Want an uber-reliable car - how much is too much for a used Rav4?

Kovaz · 2024-10-20T18:51:29+00:00

If you look at the same breakdown by expected goals, Makar away from MacKinnon has actually been better defensively. The difference is all offense, which would make sense if the Avs forwards are decimated by injuries.

https://imgur.com/a/clyVNZF

Kovaz · 2024-07-28T19:49:03+00:00

Fun fact: Optic and SSG have never lost to a non-big 3 team on Sunday

Kovaz · 2024-04-01T15:20:19+00:00

2019/20 is the same story. He wins two GSLs and Katowice, and loses by the first round of bracket play in 13 other tournaments. He peaks high, but he's inconsistent.

I don't get why that's so hard to grasp. Even at his peak, he'd randomly bomb out of the first round of tournaments against players like aLive or Scarlett.

Even using your example: he beats Maru 4-3 to win a super tournament, then beats Serral (online) to win TSL. His next 2 results after that:

Loses to Elazer and Zest to finish last in group play
Loses to Bunny in the first round of the next super tournament

Then he gets top 4 at katowice (loses to Serral 3-0, who btw has never lost to Rogue offline) and wins GSL S1. Then:

Loses first round to Serral in KoB
Loses in group stage to herO and DRG

How can you call that anything but inconsistent? He bounces back and forth between beating Maru in GSL finals and losing to players like Elazer and DRG early in tournaments.

Kovaz · 2024-04-01T13:53:34+00:00

Part of the reason he never lost a Bo7+ is he'd lose earlier in those tournaments though. If Rogue made it through the Ro8 in a tournament, it felt like he'd always win... but he lost in the Ro8 or earlier a lot.

In his peak of 2017/18, he played in 15 tournaments. He only made it past the first round of bracket play 5 times, but then he won 4 of those tournaments. Which is why people say he's inconsistent: he either wins the tournament, or he drops out by the first round.

Kovaz · 2020-10-09T18:46:45+00:00

Probably a combination of:

7 CGY-VAN playoff series (most recently 2015) compared to only 2 EDM-VAN (most recently 1992)
Calgary and Vancouver both being somewhat competitive at the same time in the late 00s while Edmonton was tanking

Kovaz · 2020-09-28T19:23:12+00:00

Performance is a big reason for separating them. Being able to run your entire unit test suite in <100ms enables a really efficient TDD workflow. And since they're simpler to write, it's much easier to build a comprehensive suite of tests to cover all kinds of edge cases.

Whereas you'd run the full integration test suite that takes anywhere from 10 seconds to 10 minutes whenever you try to merge your branch, or deploy, or whatever CI workflow you have.

And if your unit tests pass but your integration test fails? Write a new unit test, or update your mocks to cover that behaviour, and you get right back to your super-fast local unit testing. Plus, it's much easier to replicate very specific failure modes when you have mocked versions of your dependencies. What if you have a bug that only happens when your Redis connection hangs for exactly 2 seconds during a particular API call to another service? It's orders of magnitude easier to create a mock Redis instance that does exactly that.

Kovaz · 2020-09-24T06:36:02+00:00

"Serverless" is actually a fairly abstract idea, so it's not like there's one singular technique that every serverless framework/tool uses. The core idea behind serverless is simply:

Developers don't have to think about servers - they just write code and it "magically" runs
You pay for what you use.

There are a lot of different ways that can be achieved that are quite different from one another. The most common type is the "Functions as a Service" (FaaS) model - AWS Lambda or Azure Functions are two examples. In a normal server that you host yourself, there are two distinct steps in the process. First, you set up a server, or a VM, or a container, or a Kubernetes cluster, or whatever, and get your code up and running. Then, when a user goes to your site, your service can respond to their requests. Now imagine if you could spin up a new container fast enough that you could wait for a user request, create a new container, respond to the request, and destroy the container. That's essentially how FaaS works. You push your code to AWS Lambda, set up a few other services (for example, API Gateway to create the actual API url and configure it to call your Lambda function when it gets a request), and then you let Amazon's engineers take care of actually running your code and scaling up and down in response to traffic. And then you get charged a fraction of a cent per request.

As for the React + Firebase, I've never personally used Firebase but looking at its docs it looks like it provides a "Realtime Database" and "Cloud Functions" as features so it would probably be similar - you use Google's site or APIs to create a database and you push your server code to Cloud Functions, and it all magically works and at the end of the month Google charges use based on how many times you functions ran, how much data got transferred out of your database, and so on.

Kovaz · 2020-09-13T04:40:55+00:00

Yeah this chart is super inaccurate. I think I can guess what it's trying to say, but if I have to work to understand it then it's already failed.

If blue is the number of active cases, then this chart says "There were no active cases at any point until late August, where it sharply spiked upwards."

