Good, makes sense, as Scala is ‘made in Europe’ (mainly swiss and polish teams), and makes very robust software. Only it’s under-hyped. Here you can try my interactive climate-system web-model written in latest Scala, which compiles three ways - to the web-app you see, to native code for fast calculations, and to a jvm desktop app (with 25 years history, originally java).
It’s well known that each person has to have a different account for each of those big-tech services. Whereas in the fediverse, the original idea was that one account can traverse multiple services. The problem as the OP explains, is that it may seem you are following your friend’s account, whereas actually you might see just a small fraction of it, and not be aware that there is more.
I think OP has a valid point - it’s not about experienced users, but newcomers to the fediverse, who may think they are following an account, when actually they only see a small part of it - there could be some indication of what’s missing.
That’s a rate of only 1.2% per year, was that your intention ?
Yes, indeed there is always going to be a balance point, with most tasks in life. Thinking is hard, more effort devoted to one topic is less for another. But we can also get into a bigger mess by trying to tell people simple answers to complex problems.
Actually to be more specific I’m a climate-system model developer, it’s intrinsically a very complex problem, so I try to develop software to help people learn by experiment, and balance choices. You can see my current efforts here. Maybe it’s already too complex for some, too simple for others, I’m still trying to fill the gaps.
I don’t agree with this, the answer is not collapse.
To me complexity is beautiful, creating and maintaining complexity is the essence of what it is to be alive.
Although I’m no fan of hierarchy or big capital, there are better systems for organising, balancing feedbacks, and we need to keep thinking about ways to do this (which is why we’re here on lemmy).
While medieval societies based more on tribal loyalty were more unequal and hierarchical than modern ones, as well as sustaining far fewer people until the next famine or pandemic.
I consider Human Ecology as the concepts of ecology (including energy, system feedbacks etc.) applied to human society and all that depends on - which is broader than your description. I recall the activities of CHE in Edinburgh in the 1990s. However there are diverse interpretations, also the word ecology has different nuance in different languages (e.g. is used more broadly in french).
Makes sense from a human-ecology point of view (which was trendy in 1980s),
but that thread is rather fatalistic - a more useful question is what can we do about this ?
As a software developer, I’m also aware that there can be diminishing returns to increasing complexity and feedbacks, on the other hand more feedbacks can add extra powers and resilience, how to stabilise with a good balance ?
A more convenient link format:
!india@lemmy.zip
Note also:
(there may be others - didn’t re-search).
Although I don’t live there, I’d like to see more discussion of India on Lemmy.
The dolomite mountains are spectacular. However such data may be distorted somewhat near borders, if the definition of tourist includes anybody who happens to cross from a neighbouring country for the day. For example, I recall crossing SüdTirol by train, traveling from Linz (Austria) to Innsbruck (Austria) - it’s a beautiful route - and there is a convenient cross-border transport pass too.
There has been a lot of rain over the Indus basin in recent years (leading to massive floods), it’s just more irregular than the formerly reliable himalayan snowmelt. Such water needs to be stored, and with big adaptation there should be hope for parts of the delta which are defendable above sea-level rise. Makes more sense than expanding Karachi, but seems forgotten by government far away.
There’s still thin snow on the high mountains to the NE (checking nasa worldview). Where the main river emerges from them is about 200m lower than Kabul city, but it must be possible to pump some up that much, and bring it thence (about 70km) with a pipe or canal. Probably chinese will do it, maybe bringing stuff via Wakhan, if nobody else helps.
Edit - zooming on opentopomap I see traces of part of such a canal, but it doesn’t get as far (or as high) as Kabul.
Although important topic - many regions already suffer from acute water shortage, at least for half of the year - global aggregate numbers don’t mean so much, as large-scale inter-regional water transport isn’t practical. There are a few exceptions - China has it’s N-S water transfer project, there’s potential for a canal from Congo to Chad. Transfer by evapotranspiration is big, but not really planned. There’s also water (and energy) embedded in food, could be reduced if people care. Anyway what’s new (not this article)?
