mpoloton

It requires courage and wisdom to openly accept feedback and reflect on yourself instead of playing the blame game in situations like this.

Interesting read. I think Zotero (https://www.zotero.org/) is missing as a collaborative bibliography tool.

It is signed by Cacert web of trust. You can add the root certificates in your browser here: https://www.cacert.org/index.php?id=3

This is their github: https://github.com/voc

"Now let's work together to add the capabilities to HTML 5 that allows ____ to be done w/o a framework"

It takes a long time and iterations for standards to be finalized and adopted. It took more than a decade to for the release of HTML5. In addition, adding more and more features to the standard lead to bloats and even longer release cycles. I think this is the role of frameworks/modules to provide higher abstraction and convenience.

I have no idea but here is a good read regarding dumb phones http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=3040

Neat idea, but the application is very resource hungry!

Interesting talk. ISSCC also offers an edx crash course

ISSCCx ISSCC Previews - Circuit and System Insights (https://courses.edx.org/courses/IEEEx/ISSCCx/3T2014/info)

It seems so. Here is the mirror on archive.org

https://web.archive.org/web/20141013114803/http://cpudb.stan...

I've seen this happening several times after submission to HN.

The man pages are intended for human and are not meant to be specs. An advanced NLP program is required to parse man pages and infer appropriate types and combinations and I suspect it would not be perfect.

I agree that this might lead to something which is not in Unix spirit but already shell completion provide such information and this shows the need for such specs.

As much as I like the CLI, I really find this useful, because it takes time to go through document and find the desired option. I think the real solution is that every CLI program comes with a description file (probably in XML) that describes its CLI options, their types, combination, etc.

The description file should help automatic GUI creating or shell completion.

I think Open ISAs such as SPARC, OpenRISC and RISCV and their related ecosystems and tools provide the following opportunities:

-Educational: Engaging more people in hardware design and creating a much bigger community who can understand and design complex systems without the need to start from scratch. Moreover, a larger community leads to the improvements and maturity quicker than propriety solutions.

-Commercial: I agree that they may not be able to compete with proprietary solutions in few applications in near future. However, in many applications the combination of open ISAs and proprietary solution enable faster customization and development time. A good example is NavSpark/Venus (http://navspark.mybigcommerce.com/), a GNSS solution based on Leon3 with an attractive price and competitive features comparable to the state of the art.

-Security: As mentioned by others