Why is doing one thing a qualification for a good piece of software? I could see that some users may prefer this model of tools, but I use plenty of good software that provides a more complete solution than just doing one thing.
And then skip ahead and read chapter 10: git internals. This was really helpful for me to understand the fundamental concepts of git and why it is designed the way it is.
This has no been the case historically, I'm not sure why it would be now. Why would ms invest in languages like vb.net and f# if so? Choice of languages that target the CLR has always been a selling point even though c# is dominant.
$100 more for 2x RAM and storage, that doesn't seem like a "ridiculous premium". Unless you mean ridiculous in some other way than the actual dollar amount.
The point was probably that this is not scientific. Whatever model you come up with won't really have any predictive power. See arguments against pseudo-science, e.g. Freud and Marxist theories.
"Writing cached data back to persistent storage is bad", what is the "right" way to write data? I'm not terribly familiar with distributed systems, just curious. Is this referring to write-back vs. write-through?
I was wondering how this relates to Datomic... I'm not really familiar enough to say much about similarities and differences, but would be interested if someone who is could comment.
I find it somewhat funny that the term "machine intelligence" seems like it was coined in part to distinguish it from "machine learning", but, while this project is clearly part of the latter, they have chosen a moniker using "machine intelligence". Obviously no one owns the word, but it just seems people love using new buzz words and efforts to distinguish these things are quickly muddied.
I wonder if this is actually true at all? I mean, yes, everyone around here absolutely abhors software like this, but there is a class of people who love hunting for bargains and accumulating coupons etc. Is there someone who buys a laptop like this and enjoys the additional advertisements? I always wondered the same about those annoying toolbars, I imagine some people actually perceive these as useful.
Isn't this essentially the model for wearables already? Except with the opposite relationship: the phone is the smart device and the watch is relatively "dumb". This makes sense since it is easier for my phone to be much larger and more powerful, I can also take it out of my pocket if it gets too hot, etc. It looks like in this case they've made the watch smart and the larger screen dumb, which is novel, but I'm not sure I see the advantages. Also, I am much more apt to lose my watch than my phone, but maybe that is just me.
I'm not sure this blog post could have been any less dramatic. He could have not written it I suppose, but he brings up valid points that are probably useful for everyone who might be using or interested in Nim. I don't think the attitude here should be "if you don't have anything good to say don't say anything at all."
Yeah this article really says nothing interesting about the languages. The BASIC timings are from 48K Atari 800 system and the Python timing are from some unknown modern system. Not sure what the point is...
Can you suggest any good reads which incorporate the history & motivation of linear algebra? I have had some experience with the common text books, but never put much effort into incorporating it into the way I think, precisely because it did not seem worth my time to just memorize methods without much context.