hosh

Not the original OP — I had been thinking about this for years, though my interest is in resiliency rather than a sovereignty (though they overlap):

- is there a mirror adapter to push to a non-radicle node, such as Github or say, sourcehut? (Mirroring nixpkgs, for example)

- is there a mechanism to control syncs so it can be used on low-bandwidth, unreliable networks, or ad-hoc bluetooth networks?

- is offline seeding possible or in the works?

- language package managers often can reference a git or github. Would I be able to directly reference my local radicle node and have it manage (or perhaps even discover) the correct repos? (Or maybe this is a different problem and package repos themselves could be decentralized and sovereign)

On that last point, I mean that the whole build chain and supply chain can be made sovereign: I see radicle is written in Rust, which means dependencies on Cargo, the Rust toolchain, and so forth.

I got a chance to talk to one of the recruiters at my company, informally. One takeaway is that it really depends on the type of work. Even now, there are work where a recruiter has to source - personally go out to seek specific candidates. Referals are even more important here.

I have been getting great results with Gemini 3 Deep Think, though I am not using it as my personal assistant.

You mean like this? https://docs.krustlet.dev/howto/wasm/

Or this? https://podman-desktop.io/blog/wasm-workloads-on-macos-and-w...

I remember trying to use Nightmare and MudOS as a base. It’s where I really cut my teeth with the in-game ed line editor. Good times.

Ruby does have language features for composition, and “composition over inheritance” has popped up in the community. I have also looked into the use of traits in Smalltalk.

It isn’t in the content of the story, but in the craft of storywriting itself. The author does not have to know these to make use of the methods identified by NLP. Rhetoric (as a study in and of itself) and persuasion has long been studied and practiced by humanity.

I am familiar with NLP and persuasion techniques, and when I started feeling it creep in as I read this story, I started skimming. I have learned that a compelling vision alone does not mean it is correct or even wise.

The analogy is not correct. I know that burger is rich in taste and marvelous. It is also my opinion that it is an illusion, and lacks substance.

There is so much more to the cosmos than science, though I get that this is the current preoccupation of our civilization. Maybe one day, people will expand their consciousness beyond science the way the main character expanded her’s to communicate with aliens. Until then, I recognize I am in the minority here in HN with this view.

I ended up skimming a lot of it, though I closely read the beginning and the end. This is not a vision of humanity I agree with.

Technology is not the only path towards expansion of consciousness, even though in this day and age, it appears so. The wonders, marvels, and growth described in this story can be experienced through other means. To act and build as if it is the only path is, in my opinion, deeply misguided.

Probably not the most popular stance in this crowd.

The author of article seems under the impression that parental controls allows parents to stop having to assess risk for themselves.

I am very interested in the combination of Smalltalk and local-first (offline-first) designs, and the ability to share code and data on ad-hoc networks.

I know the One Laptop Per Child project started with Squeak (Scratch) with this in mind, but Scratch has since moved to an always-on Internet and Python for the environment.

I know there is a preoccupation on LLMs and vibe coding … but just as there is a smallweb movement keeping that torch lit in a sea of enshittification, there is something to be said about a development environment that can be customized by end users. For example, a website/blog authoring tool or RSS feed reader written in Smalltalk would be interesting, if not directly monetizable.

Biomimicry, not invention. He reasoned that the DNA is a vast library for transforming molecules from one to another, and therefore, ecosystems are capable of breaking down pollutants.

In practice, there are multiple vats. The first stage has algae growing, which sequesters the heavy metals. The next stages follow other kinds of ecosystems, such as organisms from swamps. He will mix samples from multiple ecosystems that normally don’t mix so that some kind of novel, self-organizing ecosystem can form around the pollutant.

Then it is measuring and monitoring the contaminants. With the superfund site, he was tracking presence of the top ten pollutants on the EPA list. However, he also shows how people can use much simpler, non-industrial tests — using samples from say, uncontaminated lake water nearby and use a microscope to see if the water being treated will kill those microorganisms. This allows for remediation to be executed by people who don’t have access to labs, but still need a way to test their water.

A much simpler version of this that follows the same design principles is capable of local, onsite treatment of ordinary black water.

That is the dude.

