The big difference between Zeppelin and Jupyter is how you can easily build interactive notebooks with input fields, checkboxes, selects, etc. This is much closer to what I thought notebooks were going to evolve into back when I saw them the first time; Hypercard for the data engineer. Observable has kind of delivered that, but on the frontend. Jupyter seems to me to have gone down the path of code editor with cells, and Zeppelin unfortunately never got any traction.
This is possible to do with ipywidgets [0] and all the ipy[stuff] packages.
bqplot [1] for example is great for 2D dataviz, very responsive and updates real-time. Based on D3 I believe. Usually I can do what I want with base widgets and bqplot and the result is pretty.
ipyleaflet is another popular library for maps.
I especially enjoy using them with voila [2] to create an app, or voici [3] for a pure-frontend (wasm) version.
If you want to develop a widget, the new-ish anywidget library can reveal handy [4].
For an example, see this demo [5] I made with bqplot and voici, that visualizes a log-normal distribution.
1. VizHub [1]: for D3 based visualizations. I have not tried it, but I have watched some D3 videos [2] by its creator Curran Kelleher who uses it quite a bit (oh, and a shout out to the great D3 content he has!).
2. This is slightly unusual but I have recently been using svelte's REPL notebooks [3] to try out ideas. Yes this is for svelte scripts, but you can do D3 stuff too. And on that note, svelte (which is normally seen as a UI framework) can be used for pretty interesting visualizations too, because how it can bind variables with SVG elements in HTML (you can get similar results with React as well). For ex., here's a notebook I wrote for trying out k-means using pure svelte [4]. Be warned: fairly unoptimized code, because this was supposed to be an instructive example! On a related note, Mathias Stahl has some content specifically for utilizing svelte with D3 [5].
I don't understand if you're saying that Zeppelin or Jupyter is easier for input fields, checkboxes, etc., though it reminds me either way of Mathematica (going strong since 1988 too!).
You can create interactive notebooks with marimo, an open-source reactive notebook inspired in part by Observable and Pluto.jl. We have sliders, checkboxes, selectable tables and charts, and more, built-in.
I'm an AWS Solutions Architect and I was helping a customer with the same issue as in the article a couple of months ago.
What I found out when I researched it is that there is a subtle difference between using lifecycles to move objects to other storage classes and for deleting objects: deletions are not transitions, they are expirations – and expirations are free. I submitted a clarification to the S3 documentation and now it says "You are not charged for expiration or the storage time associated with an object that has expired." (https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/lifecy...)
If you have objects in IA or Glacier there is a minimum duration you're charged for, but there will be no extra charges for expiring these objects.
Thanks for the clarification. Since you looked into this recently, could you elaborate on any possible scenarios when S3 Intelligent Tiering would cost more than S3 Standard? All other storage classes have gotchas built in that can cost more if you're not careful, but I'm thinking Intelligent Tiering might be friendly enough to set it up on all buckets/objects. Are there situations where this is not advisable?
Intelligent Tiering no longer has the 30 day and 128KB limit[0], but it does still have a "monitoring and automation" charge of $0.0025 per 1,000 objects[1] for the objects larger than 128KB. This may be significant if you have a very large number of objects. Potentially you could pay more than Standard if your objects all end up staying in the frequent access tier.
> The problem is that most websites simply aren’t compliant. They choose to make a mockery of the law by offering a skewed choice: Typically a super simple opt-in (to hand them all your data) vs a highly confusing, frustrating, tedious opt-out (and sometimes even no reject option at all).
Like the Techcrunch site where this was published.
And it's not possible to change/withdraw consent after allowing it. I've searched 5 minutes and found no link or widget that would get me to that screen.
I know right?! I went there and met by a giant wall of GDPR bullshit without a button to say "no", buttons grayed out but clickable, multiple page scroll down to reach the desired opt out, default everything off on the first page, but default as you went further... prime example all the way.
At one point in the process I got worried that the GDPR popup is itself whats posted and not an article.
I was confused on most examples I got because they started in the middle of a block comment. That's clearly wrong, but was it an artefact of the presentation rather than the generation?
As a european , i d rather have my surveillance camera phone china than the US. Google already knows too much about where and what i m doing, they dont need access to my camera. China OTOH doesnt have any kind of legal jurisdiction on me, we don't have some the kind of alliances that we share with US. Like during the cold war, arbitraging between spies was a safe bet.
What would you do if you were in a position of importance and China had some things you'd rather everybody not know? Don't be fooled that nothing can come of it just because the legal jurisdiction doesn't exist.
Couldn't agree more. So many people are so scared of China (the new red scare) but in reality if you did something illegal who do you have to fear more gets their hands on the data: The FBI or some PRC equivalent? There are hundreds of stories of FBI (and CIA) working in other countries but I have never heard of any PRC people kicking in the door of someone outside the PRC.
As a European I prefer having Erikson and Nokia build our networks than unaccountable Chinese companies. 5G is a unique chance to get some tech sovereignty back as the two leaders (outside of state-supportrd Huawei and ZTE) are European.
