Readit NewsAnd technically Condé does not own Ars, Advance does. Different leadership group.
And they have started pulling in the occasional Wired article, most of the time digital security fearmongering with zero to negative value. They're clearly marked as Wired on the front page now, I think because people complained, but I'm guessing Conde Nast is forcing them to keep pulling them, which is worrying.
I'm still paying for a subscription though.
The depth of articles or the decision to pull in Wired content is strictly an editorial decision made by Ars editorial leadership.
No it isn't hard to comprehend but it isn't relevant here. Privacy doesn't mean no ads and nobody is preventing facebook to require users to pay a fee.
It is similar to organs. It is illegal to sell/buy them. You can still freely give them away(donate them). Privacy is similar to that. You can't buy/sell it but you can freely give it away. In this situation Facebook seems to be trying to sell you your privacy.
It may surprise HN to learn, but most companies don't have top-tier technical talent.
Consequently, how do you do {cutting edge thing board and investors are demanding company do} with the people you have/can afford? Use an offering that decreases the necessary skill level by providing powerful prebuilt components.
From this perspective, LLM integration sounds like a perfect fit. It's something every company is being asked to have a plan on, but one few are technically staffed to execute on their own.
Running your own Spark, especially on prem, is a lot of work. Most companies would prefer to just provide their data and let someone else handle the query engine.
The parent is right however that Databricks has a feature store (tokenization) but it's not simple to set up and just getting content in and out of it is a major pain point right now.
"Validity of the SAT for Predicting First-Year College Grade Point Average"
TL;DR: High School GPA + SAT score produce correlation coefficient values between 0.44 and 0.62, depending on the population. How strong are those values?
> A general rule of thumb for interpreting correlation coefficients is offered by Cohen (1988): a small correlation has an absolute value of approximately 0.1; a medium correlation has an absolute value of approximately 0.3; and a large correlation has an absolute value of approximately 0.5 or higher.
From Dr. Shaw's paper on page 7, linked above.
In other words it's very strong, the strongest correlation coefficient that has been found for any signal associated with first year GPA at college.
This has been well understood in the academic community for decades, it's only outside of professional education circles that the validity of the SAT and ACT (when combined with high school GPA) as a predictor of future performance at college is even questioned.
I can see the advantages of standardizing on a complex, powerful tool for simple use cases. For one thing, it may be the only way to standardize: simple versions are too easy to write, and therefore you get dozens of competitors, none of whom are popular enough to shake out their edge case bugs.
It's also nice not to have to find, install, and learn a new tool when you stray over that 90% boundary.
With software dependencies, I think the advantages of small, simple libraries win out over generality. Supporting powerful use cases makes an API more complex and often means that simple, 90% use cases require weird incantations to make them work. Here I think of the times I've had to get into the guts of Jackson despite never doing anything remotely exotic with JSON. The 95% of your codebase that can be simple should be simple, so you can devote your attention to the things that need to be complex.
Counter-example: Jenkins. It does what you ask of it, its base install is "naked" and only contains the minimum functionality in the core.
Everything then becomes a plugin. Git. GitHub. Branch for multi-branch pipelines. Credentials management. And on and on and on.
Now you have stay on top of maintaining the plugins in addition to the core. Also, many plugins require other plugins so just to do some basic stuff like set up a multi-branch pipeline from a GitHub repo you're suddenly staring down the barrel of dozens and dozens of bespoke plugins with varying levels of quality and support.
A monolithic application like curl is a dream to me by comparison. Everything is tested in every release. Sub-components are kept up to date by the maintainer. No plugins fighting each other's plugins.
From afar it's easy to see the praise simplicity and modularization but honestly monoliths can be undervalued too.
Argentina
Australia
Belgium
Bolivia
Brazil
Ecuador
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Nauru
North Korea
Peru
Pitcairn Islands
Samoa
Singapore
Swiss canton of Schaffhausen
Uruguay
Australia is probably the best of the bunch but it's demography and geography are not comparable to the US, a lot of things that work there don't translate here and vice versa.
The author theorizes:
> When the only question voters face is whose ideas they prefer, politicians will naturally focus on developing and debating real world ideas rather than fantasies, and democracy can live up to its moral and practical potential.
O RLY? Is that the situation in Argentina, Bolivia and Ecuador? TL;DR: No.
This article also presumes the bedrock of democracy is elections, but in fact that's just one dimension and not necessarily the most important one -- rule of law, civil institutions, a functioning state are all equally if not more important than the selection of specific leaders.
Good book on this topic: https://www.amazon.com/Wars-Guns-Votes-Democracy-Dangerous/d...
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting#:~:text=15)%...
They don't though, do they. You can't disprove placebo with N=1.
If the placebo is the act of surgery then anything not surgery not working doesn't mean that the surgery worked by not placebo means.
But who cares how, it worked!
It's not just about the sample size, I could get into the anatomy of my injuries but I don't want to divulge more of my medical privacy than I already have.
Suffice to say that when certain things are torn or detached surgical intervention is often the only way to re-attach or restore function to the affected joints. No mount of wishing it way mentally is going to change that.
Go to the bottom of the Ars Technica page, behold the Conde Nast logo and the following text:
CNMN Collection WIRED Media Group © 2024 Condé Nast. All rights reserved. Use of and/or registration on any portion of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement (updated 1/1/20) ... blah blah, no more company names.
They publicly wave around the Conde Nast name. Not Advance. Not anything else except WIRED.
Take a minute and do some research. Advance owns Ars and the terms of the acquisition allow it to have total independence.
But again, I recommend you contact the Ars editors directly and share your theory that the Condé logo at the bottom of the page proves that they are in fact Condé stooges and have no editorial independence. See what they say. Their DMs are open.