drwiggly

Voting with your wallet does work, possibly others don't share in your tastes.

The publisher can't do that. No one can tell the future.

This looks to be an in memory db, with a wasm runtime to host domain logic. The hand wavy part was how do they handle scale and clustering? Are we sharding the data our selves (atm it seems so.).

This is nice and all but the hard part is replication and consistency in a distributed database. In memory has its uses, also disk backed tables can have their uses. Pretty much normal databases already do this, just writing domain logic in stored procs is kind of annoying.

I'd imagine embedding sqlite in your binary using memory tables is equivalent at the moment. Well you'd have to write code to publish table updates to clients. I suppose it has that going for it.

I've seen some hand wavy docs about clustering but nothing concrete.

From what I'm gathering.

  Alice measures at angle X, gets value V1

  Calls Bob on the phone, okay I measured angle X.

  Bob measures at angle X, also gets value V1

  Bob measures at angle Y, gets value V2.

  Bob calls Alice back says, okay I measured angle Y.

  Alice measures angle Y, also gets V2.

The correlation here is nobody can do other measurements while the other party is in the process of measuring. Each party can't know the other party is done until traditional communication has happened.

If each party acted independently they would randomly change the state on the other side and each party would get what appears to be random values.

Its the new delorean.

>Really for LLMs you just need to have the model put it's output to an internal buffer, read that buffer and make sure it makes sense, then output that to the end user.

Makes sense to what. The LLM doesn't have a goal, other then to spew text that looks like it should be there.

This language is interesting. General usability might be a bit away? Higher RAII is something that would be nice in C++ too.

Every user/client operation is serial.

Yeah but the Dems were in majority.

start transaction;

select id from users where id = ? for update;

if row_count() < 1 then raise 'no user' end if;

insert into sub_resource (owner, thing) values (?, ?);

commit;

??

Can you diff them?

Its just cargo culting. A lot of programming advice/processes are fuzzy in a wider context. Generally they came to be in a specific context. Relating that context is hard. Eventually its picked up as a fad and spread around, just like a game of telephone we lose nuance and context. Pair this with imposter syndrome and low confidence, everyone tries to cover their ass and do what the current hype in the industry is doing.

What if I suggested an architecture where every 5th call had the overhead of serialization and network time. Also the reliability and concern issues that go with multi machine calls. Data syncing issues and network partition concerns.

Pretty sure most people couldn't reason about this system. They'd suggest instead of having network calls on every 5th call, lets really look at our use case and only insert them where we may have load issues and have to scale. Data state becomes a big concern, make sure we know where our data is at all times and is only passed when needed to be correct and not over pass it to be efficient.

This is postulating cultural breakage is in some part due to the latest round of high achievers being detached and not paying attention to the community at large. Its an American right of passage "I got mine".

I'd say its more influenced by political media being turned into a team sport to compete with entertainment. Why do people fall for this and turn a blind eye to hypocrisy of their chosen team? Why do people need to be attached to a group? Why is the group more important then their supposed values?

Most of this supposed culture war will doom human endeavors for the complete futility of winning something that doesn't matter. I suppose the new dark ages are needed if humanity must cling to the group even when its idiotic.