I've been using React since its initial release; I think both RSC and App Router are great, and things are better than ever.
It's the first stack that allows me to avoid REST or GraphQL endpoints by default, which was the main source of frontend overhead before RSC. Previously I had to make choices on how to organize API, which GraphQL client to choose (and none of them are perfect), how to optimize routes and waterfalls, etc. Now I just write exactly what I mean, with the very minimal set of external helper libs (nuqs and next-safe-action), and the framework matches my mental model of where I want to get very well.
Anti-React and anti-Next.js bias on HN is something that confuses me a lot; for many other topics here I feel pretty aligned with the crowd opinion on things, but not on this.
You still need API routes for stuff like data-heavy async dropdowns, or anything else that's hard to express as a pure URL -> HTML, but it cuts down the number of routes you need by 90% or more.
Some of the anti-next might be from things like solid-start and tanstack-start existing, which can do similar things but without the whole "you've used state without marking as a client component thus I will stop everything" factor of nextjs.
Not to mention the whole middleware and being able to access the incoming request wherever you like.
I'm having issues with this gradient too. (Though I'm running a fever after being vaccinated yesterday, so my perception might be different than usual today).
It feels like that optical illusion with disappearing background [1] where your brain attempts to re-tune itself, and it's kind of uncomfortable.
Why do you suppose they chose to publish this hit piece as a blog post instead of going through the peer review process with a real journal article? Or at least a formal letter to PLoS Medicine?
I'm not sure. Maybe they did both and the real article is somethere in peer review pipeline. (Do you imply that no posts on replicationindex should be trusted since they're not properly peer reviewed?)
One possible reason is that blog posts are more widely shared on social media, and I agree that this is kind of a hit piece, mostly as a reaction to Ioannidis' contrarian stance on COVID-19, so publicity was probably an objective here.
This looks like something I've been hoping for ever since Dan hinted at it on twitter, but I'm kinda worried when it's going to become generally available.
My worry is mostly due to suspense for data fetching (which I really care about) and concurrent mode (which I care less about but which is still nice) releases, which were announced in late 2018 and promised by mid 2019, but then delayed at least twice since then.
We're trying not to promise dates anymore since as you rightly noted we aren't very good at estimates. Server Components rely on Concurrent Mode for streaming, but as I mentioned in the talk, we feel pretty good about our progress there, and the remaining work on CM is mostly to simplify it and make it easier to adopt. So it's not too far ahead.
As for Suspense, Server Components largely are the evolution of Suspense (although it works on the client too). We've decided to hold back releasing Suspense a year ago because we didn't have a solution to waterfalls. Now we do. So it's all coming together. In general, a lot of what we do is research, and research has many dead ends and takes time.
I think this is easier for them to pull off than Suspense and Concurrent mode because of the difference in complexities. I'm expecting this to be mainstream by the end of next year.
Microsoft is betting on pylance for VSCode instead of pyright, though, and pylance is not open-source [0].
I wonder if Guido will be ok with that. For me pylance looks like the biggest evidence that embrace-extend-extingish mindset is still alive in Microsoft, unfortunately.
The FSB's announcement doesn't speak of any new technical capability, it just says that they formalized the legal procedure by which everyone should share their crypto keys with the government.
This will certain make the NSA's job easier when spying on Russia. Instead of having to break into all these services and steal the keys NSA will only have to break into the FSB DB.
Given that:
(1). NSA's primary target when it was founded was USSR/Russia,
(2). and NSA has been targeting FSB/KGB since 1952,
it seems likely that FSB is pretty well compromised at both the human and technological level. The same might not be true of some Russian social network startup.
NSA will probably still have to break into the services every so often since failure to do so will signal they are reading the FSB DB.
Yes. Any social network, instant messenger or anything else which uses crypto will have to share keys so that government can decrypt "anything they like".
So, Facebook will either comply, or it'll have to pay the fine (800k-1m rubles ≈ $15000), or it will be banned.
The law also prescribes for all "organizers of information distribution" to store the voice call recordings for 6 months and to store metadata for 3 years. Nobody is sure what "organizers of information distribution" means, but at the very least it includes all phone calls and instant messages.
Seems to me if you vote in Putin and applaud his oppressive autocratic government, then you'll get stuff like this. Not sure what the long-range plan here, but total autocratic control by the executive branch with zero oversight is clearly on the immediate roadmap.
