Not to nitpick but TextMate and VS Code aren't even 'real' IDEs. They're text editors. The IDE aspect is added by installing plugins which a) mostly depend on the the needs of the user, and b) she didn't showed.
The one shipped by Apple on OS X 10.11.6 is 2.7.4, which was released in March this year. That's hardly "way outdated".
> Better off install the latest version using homebrew.
The Git project provides package to install binaries for OSX. Homebrew's name would be more accurate to the reality of the product if it's name was bathtub-whiskey.
Note that Git ships with Xcode, not part of OS X itself. Xcode 7.3.1 updated Git to v2.7.4. Xcode 8, likely to GM in the next month or two, includes Git v2.8.4.
You'd think that companies who profit from open source projects would support them financially. Considering how big django is there should be many other companies who profit from the projekt.
I've found that the engineers who build products on open source software very rarely have the authority to donate company money, and the businesspeople that do have the authority rarely understand the benefits of it.
I think a guide on how to get your company involved in donating to OSS projects would be beneficial. Has anyone come across any good advice, or have any experience in influencing your employer to donate?
Funding an open source project you use means funding the competitors.
A is a company, B is an individual with lots of spare time.
B feels that he can help the company by writing a tool for them. He also envisions that the tool could be used by other companies and so wants to open source it so he can provide services around the tool.
B says to A : see, I'm going to develop the tool for you for free, in exchange you test it.
Note the tool is the n-th implementation of common business practices, such as an ERP. The tool is not about something specific to A.
B thinks : I'm independent, I'm not hired by A, I write the code as free software as it pleases me.
A then says : wtf? you're going to publish that code on the web ? Therefore my competitor might get it so, no way. I'd be liable for giving away some value of the company to the competitor
So, instead of saying something like "hey, I use that program so let's fund it a little", A actually says "by helping B to develop the program, I may actually help my competitors, I'm in legal trouble".
B is somewhat screwed :-(
(I let you figure out if this actually happened to me :-))
I don't think that this applies to this very case though. Django was not made for Instagram, it was made available to the general public for free, as an open source framework. Instagram engineers only decided to use what was on the table.
I also believe that Instagram needs Django to be OSS, and the same goes for any other framework/language/library that other companies use, as OSS in itself is an extremely powerful label for a project. It brings together developers to form a community with lots of great minds and inputs. It helps feasible projects become production-ready and stable much faster than if it was closed source as its use-cases are far more wider than what a single company would provide.
Taking this from a competetive standpoint isn't very realistic in my opinion. I dare say that if either Django or Python weren't open source software, Instagram wouldn't be built on it in the first place.
I think it's absurd how Instagram can grow financially fat from the hard work of the Django Software Foundation without even contributing a dime to their fundraising or provide engineers exclusively to the DSF. IMHO Instagram should bring that fundraising up to at least 100%, considering Instagram revenue is estimated to hit $5.8 billion USD by 2020, $160,000 USD per year is a small price for the amount of value Django brings them.
It's a topic of morale though, Instagram does not owe the DSF anything, but I guess this shows where Instagrams appreciation lies.
>>> It's a topic of morale though, Instagram does not owe the DSF anything, but I guess this shows where Instagrams appreciation lies.
That's the point I was actually making. My experience that when you have people brainwashed with "competitive advantage", "profit maximization", and such, well, morale just doesn't exist anymore. In my case, I was surprised to see how quickly someone I trusted can actually switch to this brainwashed brain...
I think an easier strategy might be to work into your contract that if you happen to fix FOSS software on company time (to fix things your client notices), your patches go back upstream.
This, at least, is the implicit policy at the company I work for. It's used in the pitch ("we use and contribute to open source software, which we believe leads to a better internet" and so on) to the clients who appreciate such things.
That said, there might be too much legal tape to get that into a contract.
I tried to organize some OSS donations at the last big company I worked for. Everybody approved of the idea in theory but the red tape involved in making it happened killed it.
I think the problem in many cases is that the finance and legal people at companies big enough to make a sizable donation are so busy that stuff like this never makes it to the front of their priority queue.
Most of the time im writing simple and small programms (on a windows machine) that manipulate data, interact with the web, or work with files.
I really liked Swift from the start. It has all the language features that I like. Sadly, with no Windows support, and Linux being only a second class citizen, I'm not motivated enough to spend a huge amount of time with Swift.
I also hope that they provide a documentation like Go. The Swift book is fine but the examples of the Go documentation in addition to the text, the easy navigation between packages/structs, and the aility to jump to the implementation helps a lot while learning the language.
- People who like having a USB+Video port - Don't want to buy expensive adapters (at least the less expensive ones)?
- Performance (CPU wise)
- Price
I would rather ask why are people buying a macbook over a macbook air? The macbook air has a better price/performance ratio. And the form factor cannot be a logical argument... The macbook air compact enough to fit in everyones bag.