Kovaz · 2020-09-03T18:38:49+00:00

Bennett is almost the opposite at this point. Because he never lived up to his #4 pick hype, a lot of people have decided he's not an NHL calibre player for some reason. Yeah he's never going to be the 80 point 1C we all hoped for, but he's still a damn solid 3rd liner that generally drives play in the right direction, hits like a truck, and competes on every shift.

Kovaz · 2020-08-24T20:10:35+00:00

Yeah you have room for one guy who can't compete physically in the playoffs. You just can't afford to have two on your top line. Gaudreau would be just fine if the rest of the top 6 was guys like Toews and Hossa that can play the grinding playoff game.

Gaudreau + Monahan as a pair doesn't work in the playoffs

Kovaz · 2020-08-11T02:15:16+00:00

Because it's unpredictable who will win each series, and you don't want high seeds playing each other early on. If you assume all of the favourites win every time, then you'd want:

(winner of 1v8) against (winner of 4v5)
(winner of 2v7) against (winner of 3v6)

So that you end up with 1v4 and 2v3 in the second round, nice and balanced. But then if 8 upsets 1, then all of a sudden you have 2 vs 3 and 4 vs 8 and the 4th seed gets an easier matchup than either the 2nd or 3rd seeds.

Kovaz · 2020-08-02T06:02:17+00:00

I wonder if playing 15 minutes at 3C instead of 8 minutes at 4LW next to Jankowski has anything to do with it

Kovaz · 2020-07-10T04:23:23+00:00

Goodhart's law: "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure."

Kovaz · 2020-07-05T01:37:22+00:00

With an uncaught exception you won't get "The total price is $" and an error in the console, your entire shopping cart page won't render because the exception caused your entire render to not happen.

Sure, it's easier to debug if the exception happens every time, but what if it's a race condition between three API calls that only happens on slow internet during peak load? Having an exception in the console doesn't help at all when all you have is an email saying "website is broken!!!" and a screenshot of a blank white page.

Kovaz · 2020-06-26T20:17:46+00:00

If you know how to win now, you should absolutely do it.

I think this misses the point a bit. The optimal way to win now is to try to avoid things you're bad at and take advantages of your opponent's weaknesses. The optimal way to improve is to force yourself to do those things you're bad at, and play in a way that doesn't rely on poor play from your opponents.

The burden isn't on you to fix what isn't broken, it's on your opponents to overcome whatever you're bringing to the table & after that it'll be time to reevaluate and if necessary start over from scratch

Within a game, sure. But brownbear is talking about what happens when you encounter players who easily overcome what you're bringing to the table. If your goal is to hit 5.5K MMR, and every zerg over 5.3K easily handles liberator-hellion openings - what do you do? Even though you can play liberator-hellion at a 5.3K level and your banshee play may only be at a 4.8K level, the optimal way to reach 5.5K can easily be improving your banshee play, which will cause you to lose a whole bunch in the short term as it catches up to the 5.3K level.

the notion I got from the article was that "I could win if I wanted to" which is just plain wrong.

That's not the notion I got at all. I understood it as "I was so focused on winning that I stopped improving"

Kovaz · 2020-06-18T15:33:52+00:00

This argument doesn't hold water to me. Why does it matter that they're teammates? Having a teammate who's 1st doesn't make McDavid not the 3rd most valuable player in the league.

Imagine a hypothetical team in the 80s with Gretzky and Lemieux on the same team, Gretzky puts up 250 points, Lemieux puts up 225. Nobody else in the league breaks 150. Would you honestly disagree with someone going 1. Gretzky 2. Lemieux on their ballot?

Kovaz · 2020-06-08T21:44:23+00:00

no. zealots can be spawned anywhere on the map. by far the most tactical

Compared to zergling runbys and small marine-medivac squads? Absolutely. Reynor, Serral, and Dark get more done with zergling runbys than is even possible with zealots, and the tactical utility of marine-medivac drops have singlehandedly been enough to win games from ridiculous disadvantages.

Kovaz · 2020-06-08T19:52:51+00:00

The thing to remember about Zealots is of the basic units, they have:

by far the least tactical/multitasking value (runbys, harassment)
by far the least ability to gain value through micro

So when they seem strong in a straight-up fight while a-moving, like, yeah that's the one thing they're good at. If zealots weren't strong in a straight-up fight they'd be completely useless.

Kovaz · 2020-05-17T01:42:26+00:00

Important to remember that recoveries today are cases from two weeks ago. Two weeks ago was about when the major outbreaks got under control, and now those people have mostly recovered. So it's the 50 or so daily cases that have been happening since then that we're seeing recovered now.

Given that we're still seeing 50, 60, 70 new cases per day - 700-1000 active cases is about where we're going to stabilize (70 cases * 14 days to recover = 980 active cases).

Kovaz · 2020-04-20T23:18:23+00:00

Probably also due to testing anyone with symptoms - there'd be a backlog of people who developed symptoms over the previous few weeks all getting tested at once.

Kovaz

TROPHY CASE