Apple have enough legal experience with the EU and technically competence to have baked EU AI, privacy and anti-monopoly compliance into their product from the start.
In fact any U.S. company could base their products on EU legislation, since it provides wide safeguards for consumer privacy.
Apple deliberately chose not to and are now being deliberately obtuse and misleading.
Anyone would think they didn’t have lawyers.
Either they are incompetent or it’s a deliberate choice to play this card. I don’t think it’s incompetence.
This smells like stored procedures. You can’t unit test it. You can’t version it. Business logic in the database, (hidden brain problem), harder to isolate noisy workloads, no observability, scaling pressure lands solely in Postgres, lack of IO, especially API calls.
Good for local database only jobs though. Niche use cases.
> This smells like stored procedures. You can’t unit test it. You can’t version it
Say what? Stored procedures are awesome when used correctly.
Versioning is straightforward. You stick any sort of monotonically increasing id at the end of the name. Whenever you need a breaking change, you bump the id. You also leave the old version with the old id, retiring it only after it’s no longer used. You do need a real story for DB upgrades for this to work well. If your story is that someone on the team executes some random SQL migration as root, you’re gonna have a bad time.
You can unit test stored procedures in exactly the same way you could test any other SQL. You have to spin up a DB to do it. But if you can’t test your stored procedures, you’re admitting you have no way to test your SQL which is your real problem.
> Business logic in the database, (hidden brain problem)
Ok? How much you shove into your stored procedures is up to you. In my experience the real alternative to stored procedures is not zero business logic in the DB. It’s SQL code sprinkled throughout the codebase, where it’s harder to test, poorly versioned, and poorly encapsulated. And also often needlessly slow.
> harder to isolate noisy workloads
Dunno what this means
> no observability
Maybe some truth here. It is more work to inspect issues in SQL than most programming languages.
> scaling pressure lands solely in Postgres, lack of IO, especially API calls.
If stored procedures are causing IO problems and scaling issues then you are using them wrong.
Stored procedures often drastically reduce IO when used correctly and thereby improve scalability.
The road to eternal burning hell is paved with stored procedures. My experiences (!!) make it so i will never be convinced on the risk:reward being worth it.
I was referring to network I/O. But disk I/O should be at least as good for a stored procedure and often better. It’s classic “bring the computation to the data”. Putting the computation into the DB means that use of disk caching (up to and including CPU caching) is maximized.
Pulling the data out of the DB to do computation in a higher layer cannot be more efficient in terms of any I/O unless your stored procedure is just poorly written. It might be a win if your DB is compute bound, though.
Just a side note, that this website is classified by Apple as an Adult website. I have Limit Adult Websites set in Content & Privacy Restrictions switched on.
Led me to wonder what happens if a domain gets a new owner, and they want to petition Apple to remove the block.
It doesn’t exist as a term, but I always thought “enduked” would have been a nice term for this process.
Instead it’s the more wordy “created a duke”, since his status was both created and granted to him. The title “Duke of Wellington” was expressly created for him.
Fun fact, he should have been “Duke of Wellesley”, but his elder brother, Richard Wellesley, had already been made Marquess Wellesley.
Since the peerage from Viscount to Marquess to Duke would ended up with two brothers potentially sharing the same title, they chose to give Arthur the title Viscount Wellington, from the town where the family heritage was connected to.
Therefore his title peerage line:
Viscount Wellington -> Earl of Wellington -> Marquess of Wellington -> Duke of Wellington
He was also technically a Baron before Viscount but he received that peerage the same day as his Viscount title.
Outside British peerage he held some other cool honors and titles. As well as being the Prince of Waterloo in Belgium the the Netherlands, he was granted the honor of “Knight of the Golden Fleece” in Spain, “Knight of the Black Eagle” in Prussia, and my personal favorite was “Knight of the Elephant” in Denmark.
In the UK we have lots of reminders of him namely because of the large number of pubs called “The Duke of Wellington”.
Talking of dark patterns I’ve noticed that many site “accidentally” have the bottom aligned cookie consent banner “break” on mobile Safari, such that the buttons are arranged such that “Accept All” is the only button you can press because the “Deny All” or “Customize” go out of viewport when you go to click on them. This might be related to how mobile Safari changes the bottom bar as you move to click the button. I often have this with the NYT Wordle game. Even though I use pi-hole to block ads, it’s still annoying.
Really enjoyed that article, thanks for the link. I agree there can be a bubble and a genuine paradigm shift at the same time. We're going through our first wave of attempts, more or less wrong, but the general direction is right, that the future will never be the same.
There is an SGI IRIX screenshot there from late 90’s. I scanned the list to take a look specifically for it.
I once saw 4 of the SGI Onyx2 RealityMonster supercomputers in a post-production house’s render farm in London.
They were so expensive, ($1m+ per computer) that it was only financially viable if they were engaged on client work 24/7/365. Damn gorgeous things and they turned the display of those into almost an art piece for wow-ing film studio execs.
Moreover this claim stinks.
Apple have enough legal experience with the EU and technically competence to have baked EU AI, privacy and anti-monopoly compliance into their product from the start.
In fact any U.S. company could base their products on EU legislation, since it provides wide safeguards for consumer privacy.
Apple deliberately chose not to and are now being deliberately obtuse and misleading.
Anyone would think they didn’t have lawyers.
Either they are incompetent or it’s a deliberate choice to play this card. I don’t think it’s incompetence.
reply