This is further evidence that the west needs to disengage economically from Russia as much as possible. Facebook would be selling Russians to the FSB torture squads. There are real human rights concerns here that Western companies should not be part of. I can't imagine all these EU human rights laws allowing this. It'll be interesting how this all unfolds, but if Russians think this shit will get them out of a recession, then I think they will be sorely surprised. There will be a further divestment from Russian markets from the West and probably more sanctions, or at least, the political will to lift existing sanctions will be lower than ever.
Not too long ago people were talking about a reformed Russia who would be an EU partner, if not a member. Instead, Russians are proudly going back to the Stalin days and giving Putin's regime a 90% approval rating. Now that's crazy.
I agree. There is an english idiom, "Don't put all your eggs in one basket." I assume this includes government keys as well. This seems like a juicy target for hackers. The damage it could do to Russia is almost unimaginable.
There's also a Russian saying, "The strictness of Russian laws is balanced out by the fact that they don't have to be enforced".
Precedent: a new Personal Data Protection Law was passed two years ago. It included the crazy clause that all personal data of Russian citizens must be stored and processed on servers located in Russia. Facebook didn't comply, and I'm sure many other websites didn't comply too, but nobody cares, AFAICT.
On the other hand, our government can decide at any moment that they don't like some website, person or other entity, and they'll quickly find a way to get rid of this entity without breaking the law.
That's a rather narrow definition of comparability. If nothing else said, one would understand the term with regards to the relation of any partially ordered set – not only the one implicitly defined on that page.
I define a non-word "uncomparable" to mean something specific and rather arbitrary, but I do not intend it to be the antonym of the real word "comparable". I'll try to clarify this on the webpage you linked to. - Robert Munafo
I am certain it is greater. BB(n) grows super-exponentially.
In fact I would be willing to bet serious money that BB(n+1)/BB(n) is greater than BB(n) if 3 < n.
(This is, of course, assuming that one assumes that BB(n) is well-defined. That is an interesting point of philosophy given the existence of Turing machines which can't be proven to not halt.)
> In fact I would be willing to bet serious money that BB(n+1)/BB(n) is greater than BB(n) if 3 < n.
BB(n) grows faster than any computable function. In order for BB(n+1)/BB(n) > BB(n) to hold, BB(n) merely has to grow faster than a sequence whose new terms are obtained by repeated squaring (like k^2ⁿ). That's computable, indeed primitive recursive, so BB(n) definitely grows dramatically faster than it.
Edit: another way of looking at this is that the Ackermann function grows unbelievably faster than functions that easily satisfy the property you describe, and the Busy Beaver function grows unbelievably faster than the Ackermann function. Somehow putting it this way feels like an understatement, though!
It is unfortunately not that easy. Consider the following function, if n is even then f(n) = BB(n/2), else f(n) = BB(2n). Then f(n) grows faster than any computable function, but still if n is odd, then f(n+1) < f(n).
However you have encapsulated the reason why I would be confident of this result. :-)
My experience is closer to yours than to the author of the original post.
1) I have a phonological loop and can easily imagine music.
2) My visuospatial sketchpad (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baddeley%27s_model_of_working_...) is almost entirely spatial. I don't know the color of the floor in my kitchen, unless I paid attention to it specifically and verbally in the past. But I can use memory palace successfully.
3) I wonder if for me it's just an undeveloped habit which could be improved: I have dreams with pictures and colors once a few months, and sometimes I see pictures when I'm half asleep, but it's really hard to put myself into that state intentionally.
Interesting. I hadn't read about that model of working memory before but going through the article it does sound like we have similar experiences.
1) I also have a phonological loop - and would consider this the strongest part of my memory. I have a relatively easy time memorizing large volumes of text and my verbal aptitude on tests has always been extremely high. I also have an aptitude for foreign languages and enjoy studying them as a hobby.
2) I would agree. I could probably tell you the color of the floor of the kitchen where I'm currently living, but any past place would be difficult. I've experimented with a memory palace before so I believe it would work in theory but I haven't practiced enough to know for sure.
3) Sometimes I wonder this as well. I frequently have very vivid dreams and occasionally have flashes of things that I think are mental imagery but they're fuzzy and not something I can really do on demand.
It's the first stack that allows me to avoid REST or GraphQL endpoints by default, which was the main source of frontend overhead before RSC. Previously I had to make choices on how to organize API, which GraphQL client to choose (and none of them are perfect), how to optimize routes and waterfalls, etc. Now I just write exactly what I mean, with the very minimal set of external helper libs (nuqs and next-safe-action), and the framework matches my mental model of where I want to get very well.
Anti-React and anti-Next.js bias on HN is something that confuses me a lot; for many other topics here I feel pretty aligned with the crowd opinion on things, but not on this.