incorrecthorse

Plot twist: It's not actually scalable because no amount of tools and buzzwords can compensate for the lack of experience in proper architecture for scaling.

> For the uninitiated, Linear is a project management tool that feels impossibly fast. Click an issue, it opens instantly. Update a status and watch in a second browser, it updates almost as fast as the source. No loading states, no page refreshes - just instant, interactions.

How garbage the web has become for a low-latency click action being qualified as "impossibly fast". This is ridiculous.

And compute-intensive hash functions. Computers this day are powerful enough to hashcat each individual pwd+salt if a fast hashing function is used.

I think the common confusion boils down to:

> The moment of capturing a measurement is known as a metric event

Which suspiciously reads like a log.

In practice, a metric is an aggregate of events (the "metric events") when you're not interested in the individual event but, but in the aggregate itself. For practical reasons this is not implemented with logs but with more primitive technical events emission.

This is not fundamentally incompatible notions. If you do an electrocardiogram, you might be interested in your BPM, but it is deduced by the full log of each beat. The segregation we do in computing is more practical than fundamental.

The bad ID naming `d1` is convenient for the argument...

It blows my mind OpenAI wouldn't be able to build a Windsurf alternative for orders of magnitude less than $3B.

> we form thoughts at 1,000-3,000 words per minute

I would like to know what this measures exactly.

The reason I often prefer writing to talking is because writing lets me the time to pause and think. In those cases the bottleneck is very clearly my thought process (which, at least consciously, doesn't appear to me as "words").

It _is_ equivalent to a back door, that's the point. The UK demand can be accessed more rapidly and properly by disabling the feature than by implementing a backdoor, since it is the same thing.

Do they have an incentive to learn? If the reward process in the company also consider it "out of scope" (meaning the remaining work is scheduled as such), there is nothing to really learn.

*Cinephiles took the DVD boom era for granted

The reason it ended is because the general public doesn't care.

Those people seem to have a passion for developing package managers (instead of just seeing it as a tool that needs to do the job), and as long as it is the case, I don't see how we wouldn't end up with one new package manager every year.

Aren't you screwed from the moment you have a malicious user in your workspace? This user can change their picture/name and directly ask for the API key, or send some phishing link or get loose on whatever social engineering is fundamentally possible in any instant message system.

It can take an arbitrary amount of time. Modules are just code executed top to bottom, and might contain anything beyond mere constants and functions declaration.

Code coverage proves that the code runs, not that it does what it should do.