DarkContinent
Crime Pays but Botany Doesn't
Positioning Without Satellites or Base Stations
International chess federation sanctions Kramnik
AI to Automate Brain Diagnoses
Copilot Builder enables welding with AI
NYC to open municipal grocery store in 2027
NASA ends space mission early due to astronaut medical condition
High achieving adults rarely begin as child prodigies
Fixed-Wing Runway Design
The AI bubble is bigger than you think
US Treasury to stop producing pennies next year
Polio Outbreak in Papua New Guinea
Patrick Collison joins Meta's board
Funding halted for cancer clinical trials
FERC order rejects colocation of nuclear plant and data center
All board members resign at 23andMe
Error Correction Zoo
No. Designing a system that is always up and running and can process small amounts of data constantly is a completely different problem from designing a system that runs occasionally with a lot of data. For one thing, your output formats are usually different in the latter case (maybe you're creating a PDF for example). Also the high availability requirement just makes things different at the design level.
Finally, the author claims it's not hard to switch between batch and streaming. With a large volume of preexisting data, this is just not true. For example, if you make a REST API call for each document in a DB, it can take days or months to load that. If batching together documents isn't a possibility, how do you move data between stores easily? (This data movement is often required when switching between batch and streaming.)
Teton Pass Collapse Reveals Infrastructure Fragility
It's certainly true that LinkedIn is the go to for white collar professionals seeking to make their resumes visible passively to recruiters. But isn't life still easier with LinkedIn than in the before times, when recruiters would dig deep to get folks' phone numbers and then have to call each of those people individually? (I think the modern equivalent would be email addresses.)
It's true that LinkedIn makes recruiting much easier to scale to a mass market. And it's also true that it has a monopoly on that scaling for professional employees. But is it fair to call them an economic termite when it's still possible to do sourcing in an admittedly clunky and old fashioned way? Just because they have a monopoly on scaled recruiting doesn't mean that they hold all the cards the way Linde (also in the profile) would in the gas market. This is particularly borne out by the existence of Indeed or Stack Overflow as options for posting your resume for recruiting.