PythonicAlpha

What me frightens a little with this move (OK, I acknowledge that OpenID2.0 is deprecated and should be updated to something new), is that Google talks only about "Google+ Signin". And OK, as I read in previous discussion, Google will also in the future support logins from people with normal eMail account.

Still, I am worried, since Google does not clearly communicate these facts, but when you look at their communications, you read only about "Google+ Signin" and you have to search to find that you do not need Google+ but just the new protocol OpenID connect.

I don't like to see such communications from a company, that once claimed (long, long time ago!! Do you remember Google?) "Don't be evil".

It is OK, when they move away from an old protocol, but it is not OK, when they (and it very much looks that way to me!) use it as vehicle to market their products. Google has troubled people enough with forcing G+ on them -- so I even find it more troublesome, how they do it now (as it seems to me currently).

I fear, Google is still hunting after Facebook and is by the way inheriting its bad habits.

As I see now, they also want that a new button is used -- something with G+ on it. I see, they really lay the pressure on the people -- many people will think, that they need a Google+ account to use this feature (even if not required). I would say, Google you are going to hurt yourself!

I myself, was thinking about using a "Login with Google" button in my application ... but now, with things changed, I will think twice, before I do such a move!

He is right.

He is right about premature optimizations and also right about craftsmanship.

Many performance problems stem from bad overall design decisions, bad abstractions and bad data structures (summarized: craftsmanship). I always wonder, how fast today's processors have become and how slow they get with today's software.

One of my first computers had 64k of memory and a processor that was so incredible slow compared to today's processors, that it is unbelievable. And still, they made so many good software with it. In today's programs the resources of this computer would not suffice for the idle loop.

Also the first Unix computer that I worked on, had only 8MB of memory and had X11, LaTeX and many other stuff!

It was a long way down the road of abstractions, that today's computer could hardly live with 1GB of memory and 1GHz processor (2 cores, please, please!) for basic usage.

The real art in computer science is, to know where to optimize -- to use your time most effectively.

I would like to have a vim-clone, that also can handle embedded images.

Just a wish.

I think, that is a rather complicated question. You should also take into account how accessing other data is affected by large blobs that reside in the same database. For example: you have a table with large data blobs and other tables with conventional relational data. The blobs will take a lot of the cache size away from the other data. Also by increasing the database size, you will have potential longer access times, at least when you use spinning hard drives.

So, several things to think about (make cache bigger, how much grows the overall db size) that can change the database behavior.

Of course those numbers can give some directions, but since only the blob data was taken into account, it can not give full information.

I personally would most of the time prefer smaller db sizes, at least, on edge cases. Relational databases are great for structured data -- unstructured data is not their specialty.

Of course! Excuse my bad English!

Is it really the same (really asking)?? Sometimes there are subtle protocol changes, when something is standardized -- and as much I understand, HTTP/2 took a while ...

I think, it is because language fights are not appreciated so much here.

Thank you very much for the answer!

To clarify for my mind:

Can I than use H2O to connect to a web-browser via HTTPS and H2O is routing the same request upstream via HTTP to a web application server? (that of course would suffice for me).

Looks very promising!

I am not so much into web-servers (yet), but I found this in the feature list:

  reverse proxy
    HTTP/1 only (no HTTPS)

Are there any plans to add also HTTPS-support for reverse proxy? Since I have to include a secondary (Tornado) web-server unto my stack for dynamic pages.

It also puzzled me, that https is not supported, but in the benchmarks I found a part: "HTTPS/2 (reverse-proxy)". As I said, I am not so much in Web-servers and https/2, but that was a little confusing.

I really like the idea, that it compiles Python but is (99,9%) compatible to CPython -- since so you can still use the many C extensions (I don't want to do my projects any more without my own Python extensions written in C).

I totally agree. I also wrote my own opinion as answer to another post.

The regulation should in the first place go against the big players like Amazon .... but such badly as it was done now, it hurts the small businesses and start-ups. Another reason, that Europe is bad for Entrepreneurs!

That is right. At least, they should have promoted the minimum amount to be taxable (I don't know the right English word) to the new system. In the old system, smaller businesses which did less than amount x business could be excluded from the taxation. They should at least have a small amount left for real small businesses that have few foreign customers .... So, a business owner must decide, if he takes the hassle for one or two customers or just says that he takes no foreigners at all!

They could have said, that business with less than X "foreign" income could still comply to their own countries taxation ... but no, with such a thing, they just created more bureaucracy and support the big players like Amazon, against which the regulation should have gone in the first place ... (at least, that was the explanation).

Fruits: Mozjpg medium is still worse as BPG and is nearly double the size, it leaves a lot artifacts in the cloudy areas. Found it very convincing.

I think the results depend a little on the kind of input, but some of the pictures where rather convincing. WebP seems to do better than jpeg.

Yes, the higher performance is rather appealing. Of course one of the reasons for the success of the raspberries is the low energy consumption, but sometimes it is just to slow. A little reserve really would be good for media centers or also if you want to have a small server solution.

Of course best would be some device with low power consumption when less work is to do and which can go to full power if needed. Multiple cores would be good for that, if the device could deactivate unneeded cores or even reduce the clock speed.

I am looking forward for more power saving devices, since servers which run all the day should consume less than today.

I heard something, that the software (hardware drivers and other things) support for these not so much sold devices is sparse. Does anybody know more? I guess, they ported some Linux on it, but how about media server software (like XBMC/Kodi) and other stuff??

In some other news, I read something about ~2x that of a Raspberry, I think it was about 0,5A. That seems to me a fair deal for much more speed.

