Live data from Hacker News

Cosmologically Unique IDs

jasonfantl.com

51–60 of 159 posts

Re: Cosmologically Unique IDs

#51
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You must consider both time and locality. From now until protons decay and matter does not exist anymore is only 10^56 nanoseconds.

If we think of the many worlds interpretation, how many universes will we be making every time we assign a CCUID to something?

In that interpretation the total number of worlds does not change.

Re: Cosmologically Unique IDs

#52
post #7

This analysis is not quite fair. It takes into account locality (i.e. the speed of light) when designing UUID schemes but not when computing the odds of a collision. Collisions only matter if the colliding UUIDs actually come into causal contact with each other after being generated. So just as you have to take locality into account when designing UUID trees, you also have to take it into account when computing the o…

You must consider both time and locality. From now until protons decay and matter does not exist anymore is only 10^56 nanoseconds.

Protons (and mass and energy) could also potentially be created. If this happens, the heat death could be avoided.

Conservation of mass and energy is an empirical observation, there is no theoretical basis for it. We just don't know any process we can implement that violates it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Re: Cosmologically Unique IDs

#54
post #7

This analysis is not quite fair. It takes into account locality (i.e. the speed of light) when designing UUID schemes but not when computing the odds of a collision. Collisions only matter if the colliding UUIDs actually come into causal contact with each other after being generated. So just as you have to take locality into account when designing UUID trees, you also have to take it into account when computing the o…

Would this take into account IDs generated by objects moving at relativistic speeds? It would be a right pain to travel for a year to another planet, arrive 10,000 years late, and have a bunch of id collisions.

Re: Cosmologically Unique IDs

#55
post #18

I forget the context but the other day I also learned about Snowflake IDs [1] that are apparently used by Twitter, Discord, Instagram, and Mastodon. Timestamp + random seems like it could be a good tradeoff to reduce the ID sizes and still get reasonable characteristics, I'm surprised the article didn't explore there (but then again "timestamps" are a lot more nebulous at universal scale I suppose). Just spitballing…

Getting the entire universe to agree on a single clock for creating timestamps sounds absurdly difficult. Probably impossible?

"Agreement" of time is probably nonsense, yeah. I realized after posting so I edited in the parenthetical, but as [3] notes, locality probably makes this less of a real issue.

Apparently with the birthday paradox 32 bit random IDs only allow some tens of thousands per second before collision chance passes 50%. Maybe that's acceptable?

[3]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47065241

Re: Cosmologically Unique IDs

#56
I really love everything related to Cosmology but I always struggle with two contrary concepts that lead to paradox (for me) :

- Infinity : from school, we learn our universe is infinite.

- We often do calculation with upper limit like this one : 10^240. This is a big number butttttt it's not infinite you know. 10^240+1, 10^240+2...

So :

1. if it's infinite, why doing upper limit calculation ?

2. if it's limited, what is there outside that limit ?

Extremly paradoxal

Re: Cosmologically Unique IDs

#57
post #7

This analysis is not quite fair. It takes into account locality (i.e. the speed of light) when designing UUID schemes but not when computing the odds of a collision. Collisions only matter if the colliding UUIDs actually come into causal contact with each other after being generated. So just as you have to take locality into account when designing UUID trees, you also have to take it into account when computing the o…

Would this take into account IDs generated by objects moving at relativistic speeds? It would be a right pain to travel for a year to another planet, arrive 10,000 years late, and have a bunch of id collisions.

I have to confess I have not actually done the math.

Re: Cosmologically Unique IDs

#58
post #7

This analysis is not quite fair. It takes into account locality (i.e. the speed of light) when designing UUID schemes but not when computing the odds of a collision. Collisions only matter if the colliding UUIDs actually come into causal contact with each other after being generated. So just as you have to take locality into account when designing UUID trees, you also have to take it into account when computing the o…

Would this take into account IDs generated by objects moving at relativistic speeds? It would be a right pain to travel for a year to another planet, arrive 10,000 years late, and have a bunch of id collisions.

Oh no! We should immediately commence work on a new UUID version that addresses this use case.

Re: Cosmologically Unique IDs

#59
post #7

This analysis is not quite fair. It takes into account locality (i.e. the speed of light) when designing UUID schemes but not when computing the odds of a collision. Collisions only matter if the colliding UUIDs actually come into causal contact with each other after being generated. So just as you have to take locality into account when designing UUID trees, you also have to take it into account when computing the o…

Hanson's Grabby Aliens actually fits really well here if you're looking for some math to base off of.

Re: Cosmologically Unique IDs

#60
post #3

Great insights and visualisations! I build a whole database around the idea of using the smallest plausible random identifiers, because that seems to be the only "golden disk" we have for universal communication, except for maybe some convergence property of latent spaces with large enough embodied foundation models. It's weird that they are really under appreciated in the scientific data management and library scien…

Entity identity can be intrinsic. Why not consistency contracts?
Post reply on HN