I'm grossly over simplifying but I've always thought a cut down version of Replicache[1] functionality would be an amazing logical progression for LiveView. With Phoenix.Component[2] introducing attributes it's perhaps closer to being feasible.
> FWIW, I wouldn't be surprised if the high-performance RDMA networks being put together for AI workloads were the thing that grew into the "next" thing.
Maybe we were just early in giving (HFT) customers RDMA back in ~2007[1][2] but I don't see it entering the mainstream anytime soon. And after a relatively short 20 years of adoption, the "next" thing for hyperscalers is not going to be the next thing for everyone else.
HFT networks are also a lot smaller than hyperscaler datacenters, and designed with more cross-sectional bandwidth. A good chunk of the traffic (trading-related messages) also tends to not use congestion control.
In large web company datacenters, RDMA and RoCE have had a much "rockier" path forward.
that is only 10 percent of functionality. Another features are service discovery (docker, k8, bare metal), link optimization, visibility and monitoring, SDK and Network as Code tooling, API to manage your service connectivity and more will come.
Tbh I think it's beyond reasonable to expect when you're paying for a service that your data (or your clients') isn't funneled into another sideline. And this particular question is great timing for me, so I hope you don't mind me doing a bit of market research and get your feedback on a few things.
- Is this for personal domains or commercial?
- Are the clients 'sensitive' or do you want to protect PII out of principle?
- Do you expect to pay a premium (compared to larger providers) for client privacy?
- For records that have a distribution strategy like round robin or balanced by load, do you expect a client to receive the same result on subsequent requests?
- Is it acceptable to keep (for a record's TTL) a hash the client's subnet and the response for the purposes of only returning consistent records, or do you consider this another flavour of tracking client IPs?
- How valuable are metrics/reporting do you? Is reporting query volume at the ASN or country level enough? Too much?
- Yes. I wish that weren't the case, but considering that I can't find a single provider so far who respects end user privacy, I would expect for one who does so to charge more.
- No. Ideally, the provider wouldn't keep any logs, so they wouldn't be aware that the same client was making a subsequent request.
- I guess it's completely up to the provider. As this would be the first privacy-respecting provider, they'll probably have to go all-in with privacy, if they wish to gain traction and popularity within the community. So no, I'd personally hope that they wouldn't do that. However if this were an existing provider hoping to start becoming more private, yet they also have current customers for whom these features matter, then I guess workarounds like this are better than not being able to transition to better privacy in general. Or, even better, offer features like this for customers who need it, but allow them to be disabled from account settings for those who don't want it.
- To me, personally, I do not care at all about metrics. If a client is querying DNS, then it's because they're about to connect to one of my services (leaving cyberattacks out of the picture for the moment), at which point if I wanted to (which I don't) I could collect metrics. That being said, I don't think that, for those who want it, collecting generalized metrics at the country level, for example, would be unreasonable. And other metrics, such as DNS routing based on server "health checks" or number of resolution errors, etc. aren't bad either. It's just imperative that when the company collects these generalized metrics, they have a clear and perfect process of purging the metrics of all PII, and only saving the country name from which the request originated, for example.
> I haven't thrown any hand grenades over the wall. Overly sensitive Elixir programmers always throw a fit whenever someone says "you know, other tools are available to you too."
I don't think anyone would take issue with your comments if that's how you approached it.
Instead you're being an asshole, and for no reason I can understand. It's not like we're talking politics here...
> I don't think anyone would take issue with your comments if that's how you approached it.
I got voted into the floor for saying "you're a better elixir programmer if you also learn erlang," which is a simple fact.
I do think this. I think that most micro-language communities are bizarrely intolerant of criticism, and unwilling to cope with the idea that everylanguagehasproblems and that you can only get good at a language if you face them with open eyes.
Imagine a C programmer getting offended if you warned someone learning C "by the way, if you're doing string parsing, you're gonna have a bad time."
.
> Instead you're being an asshole
I love how I've given measurable facts and technical claims, and in order to resist, the members of this community are trotting out swearing and insults, then imagining that they've made a valuable case
> I got voted into the floor for saying "you're a better elixir programmer if you also learn erlang," which is a simple fact.
I don't think that's the case. As an active participant in the various Elixir communities, I've found that the general advice is that learning Erlang, while not necessary, is definitely worth it. Many of the community 'members' do or did plenty of Erlang programming, and the stories of all the 'goodies' and how much simpler Erlang can be at times have more than once gotten me to play around with it. I generally find very little hostility between Elixir and Erlang programmers. Far from it.
I also strongly contest that you're just saying "you're a better elixir programmer if you also learn erlang". At best, some of your comments approach the sentiment, but then end with judging the commenter a blub programmer, or something similar.
I can understand if maybe you've had bad experiences with 'micro-language communities' and you're reading that into what Elixir programmers are saying, but by and large I very rarely come across Elixir programmers who thumb their nose at Erlang. More than anything the sentiment is a kind of reverence and maybe even a degree of 'embarrassment' over finding it hard to get over Erlang syntax.
> I do think this. I think that most micro-language communities are bizarrely intolerant of criticism, and unwilling to cope with the idea that every language has problems and that you can only get good at a language if you face them with open eyes.
That's perhaps true, but Elixir is among the few communities where I find much less of that than elsewhere. The forums and slack are rife with day-to-day Elixir/Erlang programmers who lament the lack of static typing, argue about how Phoenix is too magical, and so on. One reason I was drawn to Elixir was precisely the relative lack of "this is the best thing ever and everything else sucks" sentiment that I find in so many other programming language communities.
I was assuming you were just trolling, because it's hard for me to believe that you don't see the discrepancy between what you say you are saying, and what you're actually saying. It's very discrepid!
You've been perpetuating a flamewar in this thread. We don't want those on HN. Please stop, and please don't do it again.
That includes not tossing in swipes like "This just makes me laugh" and so on. Your comments have been provocative to the point of being trollish, as well as outright nasty in places. That's not cool, regardless of how much you know about Erlang.
[1] https://replicache.dev [2] https://hexdocs.pm/phoenix_live_view/Phoenix.LiveComponent.h...