I've actually used this to implement the linear memory of a Wasm runtime (reserve 4GB and commit as needed) and have faced user complaints (it's in a library that uses a Wasm runtime internally) due to it unexpectedly running into issues, particularly under nested virtualization scenarios.
I've needed to add knobs to configure it, because even a handful of 4GB instances causes issues. I've defaulted to 256MB/instance, and for my own GitHub CI use 32MB/instance to reduce test flakiness.
This is to say: I found the idea that “just reserve address space, it's not an issue of you don't commit it” very flaky in practice, unless you're running on bare metal Linux.
Embedded environments without virtual memory are increasingly rare, and generally not places where you would need a variably sized generic list ADT anyway.
I work in the GIS space, and I've even built some simular systems, such a multiplayer map editing.
Even with that background I'm having a hard time understand _what_ this really is?
Is it a git wrapper with some geospatial features?
Why git for geospatial at all?
Instead of creating a working tree of text or the binary of shapefile, it creates a working tree with the geometry features. You can kart diff and commit features, not text or binary. You can then export those features from kart into a database or working file where you can commit or checkout from.
It looks to be equivalent to Esri's 'branch versioning' on their proprietary ArcGIS Enterprise product, but can also deal with flat files as well as geospatial databases (PostGIS), which while not strictly required becomes really useful when dealing with edits, and conflict management, across multiple editors in large enterprise organisations, such as those that deal with state or country-wide mapping of topographic features.
If it integrated with QGIS/ArcGIS to show visual differences, and allow a user to easily reconcile differences between conflicting features (based on topological rules), I'd definitely be interested though it doesn't seem like it at a glance.
@fyrn_ Re: the work you did with 'multiplayer map editing', is there anything public you could show? I'm interested in how you solved this challenge.
I copy-pasted the front page into ChatGPT and told it to "Explain some usecases", and it's pretty useful.
A city planning department tracks changes to zoning boundaries over time.
Staff can:
See who changed what, when, and why.
Roll back or compare versions.
Create branches for "proposed" zoning plans without touching main data.
Citizens can access a cloned version of planning data.
Changes or suggestions (e.g., new bike paths) can be proposed via pull requests.
Keeps public and internal data separate but linkable.
or
Farm fields are polygons; each year’s crop type is stored as tabular data.
Each season gets committed with metadata and satellite imagery.
Policy makers change frequently and often radically. Federal lawmakers less so, but lawmakers are a small subset of policymakers, and not the ones who create international pressure; those are political appointees in the executive branch, and they change frequently.
Do we know that the pilot noticed they were in the wrong physical position, or did some other status indicate the engie fuel had been cut?
I would be surprised if there was only one channel for this information
In the last mentour pilot livestream, they showed the simulator and both engines, and there's a little graphic near the cutoffs showing engine state and performance. Also, in _this_ livestream as soon as the report was released, Ben mentions in response to a question that if you cut off the engine, a lot of electrical systems are going to face power cuts, so there will be alarms blaring all over the cockpit. So, yes. There are many channels of information here.
I think "with strangers" is the important bit. If a nuclear engineer is talking to some lay person and uses hyper specific jargon, then grandparent is correct.
If you've established a shared competency with the person, and are therefor no longer total strangers, that's totally different.
True, but however, there are times when I just really need to talk about the extremely detailed bits of some problem I'm thinking about - just the act of speech is really needed; I find this super annoying in other people, but forgivable because I also experience it. I have heard so much about minutiae from my kids that I have to force myself to just semi-actively listen to. My wife has to hear so many things that annoy her as well, when I don't get enough chattering out to co-workers or colleagues.
Sometimes, explaining your issue to a random person leads you to a solution. They don't even need to have any experience with the same or a similar issue; indeed, sometimes it's better if they don't! Often turns out you don't need someone who can respond, so explaining to an object like a rubber duck will do.
My god this "article" is an inconsistent pile of AI slop.
It actively contridicts itself and changes the thesis several times as it goes on and on and on.
thanks. i opened the pdf to look for the list instead of scrolling down. the pdf mentions two supplemental tables but doesn't say that those are the videos.
"Hello Ma'am, we're from the government. We're here for your cat, the one in the YouTube video. We need it to attempt to reproduce scientific research."
reply