We've had discussions about this sort of stuff before.
As an Israeli (note the article exposing them is Israeli too) I was not aware until I saw this and I definitely intend to protest/organize about this (though to be fair I've been protesting about other stuff in the past and the climate here sucks).
Israeli here - I'll try to write this the least political as I can since I on one hand disagree strongly with the government and on the other my experience has been getting antisemstic (yes, not anti-zionist) comments whenever this gets discussed a lot (and likely downvotes but who cares I've been here 10 years and have more fake points than is important anyway).
Israel has several "cores" of technology. The military stuff is shameful (as well as other stuff). It's not just the NSOs (or less infamously the Wiz's/Palo Altos etc).
There are plenty of good things though - startups in the biotech/health/classic "tech" space. I'll spare you the long list of stuff like Mellanox that drives Nvidias in data centers and leave the googling of medtech to you. Lots of neutral stuff too.
> my experience has been getting antisemstic (yes, not anti-zionist) comments whenever this gets discussed a lot
I appreciate your experience. I have no doubt there's indeed been an increase in such comments. I think it's important to note that the Israeli government does work very hard to conflate Zionism with Judaism, (which itself seems antisemitic to me), making it harder for some to separate the two.
> There are plenty of good things though - startups in the biotech/health/classic "tech" space.
That's good to know, as I said in another comment, it may be time for those startups to make themselves heard more, not because they have to, but because it is in their interest if they have any expansion plans going forward, given what a poor PR the Israeli state and firms like NSO, BlackCore etc. give the Israeli tech scene.
> I think it's important to note that the Israeli government does work very hard to conflate Zionism with Judaism, (which itself seems antisemitic to me), making it harder for some to separate the two.
Yes, they are trying their hardest with their actions to fuel a new way of antisemitism.
Turns out if you are a religious fundamental colony that occupies territory based on the bible, that gives bad rap to the whole religion.
Except Zionism is not religious. It is a modern secular nationalist ideology rooted in ethnicity, shared ancestry, history, culture, and language. Indeed, socialism dominated Zionism for a long time.
Many if not most Israelis are not religious, and traditionally, religious Jews (especially the Orthodox; an extreme case is Neturei Karta) oppose Zionism and the State of Israel as a secular ersatz, believing that they must wait for the Messiah to restore Israel.
Of course, in the last few decades, a faction of Zionists have commandeered the messianic for political purposes, but this is not the origin.
> It's not based on the Bible, it's based on where we know for a fact people actually lived under the Roman empire. If not just speculation based on a 4000 year-old mythical text, it's literal documented history.
It's the invocation of a 'promised land', which even Israeli government officials use as a justification for their actions, that is based on (a reading of) the Bible, despite Israel being nominally a secular country.
I don't think many dispute there was a significant population of Jews within the Roman Empire, many of which lived in the rough geographical area of present day Israel.
I am not sure how any sort of present day 'inherent right' stems from that.
There's plenty of room for debate about the legitimacy of Zionism, and about what (and when) a "return to Zion" should be. Such debate has been carried out vigorously for 200 years. But it has to start from agreement on basic historical facts, and rejection of non-facts founded in bigotry.
Israeli government officials are politicians and vary in perspective, but by and large the Israeli government is a big part of the "nasty colonial racist" part. Their perspective exists but is not authoritative, and it is becoming increasingly unpopular around the world (including among Jews).
Which facts? Are you genetically 100% from Palestine? If not, then the fact is you're not Palestinian. Having trace genetics (possibly, possibly not) from people who once lived in a region does not give you or anyone else permission to go ethnically cleanse that region of the actual inhabitants and steal their land.
The country Israel historically is based on the Holocaust, because when it came to light what the Nazis did, the political views regarding that topic shifted drastically and eventually resulted in Israel getting founded. The borders were defined by the wars that followed in the decades afterwards where neighboring countries tried to invade Israel.
You don't know your history. Zionism started in the late 19th century as a nationalist and colonialist movement; by 1917 it had already secured the support of the (soon to be) British administration of Palestine for the creation of a Jewish state there; mass immigration was already underway and flooded with hundreds of thousands of colonists a territory that had had almost no Jewish presence for a thousand years or more. Ethnic cleansing of the native population was already in the plans, as shown by the private diaries of the father of Zionism Theodore Herzl.
