4 ms·

> I want to visualize 1TB of single cell RNA seq data in a browser tab, then open a new tab, change some params, and share the link to a colleague. I want it to

> I want to visualize 1TB of single cell RNA seq data in a browser tab, then open a new tab, change some params, and share the link to a colleague. I want it to be instant. But why? Wouldn't you be better suited writing a native application that would do this better? This seems like you're building a problem for this solution. Most people use a browser for Gmail and to read news. Your example already works really well on the browser on my phone

breck 5y ago
> But why? Because cancer is incredibly complicated and requires incredible amounts of data, analysis, and *collaboration*.
- aniforprez 5y ago
  The "but why" question was not pointed at visualizing 1TB of single cell RNA sequence data or collaboration. It was pointed at why you'd want to do it in a browser? Why wouldn't you be able to make links and share them from a native application that they can then open in their application? Maybe I'm missing something in your problem statement but are you downloading all that 1TB in your browser window and changing parameters? If yes Mighty has to download that data too and considering that each user is sequestered, someone you're sharing this with will have to download all that too. If you're not and the visualization is running somewhere else and the result streamed to your system how does Mighty solve that problem?
  - mumblemumble 5y ago
    This is slightly what I'm thinking, for that particular use case. The idea that you're going to shove 1TB of data down to the client strikes me as slightly unhinged. Even if we assume you can achieve a sustained transfer rate of one gigabit per second, it's going to take over 2 hours to get a terabyte shoved down to the client. I'm guessing, though, that the actual vizualization is nowhere near one terabyte. Data's going to have to be aggregated somehow, because no computer monitor can display a terabyte worth of information all at once. Even a 4K monitor would fall short by many orders of magnitude. It would be much faster, and, I think, simpler, to keep the data on a central server, have it generate the visualizations, and push them down to the client.
    - aniforprez 5y ago
      > The idea that you're going to shove 1TB of data down to the client strikes me as slightly unhinged Yeah which is why I asked for clarification from them because it seemed really weird to assert that as a positive for the app? > It would be much faster, and, I think, simpler, to keep the data on a central server, have it generate the visualizations, and push them down to the client. Yeah I completely agree but in this case, Mighty would have next to no advantage over just loading the visualization on your own machine. Hence, again the confusion about asserting Mighty as a means to an end
      - mumblemumble 5y ago
        Yeah, agreed. I can see Mighty as perhaps being useful as a band-aid to deal with someone else's poor, resource-hungry design. But if you're the actual app developer, I'm just not seeing a good reason why you would want to deliberately incorporate this technology into your design. Why farm the sever-side rendering out to a middleman when you could just... do server-side rendering?
  - breck 5y ago
    > why you'd want to do it in a browser? Distribution. There's only 1 magic platform that allows you to ship new versions at your own cadence to 100% of people. Developing for just M1s is great, when all your users are on M1s.
    - aniforprez 5y ago
      I'm sorry but can you please stop speaking in riddles and be clear about how you feel Mighty is solving this issue? I'm genuinely at a loss about how this is solving your use case but your answers are only cryptic. I truly want to understand how Mighty might help to solve real world problems How do browsers make something distributed? How are browsers the only "magic platform" that allow you this? How is Mighty contributing to solving this problem? How does M1 matter here

breck 5y ago

> But why? Because cancer is incredibly complicated and requires incredible amounts of data, analysis, and *collaboration*.

aniforprez 5y ago
The "but why" question was not pointed at visualizing 1TB of single cell RNA sequence data or collaboration. It was pointed at why you'd want to do it in a browser? Why wouldn't you be able to make links and share them from a native application that they can then open in their application? Maybe I'm missing something in your problem statement but are you downloading all that 1TB in your browser window and changing parameters? If yes Mighty has to download that data too and considering that each user is sequestered, someone you're sharing this with will have to download all that too. If you're not and the visualization is running somewhere else and the result streamed to your system how does Mighty solve that problem?
- mumblemumble 5y ago
  This is slightly what I'm thinking, for that particular use case. The idea that you're going to shove 1TB of data down to the client strikes me as slightly unhinged. Even if we assume you can achieve a sustained transfer rate of one gigabit per second, it's going to take over 2 hours to get a terabyte shoved down to the client. I'm guessing, though, that the actual vizualization is nowhere near one terabyte. Data's going to have to be aggregated somehow, because no computer monitor can display a terabyte worth of information all at once. Even a 4K monitor would fall short by many orders of magnitude. It would be much faster, and, I think, simpler, to keep the data on a central server, have it generate the visualizations, and push them down to the client.
  - aniforprez 5y ago
    > The idea that you're going to shove 1TB of data down to the client strikes me as slightly unhinged Yeah which is why I asked for clarification from them because it seemed really weird to assert that as a positive for the app? > It would be much faster, and, I think, simpler, to keep the data on a central server, have it generate the visualizations, and push them down to the client. Yeah I completely agree but in this case, Mighty would have next to no advantage over just loading the visualization on your own machine. Hence, again the confusion about asserting Mighty as a means to an end
    - mumblemumble 5y ago
      Yeah, agreed. I can see Mighty as perhaps being useful as a band-aid to deal with someone else's poor, resource-hungry design. But if you're the actual app developer, I'm just not seeing a good reason why you would want to deliberately incorporate this technology into your design. Why farm the sever-side rendering out to a middleman when you could just... do server-side rendering?
- breck 5y ago
  > why you'd want to do it in a browser? Distribution. There's only 1 magic platform that allows you to ship new versions at your own cadence to 100% of people. Developing for just M1s is great, when all your users are on M1s.
  - aniforprez 5y ago
    I'm sorry but can you please stop speaking in riddles and be clear about how you feel Mighty is solving this issue? I'm genuinely at a loss about how this is solving your use case but your answers are only cryptic. I truly want to understand how Mighty might help to solve real world problems How do browsers make something distributed? How are browsers the only "magic platform" that allow you this? How is Mighty contributing to solving this problem? How does M1 matter here