cle

54 ms·

841.
by cle 7y ago
> They wouldn't intentionally make their recommendations worse just for the sake of it. Why not? Every big platform that I know of has eventually done this with either 1p or “sponsored” content (Google, Amazon, Apple, etc.). In th
842.
by cle 7y ago
Is there research into what systemic mechanisms we can employ that would prevent formation of monopolies in the first place? Relying on corruptible human judgment and the laughable political process to apply fixes ex post facto seems like
843.
by cle 7y ago
Of course, consider your use cases. There are good reasons to use NoSQL, and excellent reasons to use RDBMS. I use both professionally and appreciate the benefits of each.
844.
by cle 7y ago
NoSQL is very much alive and kicking, it’s just past the peak in the hype curve. There is a FAANG in particular who is notorious for banning relational databases outright because of their maintenance and scaling problems for their use case
845.
by cle 7y ago
NoSQL in some cases trades off consistency for scalability (generally by sharding data, so propagating data across shards introduces eventual consistency). As you can imagine, data that reside in a single shard don’t need to be propagated,
846.
by cle 7y ago
Nobody called them serverless DBs, and nobody does. There is a vocal minority of reductionists here on HN who dismiss the accepted definition of serverless because the literal meaning doesn’t make sense. It’s just noise though. “Serverles
847.
by cle 7y ago
Serverless refers to platforms with specific and well-understood properties, such as managed servers, autoscaling, usage-based pricing, etc. What parts of SQLite have these properties?
848.
by cle 7y ago
It doesn’t matter. It is not the generally accepted definition of serverless. The meaning of a word is based on how it is generally used, and almost nobody means this when they use the word “serverless”. At this point trying to use the wo
849.
by cle 7y ago
> It is important to understand these two different definitions for "serverless". When a database claims to be "serverless", be sure to discern whether they mean "classic serverless" or "neo-serverless
850.
by cle 7y ago
Is there something actionable I can take based on the results of this page? E.g. is there some Firefox add-on that obfuscates attributes used for fingerprinting?
851.
by cle 7y ago
Is the mechanism of consent relevant here?
852.
by cle 7y ago
In my experience, the debugging story isn’t as bad as most think, because compilation times are so fast. If I need to run some code at a random location to see what’s going on, I just add it and rerun the unit test, usually it takes less t
853.
by cle 7y ago
I was actually referring to Google teaming up with Ascension to “share data”, which is what the second half of the article is about (and thus presumably related to this decision?). I don’t think Google would be so brazen to do what you’re
854.
by cle 7y ago
I try hard not to give my data to Google, for a lot of reasons. As a patient, having my healthcare provider hand my data over for them to monetize in God-knows-what ways is...undesirable.
855.
by cle 7y ago
It’s contextual. E.g. if you’re in a situation very similar to past situations where you threw the code away afterwards, you can be pretty confident that you’ll throw it away this time too.
856.
by cle 7y ago
This is exactly what the article says: > Technical debt consists in performing a fix or development in a quick and dirty way because it takes less time, even though it will make the code harder to work with in the long term. If you aren&
857.
by cle 7y ago
As an individual, many of Go's benefits aren't as useful. It's optimized for team settings, emphasizing consistency, readability, explictness, and low cognitive overhead, which are all major weaknesses of Haskell, and major
858.
by cle 7y ago
My point isn't to argue over the definition of bike shedding. If the name of this keyword is contributing to this undesirable community outburst, then its name matters, and discussions about its name are important. That's all I&
859.
by cle 7y ago
> But for some reason, our profession is infatuated with text files that make this best of both worlds impossible. Because people already have existing tools, lots of them. Text files are an easy way to support all of them. What kind o
860.
by cle 7y ago
I have written a lot of Go (hundreds of thousands of LOC), and appreciate Go's approach to both of these. I disagree that these are major issues. A bigger issue, IMO, is that people coming to Go from other languages expect it to have
861.
by cle 7y ago
I don't think it's bikeshedding. It does seem to be contributing to the dogmatism I'm seeing from the Rust community here, and this community reaction is a huge problem for Rust. So it matters.
862.
by cle 7y ago
If using an IDE is necessary to make the code readable, then Java should ship with an IDE. Or just add it to the language. I find myself often reading code outside of an IDE, such as in GitHub or other hosted repos. Why should it be less
863.
by cle 7y ago
It is unsafe. There are just multiple definitions of unsafe being used here. I agree that it's unfortunate that the meaning of the keyword is easy to misinterpret. Given the background of the people who designed Rust, I don't
864.
by cle 7y ago
> And introducing the language of "safe" and "unsafe" isn't just descriptive, it's a value judgment. It has connotations of recklessness at least, and explicit threat at worst. Is it really a value judgment?
865.
by cle 7y ago
Forcing usage of constructors is hardly more readable IMO. Which bug is easier to spot? cat = new Cat(1, 2, 4); cat = Cat.builder().eyes(1).legs(2).heads(4).build(); Additionally, from the examples in that post, records aren&#x
866.
by cle 7y ago
> Why are people doing that at all???? From a security standpoint: because it dramatically improves your security posture. Defense-in-depth is a real thing, and people who care about security use it (the people who pay big bucks).
867.
by cle 7y ago
The point isn't to stroke your teammates' egos. It's to find out why the code is written that way, and to build consensus around a different way of writing it. Consensus building is a great way to improve the cohesiveness o
868.
by cle 7y ago
The example under "Communicating by sharing memory" isn't correct, despite the author claiming that "it works". It's a very common example in concurrency 101 (updating a value). The fact that the author claim
869.
by cle 7y ago
> If you ask me, you shouldn’t pick up things until you need them. It's worth learning enough to know when you need them, and when you don't (strengths and weaknesses). That's the bare minimum for me. The next level of
870.
by cle 7y ago
IMO the burden should be on Google to prove that they don't. The flow of personal data through their systems is opaque and they have plenty of incentives to monetize the data.

More ›