aliostad

sure, but I imagine they have already removed those forks too.

Have a look at this list https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/01/2020-01-2...

Here is the terminal output of what I did to remove the file from the git history:

~/g/aliostad bfg --delete-files 1703 deep-learning-lang-detection.git

Using repo : /Users/alikheyrollahi/github/aliostad/deep-learning-lang-detection.git

Found 72811 objects to protect Found 2 commit-pointing refs : HEAD, refs/heads/master

Protected commits -----------------

These are your protected commits, and so their contents will NOT be altered:

* commit ac12aa68 (protected by 'HEAD') - contains 8 dirty files : - data/stackoverflow-snippets/cpp/1703 (3.0 KB) - data/stackoverflow-snippets/csharp/1703 (835 B) - ...

WARNING: The dirty content above may be removed from other commits, but as the protected commits still use it, it will STILL exist in your repository.

Details of protected dirty content have been recorded here :

/Users/alikheyrollahi/github/aliostad/deep-learning-lang-detection.git.bfg-report/2020-01-27/22-24-03/protected-dirt/

If you really want this content gone, make a manual commit that removes it, and then run the BFG on a fresh copy of your repo.

Cleaning --------

Found 69 commits Cleaning commits: 100% (69/69) Cleaning commits completed in 304 ms.

Updating 1 Ref --------------

Ref Before After --------------------------------------- refs/heads/master | ac12aa68 | c51406cc

Updating references: 100% (1/1) ...Ref update completed in 13 ms.

Commit Tree-Dirt History ------------------------

Earliest Latest | | .................................................DDDDDDDDDDm

D = dirty commits (file tree fixed) m = modified commits (commit message or parents changed) . = clean commits (no changes to file tree)

                         Before     After
 -------------------------------------------
 First modified commit | a4a1bbac | cb32cfbf
 Last dirty commit     | 45322921 | 6b9e8d5d

Deleted files -------------

Filename Git id --------------------------------------------------- 1703 | 530293d7 (614 B), 98c9b646 (3.0 KB), ...

In total, 47 object ids were changed. Full details are logged here:

/Users/alikheyrollahi/github/aliostad/deep-learning-lang-detection.git.bfg-report/2020-01-27/22-24-03

BFG run is complete! When ready, run: git reflog expire --expire=now --all && git gc --prune=now --aggressive

-- You can rewrite history in Git - don't let Trump do it for real! Trump's administration has lied consistently, to make people give up on ever being told the truth. Don't give up: https://www.aclu.org/ --

~/g/aliostad cd deep-learning-lang-detection.git ~/g/a/deep-learning-lang-detection.git git reflog expire --expire=now --all && git gc --prune=now --aggressive Enumerating objects: 89539, done. Counting objects: 100% (89539/89539), done. Delta compression using up to 8 threads Compressing objects: 100% (89537/89537), done. Writing objects: 100% (89539/89539), done. Total 89539 (delta 28336), reused 61123 (delta 0) ~/g/a/deep-learning-lang-detection.git git push Enter passphrase for key '/Users/alikheyrollahi/.ssh/id_rsa': Enumerating objects: 89539, done. Counting objects: 100% (89539/89539), done. Delta compression using up to 8 threads Compressing objects: 100% (61201/61201), done. Writing objects: 100% (89539/89539), 40.83 MiB | 1.01 MiB/s, done. Total 89539 (delta 28336), reused 89539 (delta 28336) remote: Resolving deltas: 100% (28336/28336), done. To github.com:aliostad/deep-learning-lang-detection.git + ac12aa680...c51406cc8 master -> master (forced update) ~/g/a/deep-learning-lang-detection.git cd ..

This is essentially what I did using bfg tool. They still took it down.

https://help.github.com/en/github/authenticating-to-github/r...

Well they said, I had 24 hours to remove the offending item according to the "remove sensitive data" link which I abided in a matter of a few minutes. They still took down the repo - that is the problem, not sending the notice.

"We're giving you 24 hours to make the changes identified in the following notice:

https://github.zendesk.com/attachments/token/BqByLyvvRzOAmVy...

If you need to remove specific content from your repository, simply making the repository private or deleting it via a commit won't resolve the alleged infringement. Instead, you must follow these instructions to remove the content from your repository's history, even if you don't think it's sensitive:

https://help.github.com/articles/remove-sensitive-data

Lack of communication and courtesy - disrespect to public good. I am happy to remove the mention per his request.

My understanding is that they hand just off the payload to another queueing mechanism. So it just returns ACK and done.

this is yet the "more detailed" post. Here is the original story https://customers.microsoft.com/en-US/story/raygun which I objected to https://twitter.com/aliostad/status/849186214045528064

We just did a benchmarking for a PoC on DocumentDB side-by-side Cassandra. It does the job, I have not yet seen anything revolutionary. Cassandra benchmarks seemed better.

