RDS also has a curated set of extensions?

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/PostgreSQLRelea...

Which includes literally all 4 extensions you’ve mentioned.

Every managed service does this, specifically because they need to blacklist extensions that touch on the managed parts of it — eg filesystem

In a given run, only the top-k sequences are selected.

Across all runs, any sequence can be generated, and potentially scored highly.

Thus, any sequence can eventually be selected.

> The contract goes something like this: the caller is a human-authored application, running deterministic code, issuing predictable queries, reviewed by a developer before deployment. Writes are intentional. Connections are brief. When something goes wrong, a human notices. The database can be dumb and fast because the application layer is smart and careful.

This assumption is that of a non-DBA who happened to get a hold of a database.

When you have sufficient users, your expected set of queries is a complete shit show. Some will be efficient, many will be poorly tested and psychotic, and indistinguishable from a non-deterministic LLM.

Also who said humans can’t query the database directly in prod? If not direct sql access, business users have the next best thing with custom reports and such. And they will very much ask for ridiculous amounts of computation to answer trivial questions.

It was a foundational assumption of SQL that business users would directly access the database and write their own queries.

It’s why row level access and permissions exist. Use them

Going solely off your description of the scenario; couldn’t you trivially model any history (H,H) node as two nodes —> (A, H’) —-> (H’, H) —> (H, B), and have it be deterministic again

I’m essentially thinking of H’ as a write-ahead-log prefixing any node

Yes, you can — that's effectively what "expanding" the chart looks like. With a parent of N children you need N target nodes (one per possible "last-active" child) with deep history the cardinality is the size of the subtree's leaf set, which is exponential in nesting depth. That's exactly the explosion flat FSMs hit when you compose them — and the reason Harel introduced H notation in the first place, to elide it. So determinism is recoverable, just at the cost of the very property state charts were designed to deliver.

I mean, the technical definition provided “the movement to end sexism, sexual exploitation and sexual oppression'” is expanded quite rapidly into including racism and then labor practices (which I’m very much struggling with the jump; the link appears to be that both involve power relationships?).

And I’m not really clear why this doesn’t extend further into basically all of human suffering in any society. Or perhaps extended upwards and encapsulate systems-thinking and any graph-relationship whatsoever

The term "feminism" as an actual technical definition seems to be quite loose; this strikes me as a 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon definition

> expanded quite rapidly into including racism and then labor practices

The jump you referring to is a quote with a reference attached. But in short terms so that might be useful to Google, but in short the concept of intersectionality means that things like feminism and anti-racism and other forms of prejudice can potentially be inter-related in terms of using different forms of marginalization as tools to enforce a hierarchy.

> which I’m very much struggling with the jump; the link appears to be that both involve power relationships? And I’m not really clear why this doesn’t extend further into basically all of human suffering in any society. Or perhaps extended upwards and encapsulate systems-thinking and any graph-relationship whatsoever

Not to really go off the rails too much but you sort of just given a not too bad description of anarchism, so like yeah it wouldn't necessarily be a leap to extrapolate that and plenty of people do

> The jump you referring to is a quote with a reference attached

I mean, your first complaint was asking the question instead of hunting down the about-me; your second complaint is that I need to recursively resolve all references before querying. At what point is it more reasonable to… simply ask? Or expect that a body of text is roughly self-contained, despite the infinite array of information that could have informed that body of text?

FWIW I googled it and found nothing to explain this. It’s not even clear to me that Ahmed engages in this behavior herself, of inverting the “intersection” from nexus between relating subjects, into a giant umbrella term called feminism

To preempt your next request, I’m not buying/reading the book(s).

> anarchism, so like yeah it wouldn't necessarily be a leap to extrapolate that and plenty of people do

The part I find to be a jump is to subsume it under feminism. The study of slavery and labor inequality can help to inform feminism is reasonable;

the study of slavery and labor inquality help to inform feminism, therefore they’re are really the same thing and feminism refers to both is a wild reasoning. It appears to be pure scope creep.

The basic logic seems to be: a relationship exists, therefore it is feminism. And I don’t see why such a definition won’t eventually consume all information ala 6 degrees.

> To which I say - why not?

Because it creates weird, presumably unintentional implications. One such implication:

> They seem to imply that feminist = artistically produced, as opposed to professionally produced PCBs. So masculine = professional? But clearly that wasn’t their intention?

The article doesn’t say or imply that whatsoever.

That a feminist art project or collective has to be defined in opposition to something else is entirely your own framing.

This is where your mind goes when you read “feminist,” which reveals your priors.

First you clone the API of the winner, because you want to siphon users from its install-base and offer de-risked switch over cost.

Now that you’re winning, others start cloning your API to siphon your users.

Now that you’re losing, you start cloning the current winner, who is probably a clone of your clone.

Highly competitive markets tend to normalize, because lock-in is a cost you can’t charge and remain competitive. The customer holds power here, not the supplier.

Thats also why everyone is trying to build into the less competitive spaces, where they could potentially moat. Tooling, certs, specialized training data, etc

If it’s their only value proposition, then every other element is just plain worse. This is the only aspect that makes them not worthless.

more specifically, the bug is due to a buffer overflow during paused chat, and presumably deviant undefined behavior between the original execution and the replayed execution.

and most importantly, it has nothing to do with the non-deterministic nature of the game -- non-determinism is trivial to account for, because PCRNGs are not actually non-deterministic; they're (pseudo)random, and deterministically so. They're just random enough to be equivalent to non-deterministic to the user.

As long as seeds are synced, it's trivially managed. But this kind of cause-for-desync is the reason deterministic engines are such a PITA to actually write. Any source of actual non-determinism wrecks everything, and there's always some miserably rare cases.

StarCraft Brood War replays would desync due to version issues, too. Any gameplay adjustments in a patch would affect the replay, often in subtle ways that would sometimes result in a valid and interesting game, just different outcome.