Chrome for mostly everything, and Firefox to access intranet sites with self-signed SSL certificates because to this day and age I can't tell Chromium on Linux to accept a friggin' self-signed certificate and stop prompting me every single time I access the site. No, adding the certificate to my trusted list at the OS level doesn't work.

The problem therefore becomes finding beautiful women willing to volunteer for a one way mission to Mars with a slashdotter.

This is assuming you want people to understand the flows and interconnections in such a diagram.

Have you considered the point of the speaker might instead have been "This is how things work. No kidding", o something along that line? In which case I think the slide is brilliant: it clearly emphasizes that the situation is a mess and makes it very easy for the audience to remember that fact, because if provides a very graphical and intuitive representation. I would think 99% of the people in the room see this and go "WTF?".

OTOH, if the speaker then went over the slide over the course of an hour, following arrows, then you might as well just shoot the audience in the face.

Additionally, no higher resolution is going to help you understand that pack of spaghetti. Is just poor visualization.

This is just a theoretical problem. Proper cooling takes can take care of this, and as of today is a non-issue on any cameras except on pixel peeping benchmarks.

I have to say the CDAF on my Panasonic G1 when using the kit lens feels as fast as the 70-200 f/4L AF on my 40D. This is definitely "fast AF" territory. This is not the case with the other lenses i've tried on the lineup, but it definitely goes to show that it is possible.

And the best thing about CDAF is that it actually gets the damn focus right where it needs to be. Unlike everything else out there. The fact that latest DSLRs have "AF fine tune" settings to deal with the mess that is PDAF attests to this.

Missing option:
- You buy the screwdriver at 80% off and sell it to your friend at full price making a healthy profit in the process.

Raise your hand if you got nostalgic and fired up xlogo (because that red symbol never goes out of style).

*Raises hand*

Well, it depends on what definition you take. The Dragon book, which is pretty much the standard CS book on compilers, defines strongly typed as "a language where type errors cannot occur at runtime". With this definition, Python is certainly not strongly typed.

Of course, I agree with you completely, but my reply was to a post that questions the technical literacy of the author.

Other than that, the derogatory comment towards artsy types was just a reflex, you shouldn't read much into it. I have many photographer friends that fit into that category and admire them a lot, although I don't go asking them for advice on technical issues (that they probably don't even care about).

Please read the 2nd web page where he showcases the four different calibration devices he uses. You don't just "go to system prefs and calibrate". It's a complicated process.

Rob Galbraith is a very reputable source for nerd-friendly information on photography (unlike many other artsy types that can't tell a bit from a byte).