mixologic

The main benefit appears to be the ability to load your own ROM onto it: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2578653

And the main benefit of that ROM seems to be that you can set an alternate DNS server to get around (some) forms of region controlling, as well as set your own application whitelist - not sure whats missing from the existing whitelist or what killer app you would root this for, but if I own the device, I should have total control over the device.

Because its not doing anything magic whatsoever.

https://github.com/fastmonkeys/stellar/blob/master/stellar/o...

I'm kinda concerned that if I star this project I'll get flagged in some NSA database.

Heh. If her electricity bill is so high I wonder if they're mining bitcoin or the like?

I count 17 that classified it as a sex object. Its worth noting that this survey was sampled after it was released to the public and a controversy had already stirred.

I was impressed that one respondent said "ouija board planchette".

The open ended nature of "what do you see" is totally questionable. The 'do you think this is a sex object' is a much better way to ask that question as even though its leading, its also the kind of thing you cant 'unsee'. "Does this look like balls?" It does now that you mention it, yes.

This looks pretty cool, but the demo should let you try some custom phrases to see if the value proposition is there. Im not sure if the brand I represent is discussed on reddit enough to warrant tracking...

I would think we would be better at spotting sock puppets. "Expert reaction?" More like paid schill: http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/about-us/funding/

Syngenta? Croplife? BASF?

Visited pages only seems to include the sites you visit immediately after doing a google search. It does not include pages found through normal browsing.

Companies seem to want to view employees as somewhat disposable and have shifted the burden of taking care of somebody long term (pensions, retirement, career progression etc) onto the employees themselves. But in doing so they're encouraging labor mobility, and seem strangely shocked to find out that employees would take with them the expertise, history, and network of contacts that they had accumulated and move that value somewhere else.

It's really interesting how they have resorted to strong arming their engineers with these shot in the back non-competes, and couple it with salary collusion and hiring agreements. Throw in the golden handcuffs (that turn into golden dental floss after a few funding rounds -- long after they've gotten their 60-70 hour work weeks out of the true believers) and you see how they are trying to stymie that labor movement.

It's really a wonder that technology workers haven't started forming some sort of union.

Yeah, lessee here, doesn't work in HR, makes 40K a year, probably an engineer, not Greek/Frat type of person. I think they'll be able to figure out exactly who this is, and get rid of him rapidly. OTOH, thats probably the best thing that could happen to him so he can start looking for another job.

Its hardly worth the risk to do something like this.

This seems more like an ad for hackpad.com than it is about a new markup language for science.

How come mine is an hour off? I just ran it and it says that Australia/Netherlands will be in 38 minutes?

Seems like this would be a good way to frame somebody else. Hack into a server, do some damage/steal files, and drop somebody elses public key on the server.

"But I didnt do it!" - Then why was your key on the server?

"I've seen a 50+ developers project with an active trunk where Git was a blocker because it was hard to push your code because of other people pushes"

That's a clear misunderstanding of how to use git. The whole idea of having a single source tree is unnecessarily limiting - everybody works in their own branches, pushes to a origin/github remote, and when their work is gtg for the trunk, they, in their branch do a git pull --rebase, or alternately do a `git fetch; git rebase origin/master`. If they haven't touched any files that other people have touched, it just moves their branch point off of the current tip of origin/master, and they can merge their changes into master and push.

The only time it should be hard to push code is if both people made changes to the same file, and realistically, the same lines of a file. Then you get a merge conflict which is awesome, because it's made you aware that what you're working on and what somebody else is working on may be overlapping.

Git's submodules and git-subtree are definitely clumsy to work with, but you can always use sparse checkout if you want to work on a small part of a large project.

Ticket handling/wiki aren't really version control features. Decoupling those features from your VCS allows you to select the one that works best for your situation.

Mercurial is easier to learn for the most frequent use cases, and its interface make a lot more sense. No argument there. But like I said earlier, once you do learn it, its no more difficult to use, follows the same paradigms, but really allows for the edge cases to shine.

