|
|
|
|
|
|
by bluecoconut
1058 days ago
|
|
|
I believe that the comment about CAP theorem violation / treating the problem as a technically unsolved thing isn't true. Eg. See the dataflow paper that sets up more clear tradeoffs for latency and correctness in large scale data processing [1]. I think it makes sense to always hold a high bar for your technology -- if it's technically feasible, and fits within budgets (time and complexity for the team), accepting artificial limitations because they soften social problems feels like a mistake / believing in a false "ignorance is bliss" belief. I think the problem that is presented is more of a problem of popular understanding of statistics and game theory, and not the technical problem. [1] "The Dataflow Model: A Practical Approach to Balancing Correctness, Latency, and Cost in Massive-Scale, Unbounded, Out-of-Order Data Processing" https://research.google/pubs/pub43864/ |
|
|