Honest question: how is this "AI-adjacent"? How does it specifically "simplify the practical application of AI models"? Focus of the question being on "AI"...
I got this one[0]. The VIS-06, specifically. I don't anyone should get the VIS-06.. maybe the 05 or 04.
The VIS-06 is so strong, when you turn it past the 5.5 mark on the dial, it's literally unusable. There's a vent flap for exhaling and ~6 mark that vent flap will invert (goes into the device the wrong way due to suction) rendering the exercise useless.
FWIW, I'm on 0.75 having worked up from 0. Going to 1 seems so hard.
Beauty of cash is that you can do whatever you want with it. For example, buy Netflix shares. Or buy Alphabet shares. Maybe Apple.
That way you can both benefit from upside and somewhat protect from downside of your own employer's shares tanking all the while you're getting laid off (as you're suggesting).
I still use GCP, but I avoid locking myself into their proprietary infrastructure when I'm writing new stuff. I feel like Google is far too cavalier about deprecating services and forcing their customers to do migration work.
It is hard to replace GCP's managed datastores because I really don't want to maintain my own database server (even if it's a managed service that someone else upgrades for me). So I've stuck to Google Cloud Datastore / Firestore, but I've been experimenting a lot with Litestream[0], and I think that might be my go-to choice in the future instead of proprietary managed datastores.
Litestream continuously streams data from a SQLite database to an S3 backend. It means that you can design your app to use SQLite and then sync the database to any S3 provider. I designed a simple pastebin clone on top of Litestream, and I use it in production for my open source KVM over IP. It's worked great so far, though I'm admittedly putting a pretty gentle workload on it (a handful of requests per day).
You don’t want to maintain your own database server, even managed by GCP, but with SQLite you have to maintain state on GCP Persistent Disks and backups to S3 using Litestream. Why do you think this is easier?
I don't have to maintain state on GCP persistent disks. I can blow away a server without warning, and I'll only lose a few seconds of data.
True, I have to maintain state on S3, but there's not much work involved in that.
If I was maintaining my own database server, I have to manage upgrades, backups, and the complexity of running an additional server. With Litestream, I don't have to manage upgrades because nothing bad happens if I don't upgrade, whereas there are security risks running an unpatched MySQL/Postgres server in production. Litestream has built-in snapshots and can replicate to multiple S3 backends, so I'm not too worried about backups. And there's no server to maintain.
What operational complexity do you see in Litestream?
SQLite is really great. By using it, you don't have to install and maintain another service, and you don't have to think about things like network security. From that point of view, that's clearly simpler.
But it also introduces a few challenges. It's not as easy to connect to your database remotely to inspect it, with something like SequelPro for MySQL. It's not possible to create an index or drop a column without blocking all writes, which can be annoying if your database is large. Database migrations in general are harder with SQLite because ALTER TABLE is limited. [1]
One last thing regarding losing the few seconds of data. If you use something like Google Cloud Regional Persistent Disk, then your data are replicated synchronously in two different data centers, which means you can lose your server, restart another one, and not lose any data. Can still be combined with Litestream for backup to S3 with point-in-time restores.
yeah, this is the more sane approach. Just use Google's replication/durability, and export to S3 when you want/need to change vendors. In this case, you wouldn't even need lightstream. Just SQLite.
If you can lose the last few seconds then yes that's fine. But for most applications I've been working on, we didn't have that flexibility (committed means durable).
I don't see any operational complexity with Litestream.io. I think that's an awesome tool. But it's not that different of managing PostgreSQL backups with something like WAL-E.
The complexity of managing your own database server only exists if you don't use a managed service. Then there is no server to maintain and they do all the things you mentioned for you.
The major difference is the risk profile of the decisions (although the time horizon might ultimately be the same): both Amazon and Apple were more mature (and significantly older, larger orgs, brand awareness, etc) running B2B and B2C businesses, while Snowflake is less than 10 years old and not well known outside some circles
While these are certainly tech companies, Amazon and Apple both primarily make their money by selling physical things. I believe part of his reservation in “tech” historically has been with companies that do not - not that he thinks they’re bad investments, just that he doesn’t understand them well enough to invest himself.
Not to mention perfectly valid non-speculative buyers.
Scenario for you: international student completed UBC and started working full-time on local tech company. After struggle to save, put a deposit on a place after saving from working part-time during later years of degree and about to close deal in a couple weeks (when new place is ready). Now, BAM! Gotta have to pony up 15% on home price agreed upon nearly a year earlier. More than original deposit! Tell me how that encourages qualified tech workers to stick around...
They aimed at a particular kind of "foreign buyers" in a crowd, but used a shotgun...
