FuzzyDunlop

This should hopefully change as WebRTC gets more fleshed out support. It's something I aim to try and tackle in my own webcam library (that was posted here a short while ago), but yeah. Finding an efficient way to even send a single frame is a bit awkward, and there's more than one way to do it.

I think you could get away with not even checking for parens, if you go with the idea that people doing it properly won't try to cheat it (because they'll learn nothing).

For people who do want to 'cheat', the grade is meaningless anyway.

I don't think this is a totally fair comparison, because anyone who knows how to code their own site (/service) is already at a major advantage.

Now, if you downloaded an off-the-shelf MP3 search engine package and merely hosted it, it'd be different.

I also don't think that surviving a sudden upsurge in traffic is a particularly impressive feat just because it's Wordpress. If anything, it highlights how inefficient Wordpress is, which might possibly be a result of trying to be easy to set up. And a lot of the people who do use it don't realise how much worse they make it by adding plugins.

Technical Cofounder: Can we release it as a simple REST API that lets you calculate fizz buzz in the cloud?

I'd also suggest that clicking anywhere on the body should dismiss it, and behave like cancelling.

It would, however, increase the quality of the offers. I'd go elsewhere if I had to make some sort of effort to hide what may as well be spam.

I've not tested it (due to not having a phone with a front-facing camera), but I'm not confident there's support for it yet.

Author here. I started this thing off as a bit of a jumble of incongruous features (take pictures, take pictures of just parts of the image, etc. etc.), and have since been whittling it down to two core components: getting a webcam feed up and running; and giving you the option to capture images from it.

Instead of adding more features before 'shipping', I probably deleted a load instead. Didn't need 'em.

I think I prefer the idea of the style guide, which you might argue is a coding standard, but the use of 'guide' allows for a bit of lenience.

Moreover, I think one of these things is missing the point if it's entirely about syntax, whitespace, and whatever else can make the code appear readable on the surface. There's no substance to this and the code can still be shite while being 100% conformant. It'll just be formatted nice.

What a standard/guide should try to do is serve the dual purpose of educating or informing people about good practices, both in general and while being language specific. Some might disagree or find it patronising, but even if it's only encouraged by colleagues or peers, it can be the sort of thing that makes you think twice about the code you're about to commit.

By the same token, using a style guide for that should never be a replacement for a good, collaborative work environment. This is essentially a people problem after all.

Everyone keeps talking about the 'white guy' as if there's only one type of person who is white and male. This ignores cultural diversity that is not related to skin colour, but place of birth and nationality, and other forms of identity.

Because I don't know the exact line up for that conference, I can make the assumption that a line up of Spanish, South African, German, Icelandic and Russian speakers - who are all white - isn't diverse.

I find it quite offensive to base arguments on the assumption that the sum of any person is nothing but their gender and the colour of their skin.

In fairness the tweet that presumably started it all originated from San Francisco.

I'm not sure I like this argument. Because one woman (who from your comment I presume everyone should know about - I don't know her) said they were never approached, this means the organisers intentionally selected (using your words) 'non-diverse' people?

I don't know what to make of this. I tend to feel that if you want to accuse someone of racism or sexism then you have to be sure it was deliberate. The accusations can be so damaging that it's irresponsible to sling them about freely without due care or thought.

I don't think that playing the discrimination card before getting your facts straight is the best way to encourage improvement. In the case of the accusations made, the people making them have contributed nothing. What they have done is deny the minorities they were supposedly defending an opportunity to speak at a large conference, because the whole damn thing has been cancelled as a result.

You might have to enable a setting in chrome://flags in normal Chrome.

It's a standard Github Pages template.

I've encountered a few ~10K sloc files, in PHP. One ex-colleague preferred them, on the basis that "it makes it easier to use Ctrl+F."

It'd be less frustrating if they didn't completely neglect their official clients. And their website isn't exactly perfect, either.

Shame, really, because custom Twitter clients have been great for experimenting with the API and even UX design, and it being a full on client means enough people use them to test those experiments.

My first impression is that this isn't a problem in need of solving; it just needs a change in approach.

The first is the conflation of classes and functions that work with classes. The update function in the example isn't reusable at all, implies you can update something other than a Person, and 'NotSet' doesn't fix that. So have it as a method on Person, and pass in a list of attributes to change as opposed to enumerating each field as a named parameter. You have the fields on the class for more fine-grained control, and functions like this don't necessarily make the code clearer.

Given that, I don't think the example presents a valid use-case for implementing 'NotSet' or whatever you want to call it. The problem is in the implementation, not Python, and the solution is a hack to enable you to continue with this approach.

It seems to use it for events, selectors, and data attributes.

Some uses are unnecessary, eg. using `closest` to get the container form element. `element.form` can be used on any form input or control to access the form itself.

I dunno though. I don't like adding jQuery as a dependency but there are still some cases where it's just pragmatic, especially with handling events.

    var NULL = null, TRUE = true, FALSE = false

I'm not sure I understand this. Why assign these to variables?

I've been writing a library that abstracts the getUserMedia API, and I've found it really interesting to be able to use JS and HTML to interact with hardware in a (mostly) simple way.

Even though I prefer the native implementation of these things, the pure creativity HTML and JS allows (because it's less difficult) is where these features really shine. Calling WebRTC "skype in a browser" is just the tip of the iceberg.

Personally, I find working within tmux more productive than a vanilla terminal, even if I never touch the remote functionality.

This was probably due to being used to using terminator on xubuntu, which tmux has felt similar to for me, and because I prefer having something I can configure/script and commit to a repo. I think it's a bit like preferring awesomewm or xmonad over, say, Gnome or KDE.

In addition to that, this sort of thing is just nice, I think.

I'd draw a distinction and say that it's probably something determined by a designer who wants to show off their Photoshop skills by having several meticulously designed websites for different devices.

As a developer, I'd leave the zoom as is and avoid this browser stuff like the plague. Too much repeated code.

Sure, can't refute that. However it's the same mentality that allows the same, basic vulnerabilities to persist throughout the years. The code basically works so sod it, who cares.

Of course, I fall short of offering a solution, because there is none that doesn't imply writing bug-free code (impossible if it's not trivial); spending inordinate amounts of our spare time vetting this code; or otherwise stopping people from learning in the first place. The other one is to tell people not to use these plugins, or to be more careful, but they need to know what's currently'safe' and what isn't.

I just don't like the mindset that 'shipping' code is the be-all and end-all when as masters of our craft (hyperbolic?) we should at least aspire to more than 'good enough' or 'working', even if it's unattainable.

I think there's a false logic present in arguing that "lots of people use it, so it's ok even if it's shit." Apply this same argument to one of several poorly coded plugins that have introduced basic security vulnerabilities and had widespread adoption. I think this is even worse when there's no commitment to improving it.

I find it curious we don't necessarily aspire to quality; and I think we should. I'm not happy just FUCKING SHIPPING IT.

This change appears to have been pushed already. Can't fault the responsiveness!

They're pretty frequent around the Islington area and outside of London. Same with the DVLA cards with ANPR cameras that park up on busy roads; and the yellow police vans with 'CCTV Unit' plastered on the side.

'Course, we can all say what we have and haven't seen and go on for ages, without some hard stats.

"Show detailed technical info"

Oh, okay. Maybe this will explain something.

"Numeric Code: 5"

... that explains everything!

My favourite thing about this is that you can basically make your own remix by clicking about the squares below, and you get an amusing chopped up video for free.

Same with log(x) too.