NuclearFishin

The risk here is that somebody might download the fake repo mistaking it for the real one

I really like the idea of this library and I've bookmarked it for future use, but following on from your point, it does feel disingenuous to make this promise in the introduction:

> (Different from git: no merge conflicts to resolve!)

As you've pointed out, there _can_ be merge conflicts, they're just resolved arbitrarily. In theory, git could do this too but obviously nobody would use it then!

CRDTs themselves are inherently conflict-free, but if the problem you're solving is not, implementing via CRDTs is not the silver bullet you're looking for.

Respectfully, I think you're both right. Certainly recumbent bikes are aerodynamically efficient, but it's worth considering that in a bike race one also needs to ride uphill, and the instability of a recumbent at slow speeds would be a disadvantage here. I haven't checked, but I suspect most hill climb records would be held by traditional bike frames.

How does one keep track of Fabrice Bellard's work? I couldn't find a Twitter profile, GitHub profile, or RSS feed from his website.

Really enjoying this talk. Thanks for sharing!

Perhaps it's not, but my gut feel is that those other systems mitigate failure by using a smaller number of large, reliable and expensive carriages. Whereas this system is going for a large number of smaller, cheaper(?) skates. It just feels like it's more susceptible to failure?

It's more of a guess than a conclusion. Because the tunnel is linear, the failure of a single skate affects the entire line, so running, say, 100 skates concurrently would make overall failure 100 times more likely.

One option is to make the skates incredibly fault-tolerant, but that seems to go against the simple / cheap ethos that this system seems to be going for.

One question I couldn't see answered in the FAQ is what happens if one of the electric skates breaks down?

Given each of the skates is independently driven, the chance of failure would be magnified by N, for N skates within a tunnel. Seems like failures could be quite common and would affect the entire tunnel?

Totally agree. Had exactly the same experience. Became a patron as a way to offer my thanks!

I can't help but have similar feelings about this, and I think your question about whether "the community has an issue with it" is especially pertinent.

Many journalists and internet pundits suggest that Magic Leap's technology was obviously over-hyped. See for example the title of The Verge's article. Adding further evidence that it was too good to be true, they used faked videos to attract software developers, as you have pointed out.

So how is it that Google, Alibaba, and Andreessen Horowitz were convinced to hand over hundreds of millions of dollars each to this company? Was it fraud, over-promising on behalf of Magic Leap's founders, or could these huge VC firms not see what everyone else could see? Is it really that easy to secure a billion dollars in funding? The question as to "what's going on here" relates as much to the startup / VC community as it does to Magic Leap.