weland

6 ms·

1.
by weland 11y ago
> > You should be (or have a strong desire to become) a HTML5 geek, JavaScript nerd and CSS wizard. Indeed, it seems that there is hardly any room left for mere programmers in this industry :-).
2.
by weland 11y ago
It will be fun to see someone lecturing JWZ on what he can do and what he cannot do on the web.
3.
by weland 11y ago
> If the citizens demand access to those services, or find it offensive that their privacy and security is being violated and circumvented, they will take action. Hah, right. They'll just file a complaint to their ombudsman and the
4.
by weland 11y ago
Yeah, that's why that proportion is important. There are a lot of examples for that. XML, C++, PHP. The list goes ever on and on :-).
5.
by weland 11y ago
I stopped using mutt a while ago, but I just used separate config files for every mail account and a bash alias to launch mutt for each one. Unless you actually need to do things like move entire e-mail threads between accounts, it works we
6.
by weland 11y ago
To be fair, if you stick to the good parts, any language is good. It's the good parts : bad parts proportion that tends to ruin things.
7.
by weland 11y ago
When studying power consumption for this type of devices, it's extremely common to measure the current being drawn, rather than to put out values in watts. For one thing, it's the current that you usually measure in these cases an
8.
by weland 11y ago
Netscape before 4 kicked ass. Netscape 4 was terrible. Netscape 6 was late.
9.
by weland 11y ago
The Pi foundation being good friends with Broadcom also helps.
10.
by weland 11y ago
It's a case of not really telling the truth, which is pretty much what lying means.
11.
by weland 11y ago
> how inportant was/is a switching supply Fairly important. Linear power supplies are pretty large and put out a lot of heat. It was commonplace back then for most appliances, including computers, to have a linear power supply. A sw
12.
by weland 11y ago
It's more likely a bold overstatement made by a superficial onlooker. Wozniak describes the same power supply here: http://archive.woz.org/letters/general/35.html , in these terms: Other hobby computers of th
13.
by weland 11y ago
This is a pretty interesting article! I raised more than my fair share of eyebrows by telling people I'm not really surprised with this kind of complexity (note: I'm an EE by formation, I took a frickin' two-semester course o
14.
by weland 11y ago
If you use an actual pdf reader instead of the JS-based in-browser crap, it's quite instantaneous.
15.
by weland 11y ago
Yep, what ics said :-). Basically, I think OpenBSD is a good operating system. It has a clean architecture, great code quality, and I am fond of its engineering principles. I don't think it's Good (TM) -- there are things that oth
16.
by weland 11y ago
Unfortunately, while this is true in the server/desktop world, this isn't true for embedded systems. Hardware that can reliably run OpenBSD tends to be in the more expensive space -- x86 or PowerPC based. There are exceptions, a
17.
by weland 11y ago
That's also true. Things weren't always like that when it comes to large organizations involved in FOSS development, but one would hope lessons are learned :-)
18.
by weland 11y ago
> Now, Canonical keeping to themselves has a very crucial advantage: they leave everyone else alone. They stay in their corner, they don't bother, they don't intervene I certainly get why it would be in their interest to not ha
19.
by weland 11y ago
I don't necessarily agree with how mjg59 chooses to resolve his issues, but it's hard not to get the impression that he's a little right about this. The problem is precisely this: > With Ubuntu and any other software ,
20.
by weland 11y ago
> Then came the new GNOME 3 and the particular way that GNOME development works. It was not workable to offer to the users a stable and distinct user experience. So, Unity was created and all hell broke loose. I decided to take Ubuntu 15
21.
by weland 11y ago
> Why isn't OpenBSD more widely used? For many of the scenarios you listed, it really boils down to peer pressure. People who make decisions know that Linux is Good (TM). Convincing them that there is a better alternative for <th
22.
by weland 11y ago
I hear this argument a lot. That situation is as unlikely as it gets. At least in my part of the world, torture is particularly discouraged as a means of gathering information during war. Not only are prisoners likely to confess anything
23.
by weland 11y ago
> Returning to the point, it takes incredible mental gymnastics to argue that a false positive automatically degrades the status of a study from "scientific" to "unscientific" No one said anything about A false posi
24.
by weland 11y ago
> not everyone agrees that use of torture 'cedes moral high ground' There probably are a few assholes who don't, but to take it seriously outside the realm of a purely philosophical discussion on formal logic is something
25.
by weland 11y ago
I just tried to look it up. Turns out the only announcements are from Dr. Web, a "famous" antivirus vendor, and techcrunch.com which quotes Dr. Web's announcement. No word on how it spreads. Also, unsurprisingly: > Once la
26.
by weland 11y ago
Where did I say publication is a claim of conclusive proof? I said they published papers in which they claimed they conclusively proved something , and it turned out they didn't conclusively prove anything. Specifically, because their
27.
by weland 11y ago
> Only a quarter of scientific drug research is successfully reproduced as well.[1] The article you are mentioning in [1] refers to the fact that a quarter of the published drug research is not successfully reproduced. That doesn'
28.
by weland 11y ago
> That's both untrue and fallacious (see: no true Scotsman). No it's not. A sound scientific approach requires that a theory be based on reproducible results. If an experiment that verifies your theory confirms your result to
29.
by weland 11y ago
> Only a quarter of scientific drug research is successfully reproduced as well.[1] This is a debate in semantics: research that is not successfully reproduced is not scientific . It should be part of that which society frowns down on a
30.
by weland 11y ago
At the same time, however, there are plenty of companies that use software released under a permissive license without contributing back -- they release none of their improvements, they don't contribute financially and so on. GPL adept

More ›