301–310 of 348 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The people who built MCP are seasoned software engineers, as are most folks who work for these labs. What are you even on about?
The people building MCP are in the same cohort as the Doge "hackers". And we can see the result.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay, well, clearly you have some funny beliefs, and I won’t try to convince you otherwise. Just think first before posting weird screeds with no basis in reality next time.
> weird Adj, something the speaker wants the audience to dislike without the speaker being on the hook for explaining why. > screed Noun, document the speaker doesn't like but can't rebut. It's funny how people in the blue tribe milieu use the same effete vocabulary. I'll continue writing at the object level instead of affecting seven zillion layers of affected fake kindness, thanks.
Personally, even the stdio transport feels suboptimal. I mostly write python and startup time for a new process is nontrivial. Starting a new process for each request doesn't feel right. It works ok, and I'll admit that there's a certain elegance to it. It would be more practical if I were using a statically compiled language.
As far as the SSE / "Streamable HTTP" / websockets discussion, I think it's funny that there is all this controversy over how to implement sockets. I get that this is where we are, because the modern internet only supports a few protocols, but a the network level you can literally just open up a socket and send newline delimited JSON-RPC messages in both directions at full duplex. So simple and no one even thinks about it. Why not support the lowest level primitive first? There are many battle tested solutions for exposing sockets over higher level protocols, websockets being one of them. I like the Unix Philosophy.
Thinking further, the main issue with just using TCP is the namespace. It's similar to when you have a bunch of webservers and nginx or whatever takes care of the routing. I use domain sockets for that. People often just pick a random port number, which works fine too as long as you register it with the gateway. This is all really new, and I'm glad that the creators, David and Justin, had the foresight to have a clean separation between transport and protocol. We'll figure this out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you a native English speaker? "does NOT constrain user's rate limit" should be "does NOT rate limit incoming requests" or similar. "We will try out best" should be "our best". "when our servers are under high traffic pressure" is at least grammatical, but it's awkward. Normally you'd say "when our servers are dealing with high load" or something similar. "your requests may take some time to receive a response fro…
I'm a native English speaker, and I partially disagree with your claims of awkwardness. "when our servers are under high traffic pressure" - this is a bit awkward I agree, but only the last three words. If we rearrange it to "when our servers are under pressure from high traffic", I think it sounds good. It's using a metaphor, and I think that should be encouraged. It's interesting. And the phrase "high traffic" conv…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s a very generous interpretation. I don’t know mandarin but these are likely a transfer of grammar constructs from the primary language to english, in the same way the Dutch will say “make a picture” or “the house of my parents”, which can be justly classified as awkward rather than as linguistic flair. If someone was editing my writing, it would feel a bit patronizing if they said grammar mistakes (many of whic…
I'm not claiming it was intentional on their part. My point was solely one of language, so how the sentence came to be written that way is out of scope. And given the word swap I suggested, I don't think it is awkward at all (unlike your examples from Dutch, which definitely are). As for it being patronising, why is telling a non-native speaker their sentence is interesting unacceptable, but telling them it's awkward…
The consensus around here seems to be that the protocol itself is fine, but the transport is controversial. Personally, even the stdio transport feels suboptimal. I mostly write python and startup time for a new process is nontrivial. Starting a new process for each request doesn't feel right. It works ok, and I'll admit that there's a certain elegance to it. It would be more practical if I were using a statically co…
I think there is a misunderstanding of how stdio works. The process can be long running and receive requests via stdio at any time. No need to start one for each request.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has fascinated me for years. I'll just re-link this comment of mine from a few years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37544019#37548278 . This was about Amazon products rather than government documentation, but the point is the same. I'll just quote the relevant part: > The people who make these products have to spend millions and millions of dollars setting up factories, hiring people, putting things i…
I live in Japan, and when you read English texts here (it doesn’t really matter if it’s a restaurant menu, a pamphlet at a touristic area, a flyer for local government services…) the same English word will often be written differently within the same document (eg for a recent one I saw: “curbside” was spelled “crubside” and “carbside”). I always wonder how that happens, because the documents themselves often smell st…
0: That's supposed to be drastically changing, we'll see if it does. English skills is still a resume stuffer in Japan.