gnoway

I would have if it served my needs, because those others required special hardware and/or hefty licensing costs.

This is really going to help a lot of sites protect themselves - right now we just have the evil bit, but being able to block addresses with a ptr in .bot should eliminate drive-by defacement altogether.

I think you're putting words in her mouth, so to speak. That paragraph begins by repeating a statement about God being found in the cracks between knowledge. I know I've read this elsewhere, it's not a new idea. The rest of the paragraph just restates this in a way that I think is very fair.

My direct answer: yes. IMO divinity is just magic backing a particular narrative. As we discover and accept alternative explanations for why things are the way they are, that magic disappears and the narrative loses power.

This isn't a new position for him, unfortunately. Here's a link to a video[0] of him in 1998 explaining it at a commencement speech.

I guess this could be taken out of context, and he's actually just being sarcastic, but I don't think so.

[0] http://www.buzzfeed.com/natemcdermott/ben-carson-egyptian-py...

This is splitting hairs a little bit IMO. Diamond is the hardest material. We can make diamond synthetically that can be harder than naturally-occurring diamond, but it's still diamond.

It shouldn't be. If anything, being as big as Dell makes me wonder why it hasn't happened already.

I work at an Enterprise software company a few orders of magnitude smaller than Dell. The number of people we have who don't even begin to understand how SSL works beyond 'its encrypted now' is frustrating.

Dell can probably recruit better people than we can, but I don't know if they can recruit better people at volume, top to bottom. It only takes a couple of people to not understand what they are doing and 'just get it done' for this to happen.

I've had issues this year w/ Ubuntu 14.04 machines where the kernel modules would not build, resulting in zpools that could not be imported. I guess that's more of a packaging issue than a code issue.

I periodically have unexpected behavior where my filesystem doesnt mount right and I have to re-mount, or the nfs exports have to be re-exported, etc. I've assumed this was due to incomplete configuration on my part but it's clearly not as brainless to set up as native fs.

Have you tried lately? Java used to be a big issue on FreeBSD, but that hasn't been the case in several years. Now it works as well as any other platform.

The article title is very misleading. It's just a proposal, couched on whether enough gas plants could be built in time to make it a reality.

Is he really non-establishment? I realize he's an Independent 'Social Democrat' or whatever, but he's been in Washington since 1991. He's pretty well established IMO.

Data on people seems to be what everyone wants. We have big data collectors like Google and Facebook firmly on the pro-encryption side, ensuring your privacy. And that the only parties able to mine your Google and Facebook activities are Google and Facebook.

On the other hand, some media companies are also ISPs now (Comcast, TWC). They don't really have destination sites collecting your general behavior, but they have something better - all your traffic in transit. Shame it's encrypted.

Keep in mind that McCain is up for re-election next year. Some of this is overstated, although I figure he probably does believe the government should have a backdoor and doesn't fully understand the implications of that.

Yes, except he's a member of the Republican Party, serving as Junior US Senator from Kentucky as a Republican, and running for the Republican Presidential nomination.

Edit: this was not meant to be snark, just an indication that, in the context of this particular thread/discussion, he's a Republican. The parent had a valid question, please stop downvoting him/her.

We've done that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th...

"Republicans"

Rand Paul is pretty openly pro-encryption. Hillary Clinton is equivocating; I think she's probably anti-encryption. These may be exceptions that prove the rule but I think what we're really seeing is a combination of ignorance, pandering and authoritarianism across the spectrum.

fastclone uses reference cloning, which references objects from another clone but pulls missing stuff from origin. There are two local object stores, the reference clone and the referenced clone. Cloning semantics are identical to a regular clone, it's just 'git fastclone' instead of 'git clone', presumably without some of the standard options like --reference, --shared, --shallow, etc.

worktree appears to do away with the extra complication; it's just another working tree off the same base clone. There's a single object store. You have two commands to deal with, 'git clone' and 'git worktree'.

I think that both can be used for the same purposes and yield similar results, but fastclone is targeted at the automated build scenario whereas worktree is more developer-focused. In an automated build environment with an m:n relationship between repos and builds, I think worktree would be more complicated because you'd have to handle the 'clone vs. worktree' decision yourself. It's also apparently not great w/ submodules yet; fastclone claims to handle submodules.

Fastclone is another attempt to deal with the distributed-ness of git in a scenario where you don't want or need local copies of the objects, just the working tree. We fight with this at my company; we like git, and it does some nice things, but our use case is really better suited to a centralized vcs. For people looking at fastclone, etc. - consider that maybe you don't really want a dvcs in the first place.