When in 1948 the UN formulated its partition plan (i.e. the proposal to expropriate the Palestinians of half of their land to give it to the Jewish immigrants), the land that the proposal assigned to the Jewish state had a 45% Palestinian population, which the newborn state immediately proceeded to ethnically cleanse. Besides, Israel never formally accepted the borders of the partition plan and immediately set to conquer new territory (plan Dalet).
The creator of Zionism, Teodore Herzl was very clear that it was a colonial project dependent on ethnic cleansing:
> We must expropriate gently the private property on the state
assigned to us. We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our country. The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discretely and circumspectly. Let the owners of the immoveable property believe that they are cheating us, selling us things for more than they are worth. But we are not going to sell them anything back. (Theodore Herzl, 12 June 1895)
All right. And? This doesn’t describe colonialism. It might be hinting at ethnic cleansing if we look at it with the benefit of well over a century’s worth of hindsight, and ignore that it doesn’t refer to the Palestinians at all, who are not the indigenous inhabitants of that particular piece of land.
Yes, it describes ethnic cleansing. As for colonialism it doesn't need to be described, moving en masse to a country inhabited by an indigenous population to settle it is the definition of colonialism.
Lol. While of course Zionism was conceived also as a solution to the persecutions that Jews were facing in Europe, it was born within the European ideology of nationalist movements of that period (which gave birth to several of the European nations of today) and of colonialism- also a widespread and uncontroversial feature of the time. Nothing specifically bad about Zionism in this respect, it's simply a product of the ideas of its time.
All the rest, about Israel existence today, is irrelevant. We can recognize the mistakes of the past to at least understand how we got to this point and what's the best and correct way forward. It's not about reverting history but at least knowing it.
I suggest you begin with the mistakes made in the founding of your own country, I’m quite certain there would be plenty to learn from, as you say.
It is disingenuous to pretend that you merely care about learning from the past when it is only one specific country’s past you supposedly wish to learn from.
The country of Israel is based on western colonialism, taking advantage of the atrocities of WWII and the Holocaust.
It was meant as a western foothold in the middle east, which is clearly the case now. In a despicable manner, Germany now is aiding and abetting the atrocities committed by the colony of Israel, as if two wrongs make a right.
> it's important to note that the Israeli government does work very hard to conflate Zionism with Judaism
This is definitely made easier by the fact that the arrogance, the endless lawyering, the shady dealings, the greediness, the constant switching between attacking and playing the victim, they all match to a tee the most known historical antisemitic tropes.
It's amazing how Trump and Bibi manage to embody the absolute worst stereotypes of their respective cultures. There's something almost Jungian about it.
I never understood this: the Palestinian children whose family and limbs are torn from them for Israeli sport are also Semites. It seems like the ultimate erasure to claim "antisemitic" for only Jews.
Etymologically you're correct that semites refers to [all] people from middle east and horn of Africa. But the label is from the European perspective, where it was used to refer to Jews. I'm sure that if they'd had a say in it, they would not have referred to themselves as Jews.
But yeah, there is indeed some irony in the term "antisemitism" in the context you describe
There is no such thing as a "semite." It's an archaic racial category that 19th century German race science used since "anti-semite" sounds more scientific than "Jew hater." Consequently, that's why it's applied to Jews rather than a larger pseudoscientific racial group.
(More broadly, "they're semites too" is the "Elon Musk is African American" of I/P discourse. You can recognize extraordinary human tragedy without re-using race science.)
Personally, I think you're going through a hard time. An individual and a country are different, but people do rely to some extent on the image of a country when judging an individual. I agree with your logic, so I'll give you an upvote
> Israeli here - I'll try to write this the least political
We are more than two years into full-on genocide and you hesitate to be political? This position reminds me of many Russians who prefer to "stay out of politics" because there are "two sides" to the conflict and it's an uncomfortable topic for them.
