To be fair, I doubt Maestro will take off like Airflow did.
Airflow filled a void of an easier orchestrator for Big Data with a prettier UI than the competitors of the time (Oozie, Luigi), implementing some UX patterns which had been tested at scale at Facebook with data swarm.
Seems like you have some experience with the orchestrator offerings. Airflow still the way to go, or would you recommend something else for someone just starting down the path of selecting and implementing a data orchestrator?
I haven't used Airflow for years but it used to be quite clunky, not sure how much it's improved since. I'd look into Prefect and/or Dagster first, both are more modern alternatives built with Airflow's shortcomings in mind.
This article claims Assange is a likely organiser of Cicada 3301, this is not a theory I have heard before - does anyone have any resources that expand on this ?
Always a point of contention between my partner and I, but I am firmly in the 'rinse-before-loading' camp.
Theres only so much the filter in a dishwasher can take before it clogs, and it is easier and a better clean to simply rinse the bulk off quickly then pop it in the dishwasher for a proper clean.
The article addresses this by saying just to scrape it off first, but I am convinced I get a better clean if the bulk of the sauce etc., is washed off too. Maybe I am imagining it.
The idea is that if it costs $r to store a base-r digit, then base 3 (or e in a continuous scale) turns out to be the most efficient. Obviously, there's no a priori reason to think that a 3-level gate is exactly 1.5x more expensive than a 2-level gate, so this is mostly of theoretical interest.
I'm thinking about how this would apply to human psychology of reading and writing numbers. Then it doesn't make sense to measure economy as b floor(log_b(n)+1), because adding in more symbols doesn't increase the complexity linearly for people reading or writing numbers. Maybe something like E(b,n) = f(b) g(floor(log_b(n)+1)), where f stays constant up to 10 or 20 symbols, and then increases after, and g increases faster than linearly because it's easier to read shorter numbers than longer ones.
