Yep. We have tables that use UUIDv4 that have 60M+ rows and don't have any performance problems with them. Would some queries be faster using something else? Probably, but again, for us it's not close to being a bottleneck. If it becomes a problem at 600M or 6B rows, we'll deal with it then. We'll probably switch to UUIDv7 at some point, but it's not a priority and we'll do some tests on our data first. Does my experience mean you should use UUIDv4? No. Understand your own system and evaluate how the tradeoffs apply to you.
I have tables that have billions of rows that use UUIDv4 primary keys and I haven't encountered any issues either. I do use UUIDv7 for write-heavy tables, but even then, I got a way bigger performance boost from batching inserts than switching from UUIDv4 to UUIDv7. Issue is way overblown.
I switched from EE to CS (well, "Computer Engineering" technically) in the late 90s. Not specifically due to Smith charts, but that's relatable. For me it was just realizing that I was procrastinating on doing my EE problem sets, which just started to seem like endless grinding of differential equations, by playing around with whatever we were doing in the couple CS classes I had. I wouldn't say I've made "a large fortune" in software, but it's kept me gainfully employed for a few decades so I think it worked out.
Obviously nothing solid to back this up, but I kind of feel like I was seeing emojis all over github READMEs on JS projects for quite a while before AI picked it up. I feel like it may have been something that bled over from Twitch streaming communities.
Agree, this stuff was trending up very fast before AI.
Could be my own changing perspective, but what I think is interesting is how the signal it sends keeps changing. At first, emoji-heavy was actually kind of positive: maybe the project doesn't need a webpage, but you took some time and interest in your README.md. Then it was negative: having emoji's became a strong indicator that the whole README was going to be very low information density, more emotive than referential[1] (which is fine for bloggery but not for technical writing).
Now there's no signal, but you also can't say it's exactly neutral. Emojis in docs will alienate some readers, maybe due to association with commercial stuff and marketing where it's pretty normalized. But skipping emojis alienates other readers, who might be smart and serious, but nevertheless are the type that would prefer WATCHME.youtube instead of README.md. There's probably something about all this that's related to "costly signaling"[2].
There’s a pattern to emoji use in docs, especially when combined with one or more other common LLM-generated documentation patterns, that makes it plainly obvious that you’re about to read slop.
Even when I create the first draft of a project’s README with an LLM, part of the final pass is removing those slop-associated patterns to clarify to the reader that they’re not reading unfiltered LLM output.
Erlang/Elixir supervision trees also rely on process linking, which is implemented in BEAM and doesn't have a real equivalent in most other language runtimes (modulo some attempts at copying it like Akka, Proto.Actor, etc, but it's fairly uncommon).
Yeah, I switched from XMonad (which I used for over a decade) to Sway a few years back. Spent some time trying to duplicate the XMonad behaviour but eventually just realized that spending a few hours getting used to the Sway approach and slightly changing my workflow was a lot easier.
* Thesis/Starting Argument
* Counter-Argument (paper requirement from Naval War College)
* Rebuttal (different perspective, not your starting argument)
Sounds like someone discovering a variation on the thesis-antithesis-synthesis dialectical method from philosophy for the first time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic
Paine is likely well versed in the philosophy and knows exactly what she's doing. Pointing this out in case anyone wants to go deeper on this kind of approach. Much ink has been spilled over the years on different approaches, criticisms, etc.
I've always just gone to the youtube channel page, view source, search for "rss", copy the URL and paste it into my feed reader. It would be great if it was more discoverable, but it's not really like you need a whole separate tool.
> If you have a feed reader system there is no need to subscribe [via YouTube] in the first place. You’ve obviated that system.
This approach works, and it's a great way to subscribe to public channels without a YouTube account. The main reason I'm not doing it is that I want to subscribe via YouTube.
> It would be great if it was more discoverable
Oh, hopefully there's a browser extension that detects feeds on a page and lights up and provides a menu. Shame that the YouTube mobile app isn't similarly extensible.
The feed reader I use (NetNewsWire) lets me simply put in the YouTube channel URL and it finds the feed.
I added all my subscriptions once, but it quickly became overwhelming, so I deleted them all. I’m not sure if bundling them all in a single feed would be better for me or not. I could bookmark my subscriptions page for the same effect. I find I’m in a very different headspace when I’m looking to watch YouTube vs reading my RSS feeds.
Most of the rss readers I know allow that. What OP built there is something that stays in sync with your subscriptions, so when you add or remove one it is automatically added or removed from you reader and do not need manual intervention
Why though? You already have the feed urls. A list of urls is the same a subscribing to channels essentially. Both do the job of letting you know a new video is released.
The risk isn't that much that your employer gaining access to your email (though you may potentially be risking the contents of emails that you view from that machine getting saved and accessed by someone at the company). It's more that you've legally entangled things. If your employer is sued or investigated, a judge can issue a subpoena for them to turn over records. If those records show that employees accessed external accounts from work systems, now they can get a subpoena to access those accounts and any other devices that have accessed those. I've seen this happen to friends. Employer gets sued and as part of discovery, they had to hand over all of their personal devices because they hadn't kept church and state separate. Took them many months and significant legal expenses to get their stuff back. If you never access personal stuff from your work devices and never access work stuff from your personal devices, you'll never be in that position.
reply