> I can get this access in under 5 seconds by opting into the desired exchange privileges under EXC<GO> or most likely just pinging my Bloomberg rep
Because there is a marketplace. If Gamestonk is successful, there will be a marketplace for low latency feed + commercial support to configure them for you.
It just takes time for free software to match commercial offering at first, but eventually it surpasses them (too many example to list) for 90% of the uses.
If it let me cancel my Bloomberg subscription, why not?
All I want is reddit + twitter firehose sentiment mining, accurate plot of basic (EURUSD, wood futures) and not so basic (VIX) things.
I do not need to keep track of cargo ships on a map.
That sounds like great free software. But again, to quote from that thread a few months ago:
The only thing that this shares with the bloomberg terminal is that it can do equities and is on a terminal.
That above Gamestonk Economy page showing how you can pull `dgs5` from FRED, is basically unrelated to the `GOVT` functionality on Bloomberg. You have to understand, quoting an index is a whole other league from pricing information on individual bonds; anyone can do the former, but Bloomberg does the latter.
There's "boring" and there's "content", and OP is probably talking about the latter. Once you have a family it takes over a lot of the energy you could previously use for work, and that's both expected and desirable.
The evidence is that a society filled with bitter, maladjusted people who's parents were too busy pouring their heart and soul into work to provide a stable, loving family household is one nobody should want. Like, there's shades of grey here, but you should prioritise your children over your next Jira ticket.
So when threatened to have their source of funding cut (as most people wouldn't be able to pay out of pocket), a union of professionals attacked the moved as dangerous/cost cutting/etc? And they were supported by their employer industry representative associations??
> Some compression algorithms support checkpointing the compression state so that it can be resumed from that point repeatedly ("dictionary-based compression"
Another toplevel comment claims it is relevant for the use case where you stuff the whole corpus into a single stream. When you want to add new data, you don't want to start over compressing everything.
Do you have a tutorial and some examples? If not, could you write one?
I sometimes deploy perl code at large scale for financial computing where only performance matters: with XS the overhead is low while gaining language flexibility.
Even in 2021, this is usually faster than alternatives by orders of magnitude.
PDL could be a good addition to our toolset for specific workloads.
- Access to GSL functions for integration and statistics (with comparisons to SciPy and R): <https://gist.github.com/zmughal/fd79961a166d653a7316aef2f010...>. Note how PDL can take an array of values as input (which gets promoted into a PDL of type double) and then returns a PDL of type double of the same size. The values of that original array are processed entirely in C once they get converted to a PDL.
Just to give a summary of how PDL works relative to XS:
PDL allows for creating numeric ndarrays of any number of dimension of a specific type (e.g., byte, float, double, complex double) that can be operated on by generalized functions. These functions are compiled using a DSL called PP that generates multiple XS functions by taking a signature that defines the number of dimensions that the function operates over for each input/output variable and adding loops around it. These loops are quite flexible and can be made to work in-place so that no temporary arrays are created (also allows for doing pre-allocation). The loops will run multiple times over that same piece of memory --- this is still fast unless you have many small computations.
And if you do have many small computations, the PP DSL is available for the user to use as well so if they need to take a specific PDL computation written in Perl, they can translate the innermost loop into C and then it can do the whole computation in one loop (a faster data access pattern). There is a book for that as well called "Practical Magick with C, PDL, and PDL::PP -- a guide to compiled add-ons for PDL" <https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.07753>.
> There are quite a few problems with that in the case of medical records.
Only if you have a paternalistic view
> Some of this information may be urgently needed at a time when the patient is not capable of giving informed consent for its disclosure or does not have it immediately available.
What if I accept the risk I may die due to bad luck/odd circumstances to still refuse the information being handled out by anyone but me?
> Some of the information may be vital to the future healthcare of the patient and would cause serious harm to them if it were lost.
Likewise, what if I accept future risks? I have more skin in the game from losing my records than an hospital losing them anyway.
> And in more of a more morally grey area, some information might be harmful to the patient if they had it.
Then what about I refuse having the information, in exchange of the information also being unavailable to anyone else?
Many people here seem to have the view "more information is good" but not collecting it in the first place seems better to me.
Hence I do no healthcare in the US, only in SE Asia where most services are available in English and Chinese anyway.
> A lot of our economic machinery more or less bakes in some big assumptions about the size of the workforce not declining
Do it like software: if the implementation doesn't match reality, fixing the implementation is easier than trying to fix reality to match the broken assumptions
“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”
But if you believe it is reasonable or desirable to engineer social changes to increase the birth rate to be able to create and support economic growth, I think your priorities ordering is not right
> The whole point is to generate an exciting event that an audience will watch. Multiple competitors having a chance of winning makes an event exciting
Disgusting. Do all the competitors also get to have a trophy in the end, like in modern day schools?
If you want everyone to have a chance, next move is to give them handicap. Make them wear lead belts. That'll be fun for you maybe?
Me, I want to see the top competitor crush the others after utterly dominating by doing daring moves
> it's not supposed to be elementary school gym class where the goal is having fun
You don't get it. It's about being so above the others that you can have fun again and getting away with it.
Quoting her:
> "they don’t want the field to be too far apart. And that’s just something that’s on them. That’s not on me,”
She's above the competition now. She is not there to win anymore.
It's hard to explain. When I read HN, I see the modern equivalent of corporate paper pushers who want to play nice and dream to excel at society game playing by society rules.
This is not the hacker spirit of the old days, which was about doing daring things. Modern ""hackers"" want to learn the framework of the day to put it on their resume linking to github that show they are teamplayer. This way they get a coveted FANG job then get 2.5 kids and a dog, a 401k, rince and repeat as happy cogs of society until the day they die. Lame.
No wonder why they don't get it!
It's a disease of the modern life ""hackers"": they don't want to bite the hand that feed them. To be fair, I don't expect much from people who need a day job to survive. They just want a ""fair"" competition of people playing by the rules, just like they do now, instead of admiring excellence, like they did before.
Simone is not afraid to stand above. That's a spirit I respect and admire.
> This decision from the International Gymnastics Federation is similar to their past low score-valuing decisions for debut moves by Biles, something she has spoken out against at length.
Doesn't seem like she sees the under-scoring as fun.
Like what, she should just quit the thing she's been dedicating basically her whole life to it and became the best of the best in her field? Why do you think it's just a question of "choose to quit if you don't like it"?
Of course she cares about what they think but it's completely out of her control, it's more of a sign of her being aware of her own power limitations and pushing through in other ways where she can have control rather than accepting whatever the committee decided.
The alternative is not to quit the sport, I think the alternative would be to play by their rules and make less riskier and outlandish routines and get higher scores.
Um maybe re-read the comment you are replying to. It seems you both agree that Simone should be scored according to her talent. I think you're being downvoted because you mis-read the comment you are replying to.
Because there is a marketplace. If Gamestonk is successful, there will be a marketplace for low latency feed + commercial support to configure them for you.