It's the new era, baby. Nobody's going to be reviewing things. You just say "make me a social site for developers" and you have a social site for developers in just minutes!
I signed up for TextLog a few weeks ago. I love the text-only social network, but their European infra meant too much latency for my US-based browsing. Maybe this will scratch that itch!
Yeah, it strikes me as a very... Silicon-Valley-brained view of software development.
For example, I'm sure there's a scary-talented engineer working on fluid simulation algorithms for a major aerospace manufacturer, and they would be fired if their work-product ever left the corporate VPN. Meanwhile, their personal stuff is in a self-hosted solution.
I am of the same idea. Requiring online, public repositories, specifically in GitHub, doesn't cover all developers. It covers many of them nowadays, so there's that.
I predict a very orthogonal outcome. This is an interesting experiment. If it gains some traction, Roblox and Minecraft are both very well situated to build a similar product and dominate the market.
I agree with this post. I’ve never found the GitHub wiki experience to be particularly ergonomic. I don’t have any issues with it, but it’s no more convenient than a simple /docs folder. And from there, it’s almost trivial to turn /docs into GitHub pages. Similar effort for a much better end product.
Wikis typically connote distributed, anonymous edits. This feature is partially covered by git already.
> I’ve never found the GitHub wiki experience to be particularly ergonomic.
That's because the original sin of GitHub "wikis" is that they weren't (and most of them still aren't) even wikis. There's this perverse thing that happened during the wiki age, where people unable or unwilling to get on board decided to just start calling things "wikis" even though they exemplify the very thing that the wiki was invented as a response to. The reckless debasing of the word then infected adjacent spaces. Sourcehut's "read-only wikis" (wat) aren't even designed to be edited in the browser; on Sourcehut, "Publishing your changes is as easy as committing them and pushing them upstream." Newsflash: That's not a wiki.
> Follow a complete course, change real manifests and see what cpak accepts, refuses or changes. Professional paths lead to an exam and a public, verifiable credential.
I don't know how this happens to me but i always have trouble with Bottles. And not just the slightly bad UI, but like today, i have an installer that i can run directly with Steam that i cannot get to run in Bottles. When i last used it a couple years ago i did get what i needed working successfully but i remember it being a struggle.
Besides the performance benefits, I use Polars at work because it’s just (subjectively) nicer to work with. The “pl.col” API lets you create arbitrary generated/virtual columns anywhere you want, declaratively. You can throw in these column expressions in wherever without actually computing their values and storing that in memory. Very powerful stuff.
I watched an interview that Casey Muratori did with Tyler Cloutier (SpacetimeDB founder and spokesperson) [1]. One of the points that Tyler is that, given modern CPU architecture with cache lines, a distributed database needs to fan out to at least 50-100 nodes to beat the throughput of a cache-optimized, single node database.
It’s cool to see the flip side of that argument. Planet scale is answering the question, “what does it look like when you DO fan out your workload to >100 nodes?”
There’s a place for both technologies. Very cool stuff.
> I watched an interview that Casey Muratori did with Tyler Cloutier (SpacetimeDB founder and spokesperson) [1]. One of the points that Tyler is that, given modern CPU architecture with cache lines, a distributed database needs to fan out to at least 50-100 nodes to beat the throughput of a cache-optimized, single node database.
Do you have the timestamp where they are talking about this? The claim doesn't pass the smell test for me. If you're talking about latency, then perhaps. On throughput, I don't understand how a single-node system could deliver higher throughput than a three-node system
reply