Firefox fixed this issue in Firefox 43, not in 44.0.2. In particular, it was "fixed" in Firefox by updating to a version of libgraphite that did not have the problem, and this happend before the issue was even reported to libgraphite.

Hence no CVE for Firefox 43 or 44, because they were never vunerable, and no CVE for Firefox 42, because it was long-superseded by the time the vulnerability was even reported.

The CVE, if you note, is for Firefox 38 ESR, which _was_ vulnerable until the 38.6.1 release.

Or maybe this is the contest organizers trolling? Because I know for a fact Firefox made serious security improvements in the last year; I reviewed some of those patches.

The actual report linked from the article talks about 250 kWh/ft^2/year, which about 29 W/ft^2.

The actual document at https://www.chelanpud.org/docs... (linked from the article) says 250 kWh/ft^2/year.

So looks like unit confusion on the journalist's part for sure.

They did both do the calculation. The pilot did the arithmetic wrong and the copilot typed in his result wrong, and the upshot was that the numbers they entered independently agreed with each other... and were both wrong.

A lot of gifted programs, and this one is no exception, only partially rely on a test for selection decisions. They also rely on teacher recommendations to a large extent. And while I'm sympathetic to the view that you have to be able to pass the test if it's reasonable, I would be shocked if there were no bias in the teacher recommendation process.

The key drawback of steam is that building a steam catapult that can vary its power output well enough to launch both large manned planes and (much more fragile) small drones is rather hard. And people _really_ want to launch drones from carriers.

The scenario you describe is pretty much how it worked, with Google and Netflix doing most of the forcing, and Microsoft only helping out a little bit.

MSE support isn't in Firefox 36.

The Youtube-only thing is currently being targeted for Firefox 37, and enabling it in general for 38 or 39 once the standards-compliance issues are worked out.

Half of the sample is below the _state_ average. As in, below the average of a different sample.

Ignoring average vs median issues, what this says is that folks in SV are no more likely to get their kids vaccinated than folks in CA in general are.

The funny part is, I bet HTML5Test doesn't measure what you thinks it measures...

Unfortunately, Stephane Charbonnier is one of the people who were killed in this latest attack. I really hope you're right that Charlie Hebdo will keep going, but it's a lot easier to recover from physical damage to offices than it is from having the staff that make the magazine what it is killed. :(

Browsers are pretty complicated, yes. Things like low-latency high-performance VMs, hardware-accelerated video pipelines, plus the details, like actual HTML parsing, CSS layout, a network stack, and so forth. Also, what matters is not just the complication but how fast you're trying to change things, and people are adding new things (flexbox, more complicated CSS layout modes, mode DOM APIs, etc) faster than ever before.

But also, in addition to a browser Mozilla is working on FirefoxOS, which involves a whole separate bunch of developers, since it's not like the browser developers are writing things like the dialer app for FirefoxOS. Also, you need QA, not just developers.

And yes, Mozilla has 1000-ish employees, for what it's worth.

It's not just Mozilla. If I look at https://www.openhub.net/p/chro... I see on the order of 600 committers with commits in the last month. And that's not even counting whoever is working on the non-open-source parts of Chrome. And not counting, again, QA and so forth.

And the worst part is, this is not a new development. Microsoft had over 1000 people working on IE6 in 1999, according to http://ericsink.com/Browser_Wa...

So yes, browsers, complicated.

The "let" keyword is not the same thing as "let blocks" and "let expressions".

The keyword looks like this:

    let x = 5;

and is in ES6. A let block or let expression (neither of which is in ES6) looks like this:

    let (x = 5) alert(x);

so that "x" is only in scope for the duration of the let block. It's syntactic sugar for:

{
    let x = 5;
    alert(x);
}

> So you still have to buy an iPhone, an iPad, an
> Android phone, and an Android tablet to test on them,

Sure. The point here is to allow you to use the devtools of your choice, not to create a test environment.