my man­ager said I can’t get PTOs be­cause we have dead­lines.Have you ever felt help­less, like you can’t do any­thing, do you know how it feels? Will you ever be able to han­dle a frac­tion of that stress? How about adding an­other layer of Atlassian sauce to make this whole ex­pe­ri­ence even worse.Have you ever thought what hap­pens when your loved one comes back home af­ter chemo, and you have no right to get sick, but some­how you man­aged to get sick with high tem­per­a­ture and the only per­son who is not sick is your 7 year old child? You have no rel­a­tives in this coun­try, and you don’t have any sup­port from the com­pany you’ve worked for. Moreover, they’re try­ing to ter­mi­nate you.Have you ever signed End-of-Life pa­per­work with a per­son you love? What if some­body at work at the same time says “what’s your plan to be back se­nior en­gi­neer on the team?”.Have you ever dreamed of the end of a chemo treat­ment? Have you ever fuck­ing cel­e­brated that?How­ever, I en­cour­age you, my friend to reach out from an anony­mous email and let me know what is the next im­por­tant thing I have to “accurate por­tray”. I will do it for you, and if you know me per­son­ally, I will pri­or­i­tize that. As of to­day no­body reached out to show where ex­actly this story is in­com­plete and what im­por­tant de­tails I am miss­ing.I think the gist is 1) wife got can­cer 2) he took leave to help 3) he wanted to keep sup­port­ing / get more time off 4) com­pany did­n’t ac­cept that, and moved to ter­mi­nate. Seems pretty… nor­mal? Not re­ally sure what Atlassian is do­ing wrong here­At­lass­ian is ly­ing. That’s why you see Pinocchio theme with big noses here. “They talk the talk, but don’t walk the walk” ← this is what one of my man­agers said, and he’s on Atlassian side. I blame them for their lies. They tricked me into join­ing the or­ga­ni­za­tion with ben­e­fits that don’t even ex­ist. They pro­mote ben­e­fits that do not ex­ist. They pretty much made my shitty times of care­giv­ing even more worse, ter­ri­ble. They did dam­age to my men­tal health be­cause of the lies. I will have to deal with that for years to come only be­cause they lied.It would­n’t be a prob­lem if it’s a fair game. Like, you got can­cer - fuck you, good­bye. I would ac­cept that. But say­ing that “take it easy bro, we’ll take care of you” and ter­mi­nat­ing you when you’re the most vul­ner­a­ble… is be­yond in­hu­mane.They have money and will sue youI’m at the point when I’m sell­ing my as­sets to sup­port us, sec­ond car, tak­ing money out of my 401k, and other ac­counts. At the mo­ment my bank ac­count is al­most empty, much less than what I had when I re­lo­cated to United States, and I had only $9k back then. My pants is what they can pos­si­bly get. You’re pretty much broke when you have se­ri­ous med­ical is­sues in the US. You’re in debt and highly likely will go bank­rupt.Thanks for ask­ing. With this kind of dis­ease you can’t re­ally tell long-term. However, the prog­no­sis is op­ti­mistic for a stage 3 can­cer. There is (hopefully) one surgery left at the end of the month, which (I don’t want to down­play the surgery, but) should­n’t be hard - this is what doc­tors say. And hope­fully, it’s go­ing to be it, the end of the treat­ment (and start of main­te­nance mode).At­lass­ian fired me right be­fore the end of my setup of fail­ure. The next month or so we plan and hope to start liv­ing our nor­mal lives.Spread the word, spread the in­for­ma­tion on­line, use hash tags. When you ever see the pic­tures of founders, don’t hes­i­tate do fix the im­ages with draw­ing them all big noses for their lies, lack of em­pa­thy and com­pas­sion.Links on­line, up­vote if you can: - /r/progamming sub­red­dit (thanks for sub­mit­ting to /r/programming!) - (thanks for sub­mit­ting to HN)Downvote if you can: - Atlassian Glassdoor rat­ing is 4.6, and it should­n’t be above 29/16 - added few com­ments about what other peo­ple think (usernames masked)9/​17 - added is­sues I’m deal­ing with be­cause of Atlassian9/18 - added fuck you peo­ple of color in AtlassianThat’s not it, folks. More to come. I have lots of other in­for­ma­tion, and will re­lease more de­tails soon * * *

A mul­ti­ple ex­po­sure por­trait of Anastasia Vlasova at home last month.

The Facebook Files

Facebook Knows Instagram Is Toxic for Teen Girls, Company Documents Show

Its own in-depth re­search shows a sig­nif­i­cant teen men­tal-health is­sue that Facebook plays down in pub­lic

A mul­ti­ple ex­po­sure por­trait of Anastasia Vlasova at home last month.

About a year ago, teenager Anastasia Vlasova started see­ing a ther­a­pist. She had de­vel­oped an eat­ing dis­or­der, and had a clear idea of what led to it: her time on Instagram.

She joined the plat­form at 13, and even­tu­ally was spend­ing three hours a day en­tranced by the seem­ingly per­fect lives and bod­ies of the fit­ness in­flu­encers who posted on the app.

We are de­lighted that you’d like to re­sume your sub­scrip­tion.

You will be charged $ + tax (if ap­plic­a­ble) for The Wall Street Journal. You may change your billing pref­er­ences at any time in the Customer Center or call Customer Service. You will be no­ti­fied in ad­vance of any changes in rate or terms. You may can­cel your sub­scrip­tion at any­time by call­ing Customer Service.

Please click con­firm to re­sume now.

Apple to­day held its California Streaming keynote, dur­ing which it un­veiled the iPhone 13 as well as up­dated ver­sions of the Apple Watch and iPad mini. But one, seem­ingly mi­nor prod­uct an­nounce­ment has caused a stir in the de­vel­oper com­mu­nity: the new full soft­ware key­board that Apple is adding to the Apple Watch.

It was just last month that Kosta Eleftheriou, the de­vel­oper of FlickType, an­nounced that his swipe-based key­board for the blind would be pulled off the App Store over ob­jec­tions by Apple. Its rea­son­ing was un­clear, with Eleftheriou say­ing that Apple had be­gun re­ject­ing up­dates for the app be­cause it re­quired full sys­tem ac­cess, a fact that Eleftheriou dis­puted, say­ing that it still worked with­out the per­mis­sions.

A sep­a­rate ver­sion for the Apple Watch would re­main, but then Apple pulled that one as well, telling Eleftheriou that key­boards aren’t al­lowed on the Apple Watch.

Now Apple has an­nounced its own, nearly-iden­ti­cal key­board for the Apple Watch — and seven years af­ter the smart­watch was in­tro­duced, no less. Eleftheriou be­lieves there’s no co­in­ci­dence here. “So now we know,” he wrote in a tweet. “See you in court, [Apple].” Eleftheriou has al­ready sued Apple for block­ing his iPhone-based key­board, a move he ar­gues is anti-com­pet­i­tive.

Sherlocking — Apple has in the past taken ideas from the de­vel­oper com­mu­nity and built them into its prod­ucts. There’s ac­tu­ally a name for it — “Sherlocked,” or the phe­nom­e­non where Apple takes a pop­u­lar third-party tool and ren­ders it un­nec­es­sary by copy­ing it di­rectly. It’s hap­pened many times over, but un­der the cur­rent cli­mate where sen­ti­ment by de­vel­op­ers is not in Apple’s fa­vor, it looks par­tic­u­larly bad.

Being based in California, Apple’s move against FlickType could be in di­rect vi­o­la­tion of the state’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL), which is broadly writ­ten but for­bids un­fair busi­ness acts and al­lows the court to or­der in­junc­tions to pre­vent un­fair com­pe­ti­tion. Apple does­n’t al­low de­vel­op­ers to of­fer their apps out­side the App Store, mean­ing they have to fol­low its rules and are al­ways at its mercy.