Also you get a 1GBit Ethernet port, I think Raspberry has only 100MBit/s.

I did not think about comparisons ... that is right.

The other examples are also valid, but rather special to RISC architectures ... but of course it does the trick.

Thanks. I think, this spec is to long for me now to read.

I am wondering, what the advantage of a zero register is? I thought about supporting direct operations, but adding zero does not make to much sense, same with minus, multiply, division .... OR/AND/XOR does also make not much sense. Storing data into this register also does not make to much sense ... or as garbage tray??? ;) (the hardware implemented garbage tray was once the April fool joke in an IT magazine).

As much I heard, the ARM instruction set is also not so simple as it could. So a new, fresh and clean instruction set would be great and the comparison of the two architectures looks promising.

I scan-read the paper, but did not encounter any number of registers. Does anybody know, how many registers this architecture has/supports ... is there any implementation yet?

Hope, there will be an implementation soon, and maybe a smartphone or tablet computer based on it... (or a new Raspberry?)

Edit: Now I see, should be 32 registers, based on the 32bit opcode-format (5 bits to address any register).

I use some similar classes in my projects.

It always has frustrated me to see that attribute- and dictionary access is so similar but still different. Of course in most cases, there are some good reasons to have it different -- but sometimes there are also good reasons to generalize access to some important values.

So, we have duck typing and car typing. And both together we have a duck-car, because it quacks like a duck and runs like a car.

In Europe, our situation is very similar to the US -- we are just some years behind. So whatever happens to the US, is also happening to middle Europe. The reason is, that our governments are happening to copy all the trends from the US and sell it to the citizen as great "blessing" from the US, even when the US long has found that it was a mistake.

And yes, the middle class is also in decline in Europe very fast. Germany once had one of the best social security system in the world. Today it is in decline very fast and some thing is happening, that nobody would have found possible in 1990 ... we speak today of "poverty among the elderly" and not for some percent, but of vast numbers of them. And those things that where invented to prevent it, happens today to be the reason for it.

The dreams of "unlimited money and profit" from the 80s, 90s and 00s where found to be false dreams that came only true for <1% of the people.

Might be. I am not enough inside this stuff to really distinguish. But there are other examples, where Apple decides, what is allowed to run on "their" hardware. I as user feel "overprotected" to say it very polite.

Also there are other companies that provide services, but don't force the users to use it in the way they think.

That is just the reason, why I restrain to use Apple hardware.

Apple products are really very good and they have invented the smartphone it it's current functionality. But Apple has a very restrictive mindset. I as user, feel that it is like being in a nanny-state, where everything is controlled, what I am allowed to do.

I want to decide myself and not let Apple decide for me, what is good for me.

I would guess, that decoding speed can become an issue for websites, where many images are already in the cache but are re-displayed rather often...

I write this, because I am building such an application and for now it has many PNGs ... and yes, using a format like BPG would be fine, because I use the PNGs only because of transparency ... but when redisplay is done via a Java Script, I doubt that I could have the same speed. Loading is not so much a limiting factor, since after some time, all relevant PNGs are already in the browser cache.

Can anybody say something to this topic?

Of course, it would be great to have this integrated into the mayor browsers soon ...

Should better read: Americas "most effective" Warplane is Going Back into Battle.

As much I know, this plane is the most effective plane against ground targets. Some targets just can't be hit effectively from great heights and this plane also stays much longer in the area as other planes can. It might be the best compromise between a helicopter and a plane.

Also it is very cost effective in comparison to some of the more modern planes.

That are the projections, right? How much security is there, that the real costs will be quite that number?

The Space Shuttle once also should be much more affordable than it really was ....

Also to compare the Saturn V with one Space Shuttle lift is really not fair at all ... since the Saturn V could carry much more weight, as much I know as the Shuttle in one lift (more than 100tons for the Saturn V vs. 24 tons for the Space Shuttle into a low orbit).

Not so new ... but it seems that some news has to be repeated on and on, that people learn.

In 1987 the book "Peopleware" already described the open office trap. But since, the idea keeps coming back in CEOs minds. I experienced it in a big corporation I was in. Decades after Peopleware, Open-Office was declared as "big new invention from the US" -- but it still was the same old fallacy.

The idea kept coming up always in new flavors and new "inventions" -- it seems that the idea is just to attractive for managers to be buried.

The problem is, that you have to invest in people to get best results -- and conventional economical thinking often times goes the opposite direction, how to cut costs.

The best solutions don't come from hacking, but by grasping the problem and it's full scope, the chance raises that you find a solution that can not only be used for the current problem, but also for similar other problems. A good programmer always tries to find similarities and to reuse old solutions in as many other areas as possible, but not more.

Such a behavior also boosts the maintainability of the solution. On the other hand, when it is ignored, a solution quickly can become unmaintainable and the solution that was implemented so "quickly" can become a black hole of man power.

I personally experienced more than one project, where the source code has become in very short time so complex and so bug ridden, that development times literally exploded.

That would be a solution. But political pressure is high, that the system stays as it is. And they that want it that it stays are the biggest players on place, since they think they can win most of this ridiculous system.

It is like dinosaurs, which make a law, that children must come from an egg....

Yes. And I am also upset, that a patent like this (when that what an other poster posted is complete) can go threw the patent process, because what the claims say is nothing more as an generic emulator that can emulate binary software of a different computer --- something that exists in hundreds or thousands of versions ... there exist at least three only for the C64 computer and this software is around for 20 years or so (Vice, one of those is ~21 years old).