You're correct. But have you been on the other side: something you know is not perfect, but someone convinces you to try something, you agree, it isn't great but it gets used... then they leave and you are stuck with something that is a pain clean up.
I understand it can suck: but what is lacking isn't your technical demonstration (unless it is truly ground breaking), but your demonstration to clean up your own mess and be responsible.
What posgresql needs is a new wire format. (pgwire4)
I've been slopping together a POC to probe the edges of what can be done as just an extension. So far I have a framed protocol with inline cancellation, named parameters, out-of-query text language selector, ad-hoc pg/PLSQL execution with cache (no need for prepare), multiple result sets, streaming large results, and more flexible bulk upload.
In other words, with this extension you can query:
```
select * from T1;
select * from T2;
```
And return them both in PG/PLSQL or straight SQL.
The existing pgwire3 protocol is one of the worst things to work with in postgresql.
100% of this will be self-inflicted no javascript and 0% of the people who I am targeting.
The Galaxy Brain isn't global usage, it is overlapping populations. Will any percentage of them care about any percentage of me?
Put another way, many people decided to effectively drop support for IE11. When my client has even a single client who still uses IE11, we don't drop support even when it is "bad to support it". But when that drops to zero, regardless of what anyone else is doing, then we can drop support for IE11.
> Didn't mean to highjack for self advertisement.
>
> As the topic matches, .... my project might be appealing to some here
That's exactly what you intended to do. That is the definition of advertising. It is true, many people might like it, so own it. Don't lie about it, even to yourself.
I tried linear demo and many other task tracker/issue trackers. Many of them were just that: "fine" but then wanted a large pricing increase for OIDC connectors or similar.
The core issue isn't hard so I built my own, native OIDC auth, status, comments, plus I made communication a first class citizen, tracked it its own status workflow. Another nice thing I like is that status has attached a workflow that associates actions with a status transitions and task screens are defined in data. All APIs go through a single endpoint that can be intrinsically combined into batches. Still fast. It isn't that great, but I like it so much better then any of these commercial offerings.
Lee had a dedication to results, not ideology. Survival is not right; survival must be earned. They explicitly avoid multi-culturalsim and groom technically competent, detail oriented bureaucrats and politicians. In other words, they view reality as real and consequential, and they do what works and take the next step.
Yes. Whole genome sequencing has... some limits. CYP2D6 for instance is an important gene address, yet is rather hard to sequence do to its many copies and minor mutations. If you don't use targeted copy callers, it can be hard to correctly sequence in WGS.
This is great. Will be useful for data access methods!
As for the detractors, from the first generics proposal this was called out as a "not now", not never. There were questions of implementation. They aren't a super large team, and they try to do things incrementally and do them well.
Gemini 2.5 and 3 can code, but they are also dumb. They don't model the world well. It's hard to use them for programming tasks.
I haven't tried grok4.2 or grok4.3 yet for coding, but it wasn't up to the challenge as an agent yet. It looks like grok4.3 shifted its training and operates always as an agent first judging on some web usage. Musk knows grok is behind and states it publically. Now with grok4.3 release I do plan to try it again to see if it is suitable.
Elon has publicly stated that he cares a great deal about safety. He has stated that the only safe models are those which align greatest with truth, that which is in reality. In this, xAI has lived up, as it has proved to hallucinate least (or close to least) in benchmarks.
If you read that, quote again, he is saying "how can you quantify safety in a card?"
Yes. GLM 5.1 is that good. I don't think it is as good as Claude was in January or February of this year, but it is similar to how Claude runs now, perhaps better because I feel like it's performance is more consistent.
I continue to use gerrit explicitly because I cannot stand github reviews. Yes, in theory, make changes small. But if I'm doing larger work (like updating a vendored dep, that I still review), reviewing files is... not great... in github.
I understand it can suck: but what is lacking isn't your technical demonstration (unless it is truly ground breaking), but your demonstration to clean up your own mess and be responsible.