I'm surprised this post has so many upvotes. This is a gross oversimplification of what Claude Code (and other agents can do). On top of that, it's very poorly engineered.
Yes I agree with you. The pattern is "composition" vs "inheritance". Defining a "thing" as "what it can do" instead of "what it is".
Instead of saying that "a duck is a Bird which in turn is an Animal which in turn is a LivingThing" (Duck -> Bird -> Animal -> LivingThing) you focus on what a duck can do: a duck "quacks, swims, etc":
class Duck(Swimmable, Quackable, FishEatable...)
I think there's still a place for "inheritance" based approach for APIs that need to be very strict about subtyping: would be hard to express covariance/invariance/contravariance without it.
Oh no, haven't gotten reports about the website being slow, thanks for flagging! Which browser are you using?
Regarding Temporal, our goal is to create the best developer experience possible, and we started Hatchet because we felt that Temporal misses the mark (I used Temporal for years before starting Hatchet).
The primary difference is that we're not solely focused on durable workflows, we're a general-purpose background jobs platform which offers durable workflows as a feature. In our view there are a set of equally important primitives: tasks, events, streaming/pubsub, concurrency, priority, rate limiting, scheduling, and yes, durable workflows.
Tasks being the entrypoint to the platform, rather than immediately dealing with the overhead of durable workflows, generally makes Hatchet easier to adopt for engineering teams. I wrote a little more about how task queues relate to durable execution here: https://hatchet.run/blog/durable-execution
We've also invested quite heavily in platform features like logging, observability, alerting, and our UI which either aren't offered or are underdeveloped in Temporal.
But ultimately I'd encourage people to give both a try - we're both MIT licensed and can easily be run locally.
We are in the process of looking for some alternatives to temporal/prefect. Would you mind sharing your email so I can send a few questions along with my cofounder?
Offtopic: when did js/ts apps get so complicated? I tried to browse the repo and there are so many configuration files and directories for such a simple functionality that should be 1 or 2 modules. It reminds me of the old Java days.
Very interesting story and well written so far, I'll finish it after work.
One very interesting thing about Xerox was not only their technology but their choice of business model. As smaller companies couldn't afford an expensive copier, they'd "rent" it and charge per copy. From the article:
> The company placed machines in well-traveled public spaces where it was on display, and in addition to sales, they also offered machine rental for smaller organizations. This was a low price for up to 2000 copies, and each copy after was 4¢. They also promised that a machine could be returned within fifteen days. The 650 pound behemoth was wildly successful.
Another similar interesting business model was pioneered by Rolls-Royce in their airplane turbine business. Instead of selling their whole turbine, they'd "rent" it and charge it "per flight hour", derisking both parts.
> it frequently produces mediocre or worse content
I agree, and I go one step beyond:
Any "series" is BY DEFINITION, bad. If to tell a good story you need +4 episodes, you're doing a poor job. Or, what's real, you're just bloating it ON PURPOSE to keep people attached to their screens.
If Citizen Kane, Tokyo Story, 2001 Space Odyssey or any other good film managed to tell their story in <3hs, I'm sure any other of these "originals" should be able to do the same.
The real quality resides in making something SHORTER and condensed. This is when you start playing with REAL cinematic mechanisms. For example, Seven Samurai is well known for its use of motion and dynamism. Kurosawa communicates a lot without using dialogue, just by the use of movement of the characters or the background. Today's productions are just: explicit dialog > cut scene nature > explicit dialog > cut scene nature > etc.
Some stories might need longer runtimes, like Lord of the Rings or whatever "bigger universe" it is. But these are EXCEPTIONS, not the rule.
For the record, I do enjoy some Series: Friends, The Office, etc. But these are just comedies, and one could argue they're explicitly made to be "bloated" (in terms of length span).
> Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away
PS: I know I'm going to get downvoted to oblivion but I don't care.
>I know I'm going to get downvoted to oblivion but I don't care.
I wasn't going to downvote you till this part.
Anyways, I disagree. But it really comes down to what you value in a story. You're not going to get the rich lore of Mordor, or even Tamriel in a 2 hour runtime. Movies excel at creating character moments, and any kind of worldbuilding that isn't built on an entire series will feel shallow. Or maybe boring because it will take the entire runtime and you have nothing to attach to.
Samurai jack feels like a great example. It could have been a focus oneshot on how Jack got back to the past and beat Aku. A great one, even. But that's not what the show is about. It's showing the long term effects of aku' reign, how society adapted around it, how the next generation receives propaganda to keep serving their tyrant, and the small bits of rebellion and hope shed among it. Jack getting back to the past to undo all that wasn't why Jack is thought of as a great hero. It's the influences he had and seeds of hope he sowed among the dystopia
Unrelated, but shows the "slow collapse" of Europe (where I live in).
We all know what a big issue Climate Change (and specially warming in Europe) is. So most European politicians go on and on about environment and all that.
Well, yesterday, I went to play football at night and finished at around 10PM. I was planning on taking the metro, as any normal European citizen.
Much was my surprise when I compared the time and cost to a Car Sharing app (Free2move).
The metro in my city is €3,80 and Google Maps estimated a metro travel time of 30 minutes.
I ended up paying €3,64 for the Car and made it home in 19 minutes. Worst part, the car was not even electric.
It makes absolutely no freaking sense.
So yeah, European politicians are just scammers. They're doing their own businesses while claiming to protect the population.
With all respect, the car sharing you used is likely VC subsidized while the metro runs on much lower subsidies.
That said, public city transport should likely just be free. (not so much regional or national transport as the extreme congestion from the Deutschland ticket has shown)
I don't know what you mean. The only way you could ever end up with a cheaper fare with a taxi is the sort of edge case you've hit - a single trip that happened to end up cheaper. And that must be an edge case, since even single trip cost is always lower for mass transit. Travel times and such may be worse of course, but not cost.
Even discounting single trip price, the more trips you make, the better and better mass transit scales. For example, take London - even if you do the brainless act of just tapping your card on every card reader as you go, you can only get charged so much: [1].
But monthly/yearly tickets are really where the cost effectiveness comes in. I was being very generous in my calculations above, I assumed you'd only travel 2x a day, to commute to work. But as soon as you've bought the ticket, all trips during its duration become effectively free, so there's no reason not to use the system as much as practicable.
For example, I've probably made around 40 trips in the last 3 days. That plus all my commuting trips this month puts my cost per trip on the order of pennies per trip. You just can't beat that for cost.
I dont know which country it is, but do people buy single tickets? Isnt there a more economic 10 ticket card or monthly etc? I never saw a country where only single tickets are available. It might make the price comparison more representative for most people.
Dzień dobry. It's Germany. There are some options but as I don't use it a lot (I bike A LOT, or use the car, which is electric) I don't have it. Regardless of the tiny rounding errors of 1 or 10 passes, the argument is that if we REALLY want to fight climate change, we should make public transportation more affordable.
I see. Thanks for the clarification. The 29€ monthly subscription in Berlin is more affordable than one would think from the first post. I get the point of the single ticket you made (I actually lived in Germany for 10 years) but I thought it made sense too to talk about the most common costs. I dont think most people only buy single tickets in Berlin, especially when work usually pays for part of the transport. Just making sure it had this context.
reply