Genuine question - not defending Apple/google - does your pwa not use a dedicated server / db for user’s data? And then localstorage just as a cache if needed?
It doesn't... started as a hobby project in 2012, wanted to see if it was possible to make an app that stored a lot of client-side data in IndexedDB. Now, my app is successful so I don't really want to move to another platform, but also it creates too much data to easily and cheaply sync to a server. So I'm in a weird situation. https://basketball-gm.com/ if you're curious.
I realize I'm a bit of an edge case. But also, ideally we could make PWAs that operate with similar data guarantees as native apps. That's kind of the idea of PWAs, that web apps should be able to mostly be the equivalent of native apps.
And it almost works, except for the data loss issue. Kind of sad. Cause there are so many other advantages of a PWA... like being able to target all platforms with one PWA is incredible. Having no gatekeepers to "approve" my app updates is incredible. But the cost is sometimes users lose all their data :)
Guessing its intended use case is business analytic queries without write permissions —- particularly for non-programmers. I don’t think it’d be advisable to use something like this for app logic
100% -- in fact originally the package used to parse out SELECT statements and only execute SELECT statements. After some feedback, we decided that the permissions on the user should handle that level of detail.
The HN community 1) likes building and hacking, and 2) has nostalgia for old technology. This makes them feel a lot of affinity toward "doing things themselves" -- server infrastructure, running desktop linux, avoiding dependencies in their code.
The reality, though, is that the steady march of progress encourages us to outsource what we can to people who are better at the thing that is auxiliary to what we do. I don't grow food because I'm bad at growing. I don't repair my car because I'm bad at auto repair.
I do build software, and my company builds a very specific type of software to solve very specific problems. I'm happy to focus on that, because that's how we make money. Other people are much better at building infrastructure than I am, and so I let them do it for me. If there comes a time when the cloud offerings are either worse than what I can build or too expensive, then I trust someone else will come along and fill the gap in the market before it becomes worthwhile for me to do it.
> I don't grow food because I'm bad at growing. I don't repair my car because I'm bad at auto repair.
These analogies are really bad. It’s not as if this is binary. Nobody is suggesting you fab your own chips or build your own data centers.
But you do cook (presumably) most of your own food, and you drive your own car. You capture most of the benefit of economies of scale and specialization, and then you do the last 5%.
This is what people are talking about. AWS is like eating out for every meal or taking an Uber everywhere. Sure it’s convenient, and has its time and place, but it’s probably not the best default option.
> The HN community 1) likes building and hacking, and 2) has nostalgia for old technology. This makes them feel a lot of affinity toward "doing things themselves" -- server infrastructure, running desktop linux, avoiding dependencies in their code.
It's not nostalgia, it's a cynical wisdom of surviving the "move fast and break things" mentality with which so many businesses shoot themselves in the foot. The more you can do in house, the less impacted you are by externalities.
> The reality, though, is that the steady march of progress encourages us to outsource what we can to people who are better at the thing that is auxiliary to what we do.
Outsourcing isn't progress, it's a business strategy that involves shifting responsibilities to a third party. Done right, it's an effective way to build on previous work to achieve an otherwise intractable business goal. Done wrong, it devolves into a shitfest as your success lies at the mercy of some entity whose interests are not necessarily aligned with yours.
> I don't grow food because I'm bad at growing. I don't repair my car because I'm bad at auto repair.
Because those things require serious investments in time and money. But there's plenty of things you can quickly pick up that make no financial sense to outsource. You can buy your own groceries and cook your own meals. You can change your own tires when you get a flat, or change your own oil when the dashboard light comes on. Not everything that can be outsourced should be.
but cloud is not outsourcing what you know how to build. afaik it requires you learn new things and doing things in new ways, permanently. And now you re stuck learning these proprietary things that are intentionally incompatible with each other and care about lock-in and money and such
you don't grow food because it s cheaper to buy, it's all about economics (which takes care of division of labour; the word literally means the division of things in a house). Free money essentially means people who do random shit remain unpunished
This is true about HN, and a very healthy perspective on cloud. It is very much the minority opinion that using the cloud is like using a repair shop for a car. The vast majority of people think they are saving money by doing it for one reason or another, rather than effectively outsourcing dev competency.
Unfortunately, the competency you are outsourcing is rare and getting rarer, meaning that infrastructure products are getting very expensive (and profitable).
You're understating the case: you don't grow food even if you're good at growing, because your value add as a niche software dev probably brings you much greater remuneration and benefit to your customers than if you were a farmer.
I doubt this comment will get far on this forum, but it does jog my memory of my favorite professor and mentor in college (a very long story). Anyway, I was complaining to him that I was struggling with keeping up learning something in fluid mechanics, and he pointed out that it took Bernoulli 20 years to put together his general equation, but, as students, we’re expected to master it in a weekend. Anyway anyway, life isn’t a race, unless you’re trying to get ahead of someone else. To your point, plenty of people can do wonderful things in their own time and on their own pace, and that may not be as fast as someone else.
I’m still in my 20s and I’ve fell to the idea that if you haven’t achieved everything you want early on then you just don’t want it enough or you’re not working hard enough.
However, what if I achieve everything before hitting 30? What would I have to look forward then?
I think some things are just meant to be hard and take a long time. You just have to learn to enjoy the process and understand that everyone has their own pace and that’s okay.
I had a different takeaway. That you can fast-track the pointless "traffic jams" (using the race analogy). Why sit in traffic for no reason?
In his example, he tested out of classes that he was already proficient in—not all classes. Doing this occasionally would allow you to have more time for things that matter.
Well, it's more like - if you can afford 1:1 instruction and find a teacher whose style really fits you, you can really speed up your learning.
I've experienced this with guitar. Self-study can be done but you really need a coach who can push you further than you think you're ready to go, along with tailored instruction. You'll make years worth of progress in months this way.
