Yes, Polars does extremely well in popular data manipulation benchmarks.
29 karma · joined January 30, 2023
Exactly, it is an industry-driven change IMO. In fact, R has gained a lot of popularity in academia, especially in the Social Sciences --though perhaps Python has gained even more.
But in industry, R's falling hard. I also think that the growing popularity of cloud analytics platform solutions such as Azure Synapse (now Fabric) is a significant factor. Though SparkR is a decent R-native API to Spark, Python has so much support in those cloud analytics ecosystems, it's hard to keep doing things in R.
R had a good run, and IMO they still have some packages that are just too good to see it languishing into the future, notably the package data.table. I have not come across a better library for data manipulation, in R or Python. The syntax is excellent and it is faster than most alternatives, especially the popular ones.
I think an important factor that contributed to R's downfall is the decreasing hype around data science, as well as the fact that the core base of R users do not have a background in the STEM fields, but rather the humanities and social sciences. I do believe that the R community of developers are dedicated and perhaps, in relative terms, are more involved with their projects than a typical Python developer. But that's not enough, the sheer numbers of Python developers eclipses R's and that is too hard to overcome.
So so true.
I was working on an adhoc project that needed a quick result by the end of the day. I had to pull this series of parquet files and do some quick and dirty analysis. My first reflex was to use python with pandas, quick and easy. Python could not handle the datasets, too large. I decided to give R and data.table a go and it went smoothly. I am usually a python user but from time to time I feel compelled to jump back to R and data.table. Phenomenal tool.
> I'm not sure how you can determine the background of someone by how fluently they can write a language - particularly when the piece in question is written better than what most college students in the US can produce.
Perhaps not so much grammatically, but the text intonation and others parts of the text do not give the proper formal tone of the comm.
> when the piece in question is written better than what most college students in the US can produce.
As if this piece of information is some high bar to overcome.
Are you conflating "good at capitalism" with "good at running a business"?
Not trying to endorse or defend capitalism, but this article depicts a good example of cronyism, which is not inherent to capitalism.
I'd also add that the premium for these types of services are higher when a system is more bureaucratic and complex for businesses.
Mr Bankman-Fried bought Mr Kives' services in huge part to add a veneer of legitimacy to his business, also helping him to make the right connections with influential people in the government. That includes donations to political parties. People like Mr Kives' are very aware that you can certainly buy goodwill from regulators and politicians this way.
As usual, there are many factors that contribute to the current housing situation. On the supply side, I feel a major issue is lack of qualified workers. And I am not sure immigration can solve this problem easily unless you are prepared to accept lower quality housing. It is not a coincidence that specialized trades like electrician, heavy machine operators, roofers are not immigrants. The standards are higher here. In the developing world, standards are much sloppier. So it isn't simply a "plug-and-play" situation. There are other issues though. I know that input prices have skyrocketed.
To me, the focus on the demand side is becuase it is easier to solve whereas the supply issues are more structural.
I don't live in a major city, land is not a problem here, building permits is not an issue.
No major party that I know of have a coherent strategy to solve the housing crisis and the TFR issue. None. They all have contradicting ideas embedded in their policies. Usually it is a mix of more incentive to own property (e.g. incentives to first-buyers, incentive to construction companies, etc) while also increasing immigration to record levels, what changes is the flavour of immigrants they prioritize (different sectors of the economy, more refugees, etc).
My household income sits comfortably in the top 5% earning bracket and there is no way we can afford a bigger home even with a substantial equity in our current house. We've been looking into places 40, 50 minutes outside of the SUBURB we live (not downtown) and the prices are slightly lower but not enough to justify the move. Tell me how this will happen the situation of Canadian families here?
The strategy of pumping immigrants into the system is not sustainable. At some point, you need to have a sustainable strategy with a TFR > 2.1. We need babies, not immigrants.
I agree, there is no conspiracy. It is just that when scientists, journalists and public servants are usually on the same side of the political spectrum, there is no need to central coordination (conspiracy). Society seems more polarized than recent times which leads to greater uniformity of ideas on each side.
Regarding Ivermectin, though the evidence was flimsy, it got quickly identified by one side as a problem because it put at risk some core beliefs on how to combat the pandemic (lockdowns, forced vaccination, sanitary passes). Even though the evidence for some of these beliefs were also flimsy or speculative.
As a father of 3 young children, my view is that social media like reddit, tumblr, discord, facebook, instagram, twitter should be out of bounds for anybody younger than 16. I would really like them avoid until their very late teens, early 20s but I know this will be impossible. The risks far outweigh the benefits, perhaps a social feed monitored by a parent is fine, but never unsupervised, the damage is real and kids can be pulled into niche subjects that may form their personality in their teen years with no sight to the long term damages. Call me square I don't care.
HN and other forums with a somewhat narrow interest/focus are fine by me, in fact I would somewhat encourage them to read and participate in these activities. People here tend to be more genuine about their interest and they tend to keep it narrow--just look at how little traction political discourse gets on this site, it's refreshing, people on this site are intrinsically focused at the task at hand.
Cost of living where I a, in NA is def higher but I also know that my kids will get a better education overall. In fact, you have to pay a fortune in tuition fees for your kids to have a similar education to public schools here in NA.
I am not sure what is your situation but if you have more than 1 child, things start to get dicey cost-wise. I don't think there is a lot of disposable income to go around, and that's for a relative low cost of living city in Brazil like Recife. I guess if you are childless things would be different and I can see the fun times outweighing the rest. But for me it is a solid "no way".
In fact, inflation is, in its current form, a tax levied by the government on all citizens--rich and poor. You are correct that the rich can find ways to hedge some of the effects of inflation, but that's expected as the rich have way more disposable income.
I just want to know for how long people will close their eyes to these policies (green energy stimulus, self-inflicted supply chain bottlenecks, QE and bailouts to ultra rich and party donors via deposit bailout).
We should not take these things lightly.
The fact that you pre-emptively accept the idea that maximizing diversity to its limits is beneficial to corporations shows that people just take these things at heart because "the people in charge said so". It is not a coincidence that much of the research of the supposed benefits of diversity in businesses comes from business schools in prestigious institutions—HBR, Stanford Business School, etc. As these institutions are one of the most authoritative entities of the structures of power in the West. At some point this bubble must burst.