It’s un­der the UCL law that Apple was re­cently forced by a judge to change its App Store rules and al­low de­vel­op­ers to link to out­side pay­ment meth­ods, where they don’t have to pay it a com­mis­sion. Developers ar­gue Apple’s de­mand that they use its pay­ment method is harm­ful to com­pe­ti­tion as they might get a bet­ter deal from an­other pay­ment proces­sor if it was al­lowed, and the fees, in gen­eral, harm small busi­nesses.

Changing tides — Developers used to be much more def­er­en­tial to­wards Apple for cre­at­ing slick tools and a safe mar­ket­place for sell­ing apps. But now they’ve be­come em­bit­tered over Apple’s strict, byzan­tine sys­tem of rules, and the 15-30 per­cent tax it charges on in-app sales.

The com­pany is­n’t the small, re­bel­lious up­start it was once, but a $2.5 tril­lion be­he­moth that brings in gobs of cash. Developers can­not as eas­ily ab­sorb the costs Apple charges and are al­ways at risk of los­ing their busi­ness, as in the case of FlickType. Apple’s de­mands no longer feel fair or rea­son­able, and crit­ics say that its de­fense that it’s en­sur­ing a safe en­vi­ron­ment for con­sumers is cover for it to con­tinue mak­ing bil­lions off the App Store. It’s be­lieved Apple gen­er­ates more than $20 bil­lion in rev­enue from the App Store each year.

Please Stop Closing Forums And Moving People To DiscordThey are not the same thing, and will never be the same thing

A few days ago Eurogamer closed their fo­rums, bring­ing to an end over 20 years of com­mu­nity dis­cus­sion. The site ex­plained the move like sites and com­pa­nies al­ways do (only a few are still us­ing them), and it made sense the way it al­ways does (that’s a lot of money for not much gain), but that does­n’t mean the process it­self is­n’t some­thing that sucks.

The fo­rums were closed on September 10, with Eurogamer’s de­ci­sion ex­plained as:I am sorry to say that we are go­ing to turn off ac­cess to the fo­rum on 10th September 2021. The fo­rum has been a long-stand­ing part of Eurogamer, and at its peak wel­comed thou­sands of ac­tive con­trib­u­tors each day.Sadly, times change and the way peo­ple com­mu­ni­cate also has changed. Traditional fo­rums are no longer a pop­u­lar place for peo­ple to come to­gether to talk, and have been re­placed in pop­u­lar­ity with more mod­ern com­mu­nity plat­forms like Discord, Twitter, and Twitch.Due to this, our fo­rum com­mu­nity has de­clined over the years to the point where there are only a hand­ful of peo­ple left ac­tively us­ing the fo­rum. This makes it dif­fi­cult for us to spend re­sources keep­ing the fo­rum run­ning. You will have no­ticed how lit­tle at­ten­tion the fo­rum has had in terms of up­dates and changes over the past few years, which is a di­rect re­sult of them not be­ing used so much.Read­ers are then urged to move to the site’s Discord, be­cause of course they would be. Now, I don’t want to pick on Eurogamer here, as like I said up top, in every in­di­vid­ual case com­pa­nies and sites have their rea­sons for do­ing this. The most fre­quently cited are the fact that fo­rums need to be main­tained (true!) and that peo­ple’s con­ver­sa­tional habits have changed, with fo­rum use dwin­dling (also true!).But I sim­ply do not care, be­cause a) I don’t work for these com­pa­nies, and b) I’m more in­ter­ested in look­ing at the long-term dam­age this is do­ing to the in­ter­net. Forums and Discord are ap­ples and or­anges. Users aren’t be­ing moved from one sim­i­lar thing to an­other, they’re be­ing shifted to plat­forms with fun­da­men­tally dif­fer­ent ways of ap­proach­ing dis­cus­sions.G/​O Media may get a com­mis­sionDis­cord is great for talk­ing in the mo­ment. It’s a place for real-time con­ver­sa­tions (or at lease those a few hours old if they’re not as busy), a fancy way to man­age mul­ti­ple chat rooms and voice comms, and if that’s what you want—and mil­lions of peo­ple around the world do, for loads of needs and wants—then great!Fo­rums aren’t the same though. They’re noth­ing like it. Forums are more de­lib­er­ate, more con­sid­ered, and while they’re far from per­fect—I’m sure you can post a bil­lion ex­am­ples of peo­ple be­ing nei­ther de­lib­er­ate nor con­sid­ered on fo­rums—the point is that they’re more per­ma­nent. Forums cre­ate a record, an archive we can search through, so that when­ever we want to re­visit is­sues, or find help with a prob­lem, or see what was hap­pen­ing dur­ing a cer­tain time, we can do that. There’s a pa­per trail, and while some­times that leads to em­bar­rass­ing takes on tv shows and game re­veals, other times it’s pro­vid­ing an enor­mous help with tech­ni­cal is­sues or parts of a game you’re stuck on.Dis­cord sim­ply can’t pro­vide that. It’s a river run­ning in real-time, and while it does have search func­tions, the way the whole app is struc­tured means you’re sim­ply never go­ing to get the same lev­els of de­tailed dis­cus­sion or archived in­for­ma­tion as we can get from fo­rums. If places want to open a Discord and run that as some­thing else, then cool, but us­ing it as a re­place­ment for fo­rums is a dis­as­ter.While every com­pany clos­ing fo­rums and mov­ing peo­ple to Discord in 2021 might have their rea­sons, if this trend keeps up we’re go­ing to look around in 2026, not be able to find a whole ton of cool and/​or in­ter­est­ing stuff, and dis­cover to our hor­ror that, some­how, the in­ter­net had got even worse.

As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 17, 2021.

Approximate date of com­mence­ment of pro­posed sale to the pub­lic:

As soon as prac­ti­ca­ble af­ter the ef­fec­tive date of this reg­is­tra­tion state­ment.

If any of the se­cu­ri­ties be­ing reg­is­tered on this Form are to be of­fered on a de­layed or con­tin­u­ous ba­sis pur­suant to Rule 415 un­der the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or Securities Act, check the fol­low­ing box: ☐

If this Form is filed to reg­is­ter ad­di­tional se­cu­ri­ties for an of­fer­ing pur­suant to Rule 462(b) un­der the Securities Act, please check the fol­low­ing box and list the Securities Act reg­is­tra­tion state­ment num­ber of the ear­lier ef­fec­tive reg­is­tra­tion state­ment for the same of­fer­ing. ☐

If this Form is a post-ef­fec­tive amend­ment filed pur­suant to Rule 462(c) un­der the Securities Act, check the fol­low­ing box and list the Securities Act reg­is­tra­tion state­ment num­ber of the ear­lier ef­fec­tive reg­is­tra­tion state­ment for the same of­fer­ing. ☐

If this Form is a post-ef­fec­tive amend­ment filed pur­suant to Rule 462(d) un­der the Securities Act, check the fol­low­ing box and list the Securities Act reg­is­tra­tion state­ment num­ber of the ear­lier ef­fec­tive reg­is­tra­tion state­ment for the same of­fer­ing. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the reg­is­trant is a large ac­cel­er­ated filer, an ac­cel­er­ated filer, a non-ac­cel­er­ated filer, a smaller re­port­ing com­pany, or an emerg­ing growth com­pany. See the de­f­i­n­i­tions of “large ac­cel­er­ated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller re­port­ing com­pany,” and “emerging growth com­pany” in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

If an emerg­ing growth com­pany, in­di­cate by check mark if the reg­is­trant has elected not to use the ex­tended tran­si­tion pe­riod for com­ply­ing with any new or re­vised fi­nan­cial ac­count­ing stan­dards pro­vided pur­suant to Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act. ☐

Title of Each Class of Securities to be Registered

Estimated solely for the pur­pose of cal­cu­lat­ing the amount of the reg­is­tra­tion fee in ac­cor­dance with Rule 457(o) of the Securities Act.

