I would figure the reason was because calculating it based on your inventory every time it's needed would've been expensive, so the developers decided to cache it, but instead of recalculating it from scratch when there's a stat change, they decided to try updating it incrementally, but I guess also imperatively. A string of mistakes has to happen to lead to such a situation but it doesn't seem super unnatural to me.
This article is AI generated, but I kinda reject the premise that it's "not all it cracked up to be" just because the agents had reasons to act the way they did & were a result of human error. The hack still happened, it should still be a wake up call, we are going to start seeing this more frequently, and learning to defend against it is going to become more important over time. None of that is challenged by any particular reason for it happening, it still happened and it's still going to happen again.
Threat models are going to have to start including that IPv4 (or whatever) scanners aren't necessarily going to only be spray and pray anymore, they could have relentless automated models at the other end that will literally dig into the particulars of your infrastructure looking for novel vulnerabilities to exploit. Maybe people will finally start to understand why security by obscurity has never been very reliable.
You don't need your database on a dedicated server. Not sure why the comparison table claims "$30 + DB server" when your web server is a perfectly good server already.
Presumably to remove it from the need to calculate. Everyone is using a different approach and one DB may require a lot more than the 30$ server can provide.
The claim is presumably that a web server running SQLite is that much better than a web server running Postgres or Redis. So they end up including it in the calculation anyway but only on one side... so it's just simply not even apples to apples.
I meant a server dedicated to the database, but yes, I agree. Never said the web server had to be bare metal.
I wonder if the misconception is from relying on managed database services. Maybe instead of installing their own database, they order one from a service provider like AWS or GCP. That would explain how they'd think that a database like Postgres would have to live on a different machine.
The goal is to optimize everything other than the database. The vast majority of PHP apps are I/O bound and this webserver lets you handle 100x as many users as php-fpm. That’s the point. Your code can remain the same and keep using whatever database.
That's not how viruses work. You're not magically immune to flu season just because you've gotten the flu (or flu vaccines) in past years. It's ALWAYS important to keep up to date on your booster vaccines for covid. Even getting one or multiple strains at home won't necessarily help when you travel either.
It actually is how the human immune system works, and in particular, there’s a huge amount of evidence that humoral immunity is protective and long lasting for Covid. Worrying about this is roughly the same degree of reasonable as worrying about getting any of the other common coronaviruses that circulate.
I know you’re not going to accept this, but there is quite literally no good evidence that boosters for Covid do anything for otherwise healthy people who have already been infected.
Regardless, the point is, if you won’t go to a language meetup because you’re worried about this, you’re likely doing far more damage to yourself from social isolation and anxiety than the virus would ever do to you. It’s time to live your life.
I think vaccinations and boosters reduced duration of illness when I got covid for the first time last year. I have no way to know though.
I think it's weird to advocate skipping shots (not explicitly, but implied) because "everyone's already been infected several times". Best to just get them even if you've been infected and then you don't have to care if they help or not. As opposed to not having gotten them if it comes out that they do help in any way.
Also that was the only time I've ever gotten sick from covid. I guess that according to you, I must've been asymptomatic several more times.
This is wildly off topic, but again, since you didn’t read it: there is no good evidence that the shots help you if you’ve already been infected. Not mortality, not symptoms, not transmission, nothing.
Get the shot if it makes you feel less anxious. It’s probably not helping you, but it’s not hurting you either.
I read your entire comment. I finished my reply before you made a couple of your latest edits, but I read those too and they don't change my answers. I feel like the assumption of bad faith here makes further debate fruitless.
In fact my second paragraph was directly addressing the claim that they don't help, so it's surprising you would so confidently assert I didn't read that part at all.
Zig comptime feels easier and more effective in practice. I've had some fun const evaluating some stuff in Rust, but I needed to use a bunch of annoying imperative hacks because so much of the functional stuff wasn't supported in const context back then. It's probably a bit better these days.
For one of my crates I needed to have a build script make a bunch of lookup tables as separate files for me to `include_bytes!` because at the time I couldn't generate a bunch of floating point conversions in const.
Certainly every new Rust release tends to have either new things which were stabilized as const on day one, or things which already existed but now have stable const.
The biggest constraint today on Rust's constant evaluation compared to where you'd expect is that trait implementations can't ever be constant, this obviously means you can't call SomeTrait::function in your constant, even if you can see the implementation of SomeTrait::function and if it were not a trait it'd obviously be constant -- but it also means sugar like Rust's for loop, which de-sugars into trait invocations, can never be constant today.
I think we can expect that to get fixed in the relatively near future, but I'd have said that last year too so what do I know.
If you have C++ experience you'd probably want a lot more. C++ is allowed to allocate inside constant evaluation, and I believe in C++ 26 it's now even allowed to persist the allocation to runtime rather than being required to always clean up during compilation, so that's a much bigger set of crazy things you can do at compile time.
> it also means sugar like Rust's for loop, which de-sugars into trait invocations, can never be constant today.
Yep, that was my annoyance.
Const allocation is possible in Rust as an unstable feature. Not sure if you can persist it to runtime, though you can persist a reference which will become a static reference. I think it being unstable is why I needed `include_bytes!`.
FWIW const traits are progressing quite nicely. It will also allow for Default to be used in const context, which is quite handy (and will integrate nicely with default field values, which only allows consts today in nightly).
It does seem like maybe a crate with convenience macros so you can get a `&'static [Foo; N/size(Foo)]` rather than `&'static [u8; N]` and maybe even a delicious compile time "Hey jerk, that's not a valid Foo, you screwed up" if appropriate from your pre-baked data files, would be nice regardless of having more constant eval.
Saying that holding a particular opinion makes you irrelevant is not gaslighting? It's not nice to respond to a frustrated developer by saying they don't exist. It feels comparable to saying someone's concerns are not real, which does amount to gaslighting to me.
No one says graphene os doesn’t exist, or the developers don’t exist, just that their opinions don’t matter because they are a miniscule fraction of the market. 2% of active devices drives no decisions at Google.
They'd write a limited test for a feature based on an ask from the software team garbled by a five layer game of telephone. Claim that the module passed validation. A few months later the software folks would have to pull a few all nighters to figure out how to work around the resulting turd during bringup.
cant wait for no one to really know whats in chips i mean, even intel hardly knows what all their reserved mem ranges are for. who will decap the chip and see if the docs were right? xD
reply