graph

'egg' is an open-source, high performance e-graph and equality saturation toolkit.

<p><strong>TL;DR: Should I give a "time out" to 'newbies' who have been 'newbies' for (subjectively) too long, or am I being too harsh?</strong></p> <p>Let me start with a graph.</p> <p><a href="https://raw.github.com/gist/9e8f8b837c1eb7e68c90/6332a8a13e51ae71adf2cdfad04d8dbb1839f791/skill-vs-time.png" rel="ugc">https://raw.github.com/gist/9e8f8b837c1eb7e68c90/6332a8a13e51ae71adf2cdfad04d8dbb1839f791/skill-vs-time.png</a></p> <p>Now let me explain what the graph <em>means</em>.</p> <p>The red and yellow lines in this graph are two people who have been in the Ruby on Rails community <em>about</em> the same period of time. The person represented by the red line has gained more skill over a shorter period of time than the person represented by the yellow line. Let's say the total time for this graph is 18 months. Both people, for all intents and purposes of this story, are gainfully employed as Ruby on Rails developers. Where they work, what they are paid and what they're building aren't important to this story. What is important is the role that these two people play in the #rubyonrails channel on Freenode.</p> <p>Yellow is in the channel nearly every single day continuously asking questions. Red (not me, by the way) is there, again, nearly every day, answering questions from people like Yellow. Occasionally, these questions take anywhere from mere seconds all the way up to (in more than one case) <em>5 hours</em> to answer. These questions are usually relatively simple things, like defining custom validations, working out nested resources or figuring out syntax errors in ERB code.</p> <p>Now, I don't personally have a problem with people who take up the channel's time by asking question after question after question, month after month after month. That's what the channel's there for. If we didn't allow all those questions then why even have the channel in the first place? My problem is that I think that a lot of the answers to these problems can be solved in a better way than asking anonymous strangers on the internet for help. Like reading <a href="https://railstutorial.org" rel="ugc">free</a> and <a href="http://manning.com/bigg2" rel="ugc">not so free</a> about the topic, for instance. Or finding an anonymous stranger who can consistently volunteer their time to help build the thing that they're having issues with, and become not-so-anonymous, perhaps even a friend.</p> <p>Basically, IRC is a shitty medium for discussing big programming architecture problems, but a great one for teeny-tiny problems.</p> <p>In IRC-land, Red only has so much patience to help Yellow in their quest for learning. If it appears that after a long time that Yellow isn't actually learning anything from what they've been told and they aren't applying any actual critical thinking to the problem space, then Red may get annoyed at the "slow-goingness" of the progress. I've seen this happen. Hell, I've been annoyed myself that some people just don't 'get it' sometimes. But what I realised is that, as the above graph shows, different people learn at different speeds. As an extension of that, different people learn better from different resources. Some people may learn better from just brute-forcing a problem. Others may need hand-holding and a walkthrough of the problem several times before they finally understand.</p> <p>I don't know what the "correct" answer is to this problem. Do you maintain the status quo and let Yellow keep asking questions, day in and day out and hope that, over time, there is actually something to show for it; that they actually reach a higher form of competency? Or do you encourage them (perhaps forcefully so) to look into other means of improving their knowledge in the field? I just don't know.</p> <p>WDYT, Lobsters?</p>

We are right around the corner from NixCon 2026. Another year where I sadly won’t be present.

Various ways to create a knowledge graph.

Datastory is the no-code platform for data storytellers. Create interactive charts, websites, and reports using Studio, CMS, AI, and 2000+ open datasets.

Printable graph paper in 57 styles, free to download as a PDF with no signup. Set the grid size, pick Letter or A4, and print at true scale.

Contribute to chrishayuk/larql development by creating an account on GitHub.

Working memory for AI coding agents, yours, and your team's. Claude Code, Codex and Cursor sessions become one living graph, queryable over MCP. Self-hosted. - motif-Labs/motif

You ask the agent about the payments retry table, and it comes back with the retry table plus the...

The first in a series on the graph database ecosystem: a rush of new engines, LadybugDB's steady climb, DuckDB's graph moment, and Postgres 19 dropping property-graph support.

We are right around the corner from NixCon 2026. Another year where I sadly won’t be present.

High-performance MCP server for AI coding agents: persistent knowledge graph, blast radius analysis, semantic search. Built in Rust. - spuentesp/lain

<p>I have been thinking a lot about verifiable strong identity online and how it could fix things like: fake news, phishing, fraud on freelancer platforms or faking results of online polls . Let me know what you think about this approach:</p> <p>The trust graph consists of</p> <p>2 types of nodes</p> <ul> <li>natural persons which have a name and control one or more email accounts</li> <li>organizations which control a domain name and an email server</li> </ul> <p>1 type of edge</p> <ul> <li>stating that a person node and an organization node have had some kind of affiliation in the past.</li> </ul> <p>Natural persons register with a trust repository providing just their name, the email on domains of organizations which they are currently affiliated with and reference emails of people in organizations which they have been affiliated with in the past.</p> <p>The sever then sends a magic link to your referenced email addresses. The verification emails simply ask the recipient to agree that a person ( as defined by their name and current email accounts) had been affiliated with their organization in the past but not any detail about their role or skills.</p> <p>Some Organization nodes are labeled as seeds of trust, for example any publicly traded company which has a value &gt;1e6$</p> <p>Other nodes ( organizations and natural persons) are trusted only if there is a path between them and at least n organizations in the seed of trust</p> <p>Key differences to the Web of Trust coined in by Phil Zimmermann in 1992 :</p> <ol> <li>IDs must be public information</li> <li>We agree on a external seed of trust</li> </ol> <p>With these differences we can clean up the graph of trust in the event that a fake account is found by re-verifying the paths from the fake account to any seed of trust. And lets remember this does not need to be 100% secure, it just needs to be difficult to the point that it is no longer worth the payout a fake account can bring.</p>

Learn how serialized writes and coarse locks limit throughput, increase tail latency, and constrain real-time graph workloads.

One Question Every CISO or Regulator May Ask to Enterprise-Grade AI Model Providers If an attacker ever compromises the AI…

One card at a time. Feeds, without the feed.

Map the complete reference graph around GitHub issues, pull requests, and repository backlogs. - vercel-labs/issue-graph

Ruiyang Wang and colleagues present GAVEL, which verifies and repairs long-horizon LLM robot plans against an explicit graph world model holding object relation