AWS Glue? No thank you.

I’ve been postponing describing my experience with AWS Glue for a couple of months now. It’s one of those things that I really wanted to get out of myself but it hurts to even speak up. Let’s end this pain, let’s end this now. Ehkem… AWS Glue sucks.

We had a use case of doing a daily ETL job from/to Redshift. The transformation was rather simple but given that developers will maintain the logic it was easier to write code rather than convoluted SQL. The job was small enough (<50k rows) that probably a Lambda with a longer timeout would be just fine; however, since more projects were coming that required a larger scale processing we were looking for potential candidates. This was a great opportunity to try out a service that boasts itself on the official blurb.

Issues started right away. Their documentation is/was really terrible. It describes how "great things are" rather than what they do. There were two pages dedicated to Redshift and they were convoluted enough that even AWS support team had difficulties understanding it. When deploying through Cloud Formation some options were missing and had to be manually updated, like activating trigger for cron job(?!). At the time of writing also only Python in version 2.7 was available with examples written by some Golang users, something like:

orgs = orgs.drop_fields(['other_names',
'id', 'org_id').rename_field(
'name', 'org_name')

No doubt that AWS Glue will be updated and most likely it’s much better now than it was 2 months before. However, I have such a terrible mouthfeel after using it that it’s going to be hard to convince me to give it another shot in the near future. For simple tasks Lambda should be enough and for larger on a single data source use EMR. In cases when there are multiple sources with dependencies orchestrate everything using Data Pipeline. Seems that the Glue is an on-demand EMR with limited not-optimal configuration thus leaving with limited control.

Toggling academia status to halted

There was a significant update on my title. Since the end of November, I am officially a PhD. The relief is immense. Obviously, life goes on and nothing has significantly changed on the outside but I can see that my approach to things lighten up and the approach of “Yes can do” returned. I’m open to new projects and ideas.

Surprisingly enough once just before submitting the final version, I stared (again?) to recognise the greater contribution that the work has and it might have. Given that the Machine Learning community is again gradually incorporating the model-based approaches and go smaller on distance (calculus). Such progress opens up opportunities to apply my work to the broader area of interest.

When will this finish…

For the past few years, my life is on hold. Yes, I go to work and do something there but the majority of the time I’m still spending on PhD. It’s such an existential trap. It’s close to the second year when I’m trying to impress a single person who doesn’t really care. It’s close to four years when I’m trying to improve some idea that I had and thought that it might work because the previous 3 years gave no results.

When I started the PhD I was motivated, interested in everything and shaking from the excitement that I’ll be pushing humanity forward. Now, I just want to do the minimum required. In the hindsight, I’ve wasted my life. Nothing good is coming from this. Hopefully, that is “yet”. December is in or out and, at this stage, I don’t really care.


Although learning and book knowledge are the best, my personal relationship with reading activity is not the friendliest. Being focused on the text is a huge struggle and I often need to re-read sentences to actually read it. That’s why sometimes I use text-to-speech (TTS) software or service.

Few years ago I discovered an Ivona Text-to-speech software which was far superior to any other TTS solution. It was able to quickly read out loud (and clear) text from my clipboard. Not only it was better than others but also it supported Polish – my language. Even though the default software wasn’t useful for my use cases, i.e. scientific papers have unusual formatting, it wasn’t that difficult to write a wrapper and GUI around the Ivona. Unfortunately, it’s not supported anymore and one cannot download the offline version.

Currently, Ivona is owned by the Amazon and its voices are accessible through the Polly AWS service. It’s a relatively a cheap service but one still has to have an internet connection and it’s not provided with any gui. At least officially.

I’ve written an application to use AWS Polly. It’s a simple graphical interface with some formatting options for the text but it does its job. The AWS Polly GUI is accessible from my GitHub page. It’s running on Python3 with PyQt5.

Features are updated as needed so if something might be helpful to anyone, feel free to contact me or create a ticket issue on the repository. I’m using this for my personal work so I’m not planning on leaving this on a side.

Google wants back my microphone

My “writing” work currently goes somewhere else and have little motivation to write anything here. But, there’s something that only internet can help, whether that’s through actual help or simply transferring my annoyance.

In the past few days/weeks there has been some uproar about Facebook listening to us and later subtly suggesting products about which we talked with others. With these it’s hard to point who is objective, so I’ll paste link to web searches and I’m sure you’ll find some “evidence” – Google, Bing and DuckDuckGO. Let me also suggest Reply All podcast who recently had episode on this mysteriously called Is Facebook Spying on You?. Obviously Facebook denies all of this, but they confirm having lots of information about you whether that’s from you directly or from your friends.

