I think what you want here is a radar chart, not a 2-2 matrix. I suspect most people embody these different types to varying degrees over time, topics and circumstances.
Readit Newsozataman commented on Could, should, might, shouldn’t – A taxonomy of futurists medium.com/@fosta/could-s... · Posted by u/doener
If you like Nix than probably try GNU Guix [1] and if possible use Guix System on server side. This is one of the most modern development in operating systems.
In the modern security conscious world where most companies run their workloads on virtual machines controlled by other companies, it's imperative that applications are deployed on such predictable, secure and reproducible operating systems.
Guix supports transactional upgrades and roll-backs, unprivileged package management, and more. When used as a standalone distribution, Guix supports declarative system configuration for transparent and reproducible operating systems.
I still think Amazon, Google and Azure will take a decade or two to build and offer something like this to it's customers. Indeed Google's Fuschia is trying to do the same, but I feel it's at least a decade away.
It has one of the best wonderful documentation [2] to get started and explore with all the details.
If I could trouble you for the common discourse here, would you mind summarizing why one may prefer to use Guix in the place of Nix? They seem to be based on the very same ideas and Guix even admits to being inspired by Nix.
ozataman commented on Redshift vs. BigQuery vs. Snowflake benchmark blog.fivetran.com/warehou... · Posted by u/georgewfraser
There is a different side to the cost benchmark that's not captured by the description here. If your use case needs a lot of stored data but not necessarily a matching degree of
peak CPU (even if your query load is otherwise pretty consistent), Redshift will become really expensive really fast and it will feel like a waste. BigQuery will meanwhile keep costs linear (almost) in your actual query usage with very low storage costs.
For example, you may need to provision a 20-node cluster only because you need the 10+ terabytes in storage across several datasets you need to keep "hot" for sporadic use throughout the day/week, but don't nearly need all that computational capacity around the clock. Unlike BigQuery, Redshift doesn't separate storage from querying. Redshift also doesn't offer a practically acceptable way to scale up/down; resizes at that scale take up to a day, deleting/restoring datasets would cause lots of administrative overhead and even capacity tuning between multiple users is a frequent concern.
Making matters worse, it is common for a small number of tables to be the large "source of truth" tables that you need to keep around to re-populate various intermediate tables even if they themselves don't get queries that often. In Redshift, you will provision a large cluster just to be able to keep them around even though 99% of your queries will hit one of the smaller tables.
That said, I haven't tried the relatively new "query data on S3" Redshift functionality. It doesn't seem quite the equivalent of what BigQuery does, but may perhaps alleviate this issue.
Sidenote: I have been a huge Redshift fan pretty much since its release under AWS. I do however think that it is starting to lose its edge and show its age among the recent advances in the space; I have been increasingly impressed with the ease of use (including intra team and even inter-team collaboration) in the BigQuery camp.
ozataman commented on Iterators and Streams in Rust and Haskell fpcomplete.com/blog/2017/... · Posted by u/psibi
I feel like the author has felt obliged to include the full results, which is noble, but it's mostly obscuring the interesting results.
What does it matter if the "cheating" versions are faster, since they're doing something completely different? (OK, in principle it could be the same with an unrealistically magical optimizer.)
Seems to me the key point is that a bunch of high-level constructs in both Rust and Haskell are very nearly as fast as a tight loop in C. That's great!
The versions that are much slower don't seem very surprising, as they involve boxing the ints. (Edit to add: OK, reading more closely, I guess 'Haskell iterator 5' is interesting to dig into.)
No idea why people reacting here so far got fixated on the "cheating" versions - it's clear to me they were included mainly to set a maximal speed baseline/benchmark and are not the main point of the article.
ozataman commented on Visualize data instantly with machine learning in Google Sheets blog.google/products/g-su... · Posted by u/pmcpinto
I'm currently evaluating BI vendors for my company and just about every major contender has this functionality or is developing it. Read the Gartner report from 2017 and they basically just come out and say that this will be the new standard in BI.
The much harder problem is data management and preparation. Anyone with half a brain and a decent visualization tool can create basic graphs - but that doesn't mean they should, especially if the organization doesn't have good data management processes in place.
Issues like data governance, data prep, and data modelling are the major pain points for me. And honestly, developing a useful BI solution is more about culture change than it is technology. If a company has poor data governance, it doesn't matter how whiz-bang their technology is, they're still not going to get useful insight from their numbers.
