Hexstream

You forgot the "brag about how you aren't affected because you do things The Right Way(tm)" part.

The phallic drive knows no bounds ;P

"many programmers seem to think there is something 'magical' about the ability to program, as if there is some kind of essential element that differentiates those that can program from those that can not."

You should read this, and maybe the linked academic paper, too: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2006/07/separating-programm...

Well, if you are indeed 100% alone in providing a service, I feel it's a bit of a misrepresentation to say "we" just because you want businesses as customers. But that's just a feeling.

"Prior to the appointment, we’ll automatically remind your customer of the date and time of their appointment."

"we"? Aren't you alone in this venture?... Or it's just a "professionalness" thing? I'm kind of torn between "I" and "we" for projects completely made by just one guy...

As always, wikipedia is a good start:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_transformation

There actually seems to be a trend in programming blogs where everyone seems to be falling all over themselves to be the one shouting the most loud and clear how "bad" of a programmer they are. At least in their tagline.

I guess it's protection so if someone finds a glaring mistake, or several, they can just say "I told you so!".

Yes, and what's more, if you have the ability to learn really fast and yet haven't accumulated much knowledge yet, one might wonder if you aren't lazy and wasting your potential.

Please, no false dichotomies.

Well, they use (or used to use) RabbitMQ, which is written in Erlang.

If someone spews lots of bogus links in your tweets wouldn't you unfollow them? If every twitter user starts spewing lots of bogus links wouldn't you stop using twitter?

A long read, but well worth it.

Given the subject matter I'm not sure how much better than this they could make it. But I must say it looks like they're trying a bit too hard to make this "cool" at times.

Well, then I hope for you you never become a statistic!

I don't understand why you couldn't just let the user optionally specify such pairings manually instead of trying to infer it in an unreliable way. It's not like you regularly use dozens of different apps which would benefit from a pairing like that. If the user frequently wants to switch between the text editor and the browser, just let him specify so directly.

So you'd have no problem if a virus could physically incapacitate your keyboard, monitor, speakers, CPU and motherboard?...

In fact, back in the day it was possible to damage your keyboard through software. That must have been fun. Not.

That may say more about you as a kid than about the show.

"I don't see any positive outcomes from that which would offset resources wasted prosecuting."

Positive outcome: to set a good precedent for "don't do stupid shit like that mindlessly or you'll pay dearly if you get caught".

I remapped my keyboard so I can press CTRL with my thumb (it's where ALT conventionnaly is). No need to use pinkies and alternate between left and right CTRL!

Somewhere on the internet, someone is taking this seriously.

"- Don't worry, Skynet will take care of the virus in no time.

- Skynet IS the virus!!!"

Do expect lots of penis drawings...

They got their terminology wrong. They're "tubes", not "pipes".

Journalists really screw things up...

Honestly, my first thought was:

"To 'thwart' 'terrorists'."

With ahead-of-time compilation, not all the layers even have to have a representation at runtime so the overhead can be really minimal.

"Even better, some enterprising start up could make an Objective-C game engine."

Isn't a game engine a bit like some sort of interpreter (which are banned on the iPhone)?...

Oh, so that's why that page was burning a hole through my CPU... I could do away with "features" like these, thank you very much.

I have strong doubts that your "Search-Engine-Friendly" feature can actually work in practice, at least for Google.

Google can't possibly compare your generated "crawlable" content to the actual content the user sees because of Javascript, therefore it can't detect whether the cloaking you're doing is ethical or not and it must assume the worst. What would prevent someone unethical to do exactly the same thing as you do except have the javascript display malicious content?

Second, you can't reliably detect search engines. Google is known to crawl pages with undetectable user-agents (ex: a regular-looking firefox user-agent) to make sure the content seen by Googlebot is the same as that seen by regular users. You can't just sniff crawlers reliably by their user-agent.

Sorry but I don't think this can possibly work in practice.

Depends how many strings are attached to it.

"Ritchie, right, auditioning for the role of Saruman."

What the hell ;)