Most active commenters
  • JumpCrisscross(5)
  • jack_pp(3)
  • johnisgood(3)

←back to thread

420 points rvz | 19 comments | | HN request time: 1.209s | source | bottom
Show context
pfraze ◴[] No.41412758[source]
Copying over my latest backend status update; figure folks would find it interesting

Servers are holding up so far! Fortunately we were overprovisioned. If we hit 4mm new signups then things should get interesting. We did have some degradations (user handles entering an invalid state, event-stream crashed a couple times, algo crashed a couple times, image servers hit bad latencies) but we managed to avoid a full outage.

We use an event-sourcing model which is: K/V database for primary storage (actually sqlite), into a golang event stream, then into scylladb for computed views. Various separate services for search, algorithms, and images. Hybrid on-prem & cloud. There are ~20 of the k/v servers, 1 event-stream, 2 scylla clusters (I believe).

The event-stream crash would cause the application to stop making progress on ingesting events, but we still got the writes, so you'd see eg likes failing to increment the counter but then magically taking effect 60 seconds later. Since the scylla cluster and the KV stores stayed online, we avoided a full outage.

replies(9): >>41412984 #>>41413343 #>>41413506 #>>41413569 #>>41415242 #>>41415812 #>>41416225 #>>41417516 #>>41417547 #
pcwalton ◴[] No.41413569[source]
It's frustrating that anything related to X/Twitter is such a predictably-partisan tinderbox because this is really interesting technical information. Thank you for sharing it!
replies(1): >>41414443 #
kstenerud ◴[] No.41414443[source]
It's partisan/political because Musk is partisan/political. And it's not just Musk.

We've been living in a fantasy land of "no political affiliation" in the tech world for decades, and now that the age of the hyper-rich has come once again, they are realizing the benefits of using the power they wield to shape the worlds they live in.

So now in the early stages of this century's great fight, we'll see our beloved tech giants join the political fray in full force, dragging their follower armies along for the ride.

And it works, too. Just look at the comments here.

replies(9): >>41414549 #>>41414566 #>>41414571 #>>41414596 #>>41414987 #>>41415229 #>>41415701 #>>41416661 #>>41417566 #
nox101 ◴[] No.41414596[source]
so strange for you to blame this on Musk. Twitter was already super partisan long before he took it over
replies(3): >>41414616 #>>41414672 #>>41415420 #
JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.41414616[source]
> Twitter was already super partisan long before he took it over

Sure. But Elon changed teams. He used to be bipartisan. But he chose a champion in the aftermath of Covid and--by the looks of it--he's chosen a bad one.

(In an alternate universe where Musk stuck to what he's good at, I could see the entire Artemis programme being delegated to SpaceX and a bipartisan adoption of Tesla as America's EV standard bearer. Instead, there is real political capital in creating a rival to SpaceX. And Tesla is going to have to constantly be on the defence against cheap Chinese imports from the Democrats and establishment Republicans.)

replies(4): >>41414695 #>>41414984 #>>41415488 #>>41415814 #
pfannkuchen ◴[] No.41414695[source]
I think people see Musk differently from how he actually is. Or at least how he sees himself.

He has always said, for many years, that he got into SpaceX to work towards the goal of making humans a multiplanetary species, and he got into electric cars to work towards the goal of having a sustainable energy society.

I think he legitimately believes that “the woke mind virus” is an existential threat to our society, and if that threat isn’t addressed then the other goals don’t matter because society will collapse before they can be realized.

From a near term business perspective his political actions are dumb, but from a personal motivation perspective they make total sense.

Or in other words, Musk is primarily driven by a savior complex, not greed (which is unfortunate for investors).

replies(6): >>41414719 #>>41414836 #>>41414915 #>>41415329 #>>41415787 #>>41416745 #
1. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.41414719[source]
> he legitimately believes that “the woke mind virus” is an existential threat to our society

Sure. I don't think he's a hypocrite. He has, however, hyper fixated on a topic that's in vogue in tech circles but totally irrelevant elsewhere.

Unlike in technology, where one can credibly fail upwards, doing that in politics comes at the cost of influence. And in this block order we're seeing, tangibly, the consequences of Elon Musk's deteriorating influence.

replies(3): >>41414884 #>>41414973 #>>41415560 #
2. jack_pp ◴[] No.41414884[source]
What is this topic that's only in vogue in tech circles? Wokeism?
replies(1): >>41414961 #
3. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.41414961[source]
> What is this topic that's only in vogue in tech circles? Wokeism?

Wokeism as it pertains to social media's discussion of the woke mind virus. Everyone has an opinion on it. But it's not of practical relevance to most people, certainly not most voters. Sort of like modern art.

replies(1): >>41416051 #
4. conradev ◴[] No.41414973[source]
I do agree that he is hyper fixated on specific things like gender

but – I do think that there are elements of the “woke mind virus” that are okay with censorship. I don’t think that censorship has any place in a democracy, and I do think it is a problem we need to address.

The executive branch asked Twitter to ban a NY Post story on the grounds that it was misinformation when it wasn’t. It was “malinformation”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malinformation

They didn’t correct the record, and Ro Khanna emailed Twitter to cut that shit out: https://www.businessinsider.com/khanna-emailed-twitter-free-...

I really don’t like Elon, but I fear the previous Twitter censors more. Media is supposed to keep the government in check and not the other way around.

replies(2): >>41415224 #>>41415275 #
5. pavlov ◴[] No.41415224[source]
Musk’s Twitter actively censors and promotes content based on the personal whims of the billionaire owner. Is that really better for democracy?