It doesn't matter how many "independent" partisans you line up to redefine genocide. Anyone with any sense understands that there is no genocide of a population that is increasing.
I didn't downvote you. You're Jewish (I stand side by side with Jewish brothers and sisters against Israel), you've expressed disagreements with the Israeli government. We're likely on a similar page then.
However:
> There are plenty of good things though - startups in the biotech/health/classic "tech" space.
Besides the point. I truly won't touch anything from that Apartheid, gen0cideal state.
c.f. the boycott of South Africa during Apartheid. Same principle.
Israeli designed/made chips are in phones, computers, all over the internet. Same with Israeli made software. Anyone using/posting to the internet is touching/supporting quite a few things from Israel.
To be clear, the job of the ordinary citizen in this situation is not to opt out. I criticise China often and yet my phone has Chinese chips. Would you have me shut up about China?. And so it is with Israel.
The job of the ordinary citizen is to do what they reasonably can to protest the gen0cidal, N'azi behaviour of its current administration with the support of a significant percentage of its populous.
Given how the troubles have turned a significant number of the population into blood-thirsty land thieves, the country should be de-N'azified like they did to Germany after WW2.
OMG, really?! Well then, because they did all those beneficial things, then I'm fine with Israel bombing hospitals, schools, and killing children by starving them while they sleep on the pile of rubble that was their home!
People justified their anti-Muslim hate after 9/11 with similar statements about polls saying most Muslims saw Bin Laden in a good light, and have anti-West views.
Not saying I agree with any of it, but I find the parallels illuminating. If anyone wonders why there's more anti-semitism now, s/he can perhaps compare it with how all Muslims are condemned as being members of a barbaric sect after any terrorist attack (yes, even attacks where the perpretator doesn't claim to be doing it for Allah).
I wouldn't be surprised if the results of a poll for actual genocide would be the same, but expulsion is not genocide. I really wish people would stop diluting the meaning of genocide at every opportunity.
Yet neither are sufficient to constitute genocide. There is possibly a difference, and there lies the key to claiming "most Israelis support genocide" based on evidence they support expulsion.
Sorry to repeat what the other commenter said but it seems you had missed the point.
No one has ever called me a kike or Christ killer. No one has ever accused me of controlling the media or banks. No one has spray painted a swastika on my house, or my synagogue for that matter.
My nation, the most powerful in the world, puts a menorah in its halls of government every year for Hanukkah. The legislative and judicial branches have Jewish members at the very top level. The head of government has a Jewish son-in-law.
Even online, I see much more pervasive criticism of my nation than yours.
Yet, listen to Zionists and I’m practically living in Weimar Germany. That dog won’t hunt.
People have criticisms of Israel. They may be fair or unfair. Address them on the merits and leave the rest of us out it. It has nothing to do with Jews qua Jews.
It's hard to separate for some people. Unfortunately those people tend to be the worst on both sides
In general, I think (or at least hope) your experience is the more common one. But fwiw I do have a Jewish friend who was personally cussed at and threatened by his own coworker explicitly for being Jewish (well, and probably because they were from Florida if I'm being honest, but there aren't as many slurs for that). The guy who did it was fired (whole thing was recorded iirc), nobody sided with him, he was clearly off his rocker in some way - but it doesn't take much to get shaken up - it sticks with you. And my friend was understandably, shaken up.
I know that because I used to live in Seattle, and unfortunately I had a really scary experience of being threatened (he yelled "I'm going to kill you b****") and chased down by a homeless man for nothing other than being a woman on the same street as him. So I saw my own perspective shift when it happened first hand. I was no longer excited about living downtown in a big city after that experience.
So what I'm saying is, neither me nor my friend took the experience and made it a defining thing. He still lives where he does, didn't blame the community or anything. And I'm back to taking public transit, talking to strangers on the sidewalk, and all the other stuff that comes with spending time downtown in a big city. But this time the city is Charlotte, my home city. It's probably not any safer than Seattle (maybe worse), but experiences shape perception, and I've always had really good experiences on Charlotte, including with homeless people. I could say it's because Charlotte has more police presence lately, or because there's not visible tent camps or open drug usage. But deep down, I know, crazy people are always gonna be out there, and the most trivial thing can make you a target.
