It depends– if you're trying to run a specific algorithm on your new supercomputer, then you'd almost certainly be better off paying for researchers to optimize or improve on that algorithm.
If that's the situation (which it is for e.g. weather forecasting or computational fluid dynamics), then a billion pound supercomputer is likely to be more of a boondoggle than a sharp-eyed investment.
A good implementation on a desktop can beat a bad one running on a supercomputer.
But if it's a time-sharing system, then it might not matter as much.
The supercomputer at my university tends to run a lot of one-off jobs like an experiment repeated thousands of times with different parameters.
On a desktop that might take weeks, but if run in parallel it's like a couple hours.
Tightly optimized code might bring that down to an hour on the cluster (or a mere week on my home PC) but I wouldn't bother because making the code more efficient might itself take a week or more.
So the fastest way to get the results I need would be to just run it on the supercomputer.
Matt Levine's excellent Bloomberg newsletter "Money Stuff" frequently comments on this - search for the phrase "Everything is securities fraud": many reprehensible things a company does are possibly not technically illegal per se (or it's hard to prove that they are), but they do constitute securities fraud, and that's easier to prove and prosecute.
They avoid making actionable statements. In this case, the CEO did not explicitly assign blame, so it would be difficult to call them a liar. Omitting is different from lying. Using vague terminology isn't lying. So you get stuck with all this corporate talk, where they act as if they're apologizing, but won't even really say what they are specifically apologizing for.
I find the amount of money in these cases so staggeringly high that I can't imagine that a vast portion of 'those in power' are not complicit in some ways. There is simply no way to mix this amount of money back into the system without lots of people of statute being involved.
Actually given the size of these institutions I find the amounts fined staggeringly low. None of these institutions is remotely in danger of losing even one year's profits because of this.
That's how you should judge this. The "highest fine ever" is $700M on a profit of $13400M (after tax) according to their financial report. Or something like $2k for someone making $100k yearly (again calculated as 4% on after tax).
None of these institutions are in any danger of serious consequences. This is a "1% less hookers at the christmas party" punishment.
> When you have 100k+ employees, it's immensely difficult to keep tabs on every. single. thing. that's happening.
Tough. You want the big bucks? You gotta solve hard problems. Big companies shouldn't be able to whine or excuse their way out of problems because those problems are hard. If they're too hard to solve, pull an HP and split your company into lots of smaller companies.
Those in power over a business with a trillion dollar asset flow don’t have to know everything personally: they can afford to hire a robust auditing department to make sure they’re in compliance with the law, just as they don’t personally handle every new hire or procurement. That also helps in court: if J. Rogue Banker’s story ends when the company learns of it and immediately alerts the authorities, it’s a lot less likely that the bank is going to get hit with penalties due to the clear lack of organizational approval.
The places which don’t have good auditing teams are gambling that they won’t be fined more than the cost of having one, which is easy to fix.
I've been developing in go/node/python on a headless 1cpu 512mb 20gb vultr instance. Tmux, vim, w3m and weechat. I use mosh and firefox from a laptop/desktop/phone/tablet and never had any issues. It does prevent me from writing rust though.
I think they require some 'independent' source of information, like news articles. I'm quite surprised by the comments on this article. McDonald's didn't present their case properly while that should have been easy. Seems the onus is on them, regardless they still have their appeal.
They provided an independent source of information. You say it should have been easy yet nobody has been able to articulate exactly what they should have done. It's not like the lawyers were being lazy; the information they did supply was quite detailed and would have taken substantial effort to collate.
Vim is my main editor, my main gripe is that it performs terribly (without any plugins) with either relative numbers, cursor line or syntax highlighting in files larger than 200 lines.
Did you try different terminal emulators? All these features sound like they cause a lot of redraws, so it could be that the terminal emulator's renderer is the bottleneck here.
Out of interest in this I made Https://linksforreddit.com. You can view who links to certain articles. I backed up and truncated the 2017 data because the VPS ran out of space but there where and are interesting patterns. Nothing proof like but the same pdfs sometimes get linked close to a hundred times by similar themed and structured essays but textually different comments.
