Yeah, I generally agree. Technologically, it's a dumpster fire. And even ideologically, it's just become a lefty political circle-jerk where any facts that are not endorsed, in some cases literally, by MSNBC are immediately purged by self-appointed gate keepers and admins.
But that's fine. It'll create more innovation as people ditch it and create better tools. The one part of the article I disagree with is where they say it's "unparseable", which obviously it's not. It's parsed millions of times a day. Even by third party tools that harvest it for semantic data.
That means it can be transformed and used to seed other databases using non-terrible description languages like Markdown.
Rights should be restrictions on government. Not mandates on personal and private business behavior.
I'm not even sure what is driving this. The EU already has a very lax work ethic. Is there really a problem in Europe with people having to be connected when not at work? What about the jobs that require a person be on-call?
That may be a cultural difference. You may see the EU as having a "very lax work ethic", but in my experience working in the EU, they see America (and Britain) as having an unhealthy work obsession.
Yeah, differences like that are why I ditched MySQL years ago in favor of PostgreSQL.
I was using MySQL at the time, and did a performance comparison of how long it took each database to dump and load a snapshot of a 100GB database.
MySQL took 3 days.
PostgreSQL took 30 minutes.
I posted on a MySQL forum asking why the drastic difference, and they tried to hand-wave it away by saying I had a lot of indexes. Well yeah, databases have indexes. I shouldn't expect my MySQL database transfers to be quick if it has an index? Features shouldn't cripple the application for routine tasks.
That's surprising to me since Postgres does less efficient writes compared to MySQL in order to optimize for read queries[1] - a sensible tradeoff since most of the time reads are more common than writes in OLTP workloads. TimescaleDB essentially solves this problem for the specific case of time-series inserts.
[In Postgres] if we have a table with a dozen indexes defined on it, an update to a field that is only covered by a single index must be propagated into all 12 indexes to reflect the ctid for the new row.[1]
The parent post didn't have enough detail, but I'd assume the dump would be using COPY for inserts. AFAIK when using COPY, the indexes are only built at the end of the command, not on each insert.
Indexes are built during the inserts for copies and for normal inserts, in general copies are faster because many people use single row inserts that need to instantiate executor nodes and other bits for every row. I think there used to be some other differences, but in general we've seen that multi-row inserts are around as fast as copies and I'm honestly not sure which one our benchmarking tool uses. (I'm at Timescale, btw). Aside from that, the MySQL vs Postgres comment above actually has to do with updates not with inserts and the main difference here is that PG stores rows in the heap whereas MySQL has primary keys that actually organize tables (and also things around copy-on-write MVCC model). So, in some ways, PG should actually be faster for raw inserts, because you don't have to deal with as many page splits and other bits for the organization of the heap, things are just written there (and indexes are secondary). We limit the overhead of building indexes by making sure our chunks are "right-sized" so that you don't end up swapping too much as you're doing inserts into recent data.
(Just noticed this was about dump/restore, during restores you can in fact write the data and then build the index in a separate operation and that can be faster, sorry for missing context)
Yeah, I'm really surprised by how dependent I've become on Amazon, a company I don't even really trust. The convenience can't be understated, especially as it's not really apparent until you start buying a lot from a site like Amazon.
I didn't realize I hate shopping in a physical store until I started using Amazon. You spend 99% of your time either wandering through aisles trying to find what you want (which they usually don't have) or waiting in the checkout line.
Neither of those things apply to online shopping. The biggest hassle when shopping online is having to login and navigate to dozens, if not hundreds of different websites, re-entering your personal info each time. But a site like Amazon is the Internet equivalent of a department store that has everything, so you only have to login once.
Even if Amazon's prices are the same as physical stores, or even a little more, the time I save not having to drive in traffic and waste walking around a store or standing in lines still makes it worthwhile.
Is this at all surprising to you? Censorship everywhere is on the rise, even in the US. We just elected a President and Vice President who have spoken about how more Republicans need to be censored online. During the primaries, Kamala Harris challenged her rivals to join her in calling for Twitter to ban Trump's account. Both Twitter and Facebook spent the last month purging all negative news about Biden's Ukraine scandal from their platforms, which they never did when the roles were reversed.
