I’m hearing that Lexmark/Unicomp keyboards were/are a cost cutting project compared to original Model F. Interestingly there is a company that resurrected true, pre cost cutting, model F: https://www.modelfkeyboards.com
I guess the point here is that a huge percentage (7% just for Vanguard) of votes was not decided by the actual share holders. These shares are passively invested because Tesla is included in indexes like S&P 500. So the decision on the 7% of the votes was made by a few Vanguard execs. I'm not arguing for or against the decision, just stating the fact that it is much easier to convince a few Vanguard managers instead of 7% of the actual share holders.
Yes, but Vanguard is very large and has a significant interest in the success of Tesla. This certainly wasn't a decision they took lightly and their vote in favor of Musk shows that they have a significant amount of trust in him.
Tesla’s second-largest shareholder, Vanguard, voted against the pay deal in 2018. BlackRock, the third largest, voted for it. Both declined to say how they were voting this time.
I actually think that for VTSAX manages, the fact that they have to vote is sort of a liability for them. My guess is that they would rather not vote at all. They own the whole market anyway, and should only care about tracking the underlying index as accurate as possible with as low fees as possible, its bureaucratic. Now they have to publicly vote in a dubious popularity contest and take sides in a battle they don't care about.
>Vanguard also has significant interest in the success of all Tesla competitors that are part of the index.
They don't really. They own GM and Ford stock, in smaller quantities, nothing from the other largest auto makers. Do you know something I am not aware of?
Most of Vanguard is a large bureaucracy with two goals: accurately track an underlying index and keep the cost low. They do have some actively managed funds but those are insignificant compared to their passive funds.
Does anyone know about BlackRock and State Street votes?
But Vanguard, which has total assets of about $9 trillion, and other big index fund managers were always likely to be key to the vote. Representatives of Vanguard rivals BlackRock (BLK.N), and State Street (STT.N), declined to comment about their votes on Thursday.
Answering "Design Uber" questions is like playing a weird charade game in a LARP camp. It is very convenient for the interviewer because they set the rules and can change them anytime. They only prepare their question once and apply it it all candidates. What type of signal these are supposed to generate? Are these some sort of behavioral/hazing rituals? Why all the smoke and mirrors? If these are testing System Design skills, why not ask a specific System Design question? Why not ask about tradeoffs between single vs multi leader vs leaderless? Why not ask specifically about document vs relational.
Better yet, why not look at the person experience and ask them how would they scale a system they actually worked on before? And what were the tradeoffs.
The relatively simple algorithm (lookup) can be several times faster than conventional algorithms at a common task using nothing more than the instructions available on commodity processors. It requires fewer than an instruction per input byte in the worst case.
Not specifically about ML, but a good paper about unnecessary complexity introduced by a premature 'scalabilitization':
The COST of a given platform for a given problem is the hardware configuration required before the platform outperforms a competent single-threaded implementation.
Or
“You can have a second computer once you’ve shown you know how to use the first one.” –Paul Barham
