This has always felt to me like evidence of a sort of computationalism. I am not a computationalist, but the thought is the "universal CPU" needs cycles for each particle. Mass is what takes time to process, so the voids experience no/less computational delay. This reads like the simulation author is messy and constrained, not godlike.

I came here to say the same thing. When you’re selling cloud services, the hardest thing to do is segment your customers by willingness to pay.

Cross AZ traffic is exactly the sort of thing companies with budgets need, that small projects don’t.

I had the pleasure of reading Montaigne before blogs were invented.

When I started reading blogs, the format reminded me of his essays.

I’m impressed by how easy it was, for someone new to all parts of the stack.

I agree MCP isn’t a big change, but that is a good thing. It’s more about making the implicit interface into something portable and reusable.

Most posix commands aren’t impressive in their own right, it’s the composability that gives them power. MCP plus data sync is similar.

This is just the first step in a bunch of cool stuff you can do. Now that the data is in a syncing database you can have models across multiple vendors and backends all working with the data locally while collaborating on changes. This means you can use the right model for the job without worrying about tracking where the data needs to go, instead each model can react to the appropriate fields and update types.

This is a super simple codebase so if you fork it and make something real, please share it with us.

Thanks y'all -- feedback taken. If I were saying it again I'd say something like:

Merkle proofs are rad b/c they build causal consistency into the protocol. But there are lots of ways to find agreement about the latest operation in distributed systems. I've built an engine using deterministic merge -- if anyone wants to help with lowest common ancestor algorithms it's all Apache/MIT.

While deterministic merge with an immutable storage medium is compelling, it doesn't solve the finality problem -- when is an offline peer too out-of-date to reconcile? This mirrors the transaction problem -- we all need to agree. This brings the question I'm curious about to the forefront: can a Merkle CRDT use a Calvin/Raft-like agreement protocol to provide strong finality guarantees and the ability to commit snapshots globally?

Apologies for the noise.

In founder mode, I pretty much only think about these data structures. So I am (admittedly) not that sensitive to how it comes across.

Spam would be raising the topic on unrelated posts. This is a context where I can find people who get it. The biggest single thing we need now is critical feedback on the tech from folks who understand the area. You’re right I probably should have raised the questions about mergability and finality without referencing other discussions.

Because I don’t want to spam, I didn’t link externally, just to conversation on HN. As a reader I often follow links like this because I’m here to learn about new projects and where the people who make them think they’ll be useful.

ps I emailed the address in your profile, I have a feeling you are right about something here and I want to explore.

I figured the responses would be more interesting. Questions about CRDT guarantees etc.

Perhaps worth seeding the convo with a remark about finality.

We launched Fireproof earlier this month on HN. It’s a tamperproof Merkle CRDT in TypeScript, with an object storage backend for portability.

See our Show HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42184362

We’ve seen interest from trading groups for edge collaboration, so multi-user apps can run on-site without cloud latency.

Thank you! I'm excited to see more and more people try it out as it gets more stable and easy to use.

Thanks, and thanks for the encouragement to fully document the gateway interface. We have been flux-ing it lately but as soon as it settles down we’ll do that.

The vision is many small ledgers, so the full replication per ledger makes sense, but we have work to do on cross-ledger queries