Facebook and I are not in good terms for a long time. It’s more a fun social experiment rather than actual social platform. Since it isn’t on my phone there’s nothing to complain about, but there’s another omnipresent God – Google. Actually I have one of its branded phone with turned on Google Assistant, so it had to be there and had to listen to me.

Long story short, I removed microphone permissions from all Google services. Obviously some weren’t happy with this, but I can’t see how this should affect their usage. Except for Google Assistant or occasional input features, nothing should care, right? No. This is really tough break up as from time to time I’m getting vocal suggestions that are close to being commands. Google calls me to when it’s safe you’ll first need to use your phone’s screen and tap the notification then you can let the Google App access some things on your device. This is especially annoying when I’m listening to podcasts or music.

In the beginning this would go on and on, but now it’s more once a day. I don’t think that it has some “time decreasing” variable build in, so it’s definitely my action. More surprising is that even if I quickly unlock phone there won’t be anything new to give permissions to. Also, it might be only happening when the phone is locked as I haven’t had this happening otherwise.

Free AWS is good. Not awesome, but good.

Amazon with it’s Amazon Web Service (AWS) is pretty cool. It gives you access to remote machine which you don’t have to maintain. Actually you don’t have to do anything other than use it. All machines come in different flavours, but what tastes better than free? Granted that it’s extremely limited, but surely we can squeeze something out of it. Right?

AWS instances, i.e. remote machines, differ in the amount of RAM, disc space, operating system, whether they have GPU access and so on. As you can expect free tier instance is pretty low on all measure values. To be more precise free tier instance is of t2.micro type, which is a general purpose burstable instance with a single CPU, 1 GiB memory and EBS data storage (default 4Gb storage).

What is this good for? Depending on the needs, this might be good for almost anything that doesn’t require whatever these instances are lacking. (Did I help?) Obviously. So it’s not so good for heavy computations, training machine learning models or storing data. First of all, it’s better to use for these some other services like S3, DynamoDB, Lex or general machine learning. However, in case of specific requirements, it’s always better just to rent(?) more powerful instance.

These cheap instances, in my option, are very good for few tasks. The main one is web scrapping. This is tedious task that requires small CPU bandwidth, but constant access to the internet. Moreover, we don’t really want to make many calls in small time period so there needs to be a delay between each download. That’s either because we would like to avoid being detect as a bot, or for simply politeness to the owner of the server (not clogging bandwidth).

Internet is full of examples of scrappers for different type of data. I’m adding my own to the collection with r-u-listening project. The core of the project is to allow for users to find similar music to their input. It is a bit more than recommender, but more on this project probably in the future. The scraper itself is more in two parts, i.e. and The database that I’m using is, which goes with slogan “It’s not just free music; it’s good music”. I do recommend it and once I have something valuable I’d like to share it with them.

Unfortunately these instances don’t come with big default memory and storage. By default they have only 4 Gb storage, which when downloading mp3 tracks will be enough for about 800 tracks (assuming about 5 Mb per track). Again, as always, it depends on the task, but for machine learning algorithms we go with The more, the merrier.

As mentioned before, free tier instances allow up to 32 Gb. To do so go to EC2 service in your AWS console. In the options tab (left side) find Elastic Block Store (EBS) and select Volumes. Then select your instance and Actions, and Modify Volume. Simple, right? In all honesty, like many things in the AWS.

I’ve been using AWS for a while. Even finished AWS general course, its essentials and 3 day onsite workshop on Architecting on AWS. All is pretty simple and consistent. I like it.

Matrix Multiplication with Python 3.5

Only recently I have started to use Python 3. It’s been out for good 8+ years and all these excuses about incompatibility with some packages were just lazy. Most packages I use are already ported and if I ever find that something is incompatible… well, I’ll think then. But for now let me pat myself on the back for this great leap, because:

In Python 3.5.3 (released today) there is an operator for matrix multiplication! Check out: PEP 465 — A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication. The choice of operator, @, is a bit unfortunate, because of the decorators and general association with reference/internet, but seeing how few possibilities are left it’s probably the best choice.

Yes, this is big news for me. The number of times I confused myself with my own matrix operations is just too damn high! I cannot agree more with the author of the PEP 465, so let my shamelessly copy&paste (paraphrased) his reasoning. Behold!