Having worked with CVS, Perforce, subversion, bzr, mercurial, and git, in distributed teams, as a sole developer and in large local teams for over 20 years, I can't think of a single plausible situation in which git is not superior in every way to all the other version control systems.

Git is a tool, and it's certainly not going to be a 'flip a switch and everything is better'. It does require that you define how you're going to use it in your particular context, but the only tradeoff I can see with git is learning it. It's interface and naming is an absolute horror show of usability, but its no worse that something like regular expressions or vim/emacs. But once it's in place, you have change management calculus, and everything else was algebra at best.

I understand the frustration of people who are used to having the benefits of open history in addition to open source. And who don't want to step back 10 years and learn dead end technologies, and who aren't used to being confronted with ivory towerism or gatekeeperism.

Otoh, I also understand why a maintainer would want to keep their codebases close to their chest, when they've achieved expert level finesse in a project/codebase, and the noob hordes with their ill-conceived ideas demand responses to their pull requests because they spent their free time writing some crap, and demand you spend your free time educating them on why their patch is a tub full of fail.

If a 13 year old responded with such a detailed, well thought out response as to the analysis of a joke, it would clearly never pass the turing test. If the response was "duh, he didnt realize he'd never run out of beer!" Then it might be more likely.

"Why isn't somebody doing this?" - Why aren't you doing this? Provide a service to VC that answers those questions as part of their due diligence. Sounds like a good idea to me.

I think you're comparing cheap in terms of time, Im talking about in terms of resource utilization and saturation. I think it would be clearer to show what the exact tradeoff is in terms of cost. In an arbitrary scenario where you have 100$ worth of ssd, and 100$ worth of CPU, and this strategy saves 75% of the SSD space at the cost of 1% more utilization of CPU, then yeah, its a total win. But isnt your example showing that it takes 5 times as much cpu time compressed vs uncompressed?

Isn't the assumed tradeoff SSD storage for CPU usage? How much more cpu time is utilized in compressing/decompressing? And whats the unit cost of that extra CPU in comparison to the cost for disk space savings of 'expensive' SSD's?

I feel bad for the person who made the mistake. Even though its obviously a systemic problem, and highly unlikely to be an act of negligence, Im sure he/she doesnt feel too hot right now.

" too much dependency injection and other magic" "No dependency injection. No magic."

What do they have against dependency injection? Why do they think its 'magic' ?

"This is a case where google wants people to mold the internet according to what their current incarnation of their algorithm says the way it should be"

You do realize, of course, that Google is part and parcel of the internet, and that much of the way the internet works "in reality" is in response to external perceptions of how googles algorithms work?

Google's early dominance in search was a result of their algorithm's ability to surface relevance. If they had never staked out that Site A linking to Site B means site B has more relevance, then the internet would be an entirely different beast, and SEO would take entirely other forms that do not amount to linkstuffing.

The internet hasn't existed 'naturally' since search engines first came around.

yeah, and wow. It says its 12 pt font, but it looks like 8 pt.. so small ?

What would the FCC/Comcast do if they didn't have a 900 lb gorilla to go after? What if consumers were using the exact same amount of high bandwidth services, except instead of it being mostly Netflix and Youtube, it were 50 or 100 similar services?

Comcasts customers pay Comcast for service. If every website they went to didnt work, they'd be calling, and blaming, Comcast.

All of their customers will still have to go through middlemen. Thats how the internet functions.

But they cant cut out the middleman. Comcast doesnt have a direct connection to netflix or anywhere else on the internet.

I think Level 3 should straight up shut off their peering agreement with comcast and watch how all the last mile customers blame comcast for the issue, until such time as comcast stops playing games.

Not very ballsy if they've bought enough politicians and lobbyists.

I guess it depends on how it was being used. If your employees came up with a great idea over chat that six month's later lead to a patentable invention, its nice that there is a record of all that information.