oliverkofoed

Thank you.

How is this different from having version control away from my work computer ?

I never have more then a day or twos work on my computer, so the most i can loose is a days work -- hardly seems worth having extra backup software for that case.

It's worth it.

I did it last year, and it took almost two weeks before i felt like i was even somewhat productive again. However, now, i feel exactly the same way when trying to use an editor without a VIM mode. What? I have to use the arrow keys to move the cursor? But, i'll have to move my hands! sigh

Vim is nice, MacVim is nicer. It'd be perfect if it had the the project drawer from textmate on the side, instead of wierd-textmode treecontrols which i never quite master.

From the posting: "This extra performance comes at a cost: it consumes more time and more memory to JIT compile using LLVM than using Mono's built-in JIT, so it is not a solution for everyone."

So, faster code but more memory usage and longer JIT time seems to be the reason why mono didn't just switch over to LLVM.

My bet is that they'd switch if LLVM supported the same features and architectures as their own, but just with better results.

Is this a marketing or a recruitment exercise? Or both? :-)

The reason is simply that some sites value having a valid e-mail address over the percentage that they loose by having a validate e-mail step.

Like it or not, e-mail is pretty much the only way to get in contact with people who don't login all the time.

I really like the video presentation. Short and sweet while being entertaining enough to watch.

Google is also one of a very few companies where this type of micro-micro-optimizing even begins to make sense.

Theres a flipside to that envy though: The time needed to make sure the html+css+javascript renders the same on all the different browsers and their different versions.

... especially when they like to radically change everything all the time for no good reason. I'm looking at you IE.

Why couldn't they just use mozilla or webkit, and concentrate on adding innovative features like chrome did.

I can't help but wonder why they didn't try harder to fix spam. As far as i've been able to tell, it'll be same-old/same-old: Mark as spam, possibly automatic filters.

It seems to me that part of the answer to the question "What would e-mail look like if invented today" should be "there would be no spam".

Couldn't it be done by request/approve like on Skype/Facebook or something more advanced like reputation or something?

Here is another one:

Sell a a nicer "native" client, either by wrapping the website in a custom browser like http://mailplaneapp.com/, or make a version that looks as close as possible to Exchange.

You're gonna live a long time, you've got time to change direction. Find a junior job doing something completely different, or even start studying something, anything.

Only things that can happen are that you become happy for you new job, or you fall back in love with programming.

Another option: I know an illustrator who was getting tired of the endless line of demanding clients wanting the same old work, so she decided to spice it up by taking internships one week of every month. She tries to make the internships as different as possible, examples being a baker, a clothing shop, some print/dtp shop, etc.

Maybe that could be a less radical way of getting some fresh perspective.

I respectfully disagree. It's not about the money; it's about setting expectations.

If you plan on monetizing by ads, have them there from day one, so your users won't cause a small riot when you add them in later.

While it's important to try to squeeze out as much performance out of a single box as possible, it seems to me that the future lies in scaling horizontally by adding more servers.

CouchDB is an obvious contender here, but as far as i know they still don't have partition of data across multiple servers (yet.., i saw a GSoC project about it).

ScimoreDB is also interesting (disclaimer; i know them personally); a full RDBMS with ACID properties and all that jazz that can partition data over a set of servers. (www.scimore.com if you are interrested)

I'm a bit tired of using SQL/Tables/Columns for storage; the perfect solution for me is CouchDB w/ partitioning where you "just add more servers". It would be cool to get to the point where we can eliminate memcached and the likes from our infrastructure because the database itself scales just as well.

just some random thoughts.