gipp

35 ms·

391.
by gipp 9y ago
Your link seems to argue that the simple fact that it's common convention makes it explicit, which doesn't really seem to hold water.
392.
by gipp 9y ago
Don't even need to go anywhere. https://gizmodo.com/5671062/there-are-5000-janitors-in-the-u...
393.
by gipp 9y ago
For the university "market", the only game in town is prestige, which teaching quality plays into very little, if at all.
394.
by gipp 9y ago
Everything you said after "this article is silly" kinda seems like just restating the exact point of the article. The central idea is that the massive costs of writing code that adheres to a specification takes away resources from
395.
by gipp 9y ago
You can, yes, but inverting a matrix is computationally expensive, and for a large X, numerical optimization methods can be much more time/space efficient.
396.
by gipp 9y ago
How does this compare to Octave? ( https://www.gnu.org/software/octave/ )
397.
by gipp 9y ago
If the video games of my childhood are to be believed, Japanese also does this for purple and black.
398.
by gipp 9y ago
The AWS example is really the same thing (making multiple identical requests is the same as one request), just explained very poorly. Further down: > If you launch your instance using run-instances (AWS CLI), ec2-run-instances (Amazon EC
399.
by gipp 9y ago
Kevin Mitnick, famously, ages ago. Not sure if anyone else has ever had that.
400.
by gipp 9y ago
That post is from 2010, before even 2.7 was released. It is extremely out of date. Re-running the same tests I get: In [1]: from typing import NamedTuple In [2]: class A(NamedTuple): ...: a = 1 ...: b = 2
401.
by gipp 9y ago
For simple classes, you can also just use `NamedTuple` like: from typing import NamedTuple class Foo(NamedTuple): bar: int = 0 baz: str = 'default' foo = Foo(1, baz='not default') This provides the
402.
by gipp 9y ago
If they have liability, it is assumed as part of their supplier contract with Honda. Open source software does not have this, and nowhere does the author suggest that should be the case -- they _certainly_ do not suggest such an assumption
403.
by gipp 9y ago
If I build an airbag in my garage, and Honda shows up tomorrow and puts it in their car, and it fails because I don't know how to make good airbags, I would not be legally liable for those failures. Honda, however, would be. Your ana
404.
by gipp 9y ago
Your line of comments is maddening, because you're clearly in total agreement with the article, yet seem to somehow be reading in almost the precise opposite of what its point was. The author was not blaming the Struts guy. She was bla
405.
by gipp 9y ago
I think the idea is that "personal" implies ownership and the second one doesn't.
406.
by gipp 9y ago
Mypy / the PyCharm typechecker have come a long way. It's not the same, of course, but you can get a good bit of mileage out of the new gradual typing system these days.
407.
by gipp 9y ago
https://qz.com/1061322/doctors-are-burning-out-because-elect...
408.
by gipp 9y ago
Yeah, it does all those things, as long as you write all the code, set up all the systems for it to interact with, and manage all the logic yourself. That's like saying Python does all those things.
409.
by gipp 9y ago
What? Luigi and Airflow are ETL frameworks. They express dependencies between tasks, schedule their execution, and that's about it. Model storage and versioning, feature definition and extraction (batch and real-time), model deployment
410.
by gipp 9y ago
I'm not really sure what similarities you see between the two.
411.
by gipp 9y ago
That's a semantic battle you've lost already.
412.
by gipp 9y ago
90% of data scientists do not use neural networks. Of those who do, 90% shouldn't be, and are letting what's fun/interesting get in the way of actually producing value. The fact of the matter is that if you're not FB&#x2
413.
by gipp 9y ago
So we should sacrifice all the things that actually make a Data Scientist's work valuable in the name of fun and obscuring mistakes? Fun I almost get, obviously good for productivity (though I think you'd really be sacrificing
414.
by gipp 9y ago
> yet you already insinuate this person is a racist bigot Where on Earth did you read that into his post? He said those are the kinds of opinions that tend to elicit those responses, not anything about the OP.
415.
by gipp 9y ago
Those are only "benefits" if you don't have automatic imports, though. In an IDE the neatness of your imports is a non-factor in deciding package structure, and who cares about the size or structure of your import block? You
416.
by gipp 9y ago
> Don't be a prescriptivist, words don't have a single fixed meaning, just because Lock defined right to mean something long long ago doesn't mean that's what people mean when they use the word. Yes, I know. I agreed
417.
by gipp 9y ago
> in nature it's quite common for any or all of those things to be taken away Not by people, is the point. Rights only apply in terms of humans and human society, obviously.
418.
by gipp 9y ago
Sure, words mean whatever the consensus is that they mean. My definition above is just the original one. If we decide it's this new, broader thing, then so be it. But if "rights" encompass things that a perfectly just, well-i
419.
by gipp 9y ago
As with your sibling comment: > I'm not saying this article is alone in diluting the meaning of a "right", it's been going on for years all around the world. That dilution, though, has made it basically useless as a c
420.
by gipp 9y ago
Which, in turn, flies in the face of the original, Lockeian definition of "natural rights". I'm not saying this article is alone in diluting the meaning of a "right", it's been going on for years all around the

More ›