In the CS curricula I'm familiar with, the introductory algorithms and data structures class is usually a prerequisite to the core systems classes. In order to learn how computers really work, you must first be familiar with the key ideas of organizing and manipulating data. Designing algorithms and data structures for real computers is an advanced topic few students take, because they are more interested in software/systems/theory/ML.
My Linux distro has never slowed down for me, except where I've personally done some weird config muckup. And I know exactly who is to blame... insert "of course I know him, he's me" meme here...
Linux file managers manage to be nice and snappy. On my machine, KDE's Dolphin, on an NVME, takes, maybe, 4 seconds to open and scan a folder that has more than 9000 folders and files.
What's Windows' problem? It has no excuse. Maybe, just maybe, the Windows Explorer, plus the stack it runs on, is utter garbage.
My experience was opposite on directory with 30k files via SMB. Windows Explorer took within a second while Dolphin took 30 seconds. Nautilus took over a minutes iirc.
I don’t know what it is, but I don’t care for it. I love plenty of other fish raw, and love tuna when cooked. Salmon I generally have no problem with raw.
It's kind of a compliment. "Hot take" is becoming common parlance, but a hot take as defined by Blind Boy Boathouse would be a connection you notice between two seemingly unrelated things, and then dive into to arrive at a smashing observation about, where you link those things by obsessively researching the connections between them, to reveal a hot take on events that no one has quite heard of, or had the same take on before.
I've heard advertisements on the radio recently for financial and sports programs and web sites where they promise "No hot takes — only real information."
Yeah, I think "hot take" [1] is the analytic analogue to expressions like "by the seat of the pants," [2] meaning something like: A rushed, likely emotional, reaction to something with no or minimal follow-up research or analysis.
Not precisely. What makes a "take" hot is its provocative or controversial nature. It's not quite flamebait -- that implies more of a deliberate attempt to sow discord -- but it's along the same lines.
>> The flu, like all viruses like it, mutates quite rapidly.
>> It'll just mutate in response to the "one shot" to get around it.
Curious how we manage to so effectively vaccinate against Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Smallpox, Chickenpox but cannot seem to do so against the Flu? Why dont those other viruses mutate rapidly to get around vaccines?
> The data presented in the manuscript show that, to escape immunity, a disease-causing, or pathogenic, measles virus would need to generate a large set of mutations — simultaneously — affecting multiple parts of the surface proteins. Simultaneous disruption of at least five antibody targets is required before the virus starts developing resistance to the diversity of neutralizing antibodies in the bloodstream.
Measles can't create an escape mutant, or at least it's so hard that centuries of immunity exerting pressure and gain of function experiments can't produce one. Flu recombines and reassorts like crazy. It has RNA segments (the media likes to call them "chromosomes", but they are not) that are pretty much interchangeable, so if you or a non-human animal gets infected with multiple strains, you can get a virus with a hybrid of those segments quite often. I think rubella actually can escape. The chickenpox vaccine mostly just suppresses symptoms. The smallpox vaccine is just another orthopoxvirus, so you get pretty good cross reactive immunity.
It's not outrageous to think that mRNA vaccines may allow for more specific targeting in a way that may be less subject to immune escape than previous approaches.
The specific targeting makes it easier to allude the vaccine as only a small part of it has to mutate.
For example, natural immunity recognizes the entire coronavirus, not just the spike as the covid vaccine does. There was a study that natural immunity was more effective against the virus and variants because of this.
You could however have yearly subscription shots like we do now, just mRNA flavored that target the new strains, but there are hundreds.
I don't see the advantage mRNA would have over traditional vaccines for the flu, but for something like cancer or HIV it seems promising. Doing something your immune system can't do by itself.
> The specific targeting makes it easier to allude the vaccine as only a small part of it has to mutate.
Nothing says an mRNA vaccine can't express more than one protein.
That said, I'm talking more about being able to target a portion of the virus that's more fragile than others - somewhere a mutation is likely to make the virus useless if a mutation occurs there.
(The ability to rapidly adjust for mutations is a bonus, too. I'm hoping we get to a regulatory regime eventually where they can tweak overnight and produce fairly locally.)
> There was a study that natural immunity was more effective against the virus and variants because of this.
Sigh, what isn't biased these days? No need to poison the well, the article is clear and sound (to me at least) regardless of who wrote it and why. Do you have any arguments against it? Or your own better analysis of the two studies?
It really annoys me how people disregard what "the other side" is saying just because it's them saying it. Just adds to the polarization. And it annoys me because I used to do the same.
> I'm hoping we get to a regulatory regime eventually where they can tweak overnight and produce fairly locally.
I don't think that's likely. Even if a scientist was able to adjust a vaccine overnight, you'd still need to do a clinical trial to verify that the vaccine doesn't accidentally target something that it shouldn't.
>I don't see the advantage mRNA would have over traditional vaccines for the flu,
The current flu vaccine targeting isn't 100% reliable. If they can get better targeting for the mRNA vaccine it could be a win.
Eggs are used in the process for the traditional vaccine. Some people are allergic to eggs, so they can't take the traditional flu vaccine. For those people the mRNA version would be an option.
I would agree that it isn't an emergency, but there are benefits to it.
I think this is the right answer. Like Corona it mutates too fast. So you need to vaccinate all living creatures that can transmit the virus all at the same time.
Another way to get rid of it is to go into a global 100% lockdown for two weeks at the same time. Again animals that can transmit it included.
Coronaviruses spread easily indoors, people need necessities eventually and will spread it in some form.
Lockdowns don't work and never worked for this virus, they cause worse damage than the disease, lowers immune systems, destroys the economy and livelihoods, and they are authoritarian.
They're relatively smart in that they can quite intelligently navigate their environment to best get at prey that might otherwise kill them.
Really, all animals are relatively smart (ignoring individual differences in a species), in that they have specific skills and abilities that allow them to be most effective for their biological makeup, and purpose in their respective ecosystems.
We humans are no different in that regard ~ we are relatively smart, in that our biological makeups grant us leanings towards skills and abilities that other animals don't have.
CS also leads to generally garbage performance with its abstractions, because computers simply don't function according to assumptions of CS...
Better to teach people how computers actually work, and then go from there.
Doesn't feel particularly surprising anymore that software has been getting slower far more quickly than hardware can get faster.