(…) encounter many mathematical formulas that look like:

S = ( H β r ) T ( H V H T ) − 1 ( H β r )

Here the various variables are all vectors or matrices (details for the curious: [5] ).

Now we need to write code to perform this calculation. In current numpy, matrix multiplication can be performed using either the function or method call syntax. Neither provides a particularly readable translation of the formula:

import numpy as np
from numpy.linalg import inv, solve

# Using dot function:
S =, beta) - r).T,
 , V), H.T)),, beta) - r))

# Using dot method:
S = ( - r) - r)

With the @ operator, the direct translation of the above formula becomes:

S = (H @ beta - r).T @ inv(H @ V @ H.T) @ (H @ beta - r)

Notice that there is now a transparent, 1-to-1 mapping between the symbols in the original formula and the code that implements it.

Of course, an experienced programmer will probably notice that this is not the best way to compute this expression. The repeated computation of H β r should perhaps be factored out; and, expressions of the form dot(inv(A), B) should almost always be replaced by the more numerically stable solve(A, B) . When using @ , performing these two refactorings gives us:

# Version 1 (as above)
S = (H @ beta - r).T @ inv(H @ V @ H.T) @ (H @ beta - r)

# Version 2
trans_coef = H @ beta - r
S = trans_coef.T @ inv(H @ V @ H.T) @ trans_coef

# Version 3
S = trans_coef.T @ solve(H @ V @ H.T, trans_coef)

Notice that when comparing between each pair of steps, it’s very easy to see exactly what was changed. If we apply the equivalent transformations to the code using the .dot method, then the changes are much harder to read out or verify for correctness:

# Version 1 (as above)
S = ( - r) - r)

# Version 2
trans_coef = - r
S =

# Version 3
S =, trans_coef)

Readability counts! The statements using @ are shorter, contain more whitespace, can be directly and easily compared both to each other and to the textbook formula, and contain only meaningful parentheses. This last point is particularly important for readability: when using function-call syntax, the required parentheses on every operation create visual clutter that makes it very difficult to parse out the overall structure of the formula by eye, even for a relatively simple formula like this one. Eyes are terrible at parsing non-regular languages. I made and caught many errors while trying to write out the ‘dot’ formulas above. I know they still contain at least one error, maybe more. (Exercise: find it. Or them.) The @ examples, by contrast, are not only correct, they’re obviously correct at a glance.

Again: yes!

More links

A while ago I’ve started to taste a bit how it feels to work in industry and it feels quite nice. Maybe that’s the specificity of field projected onto the industry, or being tired of how academia works, but I’m enjoying extremely learning all the details about Computer Science, programming and newest technologies.

In addition to last post about Data Science, which still is my main daily ‘look for’, I’ve started to dive deep into computer science. Obviously there are plenty of good information sources and excellent tutorials. Aggregate that I exploiting right now are:


I’m planning to add some subpage with links for further reference. Any suggestions are welcomed!

Data Science podcasts

I’m an avid podcast listener. Whenever there’s something that only requires sight or not much focus I’ll try to do it with my headphones on. Great thing about podcasts is that they they are more up-to-date than audiobooks and have reasonably short lengths, so there’s always a fit.

Wanting to be more current with machine learning topics I’ve found few podcasts. These are my recommendations:

Machine Learning competition on Seizure Prediction

tl;dr: Read subject and click on link below.

Some of you, i.e. those lucky ones with connection to the outside World, are probably aware about Machine Learning community trying to aggressively change our lives for better. Regardless whether we like it or not, they’re doing it. Some do this for money, others for fame, and those wicked ones just for fun.

Kaggle is a webpage that hosts Machine Learning competitions. They provide data (usually donated by companies or public organizations) and set a goal. These included detecting and classifying specific whales species from satellite images, or driving a remote car based on an hour of recording, or identifying patients that will return based on historic records, or … It’s actually pretty big. Some prices can be as big as $500,000.

Reason behind this email is one of Kaggel’s recent competitions — Predicting seizures in long-term human intracranial EEG recordings. The challenge is to “The challenge is to distinguish between ten minute long data clips covering an hour prior to a seizure, and ten minute iEEG clips of interictal activity.” Yes, many people has tried this and it’s ongoing research in many labs. The difference here is that you can actually see people’s attempts and their codes. You can read their discussions and follow their logics. It looks like an amazing source of information! Moreover, good contestants are really good at machine learning and they often do their work properly, i.e. complete the challenge.

This all is really important to me. As my background is much in EEG analysis and machine learning. The timing is a bit unfortunate, but I might give it a go.