I doubt that. As someone who uses a lot of these mostly-conservative sites, I'm not seeing a ton of infighting. If anything, it's been the opposite. I'm seeing it unite a bunch of different factions that used to fight.
And to be clear, Parler isn't uncensored. They still censor things. They're a business trying to attract an audience to make money, so they have to censor something just to protect the brand. Like posting a photo of literal shit. (I'm not kidding, the CEO explicitly said they'd ban posts like that) They're just a lot lighter on political censorship, since the big market demand created by Twitter has been for a platform that allows more political expression.
The problem with Facebook's censorship isn't one of scale. I think they're pretty good at censoring large numbers of people, as we've seen over the last several years.
The problem is with determining the standard by which people are censored. Currently, like most large social media companies, Facebook's standard is largely arbitrary, opaque and unequally enforced. Posting audio of Melania Trump's personal phone calls is fine, even though it violates Facebook's policy on posting someone else's personal data without their permission, but posting the contents of Hunter Biden's laptop receives an instant ban. Posting info about the Steele Dossier was fine, even though none of it was verified, but posting any articles about the Biden Ukraine scandal received bans...because none of it was verified.
I'm less concerned with censorship and more concerned with the censorship standard being uniformly applied, and right now, on most sites, it's not.
Most of the staff they use to censor people are young people with left-leaning politics, so even well meaning censors will inadvertently censor conservatives far more often and without explanation.
I think minds.com probably does censorship the best. There's a public log of what gets removed, and it can be appealed to a public group of randomly selected users to judge whether or not the removal was warranted. That's both scalable (since they don't have to hire thousands of moderators) and is responsive and accountable to the community it's trying to foster.
I mostly agree. However, it'll be interesting to see how well new competitors can fair in an industry like social media where the product (i.e. us) is already near monopolized on a few large platforms.
Personally, I like Parler's interface, and don't mind that it's kind of a conservative bent, but I've heard from other conservatives that the interface isn't as good as Twitters. And it's smaller audience is already keeping some big-names away from it, even people who would theoretically really like the platform, like Ben Shapiro or Scott Adams. They've both created accounts there, but have both signaled that it's just too small of a platform and is a waste of their time to post there, so they stick with Twitter.
Those personalities you mention (Shapiro, Adams, etc) are artifacts of the prior platforms. It's meaningless if not better that they do not move. What makes this exciting is new characters and economics will emerge.
Former British PM Tony Blair once related an anecdote about why he decided to run for the leadership, when Labour had just lost hard in an election and he heard their campaign lead rant, "I can't believe it, the people voted against us...what's wrong with them?" And that is how he saw his opportunity.
Between this cultural shift, tons of idle cash sitting on balance sheet sidelines looking for productive assets and growth, and a winter of semi-lockdowns ahead of us with nothing to do but code, next summer is going to be the most epic year for startups since '96-97. That is, assuming civilization isn't wiped out, but I'm pretty well hedged.
Yeah, I agree. I still occassionaly read some people I follow on Twitter, but I rarely comment and never read notifications.
I also entirely stopped using Reddit for the same reason. IMHO it's even more toxic than Twitter.
And don't get me started about Facebook. What is it about politics that takes relatively sane friendly people who you've known for years and transforms them into raging psychopaths? When my own sister found out I didn't think Trump was a literal Nazi, she then proceeded to call me a racist, with all her douchebag "online friends" cheering her on. And before Facebook, we used to get along really well. But now it's like Invasion of the Bodysnatchers.
Every occurrence of "twitter" in the top level comment could have any other social media site substituted and it would read the same and still be entirely accurate (HN is one of the rare exceptions obv.)
I've ditched the lot, deleted my reddit and twitter accounts, configured my pihole to block the domains for the occasions that my willpower fails me and my life has improved dramatically.
https://riptutorial.com/markdown/example/1741/creating-a-tab...