You can implement actor behaviours in go or node or even c, but without that lower level support it will never give you the stability guarantees that Erlang process isolation is giving.

To draw a weird comparison Elixir (with Erlang process isolation) brings two world together. First it's a PHP/Ruby level of fire-and-forget productivity because each http request is handled in an independent isolated process, which if it crashes won't affect the system, but instead provide automatically a nicely debuggable crash log. And second it provides natively all distributed tools for long-lived systems. E.g. PubSub , Sessions and database connections don't have to be rebuilt like in ruby/PHP on a per request basis but can be their own long-lived processes.

If there would be a library that could bring this easy to use process isolation+communication e.g. to C programming it would be a game changer. But the best you get in all other languages I'm aware of is to use actual process isolation (fork multiple node/ruby/go processes) and then use some kind of IPC manually or redis or k8s...

I feel we are in a shit triangle here. Ticket prices are too high <-> quality is too low <-> overall cost is too high. There have been ongoing attempts to fix this by increasing rider amounts but at Germanys population density it's impossible to ever get even near to Japanese levels [2] of low total kilometers built with high usages. After my interpretation of things there is some innovation necessary to bring the per KM cost down before the Deutsche Bahn can play a more important role in the transportation.

On the same coin the cost of public transport for families vs. car ownership is just ridiculous. I've got a family of 5 - For every German intercity route going by car is significantly cheaper than going by train - usually 5x cheaper but often more. Same is true for traveling within a city that isn't your hometown (where you might have a monthly ticket). At this point I'm not even sure whether this is a problem that can be solved socioeconomicly.

I feel electric cars, robotaxis and in the future electric planes are much more likely to solve the larger part of of transportation than that railway is going to do it. Especially given that building another set of rails now in Germany is going to take from planning to delivery 15 years. The change of technology should be planned in.

[1] https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.34457... [2] https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/141066/1/vjh_v63_i03...

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28985019

Points: 20

# Comments: 3

https://youtu.be/4dC_nRYIDZU

Not modern c++ last time I checked but active development for sure.

> A researcher studying practices and methods used by developers in the free software community decided that these questions were independent of the developers' political views, so he used the term “FLOSS,”

Unfortunately he doesn't name that researcher, whom he is attributing FLOSS to. Anyone knows?

According to Stallmann "FLOSS" is the most inclusive term including open source with a non-free license though:

> Thus, if you want to be neutral between free software and open source, and clear about them, the way to achieve that is to say “FLOSS,” not “FOSS.”

So and I'm suprised by that, while L stands for libre according to Stallman, the acronym FLOSS is a actually a more liberal term because it is neutral to whether the software in question free or only open source.

[0] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.en.html

[0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21992943/persistent-gc-i...

Point taken on the checksums, we will add those