Philosophy of Everything

  2. Consistency, Availability and low Latency in Distributed system (workarounding the CAP/PACELC theorems)   Introduction: " 1. Cache and Data Consistency in Distributed systems (CAP/PACELC/CRDT) "   TL;DR Full strong Consistency in geographically Distributed systems can only be achieved by sacrificing Availability (per CAP theorem) and with prohibitive Latency costs (per PACELC theorem). However, we can still design consistent enough systems that continue to function when one geographical region is down and without paying the inter-region latency most of the time. While eventual Consistency is OK many times, there are still cases when we want a strong read-after-write consistency for certain read-after-write flows. There is an optimum design that assures strong Consistency inside read-after-writes flows . Arguably, this is the highest Consistency level that can be assured without a prohibitive impact on Availability and Latency.

Imagine that humanity is offered the following deal: All living humans will enjoy 100 more years of healthy and happy life, finished by a peaceful death in sleep. Immediately after signing the deal, humans will forget the deal and will not worry about this "deadline". If you sign the deal, no human will even experience any suffering. As life will be extended to 100 years from now regardless of the starting age, no human will even witness the death of another human. Even old people would enjoy a healthy and happy life, becoming physically young again and regaining their mental capacity - without losing their experience. Each life will be full of accomplishments, not only by material welfare, but also with most spiritual accomplishments that a human can reasonably expect. Children will still be born, parents will still be happy about them - even more so, because all would go smooth with no worries and no accidents. People would live happily and without any worry until the ...

Killing is morally wrong universally, for most people adhering to a moral system, right?  What about killing an aggressor that tries to kills hundreds of people in your community? Suddenly that killing to save the life of many innocents does not seem so repellent for most people, don't you agree? What if the killing of an aggressor is the only solution to save the life of a member of your family? Even many religious people would consider such defensive killing the right thing to do if there is no other solution.