std_throwaway

A quicker guide for real beginners:

Do you want to understand in detail what's happening? => Arduino UNO

Is the UNO too small/slow? => Arduino Due

Still too small or you really just want a small computer running Linux but with GPIO-Pins? => Raspberry PI

Was Google Glass ever actually meant to be a big success in the short term?

It looks like typical Hen-Egg-Problem where you first have to build it in order for them to come (slowly). Then you have to wait it out until the actually useful applications arise from the dust.

While the smartphone has established its place in everyday life (after years and years of trying and mostly failing with similar approaches), the glass probably will be a tool for a thousand niche applications mostly in the corporate world who need a finished solution before they start acting.

The burden of proof is up to Microsoft in this since they don't disclose the source or the communication protocols in full. There is information being sent we cannot decode right now. We can't even begin to investigate properly with the information we have.

Furthermore, even if the current system is OK, this might change at any time without prior notice due to a pushed update.

Finally, others doing it, too, doesn't make it any less wrong.

What is the added value of 5 times more than enough compared to 2 times more than enough?

Of course; it doesn't even make sense for Europe to have a "Typhoon" aircraft due to the geographical location.

I guess Europe has some "Penguin" submarines, too.

In the northern hemisphere these warplanes are called "Tornado".

That is like asking: "Why do you wear a seatbelt if you don't even drive a racecar?"

Because I care about my data. Data corruption may kill your main storage and the first backup, too.

What about ECC memory? Intels desktop processors fail hard on that feature.

The Mexicans should educate themselves about siege weapons. There is a much superior design that could launch heavier projectiles over a greater distance without sacrificing firing rate.

The same with sound.

Thank you for taking the time to not answer the question but raising another question instead. I have serious doubts that ECC indeed is the biggest scam out there.

How does ECC compare to the fiat money ponzi scheme?

Do they support ECC memory?

So, does that make them responsible for the things done with their software?

Inside the reactor building where it belongs, so nobody is in danger outside of the reactor building. Headline could be clearer.

Did they quit because they had a better offer elsewhere?

Or did they quit because they increasingly felt they've become stuck, left behind and not valued highly by their employer?

How so?

Mac users have long known that using Safari extends their battery life. This change by YouTube probably improves it further.

Thanks for your reply. You present some interesting points.

* Project management.

* Goal/benchmark definition.

* Human resource allocation.

I can't decide if what you say is truly so. One thing that I know, though, is that the old GIMP has been very useful to me for editing images (nothing fancy). I'm not an artist/painter but if I were, I'd start that with Krita instead of GIMP. In my mind, GIMP is more of a toolbox for doing the boring stuff like cropping/converting/annotating/correcting some random images and saving them in various formats. Gaining proper color management would be a good thing in my opinion, even if everything else stayed the same.

Reading the top answer has lost me.

It starts with "No." explaining why it doesn't work and then changes it into a to "Yes, but it's slow." further down.

Commit logs of GEGL show he's been an active developer for a long time: https://git.gnome.org/browse/gegl/log/?ofs=1050

Can you comment on the substantial redesign of the GIMP that will be in the next major version?

Paint.NET is nice, but I prefer to use free software and to not use a closed source operating system from Microsoft.

I was reading a bit through the mailing list and it seemed that the GIMP development team had bit off a bit more than they could swallow at that time. This is what I've got from it:

* They rewrite the core of the software to allow a lot of new features.

* The developers could not agree on all critical details on how to proceed.

* Some developers got frustrated because things were not going their way or proceeding too slowly.

* The new model of how things work makes much of the old code obsolete.

* There are a lot of modules which need to be rewritten to use the new core.

* Before thinking about releasing the new GIMP >50% of the total work has to be done making transition hard.

* Due to its 'unique' interface a lot of people don't like the GIMP even if it would do everything they need.

* Designing and implementing a new interface is another pain point.

Considering that currently the GIMP is at a critical point in its development, a full-time developer could really be the pivotal element in making it succeed. I don't know much about this particular developer, though.

Thinking back of all the times I've used the GIMP; I'm compelled to give it a little boost.

EDIT: I'm willing to give the GIMP a boost. I don't know this developer. Is someone knowledgable about this particular developer. Is it likely they are the right person to do it?

EDIT2: He's contributed a lot already for a long time and still keeps on going strong. It looks good to me.

Keep it as simple as possible but don't try to make it simpler than it really is.

Programming languages can make things more complicated and having worked in C++14, python and VBA i can tell you that VBA does not come out on top even though it is seemingly simple. Compared to python VBA lacks so much ecosystem and language features that you will have a hard time to even parse XML, process loosely structured data and serve it via HTTP.

Looking at python vs. VBA and C++11 vs. C++03, I'd say that programming languages have generally been moving in the right direction.

Most people would die soon if they try to do that. I'm happy for you that you have a very capable body and a strong mind.

I think of the time someone can work steadily without problem as a normal distribution.

80% can do 40 hours.

20% can do 60 hours.

5% can do 80 hours.

1% can do 100 hours.

There are people who struggle to do 40 hours of quality work and there are people who can work all the time with very little sleep. Neither proves anything about the other.

The problem with randomness is that you can never really be sure.

I'm not aware that we have such storage and I'm very sure that we have not tested such storage for long-term stability.

Nuclear power is very safe if run by sensible humans without external pressure.

I just don't trust humans to accomplish this for the next thousand years without fail. Even less if a nuclear power plant is run for profit. Even less if storage of nuclear waste does not give off any profit and safe storage needs to be ensured for thousands of years.