So I really get the pull by people who have experienced victimization like that to talk about it. You feel kinda crazy if you don't, because you are surrounded by people who say it never happens because they've never seen it. That was such a big part I think of the Floyd protests - a lot of white people lived in a bubble and didn't know how pervasive overly violent interactions with the police can be (though the ironic part is that a lot of white people still don't realize that they can also be targeted by police with just as much malice). Most American black people already knew first or second-hand that police brutality was real and not uncommon - but until it was undeniable on video, it was treated by others as if it never happened.
So there's some honest middle ground somewhere, but the extremists are the one who have the most to gain from convincing people to believe otherwise.
There’s definitely antisemitism out there. Criticizing Israel is not part of it. The people that run to that ever. single. time. ought to be ashamed of themselves for crying wolf. They have no right to abuse the term and rob it of legitimate meaning because they don’t have a good response on the merits.
> Yet, listen to Zionists and I’m practically living in Weimar Germany. That dog won’t hunt.
Yeah this is so detached from reality I have to ask how you arrived at this conclusion and consider reexamining the way you consume information. Both in my own personal impression and according ADL global index USA's antisemitism is a low. Because "Zionists" have pro-Israel bias they will perceive any one who support Israel positively, and no one support Israel more than USA, so they will likely view USA as positive further lessening negtive views.
I have stood up for Jews since I was a kid, often saying "I'm Jewish" when racists/antisemitic jokes were told and I have been called those things. I've heard people say all kinds of horrific stuff about Jews. In this very thread we have:
"This is definitely made easier by the fact that the arrogance, the endless lawyering, the shady dealings, the greediness, the constant switching between attacking and playing the victim, they all match to a tee the most known historical antisemitic tropes."
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48515906
I am an Israeli and though I dislike this certain brand of companies and would never work in one, I am not sure this is strictly bad.
I assume these were hired by a local candidate (unless someone can think who has a deep interest in French municipal elections)
Currently the only actors who use fake social accounts for election manipulation are the Russians, Chinese, Iran and Qatar.
The west is completely powerless in either fighting back, regulating social networks or coming up with a technological solution.
As democracies are being undermined by foreign influence, from Brexit, to the US elections, I'd rather local parties would have access to these tools than the alternative, and that would be only done using private companies.
Of course the better alternative is getting rid of fake accounts and making social media into a unicorn and bunnies hate-free zone, don't think we are headed there though
> unless someone can think who has a deep interest in French municipal elections
The State of Israel? They are paranoid about their international standing. (Really, just paranoid in general, to an absurd and pathological degree, though for understandable reasons.)
That's doubtful, I don't think Israel has the resources to spend huge sums of money to invest in manipulating French municipal elections.. That's absurd
There legitimate reason to suspect that Israel was involved in a series of anti-muslim rallies that happened across the US a few years back. The Molly Conger's covered it in an episode of "Weird Little Guys": https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/an-accidental-nazi-ral...
That's not a conspiracy theory though, the fact that political parties during elections campaign try to influence voters, sometimes in morally questionable ways, is pretty well known and common.
I had an issue with the idea that a nation in the Middle East is somehow interested in municipal elections in Europe as it somehow will advance its security interests... that's kinda way out there
Much of the Israeli government believes that the entire world is out to get them; that every generation brings a new “Amalek” (as Prime Minister Netanyahu put it); that every Gentile anywhere in the world is at risk, if exposed to the right trigger, of waking up tomorrow wanting to start another Holocaust. Prominent Israeli politicians talk like this all the time. Here in the US, I see Zionists make similar arguments constantly ("Israel is the only country where Jews can be safe", "antisemitism is part of the European DNA", etc.).
This (delusional, paranoid, insane) attitude is central to the national ideology, and the #1 reason why the country is so messed up.
Because of it, they see any politician anywhere expressing any criticism of them whatsoever as an existential threat, someone who could turn into the next Hitler and genocide them all. That's why they just increased their PR budget to over $700 million.