Includes the ag­gre­gate of­fer­ing price of ad­di­tional shares that the un­der­writ­ers have the op­tion to pur­chase, if any.

The reg­is­trant hereby amends this reg­is­tra­tion state­ment on such date or dates as may be nec­es­sary to de­lay its ef­fec­tive date un­til the reg­is­trant shall file a fur­ther amend­ment which specif­i­cally states that this reg­is­tra­tion state­ment shall there­after be­come ef­fec­tive in ac­cor­dance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act or un­til the reg­is­tra­tion state­ment shall be­come ef­fec­tive on such date as the Securities and Exchange Commission, act­ing pur­suant to said Section 8(a), may de­ter­mine.

We are a re­mote-only com­pany. Accordingly, we do not main­tain a head­quar­ters. For pur­poses of com­pli­ance with ap­plic­a­ble re­quire­ments of the Securities Act and Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, any stock­holder com­mu­ni­ca­tion re­quired to be sent to our prin­ci­pal ex­ec­u­tive of­fices may be di­rected to the agent for ser­vice of process named above, or to the email ad­dress: reach.git­lab@git­lab.com.

The in­for­ma­tion in this pre­lim­i­nary prospec­tus is not com­plete and may be changed. Neither we nor the sell­ing stock­holder may sell these se­cu­ri­ties un­til the reg­is­tra­tion state­ment filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is ef­fec­tive. This pre­lim­i­nary prospec­tus is not an of­fer to sell these se­cu­ri­ties and nei­ther we nor the sell­ing stock­holder are so­lic­it­ing of­fers to buy these se­cu­ri­ties in any ju­ris­dic­tion where the of­fer or sale is not per­mit­ted.

This is an ini­tial pub­lic of­fer­ing of shares of Class A com­mon stock of GitLab Inc. We are sell­ing           shares of our Class A com­mon stock and the sell­ing stock­holder named in this prospec­tus is sell­ing            shares of our Class A com­mon stock. We will not re­ceive any of the pro­ceeds from the sale of the shares by the sell­ing stock­holder.

Prior to this of­fer­ing, there has been no pub­lic mar­ket for our Class A com­mon stock. It is cur­rently es­ti­mated that the ini­tial pub­lic of­fer­ing price per share will be be­tween $      and $     . We have ap­plied to list the Class A com­mon stock on the Nas­daq Global Market un­der the sym­bol “GTLB.”

We have two classes of au­tho­rized com­mon stock, Class A com­mon stock and Class B com­mon stock. The rights of the hold­ers of Class A com­mon stock and Class B com­mon stock are iden­ti­cal, ex­cept with re­spect to vot­ing and con­ver­sion rights. Each share of Class A com­mon stock is en­ti­tled to one vote per share. Each share of Class B com­mon stock is en­ti­tled to 10 votes per share and is con­vert­ible into one share of Class A com­mon stock. Outstanding shares of Class B com­mon stock will rep­re­sent ap­prox­i­mately          % of the vot­ing power of our out­stand­ing cap­i­tal stock im­me­di­ately fol­low­ing the com­ple­tion of this of­fer­ing, with our di­rec­tors, ex­ec­u­tive of­fi­cers, and ben­e­fi­cial own­ers of 5% or greater of our out­stand­ing cap­i­tal stock, and their re­spec­tive af­fil­i­ates, hold­ing ap­prox­i­mately           % of the vot­ing power of our out­stand­ing cap­i­tal stock im­me­di­ately fol­low­ing the com­ple­tion of this of­fer­ing, as­sum­ing no ex­er­cise of the un­der­writ­ers’ op­tion to pur­chase ad­di­tional shares.

We have ap­plied to list our Class A com­mon stock on the Nasdaq Global Market under the sym­bol “GTLB.”

We are an “emerging growth com­pany” as de­fined un­der the fed­eral se­cu­ri­ties laws and, as such, we have elected to com­ply with cer­tain re­duced re­port­ing re­quire­ments for this prospec­tus and may elect to do so in fu­ture fil­ings. See “Prospectus Summary—Implications of Being an Emerging Growth Company.”

See “Risk Factors” on page 18 to read about fac­tors you should con­sider be­fore buy­ing shares of our Class A com­mon stock.

Proceeds, be­fore ex­penses, to us­Pro­ceeds to the Selling Stockholder (before ex­penses)

See the sec­tion ti­tled “Underwriting” for a de­scrip­tion of the com­pen­sa­tion payable to the un­der­writ­ers.

We have granted the un­der­writ­ers an op­tion to pur­chase up to an ad­di­tional          shares of our Class A com­mon stock, at the ini­tial pub­lic of­fer­ing price less the un­der­writ­ing dis­count

The Securities and Exchange Commission and state se­cu­ri­ties reg­u­la­tors have not ap­proved or dis­ap­proved these se­cu­ri­ties, or de­ter­mined if this prospec­tus is truth­ful or com­plete. Any rep­re­sen­ta­tion to the con­trary is a crim­i­nal of­fense

The un­der­writ­ers ex­pect to de­liver the shares of Class A com­mon stock to pur­chasers on                      , 2021.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of OperationsMaterial U. S. Federal Income Tax Consequences to Non-U.S. Holders of Our Class A Common StockWhere You Can Find Additional Information

Through and in­clud­ing          , 2021 (the 25th day af­ter the date of this prospec­tus), all deal­ers ef­fect­ing trans­ac­tions in these se­cu­ri­ties, whether or not par­tic­i­pat­ing in this of­fer­ing, may be re­quired to de­liver a prospec­tus. This is in ad­di­tion to a deal­er’s oblig­a­tion to de­liver a prospec­tus when act­ing as an un­der­writer and with re­spect to an un­sold al­lot­ment or sub­scrip­tion.

Neither we, the sell­ing stock­holder, nor the un­der­writ­ers have au­tho­rized any­one to pro­vide any in­for­ma­tion or to make any rep­re­sen­ta­tions other than those con­tained in this prospec­tus or in any free writ­ing prospec­tuses pre­pared by or on be­half of us or to which we have re­ferred you. Neither we, the sell­ing stock­holder, nor the un­der­writ­ers take any re­spon­si­bil­ity for, and can pro­vide no as­sur­ance as to the re­li­a­bil­ity of, any other in­for­ma­tion that oth­ers may give you. We and the sell­ing stock­holder are of­fer­ing to sell, and seek­ing of­fers to buy, shares of Class A com­mon stock only in ju­ris­dic­tions where of­fers and sales are per­mit­ted. The in­for­ma­tion con­tained in this prospec­tus is ac­cu­rate only as of the date of this prospec­tus, re­gard­less of the time of de­liv­ery of this prospec­tus or of any sale of the shares of Class A com­mon stock. Our busi­ness, op­er­at­ing re­sults, fi­nan­cial con­di­tion and prospects may have changed since the date of this prospec­tus.

For in­vestors out­side the United States: Neither we, the sell­ing stock­holder, nor any of the un­der­writ­ers have taken any ac­tion that would per­mit this of­fer­ing or pos­ses­sion or dis­tri­b­u­tion of this prospec­tus in any ju­ris­dic­tion where ac­tion for that pur­pose is re­quired, other than in the United States. You are re­quired to in­form your­selves about and to ob­serve any re­stric­tions re­lat­ing to this of­fer­ing and the dis­tri­b­u­tion of this prospec­tus.

