parley

However, the comment for re-enabling middle click paste seems to indicate that it will indeed be removed in the future:

"We're not really ready for this change, and we haven't messaged it properly. After discussion with Allan Day and Jakup Steiner, we'll defer this change until the next cycle."

Thanks. My guess would be that not dubbing TV and movies to our native languages contributes somewhat. Personally, I just played too much video games as a kid.

That's an interesting anecdote about near-perfect mastery having downsides! I can provide a different one but on the same theme. I saw a documentary a while back in which an immigrant sadly explained that if she made her absolute best effort to adapt and speak Swedish, she would get really crappy service in stores and such because of her accent and grammatical errors. If, instead, she spoke English (which she commanded better) she would get excellent service from everyone who were more or less racing towards her in order to be polite and service minded (although that's presumably for mistaking her for a tourist instead of an immigrant, letting their politics shine through...).

I hope this isn't HN karma suicide, but as pleased as I am (as a Swede) that one of our better newspapers is participating in this, I wish they'd spent the time to rid it of spelling errors and grammatical errors. I think I can be excused for mine in a HN comment, but they can't for theirs in a public letter to the British PM. Other than that, good job.

Never thought I'd be recommending the excellent band "Godspeed You! Black Emperor" in such a context. ;)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godspeed_You!_Black_Emperor

I seem to remember Elon Musk getting a question about SABRE at a post-talk Q&A a while back (probably in the UK, perhaps an inauguration ceremony of some institution), but now I can't find it. He was skeptical and had some constructive things to say, but I'm not a physicist so unfortunately I can't remember the specifics. If anyone else finds it, kindly reply with a link!

EDIT: Found the video, but haven't yet found the specific time of the question. My connection is a bit slow, so jumping around in the stream isn't going so well. http://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/videos/view/211

EDIT 2: Found it. Elon's reply is at 48:55.

Please do! And thanks for writing this article!

I think many GPL-leaning people generally agree that BSD-style licenses are very useful for e.g. reference implementation libraries of open, royalty-free data formats. We want the open formats to succeed, so if we make it dirt simple to put support for it in commercial systems we help the proliferation of the format.

I think it's "Scapple". Thanks for the tip, it looks good!

By that reasoning alone, tarsnap would also be something skip - but it's not. I haven't looked at FileRock (yet) and don't know any of the technical details, but there's still possibility to do interesting things without trusting the server (though I don't know if FR have succeeded at this).

If you read this and intend to make security design decisions based on it (as opposed to reading it just for fun), please read more about the subject from other sources as well. A few statements in it are a bit contradictory, like claiming DH is safe from MITM while at the same time in other words acknowledging e.g. that identity cannot be proven with it. I don't mean to bash the author as primers are a good way to get people interested in stuff, but small oversights can sometimes cause big problems.

Hey Björn, you're definitely one of the most interesting companies in the Malmö/Lund area right now! Very excited to see this take off. Two thumbs up =o)

Sony Ericsson --> Sony Mobile, nowadays. Not really heartwarming for us swedes, but defeat is defeat no matter if you acknowledge it or not...

I know commenting just for the sake of agreeing is advised against, but this time I had to. If there's an outrage over app store rejection for these reasons, then imagine the reaction to gatekeeper cert revocation for the same reasons.

Important: If you're using valgrind to examine a program using certain libraries, remember to also provide valgrind with so called "suppressions".

Some libraries do things (like juggling memory in interesting ways) that can cause valgrind to give false positives and lead you on wild goose chases. I have found this to be the case for e.g. GLib - it may perform correctly, but valgrind can't tell and so it warns. Suppressions solve this neatly.

I can really recommend implementing (and testing) Paxos (and the failure detector Omega mentioned at the end of the linked page) if you're interested in learning distributed systems, message passing-based communication and juggling state machines.

It may look tricky, but once you penetrate the formalities and understand it, you'll love it. It's a nice kick when you get it working.

Edit: Although you may not want to do it in C, as I had to. At the time, I'd have given my left hand for some tuples, pattern matching and other stuff. :)

This! Offering data export functionality (API or otherwise) is what allows data portability nuts like me to use things like Read It later/Evernote/whatever without cringing a bit in fear of losing the data for any number of reasons. The probability of needing it doesn't factor into my gut feelings, just the (miniscule?) risk of it. ;o) Have already started using your app though, it looks very nice!

I'm not quite sure I understand. Speaking of the generic case, the (quite broad, I admit) statement that modular and composable functionality should enable both the unified-libraries-approach (or frameworks) and pick-and-choose-approach should (when applied) solve the OPs problem of not wanting to use what he/she doesn't need, shouldn't it?

I support the idea of a framework essentially being a light-weight layer on top of libraries, but if the framework just uses a single monolithic library then little (but something!) is gained. If it uses one or more libraries that are all properly composed of smaller modules, etc, etc, then a lot of flexibility is gained.

I'm not very familiar with Rails - especially its internals - so it's hard to comment on this particular case. However, making job queueing modular seems to have found the approval of most people in the commit comment thread you linked.

But I agree that the distinction is never clear cut, and everything needs a discussion on a case-by-case basis...

While I haven't been doing much Ruby for a while, I agree somewhat with the article. Personally, I think it boils down to composability. Building simple, modular functionality with clearly defined borders should enable both a larger library composing these modules together and offering a unified interface towards them as well as a developer hand-picking and using these modules by hand as he/she needs them. The Prismatic blog published a good post recently where the problem with libraries vs frameworks was highlighted, and I agree with that post. I'm not saying it's easy, and it's certainly easier in some languages than others, but most of us could probably agree that it's the way we would like it to be done, no?

I too was thinking exactly this. I watched the crypto walkthrough video on the kickstarter page and though what was shown looked solid, it didn't mention this. Would it turn into a client-side JS-war between the extension and the host (FB, etc)? It would be nice if someone involved in the project could mention this and why it's not a problem. Thanks! Edit: clarified.

Good point. I heartily agree. The hardware is the resource the software is utilizing, and the better thought through and perhaps the more uniform (thus receiving much scrutiny and work) the tools for delegating and regulating access to those resources in order to preserve reliability, the better and more efficient the utilization of said resource, I should think.

Many software engineers strive for modularity and component decoupling, sacrificing some things (e.g. performance, to a varying degree) and gaining others. I agree with this line of thinking, and I see no reason not to apply it to OS kernels as well. The MMU is a really good friend to have, and I think most systems in this world should appreciate reliability more than performance, especially when it comes to the kernel. I always get a bit sad as I think of the general state of things, remembering that a decade ago I thought today everything would be properly divided and sandboxed with a minimum of necessary privileges. I guess user experience trumps it in many cases.

Personally, I've always liked creating a simple web server as a nice step in learning a language/stdlib. Some concurrency, some I/O, some string parsing, etc. Obviously it's not the first thing one does, but I find it a nice package to put together that actually achieves something real.

I run I/O-intensive DB tests very often myself, and I usually use RAM-disks to speed those up a lot to allow for faster coding/testing-cycles. Obvious tip perhaps, but I thought I'd share it =o)