Julia is much more ambitious in terms of what it was trying to do in order to address scientific computing. That's a blessing and a curse. but ultimately one that I have more confidence in than carrying Python's legacy.

That is how you know this is a trojan horse. He's trying to convert you to use Mojo instead of Python in the same way he tried to convert Objective C programmers into Swift programmers.

Engineers? MIT hosts a competition for undergrads to design bacteria as a summer project. It's called iGEM.

Crispr/cas9 technology makes it almost as easy to design anything else.

Also here's a link to Sean Cassidy's Twitter account: https://twitter.com/sean_a_cas...

https://twitter.com/sean_a_cas...
"LastPass now requires email confirmation for logins from new IPs, even with 2FA: https://lastpass.com/support.p..."

Does that mean the 2FA issue is addressed?

Here's the response from LastPass:
https://lastpass.com/support.p...
(I think this link should be in the main summary for balance)

As for Google Chrome, LastPass asks that you star Issue 39511 for extension infobars outside the DOM. Specifically here's LastPass asking for improvement in Chrome January 12th, 2012:
https://code.google.com/p/chro...

I am NOT affiliated with LastPass.

Specifically, note
Vine Messages: http://blog.vine.co/post/81606...
Vine Kids: http://blog.vine.co/post/10959...

Vine works for short videos: https://vine.co/

Otherwise, I thought Google Hangouts partially supported this feature for short videos.

http://www.edwardtufte.com/bbo...

No. This is what is wrong with PowerPoint. This is what makes PP dumb.

What should be presented is a cohesive narrative. Drop the stupid rules, tell a story. Make a simple annotated illustration that is information dense and comprehensible. Forget about the slide. It's obsolete.

Now this does not mean put a million things in a view at once just to create the illusion of information density. It means think like Google Maps: information rich, quantitative, and easy to understand.

If you absolutely need a rule, the better answer is 0 or 1. Zero bullet points. One narrative.

I am not sure I would called mentoring the absolute worst act for a high achieving kid. It depends completely on who they are teaching. Tasking them with mentoring remedial students who have no interest in learning material is a waste of time. However, teaching other motivated students can have plenty of rewards. Mentees challenge the mentor with all kinds of questions forcing the mentor to have a firm grasp of the topic while also seeding new ideas.

Having advanced scholars teach less advanced scholars is essentially the framework for higher education. Ad Adstra likely has established this sort of environment at a grade school level.

I think the key is not to impose this model on everyone. Education overall should be more diverse and should span the breadth between completely vocational to the abstract. Compulsory education for everyone does not make sense either. It just creates a large pool of unwilling participants. The one-size fits all model of public education does not make any sense.

It depends how well you know Windows or Mac OS X.

systemd is roughly equivalent to Window's svchost / Services [1] or Mac OS X's launchd [2]. Maybe if you remember DOS, it's kind of like autoexec.bat / config.sys (shudder). systemd is meant to replace the init system in Linux.

Right after your computer boots and loads the hardware interface (the kernel), systemd or init is the first program that starts that is meant to start all the other programs. Traditional UNIX philosophy is to keep things extremely modular and simple. Each piece of software should do a single job and do it well. Furthermore, it should easily work with other modular programs. The controversy is that systemd has a tendency to expand in scope. While it has various subsystems and modules internally, it is trying to do "everything".

The motivation for systemd is that modern systems have many services which need to interoperate, particularly at boot time. The old init system would start each service sequentially, one right after another. Modern systems now have multiple-cores and it would be advantageous in time to start services in parallel to take advantage of multiprocessor systems. In order to do this, there is a dependency graph problem where you have figure out which processes can start in parallel and which one depends on the others. For example, before you start a web server, you probably want to make sure that that the Internet connection is up. This problem has been solved and part of the solution was retrofitted onto init. Systemd, however, also wants to supervise services as they are running and possibly respond to events. These features are more important to laptops which boot frequently and change environment. Servers, however, boot infrequently and exist in relatively static environments where the additional complexity of systemd might cause an issue.

Windows and Mac OS X have embraced solutions similar to systemd earlier to take advantage of tighter integration and also partly due to development being centralized. Linux development is more distributed and many would prefer it to be more modular and simple. The fight over systemd is a philosophical debate about whether the core services in Linux should be centralized and integrated or highly modular and simple.

The dichotomy is false, however, as what is really needed is specialized configurations for different situations. What people are squabbling over is whether generalized solutions should lean towards supporting their specialized application (stable servers vs flexible laptops). The distributions which package software have been leaning towards systemd to support both, but those interested in servers see little advantage, greater complexity, and more security issues in systemd than in the previous init system.

In summary, systemd is a replacement for the first process that starts in Linux that is supposed to provide core services. At the cost of simplicity, systemd integrates many services internally. The disagreements over this are philosophical and are about people fighting over the direction of generalized solutions rather than working towards optimal solutions for their specific needs.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

It almost seems like we are just missing the userland tools for SystemD, but I know a great selection of tools: Emacs. Once they merge Emacsd, we're set!

I cannot wait until I can go from GummiBoot to Emacs in less than a second.

I know that DragonFly BSD forked from FreeBSD about a decade ago. What are the major differences between DragonFly and FreeBSD?

Also what does the boot process look like?

That's nice, but when will FreeBSystemD be released?