Compound is an interest rate protocol on the Ethereum blockchain, that lets developers create new financial applications that are global, safe, and open. The Compound protocol is one of the largest DeFi protocols on earth, with over $15 billion earning interest, and moving billions of dollars of assets every day.
At Compound Labs we develop the protocol and new tools, alongside a community of users and COMP token-holders. Learn more about our upcoming Gateway blockchain, built in Rust: https://compound.cash/
We're always looking for world-class engineers, currently we have the following positions listed:
We work in Rust, Solidity, Elixir, Elm, and whatever other programming languages and tools suit our needs (such as formal verification). We're always learning and optimizing what we build in the name of correctness.
At Compound, you will build high-caliber technology to propel the future of decentralized finance.
I used an Amiga as a kid, and loved it. I am sure it had a profound impact on me. I never identified with a broader Amiga using community, until now. This is so cool, I'm excited to realize that the spirit lives on.
In general, groups that want to suspend tolerance do so because they believe tolerating such behavior/people poses a threat to society. The people you are telling to read more liberal philosophy clearly believe that the real threat to a tolerant society is suspending tolerance itself.
Which makes me think that the lesson of this story is not "avoid forking at all costs", but that building anything universal is a fragile endeavor. Anybody can just come along and obsolete your status with respect to that goal. As for being forgotten, it seems inevitable, if universality is your only selling point.
'www' should stand for wild, wild, web. In many ways, the web is a technology frontier, with all the frustration and liberation that goes along with it.
I sympathize with the author. The problem is trying to tame the web, as opposed to embracing it for what it is.
Who knows what she would have done if she weren't stonewalled.
Your explanation is no "simpler", you're just completely disregarding the facts. People didn't just play along, she got a lot of pushback, especially for someone in such a senior position.
In 2011, she was offered a FOIAble BlackBerry. Her team said it didn't make sense. The simple explanation is that she didn't want a FOIAble BB.
This is the best case version (for her), and what her camp wants people to believe. Its hard to see that it's true though. The IG report is pretty clear that she willfully violated recommendations and warnings about security.
Perhaps she wasn't furtively planning to take over the world, but the evidence points to more than her just wanting to use a Blackberry - it really seems (to me) like she took significant measures to avoid keeping records.
Its not really about SQL or NoSQL - I believe AdRoll internally has systems that map SQL queries onto TrailDB where its needed.
Its about efficiency. TrailDB compresses the hell out of event streams grouped by some key (typically user). I think it's generally something like 100x - it does so by making certain assumptions about your data. Similarly, when operating on your event sequences, many of those operations can be performed as integer instructions on the compressed data.
TrailDB gives you order(s) of magnitude of leverage. That's the difference between doing analytics on a single machine and a cluster in many cases. There aren't too many other databases that were designed to gracefully handle tens of trillions of events, so its really not surprising that you need a different tool for that job.
I'm so glad AdRoll finally open-sourced this. TrailDB is by far the easiest way to process trillions of events on a single machine. Can't wait for them to start publishing their internal ecosystem around it too.
What I mean is that I wonder what the internal dialogue is over this. This is more out of curiosity than indignation, I would like to be a fly on the wall to understand how this happens.
It seems to me, no matter what the reason, this is the justification they would give, because its the only reasonable one. But the Privacy Act exists for a reason, so I wonder what prompted them to decide it was worth making this proposal, and the discussion that actually ensued with the lawyers, etc. before making it. In particular, did they weigh the costs/benefits of what they are asking for, or are they just pushing for whatever privileges they can get?
Considering the government currently has the same power over citizens, I can't see how this argument holds up. Especially when the government is granted powers of total surveillance and mass hacking[1], there needs to be some accountability and balance of power.
Sure, but there are many things the FBI could be doing to be more effective. The only thing stopping them is constitutional protection of civil liberties. So I wonder what the conversation sounds like when they determine in this case, they should be exempt from the law.
also not necessarily the first one either