The fol­low­ing sum­mary high­lights se­lected in­for­ma­tion that is pre­sented in greater de­tail else­where in this prospec­tus. This sum­mary does not con­tain all the in­for­ma­tion you should con­sider be­fore in­vest­ing in our Class A com­mon stock. You should care­fully read this prospec­tus in its en­tirety be­fore in­vest­ing in our Class A com­mon stock, in­clud­ing the sec­tions ti­tled “Risk Factors,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements,” and our con­sol­i­dated fi­nan­cial state­ments and the ac­com­pa­ny­ing notes in­cluded else­where in this prospec­tus. Our fis­cal year end is January 31, and our fis­cal quar­ters end on April 30, July 31, October 31, and January 31. Our fis­cal years ended January 31, 2020 and 2021 are re­ferred to herein as fis­cal 2020 and fis­cal 2021, re­spec­tively.

We be­lieve in an in­no­v­a­tive world pow­ered by soft­ware. To re­al­ize this vi­sion, we pi­o­neered The DevOps Platform, a fun­da­men­tally new ap­proach to DevOps con­sist­ing of a sin­gle code­base and in­ter­face with a uni­fied data model. The DevOps Platform al­lows every­one to con­tribute to build bet­ter soft­ware rapidly, ef­fi­ciently, and se­curely.

Today, every in­dus­try, busi­ness, and func­tion within a com­pany is de­pen­dent on soft­ware. To re­main com­pet­i­tive and sur­vive, nearly all com­pa­nies must dig­i­tally trans­form and be­come ex­perts at build­ing and de­liv­er­ing soft­ware.

GitLab is The DevOps Platform, a sin­gle ap­pli­ca­tion that brings to­gether de­vel­op­ment, op­er­a­tions, IT, se­cu­rity, and busi­ness teams to de­liver de­sired busi­ness out­comes. Having all teams on a sin­gle ap­pli­ca­tion with a sin­gle in­ter­face rep­re­sents a step change in how or­ga­ni­za­tions plan, build, se­cure, and de­liver soft­ware.

The DevOps Platform ac­cel­er­ates our cus­tomers’ abil­ity to cre­ate busi­ness value and in­no­vate by re­duc­ing their soft­ware de­vel­op­ment cy­cle times from weeks to min­utes. It re­moves the need for point tools and de­liv­ers en­hanced op­er­a­tional ef­fi­ciency by elim­i­nat­ing man­ual work, in­creas­ing pro­duc­tiv­ity, and cre­at­ing a cul­ture of in­no­va­tion and ve­loc­ity. The DevOps Platform also em­beds se­cu­rity ear­lier into the de­vel­op­ment process, im­prov­ing our cus­tomers’ soft­ware se­cu­rity, qual­ity, and over­all com­pli­ance.

DevOps is the set of prac­tices that com­bines soft­ware de­vel­op­ment (dev) and IT op­er­a­tions (ops). It aims to al­low teams to col­lab­o­rate and work to­gether to shorten the de­vel­op­ment life­cy­cle and evolve from de­liv­er­ing soft­ware on a slow, pe­ri­odic ba­sis to rapid, con­tin­u­ous up­dates. When DevOps started, each team bought their own tools in iso­la­tion, lead­ing to a “Bring Your Own DevOps” en­vi­ron­ment. The next evo­lu­tion was stan­dard­iz­ing com­pany-wide on the same tool for each stage across the DevOps life­cy­cle. However, these tools were not con­nected, lead­ing to a “Best in Class DevOps” en­vi­ron­ment. Companies tried to rem­edy this frag­men­ta­tion and in­ef­fi­ciency by man­u­ally in­te­grat­ing these DevOps point so­lu­tions to­gether defin­ing the next phase: “DIY DevOps.”

At the same time, the faster de­liv­ery of soft­ware re­quired more DevOps tools per pro­ject. Increased adop­tion of a mi­croser­vice ar­chi­tec­ture led to more pro­jects. The com­bi­na­tion caused an ex­po­nen­tial in­crease in the num­ber of tool-pro­ject in­te­gra­tions. This has of­ten led to poor user ex­pe­ri­ences, higher costs, and in­creased time to de­liver new soft­ware. As a re­sult, busi­ness out­comes of­ten failed and the po­ten­tial for DevOps was never fully re­al­ized. In short, an en­tirely new plat­form for DevOps was needed. We pi­o­neered The DevOps Platform to solve this prob­lem.

The DevOps Platform re­places the DIY DevOps ap­proach. It en­ables or­ga­ni­za­tions to re­al­ize the full po­ten­tial of DevOps and be­come soft­ware-led busi­nesses. It spans all stages of the DevOps life­cy­cle, from pro­ject plan­ning, or Plan, to source code man­age­ment, or Create, to con­tin­u­ous in­te­gra­tion, or Verify, to sta­tic and dy­namic ap­pli­ca­tion se­cu­rity test­ing, or Secure, to pack­ag­ing ar­ti­facts, or Package, to

con­tin­u­ous de­liv­ery and de­ploy­ment, or Release, to con­fig­ur­ing in­fra­struc­ture for op­ti­mal de­ploy­ment, or Configure, to mon­i­tor­ing it for in­ci­dents, or Monitor, to pro­tect­ing the pro­duc­tion de­ploy­ment, or Protect, and man­ag­ing the whole cy­cle with value stream an­a­lyt­ics, or Manage. It also al­lows cus­tomers to man­age and se­cure their ap­pli­ca­tions across any cloud through a sin­gle plat­form.

The DevOps Platform has broad use across or­ga­ni­za­tions. It helps prod­uct and busi­ness teams to work with de­vel­op­ers to in­tro­duce new fea­tures and drive suc­cess­ful busi­ness out­comes. It helps Chief Technology Officers, or CTOs, mod­ern­ize their DevOps en­vi­ron­ment and drive de­vel­oper pro­duc­tiv­ity. It helps Chief Information Officers, or CIOs, adopt mi­croser­vices and cloud na­tive de­vel­op­ment to im­prove the ef­fi­ciency, scale, and per­for­mance of their soft­ware ar­chi­tec­ture. It helps Chief Information Security Officers, or CISOs, re­duce se­cu­rity vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties and de­liver soft­ware faster. It helps or­ga­ni­za­tions at­tract and re­tain top tal­ent by al­low­ing peo­ple to fo­cus more time on their job and less time man­ag­ing tools.

The ma­jor­ity of our cus­tomers be­gin by us­ing Create and Verify. Developers use Create to col­lab­o­rate to­gether on the same code base with­out con­flict­ing or ac­ci­den­tally over­writ­ing each oth­er’s changes. Create also main­tains a run­ning his­tory of soft­ware con­tri­bu­tions from each de­vel­oper to al­low for ver­sion con­trol. Teams use Verify to en­sure changes to code go through de­fined qual­ity stan­dards with au­to­matic test­ing and re­port­ing. We be­lieve serv­ing as this sys­tem of record for code and our high en­gage­ment with de­vel­op­ers is a com­pet­i­tive ad­van­tage in re­al­iz­ing our sin­gle ap­pli­ca­tion vi­sion as it cre­ates in­ter­de­pen­dence and adop­tion across more stages of the DevOps life­cy­cle, such as Package, Secure, and Release. As more stages are ad­dressed within a sin­gle ap­pli­ca­tion, the ben­e­fits of The DevOps Platform are en­hanced.

We are com­mit­ted to ad­vanc­ing The DevOps Platform. Our dual fly­wheel de­vel­op­ment strat­egy lever­ages both de­vel­op­ment spend from our re­search and de­vel­op­ment team mem­bers as well as com­mu­nity con­tri­bu­tions via our open core busi­ness model. By lever­ag­ing the power of each, we cre­ate a vir­tu­ous cy­cle where more con­tri­bu­tions lead to more fea­tures, which leads to more users, lead­ing back to more con­tri­bu­tions.

