Last I did benchmarking, a vast majority of memory allocations were strings that were typically all dereferenced right away and cleaned up in GEN1 GC. I had contemplated whether string pooling would be useful or not but never got around to it. Would be interesting to see if you could get reduced memory usage and potentially better performance by decreasing pressure on the GC during the GEN1 phase.
(Side note: this was when I was co-maintaining MCPC so was typically with mods installed and they heavily use NBT which I suspect is where a lot of that string allocation was happening.)
You are correct. Both links that he posted are talking about reinfection. So prior infection + vaccine > infection (no vaccine) > vaccine only > no infection/no vaccine.
Yeah. Barnes and Frei didn't read the contract at all. They were just going off the court filings. I don't think they were aware of the additional provision about AWS having the right to terminate right after the 30 day suspension notice provision.
I would suspect that it would give Twitter pause about hosting anything in AWS. But I doubt that is the case because there seems to have been a pretty clear-cut case of collusion between Twitter, Apple, Google and Amazon to silence Trump by any means possible.
That is because he's giving a tiny example of a starter template for a console app.
If you were writing a "production-level" console app with multiple commands, logging, needed DI, input validation, nice looking progress bars, etc. Then this is pretty much what I'd want for a console template tbh.
None of those sound all that inflammatory. Mostly just political rhetoric.
"We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them, because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong." -- In context, he is saying: "Cheer for the Republicans in congress, maybe not so much for the ones who aren't backing me because they aren't showing strength" -- nothing about that seems like it is incitement.
Yet somehow Democrats saying worse things is applauded.
Compare that to where actual violence is implied:
"If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere."
- Maxine Waters
"Go to the Hill today. Please, get up in the face of some congresspeople." - Cory Booker
"We owe the American people to be there for them, for their financial security, respecting the dignity and worth of every person in our country, and if there is some collateral damage for some others who do not share our view, well, so be it, but it shouldn’t be our original purpose." - Nancy Pelosi
Some of my favorites are the little old lady carrying a little American flag, the people walking in a line between the roped off areas and the folks cleaning up after a couple of trash cans got overturned.
Seemed incredibly tame compared to the riots that went on over the summer that had massive amounts of looting and had buildings burnt to the ground.
I think it is more that they see selectively removing content as equivalent to moderation and thus they shouldn't have safe harbor. So maybe they want them to only remove illegal content or something?
"At this stage, there is no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission in the novel #coronavirus (2019-nC0V) outbreak in #Wuhan, #ChinaFlag of China. However, the Chinese authorities continue intensive surveillance and follow-up measures, including environmental investigations."
https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1216397232427147264
"Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China🇨🇳."
https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152
"The Committee does not recommend any travel or trade restriction based on the current information available.
Countries must inform WHO about travel measures taken, as required by the IHR. Countries are cautioned against actions that promote stigma or discrimination, in line with the principles of Article 3 of the IHR."
https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/30-01-2020-statement-on...
There's actually a TON of regulatory compliance involved with tenant screening like this in the US.
Pretty sure that they run afoul of a few provisions in the FCRA. That they claim to "keep reporting fully confidential and DO NOT notify your tenant that you have reported to our system." seems really fishy to me. If a landlord makes an adverse decision based on information in their system, the person being screened has a legal right to view that information and dispute it.
Nobody is going to point out that of the 11 patients, "8 had significant comorbidities associated with poor outcomes (obesity: 2; solid cancer: 3; hematological cancer: 2; HIV-infection: 1)"?
I don't even understand what the point of this study was except as a rebuttal to the prior study. I mean, if people thought the prior study was cherry picking results. I don't even know what I'd call this...
There's _some_ anecdotal evidence that it _may_ work if treated early. Hopefully there are some real studies that are being done on that.
You can use things like System.GC.TryStartNoGCRegion and GCLatencyMode.SustainedLowLatency to help mitigate the GC pauses though. There is a lot of work that has been going on with the CLR GC code somewhat recently.
I'm curious where the 40x slower figure came from. It would really depend on what you are doing inside the method.
If the method is a small amount of "synchronous" code in a tight loop, then yeah, the overhead of the async call is going to outweigh any benefits (a few orders of magnitude slower).
However, if your method is doing something like reading in a 40MB file to do some processing and calls the ReadAsync methods then the difference will be negligible and you get the benefit of better parallel throughput.
It says on the page:
"Note: In general, the farther away you are from an Amazon S3 region, the higher the speed improvement you can expect from using Amazon S3 Transfer Acceleration. If you see similar speed results with and without the acceleration, your upload bandwidth or a system constraint might be limiting your speed."
So I suspect you might be having that problem in your test.
Every time I run into this or look up something on caniuse[1], I get a (most likely irrational) annoyance that we're comparing things like IE9 which came out in 2011 (predating the official flexbox spec) against modern versions of Chrome and Firefox. I think the way caniuse's interface is set up, IE9 currently lines up next to Firefox 44 and Chrome 49.
My though process goes something like:
Is it because Internet Explorer is sucky? Partially.
Is it because people/companies aren't updating? Absolutely.
Is it because Microsoft made it hard to update? Partially.
I can't help but think that if a lot of people/companies didn't update their iPhones or Linux desktops for 5+ years, we'd be seeing the same issue and blaming Apple for being so shitty.
BTW, looks like all the flexbox bugs in IE11 have been fixed in Edge[2]. I doubt that IE11 will get patched.
I would hope "stakeholders" is in reference to Project Stakeholders (i.e. Project Managers) and not stakeholders in the company (which would be absurd).
(Side note: this was when I was co-maintaining MCPC so was typically with mods installed and they heavily use NBT which I suspect is where a lot of that string allocation was happening.)