I think we lost that terminology war. Open source models mean open weight. There are only a couple examples of fully open source models with open data and code, and the labs are not incentivized to go that far.
I recall that this became a big problem for the Homebrew project in terms of load on the repo, to the extent that Github asked them not to recommend/default-enable shallow clones for their users: https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/issues/15497#issuecomment-1...
This is likely to be lower traffic, and the history should (?) scale only linearly with new data, so likely not the worst thing. But it's something to be cognizant of when using SCM software in unexpected ways!
I intentionally kept it lightweight. Just Parquet files + simple partitioning + commits on Hugging Face. That already covers most of what I need, without introducing a heavier stack or extra dependencies.
Also, I wanted something that is easy to consume anywhere. With this setup, you can point DuckDB or Polars directly at the data and start querying, no catalog or special tooling required.
Weird accusation. Iceberg is an Apache project. I don’t think anyone gets paid when you use it so not sure what the benefit of shilling would be. It is just a table format that’s well suited for this purpose. I would expect any professional to make a similar recommendation.
I have a similar project right now where I am scraping a dataset that is only ever offering the current state. I am trying to preserve the history of this dataset and was thinking of using the same strategy. If anyone has experience or pointers in how to best add time as a dimension to an existing generic dataset, I'd love to read about it.
I recently redesigned my blog to look like a modern RFC and I'm loving the way they've decided to render tables in their plain text, definitely gonna steal that.
On topic though, Stripe is trying to make themselves the Visa/Mastercard of crypto. They're in position to do so and it seems like Coinbase is their other half. I don't trust or like it though.
> * Offering optional paid features or premium content
This implies that a successful GET request to a resource that user already does have access to, might still return 402 instead of 200. This makes 402 basically unworkable.
I always assumed contributing to RFCs is about as easy as contributing to C++, which I always assumed is virtually impossible without a billion dollars or a billion citations of your academic papers.
This entire piece sounds AI written (or at minimum, heavily AI edited) with its "punchy" writing style LLMs love, negative parallelisms galore (see blockquotes 2, 3, 5), invented concept labels ("your calendar is a load-bearing wall" ???), attempts at humor sprinkled in. What a joke of a post.
reply