We em­pha­size it­er­a­tion to drive rapid in­no­va­tion in our de­vel­op­ment strat­egy. This it­er­a­tive ap­proach has en­abled us to re­lease a new ver­sion of our soft­ware on the 22 day of every month for 118 months in a row as of July 31, 2021. This is also due in part to our over 2,600 con­trib­u­tors in our global, open source com­mu­nity as of July 31, 2021. GitLab team mem­bers also use The DevOps Platform to power our own DevOps life­cy­cle. By do­ing so, we ben­e­fit from the in­her­ent ad­van­tages of us­ing a sin­gle ap­pli­ca­tion. We lever­age these learn­ings to es­tab­lish a rapid feed­back loop to con­tin­u­ally and rapidly im­prove The DevOps Platform.

We have been a 100% re­mote work­force since in­cep­tion and, as of July 31, 2021, had ap­prox­i­mately 1,350 team mem­bers in over 65 coun­tries. Operating re­motely al­lows us ac­cess to a global tal­ent pool that en­ables us to hire tal­ented team mem­bers, re­gard­less of lo­ca­tion, pro­vid­ing a strong com­pet­i­tive ad­van­tage. We fos­ter a cul­ture of re­sults built on our core val­ues of col­lab­o­ra­tion, re­sults, ef­fi­ciency, di­ver­sity-in­clu­sion-be­long­ing, it­er­a­tion, and trans­parency. We aim to be trans­par­ent to build align­ment and affin­ity with our com­mu­nity and cus­tomers. This is ex­em­pli­fied through our cor­po­rate hand­book, or the Handbook, our cen­tral repos­i­tory that de­tails how we run GitLab and is shared with the world. It con­sists of over 2,000 web­pages of text, in­clud­ing our strat­egy and roadmap. We wel­come every­one, both in­side and out­side of the com­pany, to con­tribute to the Handbook.

We have an open core busi­ness model. We of­fer a free tier with a large num­ber of fea­tures to en­cour­age use of The DevOps Platform, so­licit con­tri­bu­tions, and serve as tar­geted lead gen­er­a­tion for paid cus­tomers. We also of­fer two paid sub­scrip­tion tiers with ac­cess to ad­di­tional fea­tures that are more rel­e­vant to man­agers, di­rec­tors, and ex­ec­u­tives. Our sub­scrip­tion plans are avail­able as a self-man­aged of­fer­ing where cus­tomers typ­i­cally down­load to run The DevOps Platform in their own ac­count in the pub­lic cloud, and also a Software-as-a-Service, or SaaS, of­fer­ing which is man­aged by GitLab and hosted in our ac­count in the pub­lic cloud.

The DevOps Platform is used glob­ally by or­ga­ni­za­tions of all sizes across a broad range of in­dus­tries. To reach, en­gage and help drive suc­cess at each, our sales force is am­pli­fied by our strate­gic hy­per­scaler part­ner­ships, in­clud­ing Google Cloud and Amazon Web Services, or AWS, who of­fer The DevOps Platform on their mar­ket­places. We also ben­e­fit from strate­gic al­liance part­ner­ships, which re­sell The DevOps Platform to large en­ter­prise cus­tomers, and our strong chan­nel part­ner­ships rang­ing from large global sys­tems in­te­gra­tors to re­gional dig­i­tal trans­for­ma­tion spe­cial­ists, and vol­ume re­sellers.

We em­ploy a land-and-ex­pand sales strat­egy. Our cus­tomer jour­ney typ­i­cally be­gins with de­vel­op­ers and then ex­pands to more teams and up to se­nior ex­ec­u­tive buy­ers. Our Dollar-Based Net Retention Rate was 148% and 152% as of January 31, 2021 and July 31, 2021, re­spec­tively. Our co­hort of cus­tomers gen­er­at­ing $5,000 or more in an­nual re­cur­ring rev­enue, or ARR, which we re­fer to as Base Customers, grew from 1,662 as of January 31, 2020 to 2,745 as of January 31, 2021 and 3,632 as of July 31, 2021.

Our busi­ness has ex­pe­ri­enced rapid growth. We gen­er­ated rev­enue of $81.2 mil­lion and $152.2 mil­lion in fis­cal 2020 and 2021, re­spec­tively, rep­re­sent­ing growth of 87%. We gen­er­ated rev­enue of $63.9 mil­lion and $108.1 mil­lion for the six months ended July 31, 2020 and July 31, 2021, re­spec­tively, rep­re­sent­ing year over year growth of 69%. During this pe­riod, we con­tin­ued to in­vest in grow­ing our busi­ness to cap­i­tal­ize on our mar­ket op­por­tu­nity. Our net loss was $130.7 mil­lion, $192.2 mil­lion, and $69.0 mil­lion in fis­cal 2020, fis­cal 2021, and the six months ended July 31, 2021, re­spec­tively. Our op­er­at­ing cash flow mar­gin, which we de­fine as op­er­at­ing cash flows as a per­cent­age of rev­enue, was (74.1)%, (48.4)%, and (35.8)% for fis­cal 2020, fis­cal 2021, and the six months ended July 31, 2021, re­spec­tively. Our gross profit was 88%, 88%, and 87% for fis­cal 2020, fis­cal 2021, and the six months ended July 31, 2021, re­spec­tively.

Important in­dus­try and tech­nol­ogy trends for our busi­ness in­clude:

Digital trans­for­ma­tion dri­ven by in­ter­nal soft­ware de­vel­op­ment is a cor­po­rate im­per­a­tive to­day ir­re­spec­tive of in­dus­try. We are in the midst of a gen­er­a­tional dis­rup­tion whereby non-dig­i­tal na­tive com­pa­nies are seek­ing to be­come soft­ware-led busi­nesses.

Modern soft­ware de­vel­op­ment re­quires com­pa­nies to em­brace both DevOps and DevSecOps. DevOps aims to al­low teams to col­lab­o­rate and work to­gether to shorten the de­vel­op­ment life­cy­cle and pro­vide con­tin­u­ous de­liv­ery of high qual­ity soft­ware. Increasingly, DevSecOps, which com­bines IT se­cu­rity prac­tices into DevOps, is be­ing adopted to em­bed se­cu­rity best prac­tices ear­lier in the de­vel­op­ment process to en­hance se­cu­rity while also main­tain­ing ve­loc­ity.

Faster time to mar­ket through cy­cle time com­pres­sion is key to busi­ness suc­cess. Reducing the cy­cle times to de­liver new soft­ware from months to weeks, hours, or min­utes is crit­i­cal to or­ga­ni­za­tional ob­jec­tives and main­tain­ing in­dus­try com­pet­i­tive­ness.

Companies are em­brac­ing mi­croser­vices to en­hance their speed and ef­fi­ciency. Companies are mod­u­lar­iz­ing ap­pli­ca­tions into smaller com­po­nents through mi­croser­vices to re­lease new fea­tures or amend ex­ist­ing fea­tures faster.

Companies have em­braced a cloud-first strat­egy to scale their DevOps ini­tia­tives, pro­vid­ing teams with faster, cheaper, and more flex­i­ble in­fra­struc­ture that does­n’t re­quire man­ual over­head.

To stream­line ef­fi­ciency or­ga­ni­za­tions are con­sol­i­dat­ing point tools and adopt­ing full plat­form ser­vices.

Best-in-class plat­forms are es­sen­tial to hir­ing the right de­vel­op­ers. It is a strate­gic pri­or­ity for or­ga­ni­za­tions to in­vest in hir­ing the best de­vel­oper tal­ent. In or­der to hire the best de­vel­op­ers, it is es­sen­tial to have a DevOps plat­form with good doc­u­men­ta­tion, open trans­parency, and an en­gag­ing com­mu­nity.

