maggit

Hi! I'm the author of Bart. AMA :)

Askama and Bart seem to be pretty similar in use (compile time, based on a struct definition) except for the template languages. Askama is rich, while Bart, like Mustache, is deliberately more restricted. ("Logicless", they would call it. I don't know how to quantify that.)

From what I found in Wikipedia, the "kibi"-family of prefixes was not defined before 1998. There's a lot of computer history before (and after!) that establishing the use of kilo for 2^10. Calling this wrong outright is historyless.

Perhaps instead we could say: This is a funny artifact of history, and it is contrary to the long standing SI-definition of kilo as 10^3. We have since tried correcting that mistake by introducing the prefixes kibi-, mebi-, etc. A better table could say:

    kibi = 2^10 ~ 10^3 = kilo
    ...

amitp, the way you capture the arrow keys for the demo makes it so I can't use the arrow keys to scroll the text of the page.

Otherwise, I find you entire site super inspiring :)

This is certainly beautiful! And fascinating!

But be careful about drawing metaphysical conclusions from this. This is only an example of selection bias. Take random noise, filter it and select examples that probably look animal-like to humans. If the classification algorithm is worth its salt, the selected images are bound to look interesting.

A comparison could be made to the Rorschach test; if the patient finds clear images in the ink blot, that is supposed to say something about the patient, not the image, because the image is by construction random.

The submission title has been changed from "Replacing the Jet Engine While Still Flying" to "Mozilla’s project to replace Gecko with Servo" (at the time of this writing).

Some of the other comments are pertaining to the "Jet Engine" title. For anybody that might be confused, like I was :)

Macs have a good hw/sw-integration, but there are other features as well; I bought my first MBP for its trackpad, which is still unparalleled, and (as l1k puts it) its form language. I'm running Linux, which doesn't offer the same hw/sw-integration quality, but it's pretty good!

I've been making some notes going along as I have figured out different things over different generations of MBP:

- https://plus.google.com/+MagnusHoff/posts/Bnor8DQkKZ4

- https://plus.google.com/+MagnusHoff/posts/b23xMvSk3Hg

- https://plus.google.com/+MagnusHoff/posts/1fUQWHPujX3

- https://plus.google.com/+MagnusHoff/posts/eLtER7D8feX

- https://plus.google.com/+MagnusHoff/posts/7JHdmgZHwy8

- https://plus.google.com/+MagnusHoff/posts/2wJnwgZt2md

Additionally, the SD card slot won't work with ultra high speed SD cards, so I have had to cap the sdhci driver to high speed.

So; Yes, there are some hiccups, but I am a happy camper :)

I've been running Linux on my MacBook Pro for quite a while (years?), and while there are a couple of hicups due to Apple weirdness, they are minor.

I would definitely call my MacBook Pro a good (and workable) Linux machine.

Perhaps it is also a matter of how you fix it. Generally software bugs can be fixed by patching over the Internet, making them less scary, whereas hardware bugs are set in stone. (Stone is mostly silicon, right?)

Of course, this is a bit different for software we ship to other planets :P

I use both in concert in several installations. Varnish is so blindingly fast that it is a great addition in virtually any stack :)

As I recall, Apple has made sure to patent all of its touchpad technologies, making sure only Macs have those excellent touchpads. It seems like any competition would have to make good touchpads some other way :/

It seems like WSJ inspects the Referer HTTP header, so it disables the paywall if it seems that you navigated to it from a search engine. So, it is not a property of the link.

This, of course, makes sure I do not get around the paywall, since I have disabled that header in my browser. (I dislike the tracking aspect)

This is the exact meaning of quantum teleportation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation

Changing the title to "Researchers quantum teleport particle..." would make it clearer.

On the other hand, as far as I understand quantum mechanics, there is nothing about the "original" photon that was not teleported/transferred to the new location. It would be impossible to create an experiment that could conclude that the "target" photon was not in fact the original photon. When looking at it this way, it is not so unreasonable to call the process teleportation :)

This is not an example of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. It is instead an overt accusation that the USA is acting uncivilized with regards to this one issue, and should know better because they are otherwise civilized.