I got MacBook due to its screen resolution and because it is silent. Owning fanless Dell Latitude X1 decade ago spoiled me as even rather silent quality notebook fans had started to bother me.
The cost of the adapters is only part of it. Adapters are inconvenient, and IMO the reduced thickness isn't a good tradeoff for that extra inconvenience. (It has been in the past - losing the optical drive and ethernet port was absolutely worth it to me for a lighter & thinner machine.) Not to mention you only have one port, so even if all your USB devices use type C, you'll still need an adapter just to charge your laptop and use a USB device at the same time.
From my perspective the quality of their games is declining. Rapidly.
I don't know the author and his gaming background but he certainly hasn't spent much time playing blizzard games. At least he isn't a 'hardcore' gamer. Truth is, if you are a casual gamer you probably won't notice how dumb their current development is.
Diablo: Current content is shit, multiple design failes that needed to be corrected. Both D3 and the addon weren't ready on release, needed patches to correct the bad quality.
Hots/Hearthstone/Overwatch:
Knockoffs of Dota/LoL, Magic, Team Fortress. I don't think a knockoff should be called a quality game. Also, both Hots and Hearthstone have/has horrible balancing issues => bad quality considering being balanced is the core content of the game.
Not to mention that Hots was really shitty from a technical pov (after beta).
Regardless of your personal opinion on the design of their games, one thing they retain is their quality. Blizzard games are some of the most polished bug free experiences available (especially given their scope/size). You are never going to have a poor experience with a Blizzard game.
You might not enjoy the game, but it will not be because of game breaking bugs, poorly translated ports, low art quality, or unpolished game systems. Blizzard takes these things very seriously. If something is broken they often fix it.
Probably really bad now, or doesn't react at all and also probably will collide in critical and dangerous positions. But that is also not the future. The future is how does it interact in non-dangerous positions long-term while other cars are self-driving in compliance.
Not hard to detect for the sensors, the questions is how (if) the software reacts.
He uses an artificial neural network to make the driving decisions.
You train them by showing millions of situations (images of the surroundings, information about the cars current state and information about the imminent past in this case) and the wanted reactions/solution/answer (how to drive in this case). Hotz probably has enough "normal" data, because you hold the line all the time when driving and apparently there were enough situations where the car in front slowed down and he slowed down.
From the latter case you could guess that the car would break more rapidly if the car in front stops more rapidly than in the training sessions with a human driver (you would have to test that, as you usually cannot just look at the trained neural network and see that, because they become insanely complex after a certain depth).
But probably the car never "saw" bricks falling of the truck before you or even a kid running from the left side. Those are edge cases, that are unlikely to happen, especially on a motor way. But I'd still like to know whether his software would just apply the nearest trained case and see it as noise, or notice that something is off here and alarm the driver.
Definitely a cool project, don't get me wrong. But I get kind of sad when the work of thousands of scientists who worked on the theory and the work of Tesla, Google and big car manufacturers gets dismissed by "but look at this guy" (in general, not directed at you).
I just started learning Swift, and I keep running into stackoverflow answers saying "Here's how it worked in 1.0. In 1.2 you have to do this instead. But in 2.0 you do it this other way."
Rain shouldn't really affect your smartphone, unless it's poorly built. My Nexus 7 fell into a stream of water, getting completely submerged while turned on, and it didn't even shut off. Opening it up revealed it was completely dry, despite the case being snapped on.
Friends have had similar experiences with their Moto G, a Wiko and a cheap non-branded tablet.
Yeah it's surprising how well built are phones nowadays. I was running/cycling with a Nexus phone which I exchanged yearly and there never were any issues. Then when I got a Garmin FR110, I went for a Sandisk Clip MP3 player, who was dead in one month due humidity/wet conditions. Bought a cheapo Android phone who will stay on Kitkat forever and sticking with that instead.
It's not necessary, it's just an easy way to get a short-term advantage. It fundamentally degrades our ability to interact peacefully on an international scale, and it is one of the reasons our politicians form a privileged class.
The only justification for it is "they did it first," which is both childish and irresponsible. Just because everyone else does it, doesn't mean it is correct, necessary, or justified.
No. The second use is to "keep them honest". It's not to gain a one time advantage or short term advantage, but it serves as a way to ensure your competition isn't doing monkey business.
It's both an out of band communications channel but also provides a feedback loop. If your enemy or your competitor is engaging in something you all agreed to is out of bounds, you can respond to it with the information you have gained.
EDS and Boeing will know if the other is underselling, bribing, receiving subsidies, etc. and be able to respond accordingly, for example.
Can you tell me what legal framework will allow you to undertake these investigations --to delve into and discover economic secrets? We have enough trouble extraditing criminals, nevermind politicians from sovereign nations. What court makes decisions and who in the court is making those decisions, to whom are they beholden?
See how so many countries are rushing to resolve territorial disputes at the International Court of justice? Only the plaintiffs.
