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.
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.