Do you have recommendations for stateful workloads? Would the answer always be 'connect to an external DB/API for all state'?
E.g. if I need to run a bunch of processing, would it be
A) spin up the micro-VM and pull from a queue service
B) embed SQLite
C) use some kind of in-memory store
TBH I've been waiting for years for someone to do 'firecracker as a service'. I must have searched that exact term about once per month.
If a general system becomes good enough, you see it displace specialized systems.
In this case the Kafka paradigm can be replaced because there is such a performant NoSql DB.
It's kind of like how standalone cameras became less and less desirable as phone cameras got better. Standalone could do better quality - but this matters less once both options are really good. There is some 'good enough' point where you hit vastly diminishing returns & simplifying into just phones became worthwhile.
Databases (certainly Scylla) may be hitting a point where specializing, actively optimizing, etc. are less desirable than just reusing one good system.
My unpopular take: most comments here are super entitled.
To paraphrase: "sure it's minblowing and the biggest productivity gain in years, but I want it FREE".
Yes. You got used to it being free. And now it's not. But $10/mo is a steal. It's more than fair and far, far less than they could get.
And no. They don't owe you anything.
In fact, they probably host your code (often free), and less directly provide your IDE (for free). So this idea that they owe you something needs to be reassessed.
CoPilot is easily worth it and I think this is fair. I actually welcome it because I was nervous it might be like 80.
Hey - I don't want to be critical, but I think you should rethink your messaging.
I'll be honest with you: I thought this was a parody. It's SO abstract.
It's like you came from doing this abstract thing inside a big company & decided to do the same abstract thing as a startup. And describe it using the specific terminology used inside that specific team of SuperBigCo.
Why are there 10,000 startups who got their GPT3 keys and immediately decided that they would add some kind of unique value by turning a hello-world demo into a startup.
Great - you bring GPT3 DaVinci to Google Docs. Or Chrome. Or whatever.
You think this hasn't occurred to Google. Or that your prompt engineering is beyond Google? (In reality they're waiting for their own model, or trying to negotiate a large-scale deal as Microsoft did.)
"Extend a popular application of your choice to support GPT3" is likely already on curriculum everywhere for people learning to code.
There's no value-add being one of 1,000 people implementing the most-obvious use case when an API gets released to the world at the exact same time.
And clearly in 2 years time this is wrapped directly by Google & provided by OpenAI directly & also will be a very popular beginner code tutorial project.
The reason they announced this is specifically to capitalise on GitHub CoPilot becoming paid.
Some significant fraction of developers worldwide are right now deciding whether to pay. So they have rushed out essentially a landing page for some of the "like it but not quite willing to pay" folks
At the end of a casino the chips can always be redeemed.
There is very little liquidity in crypto. And when one of the whales breaks rank and heads for the exit every other holder will be sitting on chips with some nominal value but absolutely no buyers.
If they accepted the offer this would actually create a Catch22 chicken-and-the-egg situation where they can't employ a non-approved vendor.
Also: filling this in can open up liability. There's no way you get it all accurate, and in the event of a breech (e.g. supply chain attack where you get hacked leading to them getting hacked) they could argue that you misrepresented or didn't comply with your stated response.
So the 5k which could never be paid might also not be worth it.
Cap the amount of cells and essentially partition. Using 2 machines could conceivably double performance after scaling up stops working. So a 1bn row sum could conceivably ask for 5 200m sums then sum those.
Maintain a float32 and float64 version. Compute the float32 first and return to user, then update the result.
You could conceivably run some kind of ml model or even regular logic to predict the API call your formula engine will need to make, eg. If the customer status typing a column of sum range, you could optimistically fetch that part as soon as you see that element.
Optimistically caching is obviously high variance and resource draining.
The 10000iq version is coordination free horizontal scaling with scyladb algorithm
If I read it correctly it's more like a 1.8 bn hole.
They are counting 600m of their own token, which already had only 170m or whatever of market cap, which presumably now is absolutely worthless.
I don't mean worthless in a conceptual sense like all crypto, but this specific brand of made up money is based on the trust of a bankrupt lender. Nobody is buying that and counting it as 600m of asset is absurd.
It's like writing yourself a bunch of IOUs and claiming it gives you wealth.
OpenSea and NFTs always struck me as the most absurd concept.
I doubt anyone is remotely surprised. There is no comeback coming.
Not sure frankly how a Craigslist for "ownership" of jpegs needs so many employees.
Literally what are they doing.
Having said that I do give them props for the generous severance and keeping healthcare going way longer than they have to. That's surprised me. Ironically the only positive thought I've ever had about that company is the way it executed a layoff.
For everyone who takes the time to explain why they bounced, 1000 people did so without taking the time to explain.
I am sure the majority of people here who saw this hit back the second they saw the ticking countdown timer. Few bothered to come back and advise against it.
No matter how complex and viable a perpetual motion machine looks, you can't get more energy out than goes in.
Similarly - no complex restructuring of money into different assets will make more money come out than goes in.
Money only grows in a non zero-sum way when it's put to work in the real world: e.g. creating value by creating a product which is more valuable than the sum of its parts.
Yeah I agree. That was kind of my point also -- the "decentralized" block-chain is pretty reliant on centralized exchanges.
Real jobs is an interesting one. To the individuals yes they are real. To the economy there is no value creation and therefore the work done by these companies is just ultimately burning investor dollars & the planet in a lose:lose situation (as with everything crypto related).
The argument that the payments themselves are a service (while valid) has to be broadly competitive with the mainstream alternative.
So for "securing the network" crypto is very, very clearly less secure than conventional payments. (Far more hacks, defaults, and not centrally backed by government).
And the fees charged are vastly more and vastly slower.
The service is therefore so much worse at such a higher cost that it seems more like the arbitrary product that a Multi Level Marketing firm ostensibly sells than a real offering. (And the only real USP of "enables criminal activity" is not a valid USP that anyone should allow or touch.)
Even as a crypto-sceptic I must give you some serious props for a very well-thought out and written comment.
I found this somewhat persuasive.
But despite being very well written, all this does is say why not fiat.
If you're looking for a store of value, why not gold?
If you're looking to put the money to work, why not value-creating such as real-estate or stocks, growing the wealth through value-creation?
Seems people have baggage from bad experiences. I guess remember how large the scope & pace of AWS. And remember that this was their solution to those UX issues not the cause!
Seems really complete.
Pro-tip you may not have thought of: this is really well suited to internal debug/admin/troubleshooting tooling.
Always good to see progress, shared ideas, etc. but sadly it sounds like they have no plans to release.
It's actually very hard for them to release this. It's so tied to their internal systems (What - you don't use Bazel to compile a stack comprised of Angular and Go?).
Best case, some of their observations contribute to the more practically available models.
Rolling your own is about the same level of effort, easier to mock/modify/customize as needed.
And if I wasn't rolling my own, I'd look to a library (many in NPM) or I'd look to a Kubernetes sidecar where that makes sense (Dapr or a service mesh).
Going with an API adds concerns about compliance, GDPR, inheriting your entire attack surface, inheriting your downtime risk, configuration foot-guns, and cost.
But I don't like leaving negativity - so here's some suggestions which might tip the value:
- Having really high quality RBAC front-end UI that I can just let you deal with it
- Same for inviting people to join accounts
- Testing utilities, so it becomes really easy to run the same tests with different permissions
- Similar to the above but a browser extension where a superuser can switch to emulate any other user (or admins can switch to any user in their org if policy allows)
- Audit logging and customer facing UI for viewing audit logs
If you've doubled the prices and barely addressed it that is NOT cool. Will you be auto grandfathering in existing customers?