The high numbers here are eye-opening, but the article doesn't shed any light on the process.
I'm left with the feeling that opening a restaurant is hard, but there is nothing to chew on in terms of improving the situation as a citizen or interested party.
Not having played with SIMD much myself, does leveraging these instructions for an intensive operation like a sort push other workloads out of the CPU more aggressively than operating on 32 or 64 bits at a time would?
In other words, do you have to be more careful when integrating these wide operators to preserve some resources for other operations?
This isn't how scaling works though. Across all applications the hot data growth outpaces the cold.
So if you're designing capacity for exponential growth, the future point at which you stop experiencing exponential growth and only have to worry about roughly linear growth is a much easier problem to solve.
Are you more interested in fixing a process or fixing the problem?
Sending in-product feedback certainly could work because it's more likely to be seen by product management as it continues to roll in.
Support-driven product change requests are well intentioned but generally break down as a process internally. The working knowledge base and incentives are not properly aligned.
I think you're spot on. Self driving software seems to me like it will handle the vast majority of driving situations much better than humans could within the 5 year horizon OP is asking about.
Patterns and automation supporting modularization hasn't received the attention that patterns and automation around services has over the past 10 years.
In practice, modularization raises uncomfortable questions about ownership which means many critical modules become somewhat abandoned and easily turn into Frankensteins. Can you really change the spec of that module without impacting the unknown use cases it supports? Tooling is not in a position to help you answer that question without high discipline across the team, and we all know what happens if we raise the question on Slack: crickets.
Because services offer clear ownership boundaries and effective tooling across SDLC, even though the overheads of maintenance are higher versus modules, the questions are easier and teams can move forward with their work with fewer stakeholders involved.
That's not at all the case in my state. The state and county operated facilities were huge, and moved a significant number of people through the vaccination process extremely efficiently.
For testing, I've been to many facilities. The county run facilities have been efficient and organized, whereas the private ones were not set up as efficiently to get tests issued and results returned.
That said, my primary care office is now set up to return results quickly, so private seems to be catching up.
Healthcare options were a major deciding factor when I pursued entrepreneurship in 2011. Ultimately we decided that the Massachusetts options at the time had sufficient coverage given we didn't yet have children, but the plans were significantly cheaper than today and employer packages offered higher degrees of security.
Yes. In the early 2000s Endeca made use of several public ontologies to enhance its information access and summarization products for clients.
One particularly compelling example that comes to mind was an ontology involving public companies, figures, events, and relationships that was combined with NLP (entity and concept identification) over semi-structured content on the ETL side, and faceted search and navigation on the retrieval side, to replace a research portal for a major UK newspaper in the mid 2000s. The results were mind blowing.
It's far easier to enforce information Access control in a services oriented architecture.
In a monolith, a developer doesn't even have to use an access controlled API. They can simply access sensitive data through underlying access mechanisms and return it through an inappropriate endpoint.
Generally in banking you either separate preauthorization (or reservation of funds) from authorization, or you separate transaction from settlement and you compute an acceptable rate of loss.
Why did you decide to go with an escrow model in your use case?
I think in the near term a combination of good content and enjoyable user experience with viewing application is going to drive adoption.
I have a Roku and Samsung SmartOS TV. The only independent playback experiences that come close to Netflix, Prime Video, and Paramount+ in my limited experience are Plex, Apple TV, and for legacy stuff, TiVo.
I'll take this weird world of locked-in distribution channels for a few years while innovation progresses, and hope Plex and Apple TV win once innovation stops.
Imagine blasting this sequence down to huge numbers of consumers, and letting independent nodes coordinate on intervals in the sequence in order to establish secure one time communications.
The bit rate is so high it would be impossible to reproduce the pad despite having access to the full random bit stream, because you couldn't possibly store the historic stream for future analysis even if you could eventually determine the past communication's interval.
Personally, I think ORM has a reasonable use case here, but I also find doing this using SQL to be straightforward and easier to reason about during future refactors.
Take a look at JDBI's Repository pattern for a simple compromise between SQL and ORM for this use case in particular.
Many companies do not provide read access to application databases either, without explicit consent via well-defined process. There are many compliance-related reasons why this is implemented, one of which may be the protection of your customers' financial performance data.
Allow biases but penalize the publication of misinformation after the fact. Publishers producing informative content might emerge as the breadwinners and the propagandists will lose revenue.
I'm left with the feeling that opening a restaurant is hard, but there is nothing to chew on in terms of improving the situation as a citizen or interested party.