The Twitter/X experiment seems to have primarily succeeded in demonstrating that nobody has good solutions for this problem, and just repeating words like “misinformation” and “free speech” doesn’t get us any closer to a solution.

Props to Bluesky for trying something else, at least.

replies(1): >>41415574 #
6. jasonlotito ◴[] No.41415275[source]
“ I do think that there are elements of the “woke mind virus” that are okay with censorship”

Then let’s not focus on some made up boogeyman and ignore the fact that in 2020, the executive at the time was happily reaching out to Twitter and other platforms asking them to remove posts. The guy Musk is supporting was happily asking Twitter to remove posts.

But let’s be clear, they were asking Twitter to enforce its rules. And you can argue that the government asking like that is illegal, but I’ve yet to see a guilty verdict in court so, until that happens, Twitter enforcing its rules isn’t censorship. No one has been denied their first amendment rights.

More importantly, by Musks own yardstick, Twitter is no longer the bastion of Free Speech it was when he took control. So regardless of what you think, Twitter is worse off now.

7. jokethrowaway ◴[] No.41415560[source]
The reason I don't move to the USA is because of woke people, scary numbers of mental health and crime.

The reason I moved country is because woke politics is making life worse. Crime is through the roof, kids can't go out in the cities by themselves because it's too dangerous. They started doing mandatory "gender identity" education in school, teaching crap to my kids.

I'm still in Europe and observing a progressive decline so I'm ready to move to Asia, the Caribbean, South America (Argentina maybe?) or maybe switch to the enemy and go to Russia or China, depending on how the situation evolves.

Dictatorship for dictatorship, I just want a low tax, safe place and governments to bother me as little as possible.

replies(2): >>41416337 #>>41426360 #
8. jokethrowaway ◴[] No.41415574{3}[source]
The opposite was true before Musk.

Some friends have an ancap libertarian and they were targeted before.

Woke content is not censored and you can find it on X, it's just that most left-wing people left for alternatives.

I went to bluesky briefly and I was inundated by transgender explicit content. I didn't open it again.

replies(1): >>41415761 #
9. pavlov ◴[] No.41415761{4}[source]
Musk censors mentions of his own daughter on X — the same person who he claimed was dead on a recent interview, but who is very much alive and posting on Threads.

That kind of monarch-like behavior didn’t exist on Twitter before Musk. Their protocols for hiding and removing content may have been very flawed, but at least there was a process.

10. jack_pp ◴[] No.41416051{3}[source]
Considering a ton of podcasts talk about it and they're not in the tech bubble I'd say it's a pretty important topic especially in the US.
replies(3): >>41418721 #>>41418724 #>>41422226 #
11. johnisgood ◴[] No.41416337[source]
Some countries in Eastern Europe actively opposes gender stuff (it is banned in education). I do not know why "gender" is being asked in the first place, it should be "sex", and that is biological. Why do we ask for gender on websites, for example? What is the purpose of it, really?
replies(1): >>41424830 #
12. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.41418721{4}[source]
> Considering a ton of podcasts talk about it and they're not in the tech bubble I'd say it's a pretty important topic especially in the US

Yes, like modern art. It’s talked about a lot. But it’s an obsession of a few and irrelevant to most Americans.

replies(1): >>41419166 #
13. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.41418724{4}[source]
> Considering a ton of podcasts talk about it and they're not in the tech bubble I'd say it's a pretty important topic especially in the US

Yes, like modern art. It’s talked about a lot, especially by a particular core who gain money and influence from it. But it’s an obsession of a few and irrelevant to most Americans. It certainly doesn’t build one a national platform.

14. jack_pp ◴[] No.41419166{5}[source]
I don't know man, I'm not even from the US and I meet a lot of people being concerned about wokeism being imported into our country, do you have any proof of your allegations?
15. antonvs ◴[] No.41422226{4}[source]
It’s not an important topic, any more than any other moral panic.
16. ben_w ◴[] No.41424830{3}[source]
> Why do we ask for gender on websites, for example? What is the purpose of it, really?

I can only think of two reasons:

1) Localised messages to and from the user. Not every language supports gender-neutral singular "you/they".

2) Demographic tracking e.g. for advertising: I've been given unskippable ads on YouTube for sanitary pads, and have forgotten which ad network presented me with one for dick pills.

replies(1): >>41434646 #
17. johnisgood ◴[] No.41434646{4}[source]
Hmm, are you sure about the localized messages? They typically use 'you' instead of third-person pronouns like 'he' or 'she.'
replies(1): >>41438905 #
18. ben_w ◴[] No.41438905{5}[source]
85% sure: the claim here was that there are some languages where "you" itself comes in masculine and feminine forms. I'm told this applies to Hebrew and Arabic — אתה and את — but my ability to confirm this is limited to googling wiktionary.

85% is mainly how much I trust the sources: my experience has been kind of factoid is often true, but sometimes turns out to be "this source sounds like it means X, but actually it means Y" or worse "we made it up and you'll never check".

That said, I ought to have written "I can only think of two *good* reasons", because the third reason is "whenever anyone makes a database of people, we automatically add gender without even thinking about it".

replies(1): >>41444179 #
19. johnisgood ◴[] No.41444179{6}[source]
Wouldn't asking for "sex" suffice though? What happens when someone picks "none of the above" or "prefer not to answer"?