If it were an example of the mentioned fallacy, the poster would have to imply that the USA is not to be considered truly civilized. But this is not what the comment says.

Wayland is built up of multiple orthogonal protocols that each app negotiates access to with the server. Any given app will probably use multiple of these, for output, input, etc.

Not knowing exactly what Text Expander is, I'm guessing it would probably need access to a specific protocol for controlling accessibility features. The Wayland server would need to be configured to allow this app access to that protocol somehow, for example by way of a server-initiated popup window that asks you to allow or deny this access.

Does that explain it?

For completeness; Wayland also protects against keyloggers. In Wayland, input events are sent only to the application that hosts the window into which the input goes. So, keyboard events go to the app that has the keyboard focus.

I'm not sure exactly how X works here. I think as long as you have a visible window (1x1 pixel or more), you can get all keyboard input.

This may or may not be central to your point, but I wanted to have it out there to better inform about how Wayland improves upon X :)

Bah! That's a digression, the intended meaning here is clear.

Though let me say it is an interesting digression :D It seems that the use of that saying here qualifies for the "Loose rhetorical sense" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule...) described in that article. The one we would really like to avoid would be "Serious nonsense": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule...

As I understand it, this is indeed a fundamental feature of the Planck length; The universe might have structure smaller than this, but we wouldn't be able to tell. So the Planck length is the shortest meaningful length, in that we would never be able to discern structure smaller than this.

Ah, sorry, my bad. There is so much talk about null-terminated strings here, and I had only skimmed the article. Whoops :P

In addition to what has been said about lexicographic ordering, if the strings are large, say several kB (as they may well be), the entire operation would be dominated by memory latency. In this case it is much cheaper to read each string once, instead of going an extra pass just to find the length.

> Rotoscoping is an animation technique in which animators trace over footage, frame by frame, (...). Originally, recorded live-action movie images were projected onto a frosted glass panel and re-drawn by an animator. This projection equipment is referred to as a rotoscope.

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

It says "legally" right there in the title. I'm assuming this also takes into account EULAs and the like, that would forbid consuming the content while situated in another country.

Where did you get "bigger focus" from? It seems to me they are hard at work improving the language all the time.

Equally broken for me on Firefox 46.0.1 on Kubuntu 16.04.

Not really, but I miss it.

Not that it ever had the popularity it needed to be really useful, but I did use it to reach out to my programmer friends. As a kind of minimal effort blog. The biggest advantage with G+, as I used it, was that I could post technical stuff (like I would on Twitter) without confusing my other friends (like I would on Facebook) and it would actually be read (unlike Twitter).

If it's any consolation, this seems to be rolling out to everybody regardless. I'm pretty sure I'd never opt in to beta testing iTerm2, yet here I sit, having just gone through an automatic upgrade. Weird.

(See also https://twitter.com/shitwhocares/status/737938380470816768 for somebody else who seems to be in the same boat)

You shouldn't feel embarrassed about how you pronounce LaTeX. In the words of its creator Leslie Lamport:

> One of the hardest things about LaTeX is deciding how to pronounce it.This is also one of the few things I'm not going to tell you about LaTeX, since pronunciation is best determined by usage, not fiat. TeX is usually pronounced teck, making lah-teck, and lay-teck the logical choices; but language is not always logical, so lay-tecks is also possible.

See also http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/17502/what-is-the-cor...

The title specifies that it is talking about naive steganography. So, yes, your less-naive implementation would thwart this analysis :)

W^X stands for "writable xor executable":

> What this means is that each page holding JIT code is either executable or writable, never both at the same time.

For anybody, like me, who didn't already know :)

More important than knowing "hue 30 == orange" is the fact that one can decompose the color to "The hue of this color is orange". Then, finding orange on a color wheel is not so difficult. Especially if you can put in appropriate values for saturation and luminosity.

So, regardless of whether or not you know the exact hue value of a given color, it still decomposes more easily than RGB :)