Nonsense Don LeSantis Cheap Houses is a great partner for the money 👍

Check out the field of multi agent simulation. There is a variety of related software there.

There are also actor systems. That’s a low level model of computation. Seems like it would be suitable for building agent simulations. I’ve wanted to try that but no luck yet.

I hope he’s doing ok. That’s all.

I had to double check because wtf

ChatGPT is great at tutoring python. Go as well. Not sure on the others.

I think it’s a combination of things. My experience definitely parallels yours: when developers have access to the bill they tend to realize the cost of the services they are using. Sometimes even resulting in optimizations to those costs.

At the same time AWS can get fucked with how horrible their bills are to understand. They don’t exactly go out of their way or even slightly on a good path to deliver a clear bill.

So even if the developers have access to the bills they might just end up with an impenetrable list of bullshit from AWS

“account being deleted, something that had never happened to Google Cloud before.”

10$ says this has happened before but to a tiny customer who couldn’t get google to care.

It does! Tempted to start a campaign educating the accused on their rights to harass judges and staff.

Join me and use ~ to mean “shit changed just check the diff”

What is the power bill for running that for one day in, say, San Francisco?

Costco. Usually they pick quality stuff. If not then at least i can return it easy.

Yes but a few people will profit less. We should prioritize their feelings.

/s

The real problem right here

"Commit so many crimes that the trials for your crimes interfere with the other trials for your crimes. "

• Trump… Probably

That’s why I’m going for brain in a jar.

Can be. But really adds another wakeup jolt to the morning coffee ritual XD

Cool! Have fun! I wouldn’t worry about a lot of code quality opinions then. Especially if somebody is looking at prototypes and thinking they are not prototypes haha

My advice comes from being a developer, and tech lead, who has brought a lot of code from scientists to production.

The best path for a company is often: do not use the code the scientist wrote and instead have a different team rewrite the system for production. I’ve seen plenty of projects fail, hard, because some scientist thought their research code is production level. There is a large gap between research code and production. Anybody who claims otherwise is naive.

This is entirely fine! Even better than attempting to build production quality code from the start. Really! Research is solving a decision problem. That answer is important; less so the code.

However, science is science. Being able to reproduce the results the research produced is essential. So there is the standard requirement of documenting the procedure used (which includes the code!) sufficiently to be reproduced. The best part is the reproduction not only confirms the science but produces a production system at the same time! Awws yea. Science!

I’ve seen several projects fail when scientists attempt to be production developers without proper training and skills. This is bad for the team, product, and company.

(Tho typically those “scientists” fail to at building reproducible systems. So are they actually scientists? I’ve encountered plenty of phds in name only. )

So, what are your goals? To build production systems? Then those skills will have to be learned. That likely includes OO. Version control. Structural and behavioral patterns.

Not necessary to learn if that isn’t your goal! Just keep in mind that if a resilient production system is the goal, well, research code is like the first pancake in a batch. Verify, taste, but don’t serve it to customers.

Great potatoes… This is not very good advice. Ok for prototypes that are intended to be discarded shortly after writing. Nothing more.

The bill actually needs to get to his desk first…