The concept of the "alpha wolf" – a dominant individual who violently forces their way to the top of a pack – is a misconception stemming from studies of unrelated, captive wolves. Natural wolf packs, observed in the wild, actually function more like families, with the "alpha" pair simply being the breeding parents. These parents guide the pack through experience and seniority, not brute force. The original captive wolf research, which popularized the alpha myth, created an artificial environment of stress and competition, leading to behaviors not representative of wild wolf dynamics. This flawed model has not only misrepresented wolf behavior but also influenced theories of dog training and human social structures, promoting harmful dominance-based approaches.
The article "The Mythical IO-Bound Rails App" argues that the common belief that Rails applications are primarily I/O-bound, and thus not significantly impacted by CPU performance, is a misconception. While database queries and external API calls contribute to I/O wait times, a substantial portion of a request's lifecycle is spent on CPU-bound activities within the Rails application itself. This includes things like serialization/deserialization, template rendering, and application logic. Optimizing these CPU-bound operations can significantly improve performance, even in applications perceived as I/O-bound. The author demonstrates this through profiling and benchmarking, showing that seemingly small optimizations in code can lead to substantial performance gains. Therefore, focusing solely on database or I/O optimization can be a suboptimal strategy; CPU profiling and optimization should also be a priority for achieving optimal Rails application performance.
Hacker News users generally agreed with the article's premise that Rails apps are often CPU-bound rather than I/O-bound, with many sharing anecdotes from their own experiences. Several commenters highlighted the impact of ActiveRecord and Ruby's object allocation overhead on performance. Some discussed the benefits of using tools like rack-mini-profiler and flamegraphs for identifying performance bottlenecks. Others mentioned alternative approaches like using different Ruby implementations (e.g., JRuby) or exploring other frameworks. A recurring theme was the importance of profiling and measuring before optimizing, with skepticism expressed towards premature optimization for perceived I/O bottlenecks. Some users questioned the representativeness of the author's benchmarks, particularly the use of SQLite, while others emphasized that the article's message remains valuable regardless of the specific examples.
Summary of Comments ( 71 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42844619
HN users generally agree with the article's premise that the "alpha wolf" concept, based on observations of captive, unrelated wolves, is a flawed model for wild wolf pack dynamics, which are more family-oriented. Several commenters point out that the original researcher, David Mech, has himself publicly disavowed the alpha model. Some discuss the pervasiveness of the myth in popular culture and business, lamenting its use to justify domineering behavior. Others extend the discussion to the validity of applying animal behavior models to human social structures, and the dangers of anthropomorphism. A few commenters offer anecdotal evidence supporting the family-based pack structure, and one highlights the importance of female wolves in the pack.
The Hacker News thread linked has a moderate number of comments discussing the linked article about the "alpha wolf" myth. Several commenters express prior knowledge of the debunking of the alpha wolf concept, pointing out it originated from observations of unrelated captive wolves, not wild packs. One commenter succinctly states, "This has been widely known for a long time. Wolf packs in the wild are families." This sentiment is echoed by others, reinforcing the idea that the alpha myth is outdated and inaccurate.
Some comments delve into the implications of this misunderstanding. One notes how the flawed alpha concept has permeated dog training culture, leading to dominance-based approaches that are now considered harmful. They suggest this highlights the danger of applying observations from artificial, captive environments to natural settings. Another reflects on how the alpha myth has been used to justify hierarchical structures in human society, lamenting its misapplication in this context.
Several users discuss L. David Mech, the researcher who originally popularized the alpha wolf concept. They point out that Mech himself later acknowledged and corrected his earlier work, recognizing that the captive wolf study did not accurately reflect wild wolf pack dynamics. Some commenters even link to Mech's own website, where he clarifies the misunderstanding.
A few comments offer additional insights into wolf behavior. One explains that wolf packs are typically a breeding pair and their offspring, functioning more like a family unit than a dominance hierarchy. Another commenter highlights the cooperative nature of wolves, emphasizing their teamwork in hunting and raising young.
There's a brief tangent discussing the etymology of "alpha," with one user clarifying its original meaning in relation to stars. Another thread discusses the broader phenomenon of outdated scientific concepts persisting in popular culture, even after being debunked by experts.
While many acknowledge the article is reiterating well-established information, several users appreciate the concise and accessible explanation provided. They find it valuable in reaffirming their understanding and providing a readily shareable resource to counter the persistent alpha myth. Overall, the comments demonstrate a general awareness of the flawed alpha concept while highlighting the importance of accurate scientific communication and the dangers of extrapolating from artificial environments.