A quick way of determining this with Finnish is if it is 1) a nature word + 2) follows a simple phonetic structure where each syllable is CV or CVV (C = consonant V = vowel) then it might be from proto-Uralic and so not a result of language contact but a "really old" Finnish word and may be congnate with words in other Uralic languages e.g. Hungarian or one of several tiny languages Russia. Also e.g. puu (= tree), vuori (= mountain) is proto-Uralic. Other nature words like järvi (= lake) which don't follow the pattern might be proto-Finnic but have come from neighbours (for järvi it is apparently from baltic/proto-slavic).
The database itself may internally store a more dense identifier than an autoincrementing primary key. For e.g. ctid in Postgres or, under certain conditions rowid in sqlite. These should be fully dense after a vacuum, and rejection sampling can be used to paper over tombstones generated between vacuums.
Looks quite similar to me. Both are using canvas (combined with off screen rendering?) under the covers which seems to be key to achieving this level of performance.
I would take that with a pinch of salt. The PCG and Xoshiro guys seem to have some kind of feud so some of the criticisms might not be as big a problem as they are made out to be in practice. Here's a partial rebuttal:
I'm also interested in this, having tried and semi-successfully used mutual information for finding associations between multinomial variables. As an even more naive question, I find the actual selection of estimators bewildering. How do I know which estimator to use for mutual information? How do I know if my chosen estimator has converged or is doing a bad job on my data? Bringing it back to the topic at hand, does the estimator presented in the paper provide good estimates for a wider variety of cases than the mutual information plug-in estimator? If so I can see it might be nice for simplicity reasons alone. Can we have different estimators for this new correlation coefficient? Any ideas what that would look like?
It's not that weird that people shift the borders given that Europe is not a real continent but rather constructed around ideas of "Western civilization". Is using it EU + close allies model really worse than drawing a border at the point where there starts to be too much non-Christian influence to bare?
There is https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0249/ . I suppose part of the issue is that there is probably deviation from the standard and lots of extensions. I imagine that the standard means there is a lot of shared code between the different connectors though.
That part was the joke. He's saying it's a real problem, but that's clearly the wrong solution. For him, it's obviously a bad solution, and so worthy of ridicule.
The thing is that training the models themselves is well within the resources of even the smaller actors that would want to use them in these way. It's the interested but not-quite-interested-enough or time-poor enthusiasts that are hit the worst.
Okay, I was actually responding to your "but these are virtually non-existent since peer review/editing is time and labor intensive", but I suppose you were referring to the process of finding peer reviewers.
Peer reviewing is typically unpaid in all cases. People are donating their time and the result of their hard research work to for profit businesses because it's the only way to get ahead (prestige).
For the case of Python packages which are primarily exposing a command line script, alluded in the `start|build|whatever`, there is pipx https://github.com/pipxproject/pipx
Lots of people make use of relational databases without formally understanding set theory/normal forms. They just learn by example and hacking it. What you're seeing here with deep learning is the same situation.
Since it's been distributed to you, you implicitly are allowed to use it unless told otherwise, but possibly only for private use. Most websites, for example, are copyrighted, but you are allowed to read them.
I was thinking the same thing. Looking at this, it seems in some ways more primitive and less principled than what they were planning, but on the other hand, this is actually being shipped. Power-Fx seems to separate out the relational data from the GUI. But it has relational data and it's reactive so it's most of the way there I suppose.
Tried Dash lately and was pleasantly surprised. We didn't leave much time at all for the dashboard section, but we were able to pick it up and hack something together in the little bit of time we had left.
If you just need to get stuff done in Rust you can just start wrapping things in Rc<>, Arc<>, Box<> or even Gc<>, which introduces runtime overhead on the level of Java. It's safe and allows you to work around thinking about ownership which I think is the main pain-point of using Rust versus other languages. Obviously later if it performance becomes critical you can refactor.