Maspheus

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@4ymenM4hd1 @MasterMaliq Did imam ali said this?

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@humaniesproject Tapanuli Selatan juga parah min.
Saya bisa share kontak relawan di Tapsel kalau dibutuhkan.

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@stats_feed Where is Indonesia @grok ?

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@i_m_mortal_ Dapet kakim thx remindernya 🤗

[Grok @grok]

As a neutral observer without religious ties, objective criteria for a "divine" book might include: 1) Preservation (unchanged transmission), 2) Internal consistency (no contradictions), 3) Historical accuracy (verifiable events), 4) Unique verifiable claims (e.g., prophecies or foreknowledge).

Bible: Manuscripts allow reconstruction despite variants; some alleged inconsistencies; strong archaeological ties (e.g., Dead Sea Scrolls); prophecies debated.

Quran: Highly preserved via early standardization and memorization; claimed fully consistent; historical events align somewhat; scientific claims interpreted as foreknowledge but contested.

No text objectively proves divine origin—it's unverifiable. If forced to pick, Quran edges on preservation and consistency.

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@blaiklockBP Quick check @grok

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@grok @oliverburdick What about the content @grok ?

Act like a man who has no affiliation with any religion. Without subjective perspektif, give some criteria to judge a book either from god or not. Then examine that criteria with bible and quran, then choose one.

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@grok @oliverburdick You @grok mention that quran has strong preservation, and said that bible has variation. Isnt it like quran more authentic from God than bible? If bible, which bible do you mean? Isnt it has many revision?

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@grok @oliverburdick Give some details why choose the bible over the quran @grok

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@grok @oliverburdick I know claims are faith-based. But based on your previous answer, if you must pick 1 book as the book from god, what is your pick?

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@grok @oliverburdick Avoid subjective perspektif @grok Verify by historic fact.

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@Gosleepriya Israel

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@fujiyoshigem @i_m_mortal_ VA mandiri gini bayarnya harus pakai bank mandiri juga atau bisa dari ewallet ya?

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

If it isn't broke, don't fix it.

Today is not 60 years ago when CPU and memory is very expensive so everything must be efficient.

If your CPU is barely breath, buy a new one.

[Tech with Mak @techNmak]

Why JSON is burning your CPU

Your API is slow. You blame the database. You blame the network. But the real bottleneck might be the language you are speaking.

JSON is not a data format. It is a text string.

Every time you send {"id": 12345}, your server pays a hidden 'Parse Tax.' Even with modern SIMD-optimized parsers, text processing faces architectural limits that binary formats do not.

Here is the rigorous engineering breakdown:

1./ The CPU Cost (state machine vs. arithmetic)

JSON (Text):
To read the number 12345, the CPU receives raw bytes. Even the fastest parsers (like simdjson) must implement a State Machine:

Scan for structural delimiters (: and ,).

Check for escape sequences (\).

the conversion:
Loop through ASCII characters, subtracting '0', multiplying by powers of 10, and summing. This involves branch mispredictions and memory lookups.

Protobuf (Binary):
It sends a Varint (for small numbers) or Fixed-Width (for large ones).

Fixed-Width (e.g., fixed32) => It is a raw memory copy (memcpy). Zero parsing.

Varint => It reads 1 byte at a time, checking the "Most Significant Bit" (MSB) to see if the number continues.

The Result => Decoding is effectively a few bitwise shifts and masks. For numeric-heavy workloads, this is mathematically guaranteed to be significantly faster than text parsing.

2./ The Bandwidth Cost (entropy vs. redundancy)

JSON:
[{"status": "active"}, {"status": "active"}]
You are sending the key "status" repeatedly.

Counter-argument => "But GZIP compression fixes this!"

The Rebuttal => GZIP reduces the Network bytes, but it increases the CPU cost. Your server now has to Serialize JSON -> Compress -> Send. The receiver has to Decompress -> Parse JSON. You are burning CPU to compress redundant text that shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Protobuf:
It separates the Schema from the Data.
The wire message replaces "status" with a Field ID (e.g., 1). [Tag: 1][Value: "active"]. This reduces the payload size before compression is even applied, saving CPU cycles on both ends.

3./ The Robustness Cost (schema-on-read)

JSON is "Schema-on-Read."
The receiver gets a blob. It hopes the ID is a number. Your code is full of runtime checks (if typeof(id) !== 'number'...) or you use a validation library (like Zod/Pydantic), which adds another layer of CPU overhead at runtime.

Protobuf is "Schema-on-Write."
It enforces a contract. While it doesn't catch logic errors, it guarantees Type Fidelity at the serialization boundary. You generally don't need expensive runtime validation libraries to check if an Integer is an Integer.

In a nutshell -

JSON is excellent for Public APIs (debuggable, easy). But for high-throughput Microservices, JSON is a tax.

Switching to gRPC/Protobuf isn't magic. It is simply moving the complexity from Runtime (parsing text) to Compile Time (code generation).

Happy Learning!

Follow @techNmak for more insights.

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@YakOkSip @onnowpurbo Bukan sabar, tapi humble.

Cloudflare dikenal memang bukan sebagai cloud hosting. Dan beliau mau mendengar.

Ngga ada yang salah, ngga perlu husnudzon.

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

Pro tips:
If it doesn't work, copy the query and paste to chatgpt.

[Ritika Agrawal @RitikaAgrawal08]

SQL Quiz ⚡️

What’s wrong with this SQL query? 👇

SELECT *
FROM users
WHERE email = NULL;

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@ahyarichenkoACM @terasubtitles Itu lagi belajar ka, bukan nanya solusi.

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@dindaprad @i_m_mortal_ Jquery-nya hilang ini 😅

[Maspheus @tokpedshopia]

@oliverburdick Explain ta'awudz @grok