in actual datacenters you often don't even bother swapping parts and just let things die in place until you replace whole racks

Not my experience at a hyperscaler, at least a while back. It definitely made financial sense to swap a small part to get a ~50-100k$ server's capacity back online.

he is literally going to launch datacenters into space to train ai so they are a little related

edit: these replies aren't going to age well

Yeah, I'm not buying that. I don't see how that could be any cheaper than regular datacenters. It might just be technically feasible, but launching stuff into space will always be more expensive than not launching stuff into space. And all those pesky technical issues like cooling might be solvable, but I doubt they're that cheap to solve.

No he is not. It makes no sense from a physics standpoint or an economic standpoint. And even if they were, it wouldn’t require whatever this acquisition is.

You're right, but in this sense:

literally (adverb)

informal : in effect : virtually

Used in an exaggerated way to emphasize a statement or description that is not literally true or possible.

Ex: I literally died of embarrassment.

He says he is going to launch data centers in space. We should all know better than to take him at his word on that by now.

No, he's not. And if he does, he's as big of an idiot as his detractors say that he is.

has the person who designed the movement control ever played a video game?

when I joined twitter in 2011 there was a single mysql master user (not tweets) database and a few dozen read replicas. it was writing about 7000 updates per second and during bursts it would go too high for the single-threaded replication in mysql at the time to keep up with the master which would cause replication lag and all kinds of annoying things in the app. you just have to pick the right time to make the switch before it is an emergency.

Postgres setups are typically based on physical replication, which is not an option on MySQL. My testing shows the limit to be about 177k tps with each transaction consisting of 3 updates and 1 insert.

Be careful. During consulting I ran into similar magnitude of writes for a mostly CRUD workload.

They had huge problems with VACUUM at high tps. Basically the database never had space to breath and cleanup.

you don't use yahoo finance???

You're right, that is one thing they do well.

I wish they had an ultra wide with the higher resolution.

If you don't want to give your software away for free, don't give your software away for free. When they decide it is in their best interest to pay for it they will, i.e. support, bug fixes, changes. If you make open source software that just works they are unlikely to start writing checks nor should there be any expectation that they do that.

> When they decide it is in their best interest to pay for it they will, i.e. support, bug fixes, changes.

Maybe, but also maybe they just fork internally and fix the bug internally and don't publish the bugfix. And maybe it's never in their best interest to pay for it, maybe it's in their best interest to just freeload forever.

> If you make open source software that just works they are unlikely to start writing checks nor should there be any expectation that they do that.

I think it's good when we expect corporations to write checks to the people that write the open-source stuff they rely on. "A rising tide lifts all boats" is not automatically true in software, we have to choose to make it true. I think a world in which we make that choice is a better world. I'm not convinced we currently live in that world.

Make the license non-commercial.

That is not how people and society function. The status quo and culture is that open source is good for society and all. You are not told about why big corporations can use all this code for free. You’re actually told you’re doing a good deed by making code open source.

Then you jump on to a place like Reddit or HN and you have people mostly supporting the status quo. Of course people are going to do open source more than they should. And then if they complain later on, you will say they chose to make it open source. Reinforcing the status quo by blaming the individual.

It certainly no other persons fault than the person that wrote the software and gave it away. Making them out to be the victim in all this is ridiculous.

We can make similar arguments for the corporations: if you want to sell your software in the US market, you need to pay for a VAT for digital services that fund national endowments giving grants to individual US developers that apply to the program.

Corporations should start paying their fair share, they've scammed society enough.

They aren't scamming anyone by using open source software made available to them for free.

The are purposely ruining the commons as any corporation does to society. Companies take advantage of open source all the time without ever truly giving back, which is why we should lobby the government to compel big tech into this.

If it helps, voter sentiment against big tech is quite high and the profit margins that big tech has means there's a lot to plunder for the public.

The only question is who do you want to do the plundering?

this argument that companies are plundering something given away for free without taking it away from someone else is tiring.

that entire page is in future tense

So glad the courts are letting them run their own app stores.

It is just this article.