The authors point out that the PL community values formal methods and hard implementation, but not human factor studies and alternative programming approached like spreadsheets. I'm not from the PL community, but my first instinct was other communities such as social science, software engineering, HCI can do those things. PL has to be about building languages.
However, the example that drove the problem home for me was socioPLT. If award winning work on why program languages succeed is not highly successful, then maybe the community should indeed look into incorporating more research approaches.
The points the authors make about lack of community engagement for non-mainstream problems, lack of female creators in books about PLs, and gatekeeping of the term programming language are also convincing.
The linked repo doesn't have an informative Readme. An example showing showing Naja differs from existing tools would help people unfamiliar with Electronic Design Automation, like me.
This I highly unlikely.
Hyperscalers like AWS have custom power delivery, rack organization, redundant networking, etc. which make their instances reliable.
Long running jobs often use checkpoints which require high speed networking and storage, which I don't see an option for. Eg, I cam get EC2 instances with 100gbps networking.
Great job starting the service! But, I think you have ways to go before reaching Hyperscalers level reliability.
It seems like they plan to do hardware-software co-design.
Devices (servers, switches?) and firmware designed specifically for their software stack.
A software stack (drivers, OS) designed specifically for their hardware.
Really interested in seeing where this goes.
I don't know how to feel about this. On one side are the privacy implications.
On the other hand, 16 year old me would have loved this. This is the pervasive computing of sci-fi made real. All information is just a tap away. Control lights or run a compute job using a custom Alexa Skill.
Let me take a shot at answering this.
The idea is that the internet is a social construct. The information it holds is shared knowledge accessible to everyone.
Contrast burning your photos with burning all copies of a book. On the internet, a lot of things exist in the gray area between them.
That makes it difficult to judge if the info that was is private or public.
A one dimensional comparison like good or bad is not how these decisions get made.
Current ARM based chips are good enough for current applications. They come with massive app support and a mature ecosystem.
Given the risk of being kicked out of that ecosystem. The score tips in favor of this new technology.
The USA is one of the few places which confers citizenship based on place of birth. Most countries confer citizenship based on the citizenship of the child's parents.
Cost of a small apartment in NYC is equal to the cost of several acres of farmland. Proportional property taxes would impact both demographics similarly.
I guess it comes to supply and demand.
Other countries want US technology and services.
They don't want US agricultural products as eluded to in the above thread.
Thus, trying to sell stuff others don't want ends up making more noise compared to selling stuff they do want.
The US does this because:
1. National security (US farmers wouldn't grow stuff if nobody bought it, which is a problem if the US ever goes to war. Then, they might suddenly need it.)
2. Vote banks (Rural US happens to be the key in deciding elections and support for laws. Due to the electoral college and each state having 2 senators.)
3. Ideology (The reasons you mentioned. Free market ...)
However, the example that drove the problem home for me was socioPLT. If award winning work on why program languages succeed is not highly successful, then maybe the community should indeed look into incorporating more research approaches.
The points the authors make about lack of community engagement for non-mainstream problems, lack of female creators in books about PLs, and gatekeeping of the term programming language are also convincing.