Existing ap­proaches to DevOps suf­fer from some or all of the fol­low­ing lim­i­ta­tions:

Built to only ad­dress cer­tain stages of the DevOps life­cy­cle. The un­der­ly­ing ar­chi­tec­tures and code­bases of point prod­ucts were orig­i­nally de­signed to ad­dress dis­crete parts of the DevOps life­cy­cle.

DIY DevOps prod­ucts of­ten have much slower soft­ware cy­cle re­lease times that can be mea­sured in weeks or months in­stead of min­utes or hours.

We be­lieve DIY DevOps makes teams less pro­duc­tive as they spend more of their time man­ag­ing in­te­gra­tions across their tools rather than build­ing new soft­ware and prod­ucts.

DIY DevOps re­sults in man­ag­ing re­la­tion­ships, li­cens­ing, and pro­cure­ment across a num­ber of ven­dors. This re­sults in ex­cess di­rect costs to the or­ga­ni­za­tion. Further, this ap­proach cre­ates in­di­rect costs due to lost vis­i­bil­ity and trans­parency re­sult­ing from nu­mer­ous hand­offs across stages.

DIY DevOps re­quires dis­crete tools across de­vel­op­ment, op­er­a­tions and se­cu­rity teams of­ten lead­ing to lower qual­ity code with more se­cu­rity vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties.

Platforms with fea­tures op­ti­mized to run more ef­fi­ciently on cer­tain clouds limit the abil­ity for or­ga­ni­za­tions to em­brace a true multi-cloud strat­egy.

Inability to gov­ern, au­to­mate, mea­sure, and an­a­lyze leads to poor com­pli­ance. DIY DevOps cre­ates a lack of abil­ity to over­see the ful­some process and to an­a­lyze and au­to­mate the DevOps process as one co­he­sive unit.

con­sists of a sin­gle code­base and in­ter­face with a uni­fied data model. It is pur­pose-built to ad­dress every stage of the DevOps life­cy­cle:

Helps or­ga­ni­za­tions op­ti­mize and an­a­lyze the flow of work through the full DevOps value stream.

Helps teams col­lab­o­ra­tively plan to­gether in the same sys­tem, which en­ables faster and more ef­fi­cient work in all other stages of The DevOps Platform.

Helps teams de­sign, de­velop and se­curely man­age code and pro­ject data from a sin­gle dis­trib­uted ver­sion con­trol sys­tem to en­able rapid it­er­a­tion and de­liv­ery of busi­ness value.

Helps soft­ware teams fully em­brace Continuous Integration, or CI, to au­to­mate the builds, in­te­gra­tion and ver­i­fi­ca­tion of their code.

Enables teams to man­age the nec­es­sary com­po­nents of their ap­pli­ca­tions and de­pen­den­cies, man­age con­tain­ers, and build ar­ti­facts with ease.

Provides a host of up to date se­cu­rity test­ing en­vi­ron­ments to as­sure users de­liver sage, se­cure, and com­pli­ant soft­ware. These en­vi­ron­ments in­clude Static Application Security Testing, or SAST, Dynamic Application Security Testing, or DAST, Fuzz Testing, Container Scanning, and Dependency Scanning.

Helps au­to­mate the re­lease and de­liv­ery of ap­pli­ca­tions, short­en­ing the de­liv­ery life­cy­cle, stream­lin­ing man­ual processes, and ac­cel­er­at­ing team ve­loc­ity.

Helps teams to con­fig­ure and man­age their ap­pli­ca­tion en­vi­ron­ments.

Provides feed­back in the form of er­rors, traces, met­rics, logs, and alerts to help re­duce the sever­ity and fre­quency of in­ci­dents so that users can re­lease soft­ware fre­quently with con­fi­dence.

Provides cloud na­tive pro­tec­tions, in­clud­ing uni­fied pol­icy man­age­ment, con­tainer scan­ning, and con­tainer net­work and host se­cu­rity.

The DevOps Platform ac­cel­er­ates our cus­tomers’ abil­ity to cre­ate busi­ness value and in­no­vate by re­duc­ing their soft­ware de­vel­op­ment cy­cle times from weeks to min­utes. It re­moves the need for point tools and de­liv­ers en­hanced op­er­a­tional ef­fi­ciency by elim­i­nat­ing man­ual work, in­creas­ing pro­duc­tiv­ity, and cre­at­ing a cul­ture of in­no­va­tion and ve­loc­ity. The DevOps Platform also em­beds se­cu­rity ear­lier into the de­vel­op­ment process, im­prov­ing our cus­tomers’ soft­ware se­cu­rity, qual­ity, and over­all com­pli­ance.

stream­line work­flows and processes, and en­hance over­all pro­duc­tiv­ity and ef­fi­ciency;

en­hance their in­no­va­tion and rev­enue growth due to faster time to mar­ket;

in­crease se­cu­rity by find­ing and cor­rect­ing se­cu­rity vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties in soft­ware ear­lier or elim­i­nat­ing in­ef­fi­cien­cies in the soft­ware de­vel­op­ment process al­to­gether;

more eas­ily log, track, and trace dif­fer­ent steps across the DevOps life­cy­cle to bet­ter un­der­stand gov­er­nance and im­prove their com­pli­ance pos­ture;

at­tract world-class tal­ent and boost team mem­ber morale, re­sult­ing in greater pro­duc­tiv­ity by spend­ing more time build­ing, de­ploy­ing, and se­cur­ing soft­ware, and less time man­ag­ing, in­te­grat­ing, and triag­ing across dif­fer­ent tools;

re­duce costs by en­hanc­ing pro­duc­tiv­ity, con­sol­i­dat­ing point tools, and elim­i­nat­ing in­te­gra­tions; and

em­brace the ben­e­fits of al­low­ing our cus­tomers to have con­sis­tent com­pli­ance and value stream an­a­lyt­ics while us­ing mul­ti­ple clouds.

Our busi­ness ben­e­fits from the fol­low­ing com­pet­i­tive strengths:

The DevOps Platform is pur­pose-built to ad­dress every stage of the DevOps life­cy­cle as a sin­gle ap­pli­ca­tion, act­ing as a sys­tem of record for code and the key start­ing point from which all sub­se­quent work­flows in the DevOps life­cy­cle ex­tend;

our dual fly­wheel de­vel­op­ment strat­egy lever­ages de­vel­op­ment spend and com­mu­nity con­tri­bu­tions. It cre­ates a vir­tu­ous cy­cle where more con­tri­bu­tions leads to more fea­tures, which leads to more users, lead­ing back to more con­tri­bu­tions;

we em­pha­size it­er­a­tion to drive rapid in­no­va­tion in our de­vel­op­ment strat­egy. This has en­abled us to re­lease a new ver­sion of our soft­ware on the 22nd day of every month for 118 months in a row as of July 31, 2021;

our large open source in­stalled base al­lows us to ef­fi­ciently iden­tify and ob­tain new pay­ing cus­tomers;

The DevOps Platform main­tains full fea­ture par­ity and the same sin­gle ap­pli­ca­tion ex­pe­ri­ence across any cloud en­vi­ron­ment;

we are ag­nos­tic as to who we serve, how we sell, and where we de­ploy; and

we are a pi­o­neer and thought leader in all-re­mote work which en­hances our brand with cus­tomers and team mem­bers.

