tempguy9999

I don't think so, as that categorisation can't be perceived by them. Like, they can't see it.

I'm saying that once 2 categories had been conceptually distinguished, I could split them apart immediately because the difference had been explain, whereas they were amorphously lumped together in my head before. Typically those categories had different words, but even without that the distinction became evident.

Well that's interesting. I can see that now.

But looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shades_of_pink it appears to lump your magenta (red/purple) into the same category as red/white. So really we've got 2 categories with the same name of 'pink'? 2 different things?

It makes sense to me. It matches my experience. I can't think of examples, sorry, but I do know there have been times I've learnt new categories by words (and of course an explanation of where they differed; the semantics of the words), suddenly distinctions became obvious that weren't before.

I wish I could recall examples, so this is just a vague statement of 'in my experience' but that linguistic distinction creates categories that allow easier 'recognition' of different concepts I'd lumped together before.

> sometimes light blue and dark blue are two different colours

I believe it's so in russian

> some languages consider pink to just be lighter red

This is interesting. Here in the UK pink is generally described and accepted as light red, but I've always considered it to be a separate colour, and I met someone who mentioned he though the same, so it's not just me.

There's light red but to my eyes that is qualitatively different to this https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/shock...

Any other views? Perhaps someone with knowledge of chromatics can better resolve the question.

thanks

Thank you for a helpful comment. I can see the initial comment wasn't sufficient now you've explained how it looks to you.

The 2nd post is harder to justify in a way. Some of it comes from experience, and understanding the behaviour of a merge join vs a loop join for example, and how much slower the latter can be if applied wrongly, which points to why the optimiser is so vital.

Edit: there's also the cardinality estimation (which can so easily go wrong), the dynamic programming for joins and the combinatorial explosion when it comes to ordering/reordering of inner joins, heuristic costs of using indexes vs not, etc.

Some of it was hearsay, but I stated it as such. Anyway, point taken, and thanks again.

Sigh. The usual downvotes because... why, you can pick holes in what I said, or some people's identity is so tied up with a piece of open-source software that they can't tolerate apparent criticism of it?

Fact: the optimiser in an SQL engine is almost the quintessence of it. If you don't understand that then you don't understand that the potential cost of the declarative nature of SQL.

Fact: SQL optimisers are complex.

New fact: microsoft has pumped fantastic amounts of cash into MSSQL. Posgres just doesn't have those resources (and other resources, such as the late lamented Jim Gray).

Other fact. Postgres CTEs were an optimisation barrier until PG11 or PG12 (https://www.depesz.com/2019/02/19/waiting-for-postgresql-12-...). AFAIK MSSQL's CTEs have never been an optimisation barrier, and I've used them long enough to know. I'm also trying to understand the cost of MVCC, which PG uses but MSSQL now has as an option, to try and understand where that costs, because depending on the scenario, it will. PG does not have READ UNCOMMITTED.

Fact: The guy I quoted had used postgres on large data a while back and said it wasn't as good as MSSQL. He had experience, which is the bottom line. I also acknowledged this may have changed recently.

Other fact: I don't dislike postgres and recently have decided learn PG also, because, for very good reason, MSSQL has its problems (the ridiculous cost not being the only one).

Fact: If you just downvote me without explaining why, neither of us can learn anything.

Possibly because MSSQL is 'better', or was. MS could pump almost unlimited money into its optimiser. Posgres doesn't have that and I've been informed a few years ago postgres wasn't as good. Maybe it's caught up now; I don't know as I've no experience with it.

For developer use, sure. But if you want to do anything commercial at all, you start to shell out ma$$ively.

The express (free version) may work for you but it's diversely crippled.

What an extraordinarily comprehensive, comprehensible and informative article. I don't think I've read anything quite like it before.

Then keep quiet.

I agree completely with @foopdoopfoop.

I had a similar experience with a different language at a startup where one programmer particularly would produce the most horrid code, use new features and libraries where they weren't needed, generally overcomplicate everything. He was smart as hell and made that smartness a liability for everyone else. The bottom line in a business is the bottom line; making money. He didn't understand that at all. No level of abstraction was too high, even trivial stuff. Dumb code that did the job well... dream on.

Oh heck yes, at least IME. I work in DBs and in a company I worked for were renting 16GB machines for the hosted service for their clients. I almost literally armtwisted them into upgrading to a 64GB dev machine. When they saw how that ran, within 3 days they'd started rolling out 64GB machines to their clients. Perf difference was huuuge because the hot dataset could fit into ram at last.

As ever, it depends on one's needs, but most often that need is greater for memory. IME. YMMV. Measure first as always.

Ah good, a response instead of an unhelpful downvote or 2.

I guess it's from experience, that when there's a bottleneck in my work and in many other areas I've seen it's down to lack of ram hitting VM.

Now lack of CPU is less crippling in a way, the CPU just divides n ways and things run proportionately slower. If paging happens, it can easily be far worse than lack of CPU as disk is so slow (ok, SSDs these days may ameliorate that; I've no experience there).