DocumentDB is KV.

Thanks for taking the survey. And bear in mind after all it will be your data :)

For those who had the opportunity and pleasure of meeting you personally, the day the news broke out was a black day. You are a person who makes a deep impression, your thoughtfulness and very balanced view and how you articulate them. I now read your writings and find them even more compelling: sharp observation and bravery to spell the truth out.

Death is coming to all of us. We all die. Death of some, however, will be a big loss. You, sir, are among them.

Data and Viz @ https://github.com/aliostad/wiki-rock

I was exactly where you were. I felt I was solving problems that look almost trivial to me. Of course there are lots of hard distributed computing problems at the scale that Facebook and Google operate but not anyone is to work on them.

I found scientific programming: i.e. using Machine Learning and related disciplines to solve hard AI problems. I can guarantee you might get frustrated by lack of success and hardship of challenges but never ever bored.

In case you are interested, this is my blog post when I got inspired by this: http://byterot.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/future-of-programming-...

/api/v1/rock/similar?pos=[comma separated list]&neg=[comma separated list]

Use different names to mix and match styles. Example:

/api/v1/rock/similar?pos=Radiohead

/api/v1/rock/similar?pos=Placebo,Led Zeppelin

More info to come.

Thanks guys for your hard work.

dude, have you ever used Google Trends? It is a cut and paste from the source. The y axis is the popularity as the title says. It is so obvious even Google has omitted it.

Yes. And this trend is reversing. Have a look here: http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/machine%20learning.do

Salaries have gone up by 16%

Anyone else had similar experiences?

Imperative style means that A has to know about B. In needs to know what is the next step. With reactive it does not. This creates the decoupling. And also not everyone else's protocol. An event is an important business milestones for an order which has nothing to do with the implementation, and if you look, almost all of them are as such.

Yes, but they do them differently. BeeHive is much more opinionated about the message (must be event and has an enveloper) and the Basic Data Structures.

Also BeeHive avoids stateful actors. State is always persistent in HA queues or Basic Data Structure stores.

Well, first of all, debugging while developing an actor is actually easier: you just have to debug an actor in isolation and make sure it does the right thing and sends the right event in response to the incoming event.

In terms of debugging issues when in live, you have to rely on tracing and let something such as Logstash handle search, etc.

The ordering of the workflow is preserved. As I explained, FraudCheck is only ever done after an order's payment has been authorised.

Hope this makes sense.

No it is not the same. First of all, CQRS is applying CQS to the architecture, so it is an architectural decision. When you use commands, you know about the interface of the endpoint receiving your message. In case of an event, you do not have to know anything - and this is the whole premise of this post. In the article to come, I have explained the differences more with regard to EIP as well. A half-draft available at https://gist.github.com/aliostad/55b652e44dfe87d44444

Yes, so many buzzwords together - I admit.

The difference is replacing Commnad/Query with events. Replacing Imperative with Reactive.

Did you read the whole post or you were put off by the buzzwords?

It is about High Availability. Have you ever tried to use a central broker in NSB? The best HA you get is clustering 2 machines. And that is not HA.

Author here. Point is middlewares that are not built from ground up to scale horizontally are bound to die. BizTalk uses SQL Server for its storage as such cannot be horizontally scaled. End of story. NServiceBus... well, let's not go there :)

+10.

>> You simply CANNOT explain to a .net zealot what big data is. They just don't get it

Could have not said it better.

I am mainly talking about server technologies. So yes, client technologies do not need to scale. But if the when even LOB apps need to work wit

Remember "Can't hurt", not quite true. I am shifting focus, so I am spending time that could be spending on learning and mastering, blogging, speaking Microsoft technologies. If I am wrong, it will hurt me.

This is a REST viewpoint so assumes all services are exposed by a REST API. ESB sits in the infrastructure layer and not the presentation - so these cannot be the same.

But I think you are right that in some enterprises ESB connects everything but in this case this is a really nice presentation to watch - back from 2008 http://www.infoq.com/presentations/webber-guerilla-soa

I am really happy if you think all of this is common sense. In fact a lot of software best practices are common sense but they do not necessarily consistent with each other. Even in life, "Always help others" and "Set your goals and run for them" are common sense but they will make a different person out of you. There comes a time when you are at a fork and need to make a decision and then it is down to which one is really what you believe in.

Decision to separate domains of client and server is a big one and has its implications. CSDS is common sense as is HATEOAS but they are not consistent. ROCA is also common sense but does not agree with CSDS.

Server cannot rely on client for storing its own domain's state - while client can store user-related state for improving performance, usability.

For example, twitter cannot rely on a client to store the tweets while the client could cache the recent tweets for improving user experience.

Again, for an app playing music, keeping bookmark of the last song played can be fully stored on the client. Yet if it is needed to sync this bookmark across multiple devices (similar to kindle) it becomes a server concern.