Today, we be­lieve the ad­dress­able mar­ket op­por­tu­nity for the DevOps Platform is ap­prox­i­mately $40 bil­lion. To es­ti­mate our cur­rent ad­dress­able mar­ket we have cat­e­go­rized com­pa­nies of what we view as ad­e­quate scale into tiers based off of em­ployee count as re­ported by S&P Global. We then mul­ti­ply these co­horts by the av­er­age an­nual re­cur­ring rev­enue from the top 25% of cus­tomers in each of these cat­e­gories as of January 31, 2021. Given the wide ap­plic­a­bil­ity of our plat­form, we be­lieve we are well suited to grow our mar­ket op­por­tu­nity over time.

According to Gartner, the to­tal ad­dress­able mar­ket for Global Infrastructure Software is es­ti­mated to be $328 bil­lion by the end of 2021 and $458 bil­lion by the end of 2024. We be­lieve that we can serve $43 bil­lion of this mar­ket by the end of 2021 and $55 bil­lion by the end of 2024. We cal­cu­lated these fig­ures by de­ter­min­ing the mar­kets cur­rently ad­dressed by the most com­mon use cases for our plat­form and sum­ming their es­ti­mated sizes as re­ported by Gartner.

We in­tend to con­tinue mak­ing sig­nif­i­cant in­vest­ments in sales and mar­ket­ing, re­search and de­vel­op­ment, and our part­ner ecosys­tem to drive our growth. Key el­e­ments of our strat­egy in­clude:

ad­vance our fea­ture ma­tu­rity across more stages of the DevOps life­cy­cle;

grow and in­vest in our part­ner net­work; and

Our busi­ness is sub­ject to nu­mer­ous risks and un­cer­tain­ties, in­clud­ing those in the sec­tion ti­tled “Risk Factors” im­me­di­ately fol­low­ing this prospec­tus sum­mary. These risks in­clude the fol­low­ing:

Our busi­ness and op­er­a­tions have ex­pe­ri­enced rapid growth, and if we do not ap­pro­pri­ately man­age fu­ture growth, if any, or are un­able to im­prove our sys­tems, processes and con­trols, our busi­ness, fi­nan­cial con­di­tion, re­sults of op­er­a­tions, and prospects will be ad­versely af­fected.

Our re­cent growth may not be in­dica­tive of our fu­ture growth, and we may not be able to sus­tain our rev­enue growth rate in the fu­ture. Our growth also makes it dif­fi­cult to eval­u­ate our fu­ture prospects and may in­crease the risk that we will not be suc­cess­ful.

We have a his­tory of losses, an­tic­i­pate in­creases in our op­er­at­ing ex­penses in the fu­ture, and may not achieve or sus­tain prof­itabil­ity on a con­sis­tent ba­sis. If we can­not achieve and sus­tain prof­itabil­ity, our busi­ness, fi­nan­cial con­di­tion, and op­er­at­ing re­sults may be ad­versely af­fected.

While an­a­lyz­ing the phone of a Saudi ac­tivist in­fected with NSO Group’s Pegasus spy­ware, we dis­cov­ered a zero-day zero-click ex­ploit against iMes­sage. The ex­ploit, which we call FORCEDENTRY, tar­gets Apple’s im­age ren­der­ing li­brary, and was ef­fec­tive against Apple iOS, MacOS and WatchOS de­vices.

We de­ter­mined that the mer­ce­nary spy­ware com­pany NSO Group used the vul­ner­a­bil­ity to re­motely ex­ploit and in­fect the lat­est Apple de­vices with the Pegasus spy­ware. We be­lieve that FORCEDENTRY has been in use since at least February 2021.

The Citizen Lab dis­closed the vul­ner­a­bil­ity and code to Apple, which has as­signed the FORCEDENTRY vulnerability CVE-2021-30860 and de­scribes the vul­ner­a­bil­ity as “processing a ma­li­ciously crafted PDF may lead to ar­bi­trary code ex­e­cu­tion.”

Today, September 13th, Apple is re­leas­ing an up­date that patches CVE-2021-30860. We urge read­ers to im­me­di­ately up­date all Apple de­vices.

Devices af­fected by CVE-2021-30860 per Apple:

All iPhones with iOS ver­sions prior to 14.8, All Mac com­put­ers with op­er­at­ing sys­tem ver­sions prior to OSX Big Sur 11.6, Security Update 2021-005 Catalina, and all Apple Watches prior to watchOS 7.6.2.

In March 2021, we ex­am­ined the phone of a Saudi ac­tivist who has cho­sen to re­main anony­mous, and de­ter­mined that they had been hacked with NSO Group’s Pegasus spy­ware. During the course of the analy­sis we ob­tained an iTunes backup of the de­vice.

Figure 1: The GIF files we found on the phone.

Recent re-analy­sis of the backup yielded sev­eral files with the “.gif” ex­ten­sion in Library/SMS/Attachments that we de­ter­mined were sent to the phone im­me­di­ately be­fore it was hacked with NSO Group’s Pegasus spy­ware.

27 copies of an iden­ti­cal file with the “.gif” ex­ten­sion. Despite the ex­ten­sion, the file was ac­tu­ally a 748-byte Adobe PSD file. Each copy of this file caused an IMTranscoderAgent crash on the de­vice. These files each had ran­dom-look­ing ten-char­ac­ter file­names.

Four dif­fer­ent files with the “.gif” ex­ten­sion that were ac­tu­ally Adobe PDF files con­tain­ing a JBIG2-encoded stream. Two of these files had 34-character names, and two had 97-character names.

The out­put of the pdfid tool on these four “.gif” files was (NB: the stream had vary­ing length):

PDF Comment ‘%PDF-1.3\n\n’

obj 1 0

Type: /XRef

Referencing:

Contains stream

<< /Type /XRef /Size 9 /W [1 3 1] /Length … /Filter [/FlateDecode /FlateDecode /JBIG2Decode] /DecodeParms >>

trailer

<< /Size 2 >>

startxref 10

PDF Comment ‘%%EOF\n’

Because the for­mat of the files matched two types of crashes we had ob­served on an­other phone when it was hacked with Pegasus, we sus­pected that the “.gif” files might con­tain parts of what we are call­ing the FORCEDENTRY ex­ploit chain.

Citizen Lab for­warded the ar­ti­facts to Apple on Tuesday, September 7. On Monday, September 13, Apple con­firmed that the files in­cluded a zero-day ex­ploit against iOS and MacOS. They des­ig­nated the FORCEDENTRY ex­ploit CVE-2021-30860, and de­scribe it as “processing a ma­li­ciously crafted PDF may lead to ar­bi­trary code ex­e­cu­tion.”

The ex­ploit works by ex­ploit­ing an in­te­ger over­flow vul­ner­a­bil­ity in Apple’s im­age ren­der­ing li­brary (CoreGraphics). We are pub­lish­ing lim­ited tech­ni­cal in­for­ma­tion about CVE-2021-30860 at this time.

We ob­served mul­ti­ple dis­tinc­tive el­e­ments that al­lowed us to make a high-con­fi­dence at­tri­bu­tion to NSO Group:

The spy­ware in­stalled by the FORCEDENTRY ex­ploit ex­hib­ited a foren­sic ar­ti­fact that we call CASCADEFAIL, which is a bug whereby ev­i­dence is in­com­pletely deleted from the phone’s DataUsage.sqlite file. In CASCADEFAIL, an en­try from the file’s ZPROCESS table is deleted, but not en­tries in the ZLIVEUSAGE table that re­fer to the deleted ZPROCESS en­try. We have only ever seen this type of in­com­plete dele­tion as­so­ci­ated with NSO Group’s Pegasus spy­ware, and we be­lieve that the bug is dis­tinc­tive enough to point back to NSO. The spe­cific CASCADEFAIL ar­ti­fact can be de­tected by

SELECT “CASCADEFAIL” FROM ZLIVEUSAGE WHERE ZLIVEUSAGE. ZHASPROCESS NOT IN (SELECT Z_PK FROM ZPROCESS);

The spy­ware in­stalled by the FORCEDENTRY ex­ploit used mul­ti­ple process names, in­clud­ing the name “setframed”. That process name was used in an at­tack with NSO Group’s Pegasus spy­ware on an Al Jazeera jour­nal­ist in July 2020. Notably, we did not pub­lish that de­tail at the time.