Well problem with any Lemmy community as such a forum, is that current usage (not necessarily intrinsic to the software) is so ephemeral. So it’s good for discussing breaking news, but not to gradually accumulate discussion of solutions to complex problems, over years. I wish this were not the case, but doubt anybody will even notice this comment, as no longer ‘hot’, and folded away … Rather, a few weeks later the same topic will be reopened under a different post, and we start over again.
I agree with most of what you say. I’m a long-time fan of calculating more complex things client side, as you can see from my climate model (currently all calcs within web browser, evolved from java applet to scalajs).
Also, in regarding social media, keeping the data client side could make the network more resilient in autocratic countries (many), and thelp this become truly a global alternative.
On the other hand, some ‘trunk’ server interactions could also doing more not less, bundling many ‘activity’ messages together for efficiency - especially to reduce the duplication of meta-info headers in clunky json, and work of authentification-checking (which I suppose has to happen to propagate every upvote in Lemmy?).
Thanks, that makes sense if I think about it, but maybe users shouldn’t have to - i.e. the Mdon part-conversation way still seems confusing to me (despite being a climate modeler and scala dev), although haven’t used Mdon much since I found Lemmy. And I still feel that both ways seem intrinsically inefficient - for different reasons - if we intend to scale up the global numbers (relating OP).
Combined with topic of trains, this reminds me of the famous movie Dil Se with the Chaiyya Chaiyya song on the roof of the steam train - itself in the SW, but of which the core plot was also about an rebellion in Assam… i.e. it reminds that this problem is older than current government …
But maybe they will be motivated to catch up, as China will soon have a direct railway from Sichuan to the frontier of Arunachal…
That makes sense, to store only popular stuff, or temporarily - especially for ‘heavier’ images (although as we see with lemm.ee, that leads to issues when an instance dies). Yet I also wonder about the scalability of just the minimum meta-info, whose size does depend on the protocol design.
For example with Lemmy every upvote click propagates across the network (if i understand correctly, mastodon doesn’t propagate ‘likes’ so consistently, presumably for efficiency, but this can make it seem ‘empty’). Maybe such meta-info could be batched, or gathered by a smaller set of ‘node’ instances, from which others pick up periodically - some tree to disperse information rather than directly each instance to each other instance ?
As the fediverse grows, gathering past meta-info might also become a barrier to new entrant instances ?
I don’t think the general architecture scales that well (think of all the duplicate storage …
That’s my hunch too, although haven’t studied in detail - so I wonder how we can fix it ?
Is there an forum that discusses this scaling issue (in general, across fediverse) ?
This article feels to me really out of date. Scala3 was launched nearly five years ago, The tooling and lib-support was indeed dodgy back then but works very smoothly now. Scala3 also broke Scala2 macros, and some people whose business-model was selling support for clever libraries built on those macros made a lot of fuss (bad publicity). Meanwhile Scala3 has new more robust macros which work fine.
I develop in scala an interactive climate-scenario model web-app . It’s running the model in your browser (500 years x 250 countries x many gases, sectors, feedbacks etc. - so it’s complex)… The scala code compiles to js (or wasm) -which is what runs this web app - but the same code also compiles with scala-native to run fast batch- calculations or tests. It also compiles to the jvm app like my older java code, but I rarely use this now.
Scala3 code looks more like python than java - minimal brackets, and much nicer to read and higher level than rust.
As for tools I just use Zed editor with Metals for LS, Mill for build, and other libs from the lihaoyi ecosystem, no web ‘frameworks’. Scala is both robust and flexible. In general - if the code compiles, typically it runs correctly first time, if not the very-intelligent compiler identifies precisely what to fix where (very different from so-called ‘AI’). So instead of reams of junk ‘tests’, it’s usually just enough to check whether my climate system plots look and behave as expected - higher level thinking.
As for Kotlin it was effectively a russian-led (at the time) fork of Scala, staying closer to Java - so less flexible, but they did much more systematic marketing - and I suspect some of that deliberately pushed blog posts knocking Scala.
What Scala lacks is promotion, so those following fashions of this hype-driven world won’t find it.
For those who use it, it’s a great language, to do complex stuff that scales robustly.