I don't want to be the wise guy, but you know that technically, the People's congress was elected correctly, right?
And yes, they had multiple parties until the republicans had two elections in a row, and managed to influence the supreme court so much that they could gain total power over new arising parties (declaring them illegal from the start if they do not represent the congress's opinion), up until there was no way to get elected because the media was controlled by the very same laws.
See any parallels regarding Fox News and the Republicans or say, Dick Cheney?
No? Maybe do some research on your own and sleep over this.
China is actually the only country I would compare US's democracy with, because a lot of candidates have no choice but to join one out of two partied to even get considered to be elected. And it's not the 1st vote that decides this, because democracy in the US doesn't differ between party votes and candidate votes (whereas most other democracies have moved on, for like hundreds of years, and fixed this).
Thr problem I see here is that the US didn't have a revolution. Europe had to be crushed a couple of times in order to learn how to prevent their architectural mistakes in future.
Data collection and political system are VERY different. All governments collect data on their private citizens, but not all sell their organs for profit or do forced sterilization
I think the US is much better at collecting data. The US has been proven to collect data and plant backdoors, China has not, despite how much the US states that eg. Huawei has backdoors in their 4G/5G equipment. So either China is much better when it comes to privacy online, or just way more competent as they manage to avoid getting caught.
Answering to both responses to my post: as an European citizen I know that technically US is better at doing data collection, even more so because it's a "friend" country and we can't wait to give our data to them
But my question really is: does it really matter to me, provided that the data is gonna be collected anyway, who does it?
They're both, at my eyes, not doing it to my advantage.
I guess as an Italian I don't see China as a bigger threat and probably China is less interested in harvesting my data for the reason that they are not selling me anything by targeting me whenever I do something on the internet?
I speak English, I don't speak Chinese, my continent is watching the US elections tonight, it doesn't happen with Chinese politics, my pears stay awake at night to watch the Oscars, I don't even know if the Chinese equivalent exist, basically what US does is much more relevant in day to day life, what happens in China stays in China, so they are not really trying to buy my attention, which is the most valuable asset I own.
Well, until that democracy decides you have something interesting they want to take away from you.
In that case, regardless of whether you're a grotesque dictator or a quasi-peasant just getting by with your life, better start counting the days before something bad happens to you...
Good point. Democracies are horrible because they gave us nazi germany. Or how about we stop with the silly propaganda talking points and deal with the topic at hand?
As a non-US citizen, how can I be sure that all non-Huawei equipment is free of back doors, data-exfiltration and forwarding capabilities excluding the lawful interception feature set?
Internet was too ethical, naive and immature when NSA did that. We were happily using unencrypted connections to connect to forums, telnet based BBSes and such.
NSA, OTOH, intercepted the switches which would isolate high security networks (red/black separation) and bleed sensitive information with these enhanced hardware.
>As a non-US citizen, how can I be sure that all non-Huawei equipment is free of back doors, data-exfiltration and forwarding capabilities excluding the lawful interception feature set?
I help companies reduce their AWS bills, and do cloud migrations to AWS. This is well suited to being done remote, and I'd be happy to do a free video call to get an idea of your bill and what can be done – it's almost always possible to reduce your bill by a large chunk. I've been working with cost optimization in AWS for a couple of years, and with AWS for more than a decade.
We went through something similar a couple of years ago, when TLS wasn't as pervasive as it is today and at first focused mostly on minimising the response size – we were already using 204 No Content, but just like the OP we had headers we didn't need to send. In the end we deployed a custom compiled nginx that responded with "204 B" instead of "204 No Content" to shave off a few more bytes. It turned out none of the clients we tested with cared about the string part of the status, just that there was a string part.
When TLS started to become more common we realised the same thing as the OP, that the certificates we had were unnecessarily large and costed us a lot, so we switched to another vendor. When ACM came we were initially excited for the convenience it offered, but took a quick look but decided it would be too expensive to use for that part of our product.
Is anyone still seeing problems like this? I found duplicate entries in our Parquet CUR reports, but not in the CSV versions (we export both, for reasons). The duplicates were from 24 September beween 00:00 and 13:00 UTC and only for Usage and DiscountedUsage. Not limited to EC2, though, it was Redshift, CloudWatch, and a lot of other services too.
I'm Swedish too, and grew up with the same understanding as the parent poster. Only in recent years have I understood that khaki can refer to both a military type green or sand like beige color.
Swede here. I asked my wife too, her reply is that the color "khaki" is a shade of green - "khakigrönt". But the specific style of pants - "khakibyxor" - are generally beige.
Great to hear that tag based auth is coming. I'm at a loss about how to use it without something like that. It looks like you either have to handle each instance individually (which makes no sense where AWS has been pushing auto scaling and spot instances for a decade – instances are ephemeral in our world), or have one rule that applies to everything in the account. To me, being able to limit access to groups of instances is a required feature.
