Small piezo beepers typically don't draw much current. The article doesn't say what part they're using, but a datasheet for a typical piezo beeper [1] says it draws 12 mA at 12V - and much less at 3.3V, which is what this device is operating at. So it's probably going to be fine, especially since it's only running the buzzer for <50 ms at a time.
> It annoys me a little when people here talk about how worthless management is. I just want everyone to know that good management is very hard, ...
People talk about how worthless management is, because most management is not good and most "managers" are worthless. Promotion to your level of incompetence is a real thing in tech management circles.
The "required" reading for newly minted managers in my $billion company was/is this shit called "One Minute Manager": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_One_Minute_Manager, including "one minute reprimands" as if employees are children. Happily, I am no longer a manager.
The most brilliant software developer (an EE PhD) that I have ever worked with has been using the singular value decomposition (SVD) to solve an enormous number of linear algebra and numerical computing problems in engineering software. The SVD seems to be useful for many engineering computations if you know how to apply it.
It’s the optimal low-rank approximation of a matrix in some norm-2 sense, it has those nice beautiful orthogonal factors on both, and it is often quite easy to compute. Why wouldn’t you use it, right? If you are going to have one trick, truncated SVD is a good pick.
Does he like Halko, Martinsson, and Tropp’s randomized SVD? It is pretty slick.
> How did we get to a place where either Cloudflare or AWS having an outage means a large part of the web going down?
As always, in the name of "security". When are we going to learn that anything done, either by the government or by a corporation, in the name of security is always bad for the average person?
This again? You don't need a license to be an engineer. Every graduate of an engineering school at an accredited university/college IS an engineer. People seem to conflate an "engineer" with a "professional engineer". The two are not the same; the latter requires a license. At least in the US.
There are states that regulate the bare term “engineer” depending on the context.
And all states require a license to offer certain engineering services, so practically speaking in certain fields you can’t “be an engineer” without a license.
For example in most (all?) states you can’t hang up a shingle adverting yourself as an “Engineer” doing structural work without a license even if you aren’t calling yourself a “Professional Engineer”.
The audience of software research is other software researchers.
The expectation that a practicing CS graduate, even with a master's degree, should be able to read, understand, and apply in their work research articles published in academic journals is not very meaningful.
Not because they are not capable people, but because research articles these days are highly specialized, building upon specialized fields, language, etc.
We don't expect mechanical engineers read latest research on fluid mechanics, say, making use of Navier-Stokes equations. I am a mechanical engineer with a graduate degree in another field and I would be immediately lost if I tried to read such an article. So why do we expect this from software engineers?
Well I think you have to ask what the goal of the researchers are. In the case of fluid mechanics they may research new algorithms that make into the software mechanical engineers use, even if they don't understand the algorithms themselves for example. So mechanical engineers still benefit from the research.
So I guess what I'm wondering is if software engineers benefit from the research that software research produce? (even if they don't understand it themselves)
Not all engineers are in the target audience, and not all details of research findings need to be conveyed to the target audience to make a real impact. The point is if no findings ever make it to engineers (in the broadest sense), there is zero real world impact. I guess real impact is not the only goal but it's a valid one.
> Summary: A dot product is a weighted sum of two vectors.
Nope. This is incorrect. The dot product is a weighted sum of a vector's elements, where the weights are the elements of the other vector. Weighted sum of two vectors would require a third entity to provide the weights.
A dot product is a weighted sum of two vectors, but not in the way the author suggested. The author's use is that one of the vectors is the weights and the other is 'the' vector, so the dot product is the weighted sum of ONE vector. It just so happens that because the author is not interested in the geometric interpretation of the dot product that they forgo the metric.
On the other hand, it is common to need a metric, which is actually the set of weights in the dot product. If `g` is the metric,
dot(a, g, b) = np.einsum('x,xy,y->', np.conj(a), g, b)
g doesn't have to be diagonal, but if you want the dot product to be symmetric in a and b it ought to be self-adjoint. Then you can find a basis where g is diagonal with real diagonal elements, which you can interpret as the weights.
It's an interesting callout; if you go Google "weighted sum of two vectors", it's not too hard to find more authoritative sources (nothing as authoritative as Axler or Strang, of course) describing either a dot product or a linear combination in those terms.
Well... It is exactly the same.
reply