[1] https://www.graphengine.io/docs/manual/index.html#what-is-ge
MS is on a roll. My bias since 1996 is being eroded with each OSS release they have, and multi-platform targeted support.
I started using VSCode regularly as my main Rust IDE, and I feel dirty for liking it. It's seemless across macOS and Linux.
Doubt it.
In my personal opinion, they're just playing catch up and trying to grab a piece of the pie in the Server space that opensource have been gobbling up.
Linux got web server, cloud, scientific computing, big data (hadoop, spark, etc..), etc...
I believe they're releasing these open source so they can get people on their Azure cloud and get people into their microsoft ecosystem instead. They're emulating what makes Linux so popular, a good ecosystem and also opensource software.
I do not think they will give up Window for free or even opensource at all.
They was willing to lose the internet for desktop. Their mentality was everything goes through the desktop. Google and the internet proved them wrong and made app OS agnostic via webapp. They neglected search engine for desktop and Google ate it up. That's how crazy it is.
There's also a theory of how they dominated Gaming via DirectX so they can keep their OS popular. I doubt they would give up DirectX and gaming lead via opensource.
I think it's a good strategy but I personally love open source ecosystem much more than Microsoft and have trust issues with them in the past.
They're just playing catch up just like Bing vs Google, IE vs Mozilla, etc.. There's still money to be made even though there are clear leader in each space Microsoft neglected.
It does have something to do with SQL Server vs the world -- and that is life as usual at Microsoft.
Microsoft had a big leadership role in XML standardization at the W3C but has had little to do with RDF. (ex. Oracle contains a forward-chaining triple store optimized for geospatial work, SQL Server does not.)
The Microsoft SQL server team would naturally oppose any effort to make a competing database. They've tried to deep six the JET engine that powers Microsoft Access because (i) people want access, and (ii) Microsoft SQL server Express/Compact/whatever is not an effective replacement.
Thus, there is not a lot of room under Microsoft's umbrella for a competitive project, but "yet another open source graph database" is not seen as a threat.
Why not?
I love Windows but I seriously will not touch UWP until they loosen up the sandbox restrictions so that I can do regular IPC with a win32 desktop app. You can't even send an HTTP request to a little node.js Web server running on your desktop right now. Fuck that. I'm not buying into it.
The whole reason for the UWP sandboxing is to make it so that users can confidently install UWP applications with some assurances that it isn't spyware/malware/blackmailware that will take over their PC or steal their personal information.
UWP is Microsoft's answer to years of criticism they received for the way process permissions work on Windows. They aren't going to just dump it all because you and a few others find the priviledge model inconvenient.
> You can't even send an HTTP request to a little node.js Web server running on your desktop right now.
If your node.js web server was network accessible you could. But, no, it won't allow unchecked IPC as that directly defeats the whole point of sandboxing to begin with.
Personally I haven't used UWP much either, but that has nothing to do with sandboxing and everything to do with poor performance and UI issues (e.g. window controls, built in UI elements, etc). I still find the Windows 10 UWP Calculator horrible to use, it was a MASSIVE downgrade over the old one.
Moreover, win32 desktop apps can use the AppService mechanism exposed by UWP apps (but cannot host an AppService themselves, just connect to UWP-hosted AppServices)
One day my GNU/Linux installs will also only run sandboxed applications.
I guess you don't use either an iOS or Android device, because you cannot do regular UNIX IPC on them.
I assume that Microsoft is not going to be naive enough to do the same.
IMO Microsoft's interest in openness revolves around remaining a viable option in the cloud era. They need to protect their investment in the .NET ecosystem and MS-centric development workflow, which means making it easy for people to run .NET programs on *nix-based VPSes and containers.
The kernel? The more platforms the better?
* Intellectual Property.
* The concern about opening a can of security vulnerabailities and the associated negative press, is probably on their minds.
Still, I wish they would open source the components they can, if only as a gesture.
It is wishful thinking to believe that "they want to be more open, but just can't". They are open sourcing only where they are weak, and that's just not true of the OS (or Office or SQL Server, for that matter).
They are evolving the framework to be faster and cross-platform based on external pressures but in the last few years they have managed to overtake several of the other language/framework options to again be one of the top choices for new projects.
They aren't catching up, they're leading the way.
While I still haven't bought an MS product since 1996, I don't think I have a problem with using their OSS. I see it as supporting companies when they do the right thing.
Honestly Apple's tightening up of the control on their platform in recent years, like requiring LLVM bitcode with apps on some of their devices which only works if it's Apple LLVM generated bitcode, has me swinging the opposite direction from them.