And data management / preparation is where major mistakes are made - get a join wrong and you may easily be missing data or double counting something just obscure enough to go unnoticed like "ancillary sales".
There is something potentially harmful, or perhaps that needs addressing, about end-user tools growing in expressive power. A good friend who does statistical genetics work once told me "but I don't want every user running their own regressions and drawing nonsensical conclusions from badly prepared data!"
Our Site:1 speakers are lovingly handcrafted. We make them one at a time, to our customer's desired spec, using their preferred tonewoods, choice of hardware, as well as other unique customizations.
...
The only way to meet their demands would have been to mass-produce huge volumes of speakers featuring no customizations.
How is Amazon even possibly a good place to sell this kind of an item? People overwhelmingly go to Amazon for the cheapest items that are the types of products that are sold at massive scale.
So if you can't by virtue of your business model sell 100,000 SKUs delivered two day prime, then it seems like Amazon would be a terrible place to try and sell.
I mean it looks like they make a fantastic product for a specific subset of audiophiles: ones that don't want a system to dominate their home. However they don't need Amazon's market to get to the scale they claim to want to reach.
Well, it's really tempting and financially desirable to try and get on Amazon anyway. There are lots of consumers on Amazon with both an appetite for that kind of an artisan item and the purchasing power to go for it despite the higher lead time. So the demand side is usually a given.
Don't forget that, from the manufacturer's perspective, Amazon is not only the logistical facilitator, but also a sales channel where huge numbers of potential customers are introduced to companies they wouldn't naturally be exposed to.
ozataman commented on Chrome will aggressively throttle background tabs blog.strml.net/2017/01/ch... · Posted by u/callumlocke
Pinned tabs would be an easy solution for this.
"Don't throttle pinned tabs"
I don't want to have to pin every single tab I want unthrottled - that's a mixing/piggybacking of otherwise orthogonal concerns. Just make it a separate option I can set per tab.
ozataman commented on Chrome will aggressively throttle background tabs blog.strml.net/2017/01/ch... · Posted by u/callumlocke
Hi, this is Alexander. I'm an engineer on Chromium team working on scheduling and on background tab throttling in particular.
Firstly, I want to make clear that we are not shipping this in Chrome 56. We have enabled throttling as an experiment in beta channel to measure impact and collect feedback from web devs. We will aim to ship it in Chrome 57, subject to further feedback.
In response to concerns voiced we will disable aggressive throttling when active websocket connection is present. Tabs playing audio are already unthrottled.
We will also consider more signals to use in exempting a page from this throttling: metatag, pinned tabs, permission to show notifications from user. Please leave a comment in the bug (crbug.com/650594) if you have other suggestions.
Looking forward to your feedback, Alexander.
In addition to automatically inferred signals, it would be great to give the user optional complete control over throttling as well at a per-tab level. I.e. a switch somewhere that user can freely enable/disable for a given tab to mark it throttled vs. unthrottled, whatever the right terminology would be.
ozataman commented on How to Become a Great JavaScript Developer blog.ustunozgur.com/javas... · Posted by u/ludwigvan
Knowledge work is different.
How to become great at Chess: - Read books about chess. - Watch other people play chess. - Read in-depth analysis of past chess games.
How to become great at Math: - Read books about math. - Watch other people perform math. - Read in-depth analysis of math.
You also skipped a key assertion from the author: "Do exercises and try to explain common JavaScript concepts such as inheritance in your own words."
But you're right, nothing beats digging in and creating something.
Any great chess player (let's define that as near-IM fide ratings and up) will tell you that it's a highly iterative process between practice, analysis and reading that is very much anchored around practice.
They play thousands and thousands of hours and, yes, also spend quite a bit of time reading, thinking, analyzing (both their own and others') games and learning from mentors/teachers. However, practice is king and all the reading/analysis would be worthless in its absence. They would have no anchors to grab onto in your brain - no way to really become operational.
A chess "player" that mostly reads, studies and analyzes with a little bit of practice sprinkled in between would indeed be hilariously weak.
That's when you know you've captured something, when people hate use your product.
Any real alternatives? I've tried continue and was unimpressed with the tab completion and typing experience (felt like laggy typing on a remote server).