Dr John Todd has figured out and demonstrated a method to remediate DDT-contaminated water without the use of electrolysis, or other energy inputs. He was able to decontaminate one of the top superfund sites. The method is broadly versatile, and requires even lower tech than electrolysis. His methods can also sequester heavy metals. It involves introducing organisms across all of the kingdoms so that they self-organize on the contaminant.

More narrowly, Paul Stamets has worked a lot on mycroremediation — remediating with fungi.

I'm not sure I understand the issue.

Wouldn't the pattern be to use a reverse proxy for ingress and everything goes through there into the backends? Keep the pod ips range that is not directly reachable from outside the cluster?

The older versions of Istio uses an init container to redirect inbound and outbound traffic from the main container to the Envoy sidecar. You still have to have some kind of admissions hook to inject things if you want it automatic, but the apps don’t need to understand proxies.

> TLDR? Goat-staring is real?

The movie was based on the work of a journalist investigating the topic and wrote a non-fiction book on the subject.

It’s also true that the kind of people who are ready for staff level work are already doing staff level work. While social capital is a factor, it isn’t necessarily accumulated because of title or experience.

The idea of “disambiguation” is itself ambiguous. The way I recognize other people solving problems at a staff level is we are communicating in terms of properties, constraints and tradeoffs. Crucially, these constraints are not necessarily business constraints, but rather, constraints inherent to an architecture. For example, queuing works for ordering because it append-only, and monotonic. So as soon as you have multiple queues (such as partitioning) or try to reorder it, it also loses its ordering guarantee. Does the problem require ordering?

The first couple chapters of Roy Fielding’s dissertation goes through this. The first time I tried reading it, I did not have experience to understand. It was a slog and I got little out of it. The next time I tried reading it, it was helping me gel and articulate things I had started observing from experience. I recognized that I had previously been so focused on architectural elements and that the properties and constraints were far more important. It is this that determines what is being traded off, and antipatterns pop out. Knowing properties and constraints allows me to quickly identify problems, and start the process of disambiguation. Many of the other staff or principal engineers I have chatted with communicate along these lines.

I don’t try to ask smart questions or dumb questions. I ask questions so that I can understand properties and constraints.

It got me thinking:

- how well does such an ecosystem resist enshittification? Given some of the other comments, Nostr itself would not. However, is that true for every relay networks?

- does the Willow protocol have the same basic constraints? I know willow works with user-owned keys, but can it also organize as something similar to relays?

- local-first apps organized this way would be an interesting ecosystem

- how well would this work with keyhive? (Local first access control)

Number (3) has better explanatory powers than (1).

However, for the purpose of assessing social and family impact, it is rendered to (1). Both schools and state (US) programs use (1) to assess if a child qualifies for support. This is not always related to how to parent or educate the child.

Fortunately, the US school system with IEP (individualized educational plans) are developed along (3). (Source: two of my kids have ASD)

None of that necessarily helps in informal social contexts or in professional workplace settings. I think the American Disabilities Act covers reasonable accommodations for people with autism spectrum disorders, though I am not sure if it requires legal disabled status.

Lastly: I met a Native (Navajo) family with a child that seems to me, have some developmental disabilities — but I think they take a very different approach. For one, they don’t seem to have the usual social stigma associated with this, and are baffled why I would suggest getting state support for early childhood intervention. If anything, I would not be surprised if they thought I was, yet again, someone unthinkingly pushing a colonialist worldview.

Humans do the same thing.

I have a friend who is a systems engineer, working at a construction company building datacenters. She tells me that someone has to absorb the risk and uncertainty in the global supply chain, and if there are contractual obligation to guarantee delivery, then the tendency is to start straying into unethical behavior, or practices that violate controls and policies.

This has as much to do with taking the slack out of the system. Something, somewhere is going to break. If you tell an agenic AI that it must complete the task by a deadline, and it cannot find a way to do that within ethical parameters, it starts searching beyond the bounds of ethical behavior. If you tell the AI it can push back, warn about slipping deadlines, that it is not worth taking ethical shortcuts to meet a deadline, then maybe it won’t.

I prefer heads down time. At my remote workplace, I found several channels where people ask for help. Combined with office hours, it is the main way I keep in touch with what is going on.

