> the model has to re-run the generation, and the client has to start receiving tokens from scratch again.
I don't understand. The payload can be designed to have sequence number. In case of reconnect, send the last known sequence number. Sounds like a application level protocol problem and not transport. Am I missing something?
The pub/sub mentioned in the article essentially does the same thing.
The blog author is confusing SSE the protocol itself, with how the application is typically implemented. SSE is great and can trivially be implemented in a way that allows history, catch-up, and resuming. The "Pub/Sub" mentioned at the end of the exact application of SSE that the author wants.
How does that make the EU regulation something bad? The bad thing is that the companies are willing to bombard us with the worst possible cookie banners, in order to monetize our visits.
Maybe the next EU regulation should be to prohibit those banners and allow companies to add a small toggle somewhere on their site so we can toggle it to allow them to set 3rd-party cookies.
The EU's own government websites [1] are littered with the same cookie banners. They want the visitor data just as bad as everyone else.
> Maybe the next EU regulation
We don't need anymore EU regulations seeing how bad and thoughtless they already are.
[1] https://european-union.europa.eu/