Just to be clear, this is trivial in vim using :!curl. No fancy plugins required.

Honestly, this reads like an argument from an advertiser trying to justify their purpose.

Where a box is on the shelf - at least in every supermarket I've visited - has no effect on the convenience of the product. So that's a stretch.

I don't have kids but I am aware of the phenomenon of children making choices that an adult would not make. I won't assert that I would never buy my kid the cereal s/he wanted because it was marketed to them, but I will suggest that the value of entertainment gets canceled out by my feeling like a bad parent in that situation. Maybe I'm just bitter because my parents wouldn't buy me the fancy-box cereal.

Finally, I think Gucci is in the image business, which I agree is heavily dependent on advertising to sell the image. Without advertising it wouldn't surprise me if Gucci didn't exist. If your self-worth is tied up in what shoes you wear then I agree, advertising has added value here.

Adds value from the perspective of the seller, sure. If I buy the honey nut cheerios vs. the off brand honey oats, I've received poor value because I've paid more for the same thing. And it's only adding value for the seller if they can sell the product for more than they pay in advertising - if this wasn't the case, people would not advertise because they would lose money.

I'd also like to suggest that the Soviet 'underconsumption' you speak of might be better characterized as 'proper consumption'. It's not a mandate that we buy a product just because someone's selling it.

That is why I qualified it w/ 'actually'. I'm aware of what's going on.

Is this just an assertion that no money == no counsel, or is there some other attack on the 6th amendment here?

I think the notion that 'clean' assets can be frozen pre-trial is unfair, but as long as a public defender is actually available, that would seem to satisfy the amendment.

I think that the products you're complaining about are in the state they are in because of vendor choices independent of the software development process. If total stability and backwards compatibility are not design requirements, neither Agile nor Waterfall will automatically implement them for you.

I think your class or professors are assigning behaviors and outcomes to development processes that should instead be assigned to the companies or people implementing them.

I don't like trying to make direct comparisons between Agile and Waterfall as if they are two separate mutually-exclusive approaches to development.

A product developed in an Agile process still has a 'maintenance phase'; the idea of software maintenance is not a Waterfall concept, it's a Software Development concept.

One thing I think you're having trouble with (maybe) is that this article was about Scrum, but you're attacking Agile. Scrum is an implementation of Agile, or maybe better characterized as a process facilitating Agile development, but it is not uniquely Agile. There are other Agile implementations/processes (Kanban, XP, etc.). Agile is more about attitude than implementation.

What Scrum is attempting to do is break down big ideas into small workable units, and help teams organize, assign, track and complete those work units efficiently. It separates the development cycle into several sprints: a team works a selected amount of items per sprint based on their capacity vs. the 'weight' of those items. If the development process using Scrum incorporates accepting changes to requirements or the design along the way, it's Agile. If it doesn't, Scrum can look a lot like a series of tiny waterfalls; you can absolutely have a Waterfall process where your teams organize and execute work like Scrum.

The most important thing to keep in mind is that neither Agile nor Scrum dictate what you consider to be a finished product, or a successful product. The standard of quality you added to one of your earlier comments is absolutely achievable using Scrum or another Agile process - in fact, it is the stated goal of Agile to turn out a high quality product which meets stated requirements.

Don't break support for them?

There are still requirements, there is still design. If you have a customer depending on your API, that is a requirement. Agile doesn't mean requirements go away.

I was wondering about this too. Lists of commodity parts might be treated like recipes, which are not subject to copyright per http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl122.html, but the drawings are a different matter.

Quartz glass refers to fused quartz, which is a glass.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fused_quartz

You could pre-translate, but Gozer would probably still laugh at you because they use Old Persian cuneiform, not Sumerian. You might also risk your message exceeding 140 characters post-translation.

Australia is hostile to foreign animals. There was this really absurd example from a few months ago:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/13/johnny-depps-dogs-a...

"During unification, the northern Italian powers decided that having a country that speaks about a dozen different languages would pose a bit of a challenge to their efforts, so they picked one and called it “Standard Italian” and made everyone learn it. The one that they picked was Tuscan, and they probably picked it because it was the language of Dante, the most famous Italian writer."

The article was specifically about how the New Jersey Italian American accent came to be, so including details about Southern Italian emigration to South America and the rest of Europe probably wasn't necessary.

I wasn't asserting anything here, just pointing out that there has been an alternative for almost 2 years.

It looks like ES separates repos by version[0], if that helps at all.

[0] https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/mast...