It would go a long way for my perseption of Apple if they either drop the LLVM bitcode requirement, or at least standardize on a non-proprietary version.
What are the good use cases for these ?
Is there a better way to this ?
Ideally, we should persist the Object Graph directly without any data conversion. I see a difference in - How we compute and How we store data.
tracking goods (amazon uses a gigantic graph database to track everything in its warehouses throughout the goods' lifecycle)
network analysis
Could you elaborate on this? Are there any articles/papers on this topic?
I'd like to see the Spanner+Cyc GIS-capable global distributed real-time graph engine with FPGA accelerated OLAP support MS Research is probably sitting on, because we can almost / pretty-much hack that together with OSS now.
I welcome open source, eventually, I believe that it will eat commercial software, if the right economic incentives are in place. Microsoft may be signaling this to the market.
Never Forget.
Microsoft has changed over the years and is not the same company in 1997. It used to hate FOSS projects and now they contribute to them. MSFT used to hate Linux and now they embrace it adding Ubuntu support to Windows 10.
Sure never forget, but if you see changes for the better, learn how to forgive. If they go back to the way they were in 1997, just speak up about it.
Microsoft adapted to tablets with Surface and they seem to do well for artists using pressure sensitive pens.
Here is the github page:
*Edit: checking the site on my phone now and it seems to load, pretty poorly designed site though IMO, unbalanced layout but at least it loads now.
EDIT: I've created a wiki page for computational graphs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_Graph. Add your input.
> Recall that in our general definition a feed-forward neural network is a computational graph whose nodes are computing units and whose directed edges transmit numerical information from node to node.
> Each computing unit is capable of evaluating a single primitive function of its input. In fact the network represents a chain of function compositions which transfor m an input to an output vector (called a pattern).
From: https://page.mi.fu-berlin.de/rojas/neural/chapter/K7.pdf (1996)
Another ancestor would be the Data-Flow paradigm:
> .. programming paradigm that internally represents applications as a directed graph, similarly to a dataflow diagram. Applications are represented as a set of nodes (also called blocks) with input and/or output ports in them. These nodes can either be sources, sinks or processing blocks to the information flowing in the system. Nodes are connected by directed edges that define the flow of information between them.
From: https://paginas.fe.up.pt/~prodei/dsie12/papers/paper_17.pdf (2012)
I'm somewhat aware but it seems like the idea of a computational graph is the most generic computational idea I can think of and I'm surprised it's not more explored.
> Another ancestor would be the Data-Flow paradigm:
Oh yeah, data flow is definitely another one.
Automata can be represented as graphs- that's the main idea. When you look at the typical automaton diagram with states and transitions- that's a graph (with states as vertices and transitions as edges).
I think the confusion arises from the fact that, while automata can be represented as graphs, graphs can represent a much broader array of processes and objects (e.g. belief networks or semantic networks). I guess you can represent pretty much anything as a graph.
So "computational graph" as I understand it, just stresses the point that what is represented is a unit of computation (a.k.a. an automaton a.k.a. a grammar a.k.a. a language etc. etc.) rather than some other kind of graph.
Exactly. I think that the fact that the nodes represent a unit of computation is enough for it to be different from normal graphs I think.
> LIKQ is powering Academic Graph Search API, which is part of Microsoft Cognitive Services.
"Fool me once..." I guess, or as we say in France "Cold water scares the scalded cat".
Does it do streaming data such as Flink or Storm? Or is it batch-optimized?
What languages does the compute engine support?
https://github.com/Microsoft/GraphEngine/blob/master/LICENSE...
Actual astroturfing, when it occurs, is an abuse of HN that we crack down hard on. Defending this community against gaming and abuse is a huge priority for us. Any user who thinks they might be seeing it happen on HN should email us right away (hn@ycombinator.com) so we can investigate.
Imaginary astroturfing—the bug that causes some users to be certain that those who disagree with them can only be nefarious shills because otherwise the pure reason of their own point of view would be fully accepted—is also an abuse of HN. This one is orders of magnitude more common, and it is poison. It eats away the heart of civil, substantive discourse, the assumption of good faith on the part of others.
Therefore we ban astroturfers, and we also ban users who accuse others of astroturfing or shilling without evidence. An opposing view does not count as evidence, and playing this card as a rhetorical device in an argument breaks the HN guidelines.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13607640 and marked it off-topic.
All: both astroturfing and groundless insinuation thereof are against HN's rules. For more, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13610097 upthread.
HN really needs to do something about Microsoft's vote manipulation - it's becoming quite blatant at this point.
Then don't buy from those people. Simple
