Interesting, but I've read for a long time, that our humanoid predecessors at some point figured out how to get to bone marrow with tools. That provided the energy dense food as well an evolutionary impetus to develop larger brains to build better tools and handle them better. Fire and the capability to cook were developed much later.
While meat was definitely a caloric bonanza for early humans, recent primate studies offer evidence that sugary fruits continued to be a critical “brain food.” A 2017 paper looked at 140 primate species and compared their brain sizes with their diets.
“What [that study] showed very clearly was that the fruit-eaters, the frugivores, had 25 percent bigger brains, on average, than the folivores, the leaf-eaters,” Brand-Miller says. The fruit-eaters also had bigger brains than the omnivores, which ate meat.
But the Inca lived to late for this discussion. They already had advanced agriculture. For evolutionary terms, the time before agriculture and the time of the predecessors of homo sapiens are more relevant, because that time span was larger by orders of magnitude.
You could manage those VMs with https://microvm-nix.github.io/microvm.nix/ that helps with mounting the nix store read only from the host into the vm. That should save more space than trying to reduce the dependencies of the system closure of the vm.
STM is seldom used in modern Clojure projects, it is certainly not the dominant model. Most projects I am aware of use a few or even exactly one atoms with immutable data structures.
When you are administrating so many Java applications, you should investigate an hour or ask your favorite AI how to configure the logging library used in your application of interest. They allow you to remove stack traces and lots more.
That would require convincing the entire organization to change SOP and use a non-standard configuration of the vendor software in a high security private cloud.
> Garbage collection, by definition, trashes locality.
No, it doesn't necessarily. It is correct if you are thinking about mark and sweep GC. But that is 50 years old. Generational GC has much better locality. And GC can even improve locality sometimes by moving objects together that are connected by references. I am not claiming that GC is always a big win for locality. That would be very far from the truth. On the other hand it is not by definition so, that locality is trashed by GC.