FORCEDENTRY is the lat­est in a string of zero-click ex­ploits linked to NSO Group. In 2019, WhatsApp fixed CVE-2019-3568, a zero-click vul­ner­a­bil­ity in WhatsApp call­ing that NSO Group used against more than 1400 phones in a two-week pe­riod dur­ing which it was ob­served, and in 2020, NSO Group em­ployed the KISMET zero-click iMes­sage ex­ploit.

To our knowl­edge, the KISMET vul­ner­a­bil­ity was never pub­licly iden­ti­fied, though we sus­pect that the un­der­ly­ing vul­ner­a­bil­ity (if it still ex­ists) can no longer be ex­ploited via iMes­sage due to Apple’s in­tro­duc­tion of the BlastDoor mit­i­ga­tion in iOS14. We sus­pect that NSO Group de­vel­oped FORCEDENTRY, which cir­cum­vents BlastDoor, in re­sponse to this mit­i­ga­tion.

Despite promis­ing their cus­tomers the ut­most se­crecy and con­fi­den­tial­ity, NSO Group’s busi­ness model con­tains the seeds of their on­go­ing un­mask­ing. Selling tech­nol­ogy to gov­ern­ments that will use the tech­nol­ogy reck­lessly in vi­o­la­tion of in­ter­na­tional hu­man rights law ul­ti­mately fa­cil­i­tates dis­cov­ery of the spy­ware by in­ves­ti­ga­tory watch­dog or­ga­ni­za­tions, as we and oth­ers have shown on mul­ti­ple prior oc­ca­sions, and as was the case again here.

In 2016, we ti­tled our re­port on the dis­cov­ery of an iOS and MacOS Apple zero-day the “Million Dollar Dissident.” The ti­tle was cho­sen to re­flect the huge sums that au­to­cratic gov­ern­ments are will­ing to pay to hack their crit­ics. Mercenary spy­ware com­pa­nies de­vote sub­stan­tial re­sources to iden­ti­fy­ing soft­ware vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties on widely used ap­pli­ca­tions and then pack­age those ex­ploits to ea­ger gov­ern­ment clients, cre­at­ing a highly lu­cra­tive but widely abused com­mer­cial sur­veil­lance mar­ket­place.

Our lat­est dis­cov­ery of yet an­other Apple zero day em­ployed as part of NSO Group’s ar­se­nal fur­ther il­lus­trates that com­pa­nies like NSO Group are fa­cil­i­tat­ing “despotism-as-a-service” for un­ac­count­able gov­ern­ment se­cu­rity agen­cies. Regulation of this grow­ing, highly prof­itable, and harm­ful mar­ket­place is des­per­ately needed.

Our find­ing also high­lights the para­mount im­por­tance of se­cur­ing pop­u­lar mes­sag­ing apps. Ubiquitous chat apps have be­come a ma­jor tar­get for the most so­phis­ti­cated threat ac­tors, in­clud­ing na­tion state es­pi­onage op­er­a­tions and the mer­ce­nary spy­ware com­pa­nies that ser­vice them. As presently en­gi­neered, many chat apps have be­come an ir­re­sistible soft tar­get. Without in­tense en­gi­neer­ing fo­cus, we be­lieve that they will con­tinue to be heav­ily tar­geted, and suc­cess­fully ex­ploited.

We thank the tar­gets of Pegasus spy­ware that have al­lowed us to an­a­lyze their de­vices, with a spe­cial thanks to the in­di­vid­ual that worked with us on this case. It is thanks to them, and their brav­ery, that we were able to make this dis­cov­ery.

Special thanks to all at Apple for quick and re­spon­sive ac­tion.

Thanks to our Citizen Lab col­leagues for feed­back and edit­ing.

MOSCOW, Sept 17 (Reuters) - Alphabet’s Google (GOOGL. O) and Apple (AAPL.O) have re­moved jailed Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny’s tac­ti­cal vot­ing app from their stores, his team said on Friday, af­ter Russia ac­cused the U.S. tech firms of med­dling in its in­ter­nal af­fairs.

Russia goes to the polls on Friday to elect a new par­lia­ment in a three-day vote that the rul­ing United Russia party is ex­pected to win de­spite a rat­ings slump af­ter the biggest crack­down on the Kremlin’s crit­ics in years. read more

Allies of Navalny, President Vladimir Putin’s fiercest do­mes­tic op­po­nent, planned to use the mo­bile app to or­gan­ise a tac­ti­cal vot­ing cam­paign to deal a blow to United Russia.

Russia de­manded this month that Apple and Google re­move the app from their stores, say­ing a re­fusal to do so would be treated as med­dling in its par­lia­men­tary elec­tion.

Apple and Google did not im­me­di­ately re­spond to re­quests for com­ment.

On Thursday, Russia said of­fi­cial ap­proaches had been made to the two com­pa­nies’ chief ex­ec­u­tives. read more

Ivan Zhdanov, a Navalny ally based abroad, said on Friday the re­moval amounted to po­lit­i­cal cen­sor­ship.

The com­pany has been founded along­side Alex Fielding, who was a mem­ber of the first iMac team and founded “Wheels of Zeus” (‘WoZ’) in 2002 — a com­pany that cre­ated wire­less lo­ca­tion track­ers - but it is un­clear ex­actly what the com­pany will do.

Privateer’s web­site is cur­rently in “stealth mode”, with more de­tails to be re­vealed at the AMOS (Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance) 2021 con­fer­ence, which starts to­day.

Mr Wozniak also shared a short video — a com­pi­la­tion of var­i­ous space de­vel­op­ments over time with in­spi­ra­tional voice over and mu­sic - that says that it’s “up to us to do what is right and what is good … so the next gen­er­a­tion can be bet­ter to­gether”, along­side other generic plat­i­tudes.

Many pri­vate space com­pa­nies, such as Elon Musk’s SpaceX, Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin, and Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic, are at­tempt­ing to push space travel for pri­vate cit­i­zens, such as SpaceX’s Inspiration4 voy­age. Privateer, how­ever, ap­pears to be fo­cused on space de­bris, which is be­com­ing a ma­jor prob­lem around the Earth.

In a press re­lease for a 3D ti­ta­nium al­loy printer, spot­ted by Gizmodo, Privateer is de­scribed as a “satellite com­pany fo­cused on mon­i­tor­ing and clean­ing up ob­jects in space”, with Mr Wozniak quoted as say­ing that “the team at Privateer Space will be able to achieve the af­ford­abil­ity and light­weight­ing ca­pa­bil­i­ties needed to pave the way for our satel­lite de­sign and launch.”

The num­ber of ac­tive and de­funct satel­lites around the Earth has in­creased from 3300 to over 7600 in the last decade, and that num­ber could grow to as many as 100,000 satel­lites be­fore 2030.

Such a sub­stan­tial in­crease runs the risk pre­dicted in 1978 by Nasa sci­en­tist Donald Kessler: that the domino ef­fect of such an event could cre­ate an im­pen­e­tra­ble layer of de­bris that would make ter­res­trial space launches im­pos­si­ble — es­sen­tially trap­ping us on Earth.

Earlier this month, a group of for­mer as­tro­nauts, in­ter­na­tional space agen­cies, Nobel Laureates, and gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials across the world signed an open let­ter to stop anti-satel­lite weapons (ASAT) test­ing in or­der to try and ham­per this even­tu­al­ity.