> Much of the Israeli government believes that the entire world is out to get them; that every generation brings a new “Amalek” (as Prime Minister Netanyahu put it);
Sorry to inform you but the idea that every generation breeds someone that will try to destroy the Jewish people is firm in Jewish religion (and with merit). That is repeated in every Passover. It is also based on quite firm historical grounds though.
> that every Gentile anywhere in the world is at risk, if exposed to the right trigger, of waking up tomorrow wanting to start another Holocaust
That's your interpretation, as for someone that is versed in the local language and culture, I think it is wrong
> Here in the US, I see Zionists make similar arguments constantly ("Israel is the only country where Jews can be safe", "antisemitism is part of the European DNA", etc.).
This (delusional, paranoid, insane) attitude is central to the national ideology, and the #1 reason why the country is so messed up.
Like it or not, but Zionism has said that European antisemitism is pathological and will end in disaster for the Jewish people. That might be regarded as paranoid in 1932, but zionist jews were largely saved while other less paranoid Jews were completely exterminated in an actual real genocide.
The message which you characterize as paranoid is quite easy for Israelis to understand as most of the country is descendent to refugees from genocide, ethnic cleansing or both
> That's why they just increased their PR budget to over $700 billion.
Sounds like a lot. In any case, I don't see how any of this explains Israel's obsession with municipal elections in France. But I guess it's a difference in axioms. Once you believe Israelis are insane, then you don't need to rationalize your own beliefs, even though they lack any logical ground
> That's why they just increased their PR budget to over $700 billion.
Million, not billion, sorry for the typo.
---
Yes, the paranoia is for understandable historical reasons. It didn't come out of nowhere, I get that. Most paranoid people are paranoid due to real traumatic experiences that happened to them. But none of that makes it any less harmful or destructive. At worst, it becomes an endless cycle of self-fulfilling prophecy.
(Israel is hardly the only example of an entire society going down this dark path. E.g. Germany: horrible traumatic experience of losing WWI -> paranoia, "we must have been betrayed" -> "the Jews did it" -> Nazism, the Holocaust.)
I would say that it is even more of a paranoid, delusional conspiracy theory to say that GP is subscribed to a conspiracy theory, or is paranoid or delusional
Ignoring the actual situation as I don't care to go into that right now, just talking about the mechanisms working with here. I did have access accidentally to buy cheap social stuff. Not that it would be hard to run it myself, just wouldn't be worth the effort to make it run well for controllably long time.
But anyway, i didn't do anything with it, but i always thought, how do easy it would be for a competent, young, informed government, to realize counteracting the digital influence of foreignn governments is much more important than whatever else they prioritise. Exaggerated, maybe, but it should be at least top 3 or whatever exact position in ones priority list. Because especially: it's so easy, to spend a few thousand euros to hire some really competent people who might just pay some shady social account broker, now even with the use LLMs , much more scalably & effectively, to counteract and do even better stuff than what they do.
But then, remembering bernays, i am happy they are incompetent. The day they reach competency with the toolset that is yet in infancy, i will regret not having tried to control who is running this. On the other hand, you just can't risk doing this. It will lose your control eventually. And without being a conspiracy theorists, it won't be long until more pips (people in power) will notice the ease of influence- and propaganda (in bernays understanding, the one who rebranded it as public relations), through these tools.
Luckily, i've never been in a knife fight. Though i've heard, that with an unskilled fighter, you have pretty bad chances of not getting hurt. But a skilled one is a death sentence.
Of course i don't want to be attacked by a knife. And i don't want to take some other unskilled street gangster and train him. Of course, some people get humbled if introduced to power. But many corrupt. And those hungry for power, are rarely those, who should have it. This could be an hour long discussion. But just look around the people you know well. Maybe yourself in certain situations or relationships. Every humans has the potential.
You guessed wrong. As far as I know, there's no such lobby, and I find your suggestion of its existence to be antisemitic. But the pro Israel lobby is quite open and public. Aipac's spending, for example, is public knowledge, and you can look it up for yourself.
Actually Temporal does have a way to avoid determinism called rainbow deployments.