We also write up a weekly priorities (by team), and all the leadership put it together into emails. It is a great way for me to read what is going on.

I shift between deep work and collaborative problem solving.

It is not as if you can’t try structure things to have both.

The ideas in Erlang keeps getting (poorly) reinvented.

So it remains a “secret” weapon and I am fine with that. Not everything have to be validated by popularity in order to be unreasonably effective.

Kubernetes is a good example of a microservice architecture. It was designed in a way where each microservice work with other microservices in a way where the dependencies are not so coupled together.

For example, the API server only reads and writes resources to etcd. A separate microservice called the scheduler does the actual assignment of pods to nodes by watching for changes in the resource store against available nodes. And yet a different microservice that lives on each node accepts the assignment and boots up (or shuts down) pods assigned to its node. It is called the kublet. The API server does none of that.

You can run the kublet all on its own, or even replace it to change part of the architecture. Someone was building a kublet that uses systemd instead of docker, and Fly.io (who seems to hate kubernetes) wrote a kublet that could stand things up using their edge infrastructure.

The API server also does some validations, but it also allows for other microservices to insert itself into the validation chain through pod admission webhooks.

Other examples: deployment controllers, replicaset controllers, horizontal pod autoscalers, and cluster autoscalers to work independently of each other yet coordinated together to respond to changing circumstances. Operators are microservices that manage a specific application component, such as redis, rabbitmq, Postgresql, tailscale, etc.

One of the big benefits of this is that Kubernetes become very extensible. Third-party vendors can write custom microservices to work with their platform (for example, storage interfaces for GCP, AWS, Azure, or Ceph, etc). An organization implementing Kubernetes can tailor it to fit their needs, whether it is something minimal or something operating in highly regulated markets.

Ironically, Kubernetes is typically seen and understood by many to be a monolith. Kubernetes, and the domain it was designed to solve is complex, but incorrectly understanding Kubernetes as a monolith creates a lot of confusion for people working with it.

Yeah, the isolation provides a fault tolerance not seen in wide use until Kubernetes.

Although it would be neat to implement some of the benefits of a service mesh for BEAM — for example, consistently applying network retry/circuit breaker policies, or dynamically scalable genservers.

I have worked in production Elixir. (Learning platform supporting realtime student-teacher classroom experience).

Whatsapp is implemented with Erlang.

It is a more robust platform for agentic AI, and I’d certainly start with a BEAM language for agentic AI.

What BEAM offers isn’t modularity, but concurrency. Every genserver is operating concurrently, all within the runtime. Up until actor models came to Java, and more recent Java with lightweight threads, Java was incapable of this. Java is still missing things that BEAM and OTP provides.

Besides: Erlang predates Java.

It is not so black and white.

The BEAM ecosystem (Erlang, Elixir, Gleam, etc) can do distributed microservices within a monolith.

A single monolith can be deployed in different ways to handle different scalability requirements. For example, a distinct set of pods responding to endpoints for reports, another set for just websocket connections, and the remaining ones for the rest of the endpoints. Those can be independently scaled but released on the same cadence.

There was a long form article I once read that reasoned through this. Given M number of code sources, there are N number of deployables. It is the delivery system’s job to transform M -> N. M is based on how the engineering team(s) work on code, whether that is a monorepo, multiple repos, shared libraries, etc. N is what makes sense operationally . By making it the delivery system’s job to transform M -> N, then you can decouple M and N. I don’t remember the title of that article anymore. (Maybe someone on the internet remembers).

Does this also apply to thumbdrives?

This article does not do a very good job of talking about why pigeons were domesticated, and instead, rely upon argumentation by pathos. It only mentions racing in passing, but breeding pigeons for racing weakens the whole argument.

In the Middle East, pigeons were raised as a food source. There are structures that allow flocks to nest, and from time to time, people would cook some for food.

I have seen a video of someone doing so in London with one of the many free roaming pigeons.

There may be other relationships pigeons have with humans.

It’s still possible to redomesticate pigeons. There are some obstacles. If they are going to be harvested for food, then people need some way to make sure they are disease free, and on-site butchering is legal.