i looked into it (but i forgot to note where i got it from) as i was drafting a document and wanted to know the prescription when to fully spell out a number. as a “rule of thumb”, anything less than 10 (or less than multiple digits) merit using the whole word (although some style guides dictate that ten is still a “small” number but i don’t subscribe to this as it’s more cumbersome to generalise). for example, using one instead of the numerical symbol 1.

that said, you may decide to “break” this rule depending on your actual or planned readership. sometimes you need to know when it’s appropriate to break certain rules: just as when abstract painters eschew fundamental or standard techniques.

i’m not sure of “large” negative numbers though – my hunch is that maybe a “modified” rule applies depending on the number of digits. that is the “rule” for writing but, in my experience, different audiences have different expectations: case in point, writing for the web might require a different mandate. what about those containing decimal points? is there an exception for numbers in tables? variances can lead to strife. if you are aware of these (and other) guidelines, kindly share your knowledge…

i was composing something in Word and was confused in which was the right preposition for a reference to a month so i Googled it.

i used to “Google” (i mainly restored my browser tab) “fun facts” daily but eventually had a “technical difficulties” so i abandoned this practice.

for a specific time, you’re supposed to use ‘at’. referring to days and dates merits ‘on’, and for other units ‘in.’

i watched Juliet Naked it wasn’t that different from a “formulaic” romantic comedy – it’s just i found the dialogue quite “pithy”.i liked the comedy stylings of Chris O’ Dowd in The IT Crowd (maybe since i used to work in tech i could relate). strangely, it’s his choice of “dramatic” roles i find appealing: this film and The State of the Union, a limited television series.

it sort of reminds me of the movie: High Fidelity ( this was a very rare instance where i enjoyed the film aside from the book by Nick Bantock – who happens to be one of my favourite authors).

it’s probably the writing which i like in both films – i’m a sucker for “good” dialogue. there’s a line in the film which struck me, paraphrasing it was to the effect that art is not for the artist as water isn’t for the plumber – effectively elevating the “beholder” in the power dynamic wrought equation.

generally, i tend to like some of the roles that Ethan Hawke accepts: Gattaca, Boyhood, Great Expectations, Training Day, Reality Bites, and Dead Poets Society, It seems “foolish” to expect i’d like all his movies.

if you’re doing nothing, it’s an “alright” flick to watch.

SPOILER ALERT ; if you plan to watch the film, don’t read the rest of the entry as some aspects of my discussion may ruin the experience for you.

i apologise for chiming in late as i saw it awhile back but out of respect for my brother i held up posting as he was “stuck” on Holidays and when he came back it was the Manila Film Festival (showcasing Filipino films). he was only able to watch it last night because of his “tight” schedule,.

IMHO, it was just alright. that said, ending a “beloved” franchise can be tricky – one only needs to consider the “disincongruous” reactions to the GoT (strangely, i never got into it given my proclivity for fantasy fiction) finale. i can understand why the “fan boys” thought it was good and why the critics panned it – it doesn’t really matter what other people think. i’ve learned being in Australia that if you like something then you like it and you shouldn’t feel “guilty” about it.

IMHO, it wasn’t the best one but it was far from being the worst one. for my money, Episode V is still the best followed by Rogue One: A Star Wars Story but that’s neither here nor there since i’m not an “influencer”. i was still going to watch regardless of what critics said: i have this “annoying” thing of thinking for myself – maybe if i wasn’t such a fan or on-the-fence about watching it, i’d seriously consider what others had to say. case in point, Frozen 2 (i’m not really their core demographic although i do occasionally “enjoy” their films – i prefer Pixar) was a “smash” in the cinemas in spite of their negative reviews – i don’t think their “market” truly cared. as an aside, i think Disney is really clever to also own “properties” such as Star Wars and Marvel (i have to comment as i can’t help myself: i’m a huge fan of the MCU and Infinity War but not so much of Endgame – i have this thing about using time travel to solve things but i digress…) which have lucrative franchises that gross well at the box office.

i didn’t mind that Emperor Palpatine was back – i just wanted a more plausible rationale for it and not simply glossed over like i felt the film did . i’m a fan, as well as a critic (i don’t think they’re mutually exclusive, i just don’t appreciate “lazy” writing). moreover, i found Poe’s final speech to the Rebellionbaduy“, “cheesey”, and trite.

like The Force Awakens reminded me of Episode IV , this made me think of Episode VI. there seemed to me a congruence between Rei’s and Luke’s offer to join from the Emperor (thwarted by a final “redemptive” act by Kylo Ren and Darth Vader respectively) and the “ruse” which was actually an ambush. there is nothing wrong with paying homage and parallels to the original trilogy but, for my taste, it was a little to close to home which made them predictable – i’m guessing that’s what some fans wanted.

but, all-in-all, i thought it was a valiant effort as ending something “gracefully” is always hard.

