traviscj

single single-page app?

edit: apparently a thing -- https://single-spa.js.org/

To me, the distinction comes down to: carpooling implies some kind of repeated/scheduled vehicle sharing (like coworkers coordinating a route to get to work at 9a every weekday, while ridesharing is much more ad-hoc/on-demand (like craigslist rideshares between Seattle and Portland to split the gas bill).

Definitely agree that Lyft/Uber aren’t really ride sharing in that sense though — the driver’s goal is to earn a fare on a trip he wasn’t going to take otherwise, while the original ride shares were a cost-reduction on a trip the driver was going to make anyway.

Seems like a tough sell to find enterprise architects that want to screen full-time, but maybe it would make more sense to someone that actually liked interviewing... or, as you said, maybe you could just pay them enough!

They have both.

Really interesting comments, thanks for taking the time to share.

> become your own advocate

Really resonates with me. Almost every time I go home and hang out with my parents, they share a new horror story about some close call with their medical treatments. (They've both had--and beat--cancer.) Last trip they were telling me about one of the days my Dad was getting chemotherapy; they needed to get a blood draw before the chemo was administered, and the cancer doc had instructed _them_ to make sure the phlebotomist installed a catheter for the initial blood draw, because (if I understood correctly) the extra needle hole in the vein from the blood draw can cause the chemo meds to leak & stagnate near the hand (which risks _the hand_...) But the phlebotomist didn't ask/confirm/want to, apparently because of some damn billing difficulty since the labwork division was different than the oncology division.

My conclusion is that there's a huge opportunity for more patient advocacy to really improve people's lives. Your "data for informed consent" angle sounds like a way more scalable path toward something like that!

Interesting fact, but honest question: What's the usefulness of this distinction?

- earthquake kit (water, energy bars, flashlight, first aid kit, foil blankets, ...)

- mess cleanup (paper towels, wipes, windex)

- small tool kit (leatherman, couple wrenches, battery post brush, duct tape)

I think there’s more but that’s off the top of my head.

It doesn’t have to pay for itself every year, which helps. (Still too much though, maybe...)

Or just let the DB work for you with BEGIN; + (select/update/delete) + COMMIT; or ROLLBACK;

I (partially) recreated your `seq 1 15` example here [1] -- no sleep, but my lshw wasn't as interesting as yours :-) I'm hitting command-shift-| to bring up the "filter through command" dialog.

[1]: https://tcj.io/i/textmate_piping.gif

Nicely done!

I do a pretty similar version of this with command-| in textmate, but I've wished for/thought about building a command like this to speed up the process!

The textmate approach does have the advantage (or perhaps disadvantage, for large enough inputs!) of emitting immutable "views" of the data at each step, rather than (presumably?) re-evaluating the pipeline each time, which is nice if the steps of the pipeline are the slow part, or to go back 2 steps and start a new pipeline. Maybe a potential future flag? :-)

Automatically emitting an `up<N>.sh` script is super clever too!

"O(1) expected restructuring" doesn't imply "O(1) expected insert/search/delete".

My read of your quoted text is "This has the same average time complexity as WAVL/red-black trees, but is a simpler algorithm", which puts the search/insert/delete time complexity at O(log(n)). Being top-down means log(n) time complexity since that's the lower bound on the height of the tree.

(Eh, lots of other more succinct discussion along these lines. That’s what I get for commenting before reading! Good luck w/ this work!)

I’m curious if an additional constraint like “total (absolute) time shift from this year to next (over all families in the district) <= K” or “max shift in first bell over all schools in district <= MS” was considered, along with the acknowledgement that this is e.g. an N year process to get from the current schedule S_0 to the optimal schedule S^*.

In my mind, this alleviates a lot of the “would have to change jobs this year” concerns, because the people making changes would ALREADY be making bigger changes (starting to take their kids to school), and the most extreme schedule changes would be deferred until the children on the existing schedule had aged out of that grade’s current schedule.

(Done enough optimization modeling to know this isn’t an easy path... but seems like it has some potential.)

Similarly, (maybe this was just the article dumbing down reality a bit, but it sounded like the transit expenditure vs parent happiness units were somewhat fungible. Any possibility of offsetting a bit of upfront expenditure with future savings of the more efficient (say from year N/2 onward) future state?

Like Checked vs Unchecked exceptions

For the love of god, learn how database indices work -- basically everything at https://use-the-index-luke.com/

"I didn't smash this F^O9dA66@wUPpK5$lTXBbrQ#yLP1EGl$"

Or the contempt comes from the state of feelings, anecdotes, and persuasion trumping science, data, and logic. Hard to argue rationally against “but I feel like pigs might fly” by starting with your own feelings on the topic.

I guess the world used to have less facts, and now they have to choose which ones to publish?

Jk. Money talks, and outrage sells better than dry facts.

Oh man, so many hours in my teens on this. It was my tumblr, I think.

I read the GP as saying “you don’t even need to create the scaffold methods” described in your post.

I’ll take prototype-producing egoism and PR stunts over “not my job”-ism any day.

I’ve noticed a pattern where the simplest solution DOES accomplish the goal, but isn’t what a user might consider the “shortest path”. How do you count a workaround where it technically can accomplish the end result, but requires a minor annoyance? What about a major annoyance?

What about a process so painful nobody has even thought of it?

Maybe we need a “War Dove GPL”?

We do this extensively. A field can be marked as "redacted", and then interceptors can do things like:

1. (most pertinent in this discussion) The logging framework can redact fields before emitting log entries. 2. Endpoints can redact the data unless the client explicitly requests (and is allowed to receive) unredacted data. 3. Serialization mechanisms (e.g. Gson) can be configured to redact data before serializing. (Again, probably can't always do this, but can make that the default for safety.)

It's also very straightforward to hook up as a Java annotation that does the same things.

Wouldn’t we just end up paying N rents to N partial owners, each of whom owned $249,999-sized parts of a given estate?

Your plan is to loop the government/regulators into the scam? What exactly is that incentivizing and how does that improve things for the average bank customer?

No majorities, I guess?

Piling on/agreeing with you: The “magic smoke” isn’t the model, it’s the infrastructure the model plugs into, the data->feature pipeline, AND the model. Assuming you’be done the things you mention (and maybe with one additional assumption of several models operating at once), I would also consider the models themselves to USUALLY not be super super sensitive.

One weakness of the way you’ve described this: John isn’t getting a commission on trades between the minglers, he gets a commission by the things he blares on the TVs in the room.