rogerbraun

Sounds interesting, but there's a typo in the first sentence: compatable -> compatible.

The PSA endings you linked to all seem to be sensible and somewhat obvious advice for children, like not to pet strange animals and to be nice to your friends. Similarly, the show Captain Planet had lessons about caring for the environment. I think this is qualitatively different from teaching kids about copyright law.

You faked thousands of dropbox accounts, created thousands of fake mailing lists and it seems you bogged down parts of the network. This may not be terribly destructive, but it is reckless and borderline malicious. Someone at MIT and Dropbox will now have to spend their time checking their systems for your manipulations. It may have been fun, but I don't think it was worth it.

As a counterpoint to the "OpenGL needs to start from scratch" discussion, take a look at JWZs blog about porting XScreenSaver to iOS: http://www.jwz.org/blog/2012/06/i-have-ported-xscreensaver-t...

I don't agree. The OP makes it sound like it's a malicious backdoor installed by Ubisoft to get superuser access to a system. In fact, it's just a badly programmed way to launch games / any executable. To do anything else, you will have to find a way around the other security mechanisms, such as UAC.

I am in no way trying to say that this can not be dangerous, but it's different from what we would usually call rootkits.

I know, but that's not what the submissions says. It feels a bit sensationalized.

This does not 'install a backdoor that allows any website to take over your computer', right? It just makes it possible to launch any previously installed executable if you know the path.

He says that he can explain away the difference in calorie burning as an effect of the measuring method later in the article.

I can't see how Microsoft thinks that this can survive an antitrust case in Europe.

I am actually doing games, too. When we started our current game, we looked at the options for multiplatform development and found Air. I was really surprised by the (technical) quality of the system. It's easy to set up, easy to program and has really good performance. I now wonder why I have never really heard about this.

You can also do this with Adobe Air. It's also free. Take a look at http://www.flashdevelop.org/.

This is actually something I think will go away once we manage to overcome sexism in society. There is really no reason for it at all.

Right. They should be separate but equal.

We did similar things with images in this Codebrawl: http://codebrawl.com/contests/content-aware-image-cropping-w...

I think a guide to sex positions is as sexually explicit as it can get, it's just not necessarily pornographic.

I also think that the argument that it keeps the store clean so kids can browse it does not really work. Other online stores like Amazon don't have this, you can search for and buy porn there and nobody is outraged. A much better idea would be to give apps a suggested user age, so you could filter the store.

I don't think anybody questions if this is legal in the UK. Just if this is sane. And it clearly is not. Of course, I can see why there should be a trademark for "London Olympics 2012", but why for just the city name and the year?

Also, I think it really clashes with the supposed spirit of the games. If it is not a friendly, peaceful and international battle of athletes, but just another event where McDonald's and Samsung can advertise without any distractions, why do we need it? And why should a city finance it?

You are taking this too literal. "LSL isn't helping" means that it perpetuates a view of women and dating that is bad for society. I know it is a parody, but even so, it is a small part of the larger problem we have with sexism in our society.

It would be great if you could write that post! Wonderful project!

Wow! This looks really good! I always wanted to try out Lua, maybe this is a good reason to do so.

Mine would have been Javascript.

You might want to take a look at my implementation. I use the content of the linked sites via viewtext.org. This is probably more reliable.

I thought it was familiar, too ;-)

What do you actually use as features for training? Just the words in the title?

Why would you work for free?

No, but for loops are simple. Classes are not that simple. Of course, no feature really is "magic". But there are a lot of features that may be easy to use but hard to deeply understand. Take for example the attr_accessor method that Ruby uses to make variables pseudo-public. Most beginners coming from Java think that it is a language keyword, similar to "public". In fact, it just writes getters and setters for you. Of course, everyone could just write their getters and setters themselves, but this is just what language is: A way to abstractly tell a machine what to do. And if you don't know how it works (and maybe even don't need to know), you can call it "magic".

> 1) They make hardly any money from their 30 percent.

This is fascinating. Do you have any sources?

A very good point. I also use the same method as you do, but you probably know how flaky this can be sometimes, too (At least if you use all this: Gmail, G+, Analytics, Google Music).

You are right that there are cases where you would absolutely would want to have completely separate accounts. That's why I would like to have this as an option: Linking two "services" from different users, or attaching two users/emails to the same service.

As it is right now, Google+ for Apps is mostly useless for anyone who already has a G+ account. And I don't think that Google really wants to release mostly useless products.

I don't think that this is the same. I can not think of a reason why one should have two Facebook accounts, except for maintaining two complete separate sets of relations, for example for anonymity.

But having several Google accounts can happen much easier, for a variety of reasons. For example, I have used a GMail address for since my teen years. Turns out I don't actually like the format stupidnickname@gmail.com anymore and would rather have something like myname@mydomain.com, but I'd still like to keep the GMail interface. Google Apps is wonderful for this, so I made an account there.

But I can not just ignore my old account, as I still get email sent to the address (I forward it) and I used the Google Talk functionality for my Jabber needs. Also, I bought my first Android apps with my old account, so they are linked to it. That means that I have to use my old account as the first one on any Android device, or I can't download my apps again.

What I would wish for is this: Have services that can be linked to any identifier/email, and shared between any number of them, so I could, for example, have two sets of email (one private, one business), but just one of GTalk, G+, Feedburner and Analytics.

I know that implementing this on top of the current system might be hard. I still think that this is the kind of functionality one can expect from a company like Google, and I would gladly pay for it.

No way to join accounts, again. I can not understand why this kind of basic functionality is missing.

EDIT: Just to clarify, I mean there is now way to connect a Google Apps account to another Google account so that they can share certain services. I sort of understand why they think they don't need it for email, but having two separate G+ account is completely superfluous, thanks to the Circles system.

This reminds me so much of the UNIX Hater's Handbook, which argues that this attitude ("it's just a rite of passage", "it is better now anyway") is a result of growing up in a world where the design errors of UNIX are seen as features. I don't know yet, but it is an inspiring read nonetheless: http://www.simson.net/ref/ugh.pdf

So now it's only for non-prophet organizations?