when i started preparing stuff for DataFrames, it seemed sensible to introduce the Python Dictionary.

in it, i use the NATO alphabet, which as we all know is an acronym. Another form of an abbreviation is an initialism. Both utilise the first letter of words to form a “new” word but the former pronounces it as a word, while the latter is voiced by each initial (like AI for Artificial Intelligence).

as part of forming the subheadings, (although often used interchangeably) i discovered if i should use duplicate or replicate.

here’s the updated repository:


I originally thought of doing both a presentation and blog post but due to time pressures opted for the latter. Here’s a concise version of what I ended up doing…

I’ve used a “structured” approach to impart more formality but being a blog post I decided to make it more “medium-friendly”.  =)

A.  Introduction

A.1 Description and Background

Since New York city had over 60 million visitors last year alone, it may be useful to recommend hotels based on their physical proximity to major attractions (such as Central Park – not Central Perk of Friends fame) or what I called Places of Interest (or POI for short)using the Haversine formula – it’s a technical way of measuring distance between points using Latitude & Longitude (I won’ bore you with the details as it uses a lot of Trigonometric functions).   Essentially, it was envisioned to help plan your trip to the Big Apple.

A.2 Data

It used “free” data to determine which hotels are in which neighbourhoods and in which boroughs (so I used an API called FourSquare to get some of the place information).  Unsurprisingly, the major hotels were clustered in and most POI were located in Manhattan.

B. Methodology

I used clustering to segment my data (thankfully, the hard bits are already implemented). Freakishly, the cluster of neighbourhoods corresponded to the NYC boroughs (you know somebody worked it out).  This was confirmed visually (after all, seeing is believing) by something called a Folium map (see below).

This is one of the “cool” tools available at your disposal.  This is not, in and of itself, conclusive proof but you can “go down a deep rabbit hole” of data to assert your claim.  This is, by no means, the only “weapon” available to you but it sure is pretty.

C. Results

Unremarkably, the data merely confirmed what we’ve always known:  hotels are near one another and sites are chosen for their proximity to popular landmarks and sought after amenities – it’s so obvious, duh.

D. Discussion

It’s not always about generating new insights.  It’s sometimes about “empirical”  confirmation of things we just take for granted as true.

E. Conclusion

I can talk until I’m blue in the face but you’ll probably pay me no mind and tune out (if you haven’t already). In short you can use Data Science (and its associated tools) can be powerful in uncovering secrets.

If you’d like to read a more detailed and “serious” document, the full  report can be dowloaded at


If code is more your thing, a Jupyter notebook in Python can be obtained from:


If you’re generally more interested in GitHub (and open source computing), you can go to the following address:


This has mainly been about content but, in my experience, context can be just as, if not more, important – that’s how you should think about Data Science!

it wasn’t an “ugly cry” but I even surprised myself with involuntary tears and noises despite being cold-hearted – my “excuse” is my age and my ABI.  Maybe it was a combination of my wife finally expressing her true feelings (as she was busy making arrangements ) and seeing my mother-in-law (for the first time and the stark realisation dawning on me).

it’s hard not to talk about somebody else and make it about you but everything’s relative and according to your personal viewpoint – this is an entry in my blog after all.  It’s often difficult to pay “tribute” without getting any reflected light upon yourself – I’ll try to cast as small a “footprint” as possible.

i’ve always subscribed to the concept that memorials are for the benefit of those left behind.  We grieve at our loss and how our lives are less now- and sometimes fail to celebrate that the person has moved on.  Understandably,  we are just human and it is natural to feel this way but it is sometimes subject to a tinge of “selfishness”.

i think it’s rather apt that this goes out on the feast day of  St. Augustine.  i do agree that the Bishop of Hippo’s life be celebrated but “most” overlook the importance of St. Monica, his mother. And how hidden figures can be “forgotten” by history.

My mother-in law was selfless, kind, patient, understanding, amongst other things.  She had her faults, don’t get me wrong but the positives vastly outweighed the negatives.   Her penchant for not complaining about pain or discomfort was, ironically, part of her undoing.

i ran across an article  (

) recently why we hold certain people in high regard.  i argue that selflessness is an extreme form of humility.  she might have not seem intellectually curious but I suspect she was simply a product of her generation when most women were relegated to domestic duties. Perhaps, it would have been more developed under different circumstances – she did, after all, “painstakingly” tutor my wife and niece, both of whom excelled academically, and, given the opportunity, would have liked to become a teacher.

As a sign of her uttermost empathy, although she was in extreme pain, she asked about our family’s laundry situation.  That was quintessentially her.  I, guess, that was one way of externalising her love aside from cooking.

She would have not liked me making a fuss because of her but I don’t know any other way but to share her name: Lucila Legaspi Reyes.

Words are just words.  Sometimes words are not enough – this is one such instance.