If you're fine with deploying several versions of workers (and are on a reasonably new version) you can just avoid the determinism issue altogether with their k8s controller.
If you do need to have some long workflows, there is an explicit hook for "what happens to existing workflows on version upgrade".
But to be fair - none of the other orchastrators I used (like AirFlow) made me write workflows.IsNewCode/IsOldCode like temporal does. On the other hand AirFlow doesn't even have the capability to do that in the first place (or at least it didn't last I used it).
Well sure - that's essentially the same as wrapping the whole workflow in a version check for each version; copy-paste the whole lot and change the code wherever. It's still surfacing an issue that would otherwise be less visible on a system that did allow a worker on a new version to pull an old half-completed workflow
In the last two years, we built (with a team of 15, now 100) a billion dollar business on top of Temporal that performs business critical applications for fortune 500 companies. We couldn't be happier with temporal.
Determinism sucks, you do have to work hard and make everything idempotent in activities like we would for durable software anyway. The language we used was incorrect (Go) and has a lot of boilerplate compared to alternatives we later investigated (Python and TypeScript). Visibility can be slow and misses information. We needed to write our own APIs to work effectively with Agents for root-cause analysis of failures.
With all the caveats - Temporal is amazing, it feels much better than previous orchestrators I used like Prefect or Airflow. 100% would adopt again.
That is the real truth people are voicing when they say Temporal is heavy. They are really saying: Durable, reliable, distributed workloads are hard and it takes effort to manage! And that is true. I know of no systems that make that genuinely easy. It is a hard discipline. Maybe Temporal makes that harder than it should be, but I have no experience there.
There are no free lunches in this space. I have no idea how good or bad Temporal is since my usage is pretty small and isolated, but software rarely just works and impresses me and Temporal for my local machine orchestrating genuinely did. I think Netflix's conductor is another cool option, but I ended up with Temporal due to license.
Have you looked into DBOS? Same thesis: durable and reliable workflows are hard to manage -- it just doesn't have to be as hard as Temporal makes it be :)
Have not. For my workflows this was fine. Good to keep in mind thoUgh. I don’t plan to manage a truly distributed system with it. Plus my only reason to do so is professional and we rolled our own system here due to our size solutions like DBOS or Temporal would not work well.
- Temporal itself is written in Go and we use Go for our backend so we expected this to be a natural fit.
- Temporal makes writing activities in Go very explicit and boilerplatey
- This in turn makes testing more difficult than it needs to be often
- Temporal doesn't play well with Go's concurrency model at all (all stuff like goroutines needs to go through its special workflows.Go) a lot more often you have to write stuff that "appeases" temporal.
- The whole workflows.ExecuteActivity(...).Get(...) is weird, having futures in a language explcitly designed to avoid that is weird.
- All our compute isn't done on temporal workers anyway, its done (in another AWS account, owned by the customer) in batch compute (aws batch, lambda, ec2, whatever) so our temporal code isn't CPU heavy but is highly concurrent and needs a very high reliability guarantee.
- Compare that to temporal with TypeScript, where it's simple and easy to use the same code inside or outside of temporal. Testing is trivial and the code looks like "regular code".
Interesting. Perhaps the go sdk is in alignment with the go-principle of being explicit.
I’ll take care to review examples of goroutines etc under temporal before calling any shots.
Thanks
Rust is really fun to work with and the compiler is great, just make sure the rewrite takes compile times into account since larger projects often have to be organized in a way that makes compilation reasonably fast.
how long does it take to compile?
@jarredsumner: It's basically the same as in zig using our faster zig compiler. If we were using the upstream zig compiler, rust port would compile faster.
This is at least partially disingenuous. Zig is working on, and has already shipped for some situations, a faster compiler. Bun runs on an outdated version of Zig that doesn't include it.
Single compiles for sure. Where Zig is optimizing compilation is in the incremental compiler, which I've seen compile the compiler itself in an instant after a single line change.
Of course, that kind of speed is probably not interesting to some people if the AI is writing tons of lines of code before they go to the compilation step.
I found making single line changes in Bun’s zig code led to very long compiles compared to doing the same in Rust code. It was a while ago though and maybe I was doing something wrong.