So why? Experience suggests lack of ram is more common than lack of cpu and the effect is worse. Of course the best thing to do is examine your system before you take anyone's advice, including mine.

IIRC grain is the reproduction of the plant. Women do the obvious work of giving birth, hence the link.

There's your "coherent inner logic in the abstractions" right there, it just isn't useful to HN readers except as a curiosity. We can't do anything with it.

> coherent inner logic in the abstractions

Umm, I recall in The Innocen Anthropologist the author said that grain threshing areas are closely associated with fertility of women. Doesn't really fit.

I do agree anthroplogy matters because so much of tech is about people not tech.

That's just lazy.

I'd imagine more mem would likely be more helpful? Sure you're not thrashing? Sorry if I'm patronising you... but thrashing is a killer

I'm having exactly this problem at the moment. Been isolated far too long, not used to noise now, stir in some buggery of mental problems... But I' forcing myself out right now to the pub. I won't enjoy it now nor for weeks yet, but going through that is necessary if I'm going to recover.

Sometimes it's just down to repeated practice, same as anything else.

HTH and good luck.

Lies are lies. Some are more evident than others. This was blatant. If you do not care about facts and truth then don't complain about the world you're allowing to be created by liars. Don't complain about shoddy products sold as good quality, don't expect contracts to mean anything, don't complain when politicians are dishonest. Do expect a race to the bottom, that bottom being a very ugly place.

I'm a brit and I suppose I'd describe myself as a remainer. That is itself a label which I don't like, but let it ride.

So an example message I'd be OK with is if bojo (boris johnson) had said that the uk gives 160 million (or 199 million[0]) a week to the EU, instead of his claim that it was £350 million a week (which deliberately and dishonestly ignored the rebate), I'd be OK with that.

I fear that tribalism is a disease that's damaging both the UK and the US at the moment; make your point with facts as far as possible.

[0] dependng on how you count, I've heard both figures

> The entire point of profiling is to spend less money

This totally misses my point.

I've heard similar regarding how they do things in the US, though your expression is more extreme. If true that has to be the most inefficient and corrosive way of improving anything.

I messed up, thanks for catching it. My mistake. Upvoted.

> because voters are supposed to be educated before they become potential voters

yes, in that they make up their own minds rather than be open to influence by those with most money.

> Or is it just that you shouldn't try to convince them with simplified messages that don't reflect the actual complexity of the universe?

Such messages tend to be of the form 'vote X! Y is crap!'. Or outright lies (qv. certain leaders) That's not even a simplified messages, the first is pure tribalistic emotive, the second, well, it misrepresent reality (aka 'wrong' or 'deceitful' or 'lie').

If the were factually based and told both sides I guess I'd be OK with it.

> Or that you shouldn't do it via Facebook?

No, facebook is just a tool. How that tool is used is what makes it right or wrong.

BTDT and I'd say no, it's a psychological effect of being overwhelmed mentally, even if you could handle it in better circumstances. Even the most trivial problems become crushing. Even imagined problems.

> It seems like a sensible way for a political party to get votes

Democracy was about educated voters, I thought. If you find this acceptable, we're on different planets. Perhaps ask a German about slippery political slopes? Or live long enough and find yourself in the middle of one.

> the article you linked to says this: "The Russian meddling that German state security had been anticipating apparently never materialized. Instead, the foreign influence came from America."

It also says "While the Russian episode involved ads bought under false identities by people with Kremlin ties" which you must have seen if you'd searched for 'russia'. How this statement links with the one you found, I don't know.

Filled up with cute clipart. Few images of the artifacts themselves.

Possibly the ultimate failure in basic interface design. Thanks, morons.

> Would you prefer a government that is open and overt about their domestic surveillance or one that tries to keep the public in the dark about what is happening

Translation: would I prefer a government that is openly hostile to human rights, or one that has some laws.

In answer, I'd prefer my system not yours.

> which is why they're kept misinformed + uninformed

And out comes the usual claim that westerners are ignorant.

"the Cybersecurity Law and related laws and regulations are very clear that they apply to all individuals and entities in China without regard to ownership or nationality. There are no exceptions. More important, the new Foreign Investment Law that goes into effect on January 1, 2020 eliminates any special status associated with being a WFOE or other foreign invested enterprise. Foreign owned companies will be treated in exactly the same way as Chinese owned companies"

If true? Talk about screwing your own pooch. With the milspec PoochBuster 9000.

Excellent reply, thank you.

Again, this is not aimed at you but the general posting without underpinnings that goes on far too much.

My problem is that when this plane is discussed there are some strange posts that I don't trust (they try to spread blame to the pilots, to question other countries' flight safety, smear things out). Also there are claims from people who may have just done some reading, and kudos to them but they aren't experts. Without more info a post like yours may fall into either of these camps, or you may be an actual expert, or quoting one. Clearly the latter here, so I can trust your info now.

> about these things is not compatible with a 5 minute HackerNews comment

Actually they are. If a verified expert they can present a lifetime of experience in a short sentence, then do. With any luck these threads will become a fraction the length and much more informative.