fancy_pantser

zed.dev is like Orca, but lightning fast and fully multi-player (both AI and humans)

I've always wished the program was called Lutus Notes.

One can only trust a verifier as far as they can trust anything made out of software.

Worth it to prove the pez dispenser deployed them correctly? Small % of the total launch cost.

Based on v1 satellite cost estimates, under $5MM for 20. It was v3 sats, don't know the cost on those yet.

Not who you asked, but if you're looking for a rec, I've been using GLM and Deepseek models through Deepinfra because the prices are decent for US-based deployments and there's acceptable throughput and policy/terms. I'd love to find another that lowers prices over time when they roll out e.g. multi-token prediction instead of just taking a larger margin, but I don't know of any today.

Alas, many financial models do well in backtests and then fail in the real world. You have to expose them to all kinds of market conditions and not just the recent one. Good luck out there!

You can use backtesting instead of waiting a month.

Maybe there was more in the context before that question? I just copy-pasted that question into Opus 4.7 and it replied:

    Yes. A RimWorld year is 60 days, split into four 15-day quadrums (Aprimay, Jugust, Septober, Decembary), each corresponding to a season.

I think where we went wrong in understanding this PR is in the assumption that it's designed to invite review because that's how a lot of other team- or community-driven projects work.

Thanks, I think I'm all caught up now. The timeline is like this if I understand correctly: your successors (Yossi Gottlieb and Oran Agra) explicitly announced a new governance model in 2020, saying the project had "outgrown the BDFL-style of management" and that they wanted to "promote more teamwork and structure". With the relicensing in 2024, however, external contributors with five or more commits to Redis dropped to zero in the first six months (basically, community contribution collapsed). In late 2024, you came back in the role of "Redis evangelist" and a year ago there was an additional licensing change, adding AGPLv3 as an option (8.0's tri-license). So now redis has your steady hand on the wheel again.

I was confused because the last time I checked on things, it was still about fostering community input and advancement but not necessarily consensus. Things have tipped back in the original direction since then. I don't think "Redis was completely built in this way since the start" is completely accurate, but also the community effort under the new governance model never got very deeply entrenched while you were away.

I think the point GP is making is this is a PR that smells like a solo dev working on their own project and not how a community-driven project adds major new functionality, although I'm sure there are docs and descriptions (or at least a discussion of tradeoffs and design decisions if not ADRs) are somewhere, but not linked handily to the PR. There is a lot of explanation in the blog post and PR, but it's unilateral-looking.

c.f. valkey and others

It's looking rather low on reasoning and long-range problems with the approach described. For example, even with 16 agents and compaction, the HLE score is significantly below Anthropic's Mythos. Like you, I can see the release as a net Good Thing, but apples-to-apples for each org's latest models do have Meta holding steady in the middle pack.