The Slashdot summary is confusing, as is the eweek.com headline. Reading the article, it is clear that it is about the code that powers the official Python interpreter, AKA CPython, AKA /usr/bin/python. When I clicked the link, I thought Coverity had surveyed the entire world of open source Python code and discovered that Python programmers as a whole publish higher quality code than people who e.g. program in Ruby. That's not what the article's about.

It'd be great if the headline in Slashdot were to be fixed to say, "Python interpreter has fewer code defects compared to other open source C programs, says Coverity."

> 165 million years ago

Can't tell if typo or actually meta-trolling about science.

The laptop was mis-priced due to a bug in Dell's system, one of the engineers on the project tells me. It's now $1449 , as you can see at http://www.dell.com/us/soho/p/xps-13-linux/pd .

Can the title here please be fixed?

It exists. It's called CC+ .

More information: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CCPlus

It's not actively promoted by CC, but if you read that page you'll see exactly how it works.

-- a former software engineer at Creative Commons.

This was actually a preimage attack -- that is, I intentionally created a collision for 0x70096AD1.

No birthday paradox required. I looped through the entire key space. It takes, as written in the article, less than a few hours on a regular netbook.