I have had to do this, well over a decade ago now, when working at a place that was a pretty big deal in the node world, and node was still pretty new. They helped us.
I would imagine GH would do the same if its a high enough profile issue.
Yep, we had to do this recently with Renovate, where we had too many releases, and new publishing hit a size limit on the registry, so we needed support to help us unpublish a load of old releases
First minio and then localstack, as an open source maintainer I find that abandoning their community is bad faith. I totally get wanting to monetize but removing the free product entirely feels like such a betrayel.
Luckily, I've been vibing with Devin since this started having it build a cleanbox emulator on top of real s3 tuned for my specific use case. It's a lot less general but it's much faster and easy to add the sort of assertions I need in it. It's no localstack but for my limited use case it works.
It does feel like a betrayal. We live in a world where money is the main thing that matters and it's increasingly hard to come by and you need increasingly more of it (these are all designed policies, not emergent behavior). It makes sense that people don't want to do things for free unless they already have enough money.
Engineers who remained apolitical are now surprised the politics is bad.
Personally I think we should at least discuss changing this system into something that is more sustainable. Money is main thing, because it was decided that private property is more important than people. People like Joseph Stiglitz show that there's no such a thing as an invisible hand, even though he still believes in free market.
Yeah these moves will gain them a year or so but all these companies built on a "takes time to implement library" are all dead in the water. Localstack has nothing fancy, it just takes time to build. And that moat is gone, it's maybe 4 weekends of token quotas I wouldn't use anyway.
You are not misunderstanding anything, I use Go and Rust/TypeScript in my daily work and you are correct - it is the OP that does not understand why people use lockfiles in CI (to prevent minor updates and changes in upstream through verifying a hash signature).
They may be an expert in Go, but from their writing they appear to be misunderstanding (or at least misrepresenting) how things work in other languages. See the previous discussion here: https://lobste.rs/s/exv2eq/go_sum_is_not_lockfile
> They may be an expert in Go, but from their writing they appear to be misunderstanding (or at least misrepresenting) how things work in other languages
Thanks for that link.
Based on reading through that whole discussion there just now and my understanding of the different ecosystems, my conclusion is that certainly people there are telling Filippo Valsorda that he is misunderstanding how things work in other languages, but then AFAICT Filippo or others chime in to explain how he is in fact not misunderstanding.
This subthread to me was a seemingly prototypical exchange there:
Someone in that subthread tells Filippo (FiloSottile) that he is misunderstanding cargo behavior, but Filippo then reiterates which behavior he is talking about (add vs. install), Filippo does a simple test to illustrate his point, and some others seem to agree that he is correct in what he originally said.
That said, YMMV, and that overall discussion does certainly seem to have some confusion and people seemingly talking past each other (e.g., some people mixing up "dependents" vs. "dependencies", etc.).
> but then AFAICT Filippo or others chime in to explain how he is in fact not misunderstanding.
I don't get this impression. Rather, as you say, I get the impression that people are talking past each other, a property which also extends to the author, and the overall failure to reach a mutual understanding of terms only contributes to muddying the waters all around. Here's a direct example that's still in the OP:
"The lockfile (e.g. uv.lock, package-lock.json, Cargo.lock) is a relatively recent innovation in some ecosystems, and it lists the actual versions used in the most recent build. It is not really human-readable, and is ignored by dependents, allowing the rapid spread of supply-chain attacks."
At the end there, what the author is talking about has nothing to do with lockfiles specifically, let alone when they are applied or ignored, but rather to do with the difference between minimum-version selection (which Go uses) and max-compatible-version selection.
Here's another one:
"In other ecosystems, package resolution time going down below 1s is celebrated"
This is repeating the mistaken claims that Russ Cox made years ago when he designed Go's current packaging system. Package resolution in e.g. Cargo is almost too fast to measure, even on large dependency trees.
As an Israeli (note the article exposing them is Israeli too) I was not aware until I saw this and I definitely intend to protest/organize about this (though to be fair I've been protesting about other stuff in the past and the climate here sucks).
reply