ProTip for casino-robbers in and out of movies: If you absolutely had to build a (directional) NNEMP impulse generator, an EPFCG would be the easiest, but loudest, way to power it... of course, it's obvious: don't anyone be anywhere near it when it goes off, as it would likely damage the cardiomyocytes and/or neurons of the sick, young and old at a minimum per Chinese research in this article about battlefield NNEMPs.
On the plus-side, that money has bought him the choice to build whatever, whenever, almost never having to beg for financing ever again and the choice to not sell.
DHH often talks like bootstrapping and not selling is The One True Way™ but,
financing trades equity for time: accelerating traction or traction-ability that can beat someone else to market (T2M). It's a slower path, but it's not rushed either. Pluses and minuses to both, and it depend on the category and circumstances
I'm actually surprised by how good the wood pulp version tastes. Unless I'm buying straight up vanilla ice cream, I don't mind the wood pulp version of vanilla at all. If it's vanilla with stuff mixed into it, I won't really be able to tell the difference.
I read in an article that real vanilla only matters for applications that don't involve high heat, as the other flavors in a real vanilla bean get cooked out. Imitation is just as good for most purposes.
Reading the article, they talk a lot about the alcohol cooking away leaving you tasting less alcohol in the product. Now my question is, where do I buy vanilla that comes in 35% alcohol solution? I can only ever remember seeing dry vanilla.
It doubt that imitation vanilla copies all the chemicals that are present in natural vanilla, as there must be hundreds. With artificial flavorings they usually only copy the most dominant component.
You're right, but vanillin (C8H8O3) is very dominant (even in natural vanilla) and, as natural vanilla is cooked, a lot of the other compounds tend to be destroyed.
"Excuse me, but your house wasn't destroyed in the fire, it was merely broken down to other chemicals. Your insurance only covers destruction of property."
I bought a bottle of synthetic and a bottle of organic real vanilla extract recently, and did a taste/smell test.
The synthetic smelled and tasted like vanilla-flavored motor oil and rubbing alcohol. It was terrible, and cheap, and plentiful. I can't imagine what I could use it in to mask that chemical flavor. Ugh.
The aromas and flavors of vanilla extract are exactly what you will taste in your finished product. They don't really transform into anything, the ethanol and water just evaporate and leave you with the dissolved solids from the bean. Tasting it in raw or extract form tells you what it'll taste like in a finished product.
Flour, on the other hand, varies greatly in its end result based on the genetic variant, grade quality, and milling, in combination with amount of water and the mechanical process of mixing. You can determine the effect on the cake by looking at the type and grade of flour, along with its moisture content. I wouldn't advise eating it.
The vanilla is going to interact with hundreds of volatile compounds during cooking while going through chemical changes. These things change the overall flavor. There's so many different things that can change how the end flavor comes through. Time and time again, it's been shown that the real vs fake vanilla thing doesn't matter for more complex foods (read: baked goods where maillard reactions are going to be common and the volatile aromatics present in real vanilla get destroyed)
In ice cream, cocktails, whipped egg whites, and other foods that are minimally processed, the complexity of real vanilla makes a big difference. I'll eventually make some batches of cookies and small cakes and compare.
Under 150% gross profit margin (without electricity, fibre or real-state) over 3 years. I'd say the closer figure is ~ $300-400k per box for single company-scale servers, leading to a closer-to-net profit Amazon profit of around 100%
Although, it's possible to keep a server beyond its lifecycle and run it into the ground once it's already paid-for, as opposed to getting nothing at the end of the Amazon lease.
There's trade-offs for both cases; some people would rather pay more to not have to deal with quotes, vendors or shipping issues.
Anyone paying more than a negligible amount (per server) for any of these is needlessly over-paying. For a server this expensive, it had better be way below 1%. (Tech support is arguable, but it costs a pretty penny from AWS, too).
> RAM 64GB: $866.23 x 192 = $166,316.16
These CPUs can't support 192 DIMMs, only 96, so they're limited to the much more expensive 128GB modules. That means you're looking at closer to $250k for the RAM alone.
If someone wants to throw more money on RAM to be slightly faster, that's a solution design-decision; it's doubtful Amazon would do that. If they are, great.
No, that's an misinformed, all-or-nothing, gross-mischaracterization.
Data management systems are a toolbox.
The core tenent, distilling ACID, of RDBMSes is referential integrity: that what a foreign key points to can't simply disappear and leave a dangling reference. If you have a database of customers and their orders, you want orders destroyed with that customer, and the referring customer can't simply vanish. There are several delete dependent policies, depending on the use-case.
Key-Value stores (NoSQL) typically make no such guarantees. KVSes and Document store are fantasic for less critical and more nondeterministic data like user profiles, likes and tags... things that don't matter as much, as say, bank accounts transactions. Only a fool would use eventual consistency where it could be gamed by making maximum simulateneous withdrawls of say a $1000 at multiple locations. This is where atomicity and consistency are very important.
Use the right underlying data guarantees for the task at hand... not like a consulting company whom tried to turn a DBMS into a NoSQL by having a single database table store everything. IIRC the columns looked like this:
Key | Value | Type | Notes
Good luck indexing that pile of slow, and say hello to full-table scans for nearly every fetch.
This is bureaucratic nonsense. For 50 years, RC planes have been fine. This is a knee-jerk overreaction to take out their frustrations on convenient bystanders, eg hobbyists, when they can't defend against terrorists with flying bombs whom aren't going to register anything. Plus, how will it be enforced? Going to put FAA goons in park trees to catch those felonious dads shooting Estees model rockets and buzzing RC planes (aka "drones") around?
