The quantity of profanity spewed would run past most locality's obscenity standards.
it is actually pretty well officially documented by google these days. making something "hard to accidentally trigger by someone who doesn't read documentation and who we think is too stupid to know what it will do" is not quite an easter egg...though close.
My new music player (SubFire - a player for Subsonic servers) has an easter egg in it, but only because i don't have time to give it the care it would need to actually make it a "useful" feature to anybody but me. Triple-clicking in the copyright footer will bring up a search box, and that can only happen on the Chrome version.
Basically, I needed a quick search to get to song titles, for my own purposes, but if I were to properly implement search, it would need to be very different...I know what it should be, and I don't have time to build that. So I now have one undocumented feature that does what I want the way I want for the purpose I need it for.
For that matter, it was in pre-messenger "Chat" for Facebook that many of us were hit by those "Hey, I'm stuck in London and my wallet was stolen, can you send me some cash?" scams from hacked accounts.
Making it easy to say yes to that kind of crap is just ridiculous.
from my blog on this, just now:
Proponents of refactoring have never ever said otherwise (unless they themselves are confused on the matter). Code is only readable if it is either simple, or clearly follows design patterns, or is clearly commented and the comments are up to date with the current version of the code. Code is only easy to change when it is readable and when all external dependencies are well known. That last part is a key thing that metrics aren't necessarily able to capture.
A refactoring project, if not refactoring to the right design patterns to address what was wrong with the structure in the first place, is not going to improve it. One must know clearly why the current structure is making a bug-fix or a new feature difficult to implement.
And while some refactorings are 'good' in that they reduce a lot of copy-paste code, others are good because they add code, or add classes (an alternative increase in complexity). Different refactorings have different effects, and are used in different situations.
And as always, if you don't need to refactor, don't. A refactoring is to improve the design, not to rewrite for its own sake.
And there-in lies the great flaw of the whole idea of such a study: you can't measure the quality of a software design. Some things you just have to judge for yourself, based on experience and attention, and no arbitrary metrics number will ever differentiate between a good design and a rubbish heap.
Disclaimer: I hate software metrics.
they aren't real. they were never real. they never will be real.
if you're talking fiction and you want to talk about WWZ or Walking Dead, or whatever game it is you all are still playing, fine.
But stop posting crap like this where people make simulations about zombies and apocalypses as if this shit is real.
the second you used the phrase "government overreach", you gave away that you are, in fact, a right-wing (or libertarian-right) jerk who has no interest in anything other than discrediting the government so you don't have to pay taxes and exist as a member of this society.
to which I say, piss off.
go back to simcity version 1 or 2. homelessness wasn't a problem 22 years ago, right?
on top of that, being only a month or so old, it wasn't ready when the makers like Samsung needed to do their final packaging and testing for the Christmas season phones as all that had to happen in July through September to give the factories time to put the chip in and ship. How can I buy a 5.0 phone when the vast majority phones on the market now left the factory 3 months before 5.0 was released?
plus a 5g or 6g phone speaking 5.0 is going to be quite more expensive than the 2013 4g that as a simple matter of *hardware* is going to be fast enough for what most people throw at it, at least in the first few months. Why get a $250 (after contract) 5g phone with 5.0 on it when the 4g is only $99 and will run all the same apps just as well?
if it is that much better, samsung would already be pushing the updates to my more recent devices.
one problem was the timing of the release. they put it out just a month ago, but everybody bought their Christmas toys *2* months ago, and that meant they had to be in the factory *4* months ago. It wasn't out nearly in time to make the 2014 sales, so it has no chance of an upswing until this summer or next Christmas.
The only ones to reply so far are overly cynical, probably from having stayed up all night gaming or hacking code and likely are on their 6th cup of coffee.
seriously, have you ever tried to get a cert installed properly in J2EE? Node? PHP/Apache? Ever tried to get PGP working right on t-bird?
There is nothing about the process that is straightforward in any way (including the cert signing stuff). Thus, most websites will simply find it easier to not bother. Let those who can pay for experts pay for it, but until expertise becomes "push this button" easy, and still almost free, it isn't worth it for typical web traffic.
...is Dave Brubeck in all of this?
Dear Google, I asked for "Time Out", not whatever this crap is about.
The article just talks about web-reading, and how more and more webpages are being responsive (for mobile reasons) in ways that actually now optimize sites for vertical orientation over horizontal.
However, from a coding and word processing* perspective, vertical layout is a bit better, too, as it allows you to see more of the text and the text's context, than horizontal mode does. Thus, most developers who pay attention to such things do use both, as the first 5point comment suggests above.
In fact, that was the actual vision of the PARC crew that invented GUI and WYSIWYG back in the 70s: the Xerox Alto workstation they created did have a vertical monitor, for this very reason: the idea was that if you were using a word processor to show you a page's layout, seeing the whole page on screen was the desired effect. They discovered it improved coding productivity once they were using the workstation to produce the software.
(that said, it is NOT better for spreadsheets or powerpoint, or database-editing tools, so there we are.)
So glad I'm not the only one who thought that when I read the headline.