Comment: Re:"rockstar developer" (Score 2) 487
No-one who identifies himself as a rockstar developer is a rockstar developer, and no good developer would call himself a rockstar.
You are not a rockstar (developer or otherwise) unless you have the groupies to prove it.
Comment: Re:Don't look now... (Score 2) 122
+ - Google Blockly - A Language With A Difference->
However Blockly is different. It works like Scratch or App inventor but it is written in JavaScript. This means it can be included in any web page or web app very easily. This in turn means that it can be used for education, getting people to learn to program, or as an easy to use script generator for the app. The FAQ gives the example of automating GMail filters and mangement.
The additional difference is that Blockley can compile its programs to JavaScript, Dart or Python so you can take the script and develop it further.
This is a really good idea. As long as Google doesn't throw this one out in a fit of reorganization and spring cleaning, this is a welcome new language.
Good luck Blockly!"
Link to Original Source
+ - India fails, Russia leads at Google Code Jam->
Are Indian and, to a lesser extent, US programmers just not good enough, or is there another explanation?"
Link to Original Source
Comment: Re:What's he going to call it? (Score 1) 78
Comment: Re:Rest of the world. (Score 2) 24
* Google says: “We are unable to issue rewards to individuals who are on sanctions lists, or who are in countries (e.g. Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Syria) on sanctions lists.”
* Facebook says: “You must... Reside in a country not under any current U.S. Sanctions (e.g., North Korea, Libya, Cuba, etc.)”
But researchers in those countries needn't worry; the government over there has their own reward program for discovering security bugs.
Comment: Re:Now... (Score 1) 107
The very undirected process a hypothetical Deist god would set in motion (evolution) is specifically what Intelligent Design claims does not work.
People who believe in both Intelligent Design and evolution, and also have some knowledge of the science behind evolution and natural selection, don't necessarily say that evolution on its own cannot produce the creatures that we see, but rather say that it is so statistically unlikely that it would have required the manipulation of probability by some intelligent deity to arrive at the results we have.
But all the millions/billions/whatever times the evolution did not produce intelligent creatures we were not there to observe it. You don't know how many failed evolutions you haven't observed, so unlikeliness does not imply manipulation.
Comment: Re:Compatibility or conversion (Score 1) 274
Comment: Re:Compatibility or conversion (Score -1) 274
Comment: Re:security through obscurity, yet again (Score 1) 100
Comment: Re:Firefox's problem (Score 1) 297
Although these leaks are not Mozilla’s fault, they are Mozilla’s problem. Many Firefox users have add-ons installed -- some people have 20 or 30 or more -- and Firefox gets blamed for the sins of its add-ons.
Now they are going to improve reviews and make it possible to mark add-ons as memory-hogs / -leakers.
Comment: Re:Recursive Logic (Score 1) 545
As I used to say "it was damn difficult to write, it should be bloody difficult to understand".
used to say when you still had a job?
Comment: Re:Faulty Reasoning (Score 2) 653
Comment: Re:FUCKING ENGLISH, DO YOU SPEAK IT (Score 1) 66
(not until something gets killed anyway)