3 ms·
The thing that interest me about wasm is having ultra lightweight small processes, which happen to tap into very large pools of already resident libraries in a
by jauntywundrkind 3y ago
The thing that interest me about wasm is having ultra lightweight small processes, which happen to tap into very large pools of already resident libraries in a safe sandboxed fashion.
There's been huge huge strides in low-profile elegant serverless platforms built around v8 isolates. We can get all those wins and more - in an way more scaled out more multi-tenant way - with wasm. If it lives up to it's aspirations, which it seems on target to do.
Luke Wagner's WasmCon talk iterated through the core attributes of what makes wasm wasm and what those attributes unlock. The ability to host much much much more with a muchower profile, with extremely short-lived sandboxed runtimes, is incredibly enticing. The app-server model could finally be disrupted.
I have no patience for "bigger than AI" apples to oranges comparisons. Wasm is orthogonal, has it's own features & distinctions. The direct run off comparison shirks both of their value.
- scubbo 3y ago> I have no patience for "bigger than AI" apples to oranges comparisons. Wasm is orthogonal, has it's own features & distinctions. The direct run off comparison shirks both of their value. Eh, fair. At the time I thought it was actually a fairly reasonably and pithy way to compare an hype-inflated technology that is being mindlessly applied to every possible target (while also, I concede, being thoughtfully, practically, and usefully applied in some cases, too), to an under-hyped and (AFAICT) almost unheard-of technology which seems on-track to provide an unshowy-but-significant optimization to basically any web technology ever, everywhere - but you're right that they are, indeed, trying to do different things, and comparing their impact is somewhat reductive. WASM is certainly not better than AI at the things that AI is trying to do.