191–200 of 236 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Furthermore, you may simply be uninterested in the sort of tasks google might give you.
Like inverting binary trees
It may very well be that they have inverted binary trees on every desk.
--
Yes... I am aware inverted indexes are not binary trees.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I really think that open-source software shot itself in the foot by incorporating unlimited free sharing for every recipient into its mantra. Now everyone thinks that open-source has to mean impoverished, because despite all the happy vibes, very few people will pay for software that they could otherwise get for free. You can make your software "source available", i.e., not open-source under activist definition…
I can't help but think that if the Linux kernel were under a CC-NC-BY-SA-type license, as you suggest, that it would be practically unheard of today. BTW, please mind the distinction between open-source software and Free Software. You don't have to like the FSF, but the distinction they recognize is important.
I don't suggest that the Linux kernel be distributed under non-commercial terms, and I agree with you that such a project wouldn't have done well.
>BTW, please mind the distinction between open-source software and Free Software. You don't have to like the FSF, but the distinction they recognize is important.
Right, so there are 3 levels of "purity" here. For the record, I didn't run afoul of any of them; I intentionally distinguished my suggestion as "source available", not "open-source".
There is "Free Software", which is software meeting Stallman's "Four Freedoms".
There is "Open Source", typically referred to as the improper noun "open-source", which activists insist refers solely to license approved by the OSI (Open Source Initiative). Because these include permissive licenses, the FSF considers them potentially non-free, and makes the point that Open Source isn't good enough; it must be Free Software.
Then there is "source available", insisted upon by the OSI people, to indicate that while you can download and modify the source, it is not distributed under copyright terms they like. This would be source distributed only for non-commercial use, for example. Jef Raskin's Archy project (apparently now dead) [0] was distributed under CC BY-NC-SA and made this distinction.
I found PhantomJS pretty unusable for my use-case. It always spits logs to stdout and there's no way to change that. Filed a bug and he said "fix it yourself"...sorry I don't know Qt.
Better than it being closed source and you being told to go away.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And while people wait, you can already do a 'poor mans' headless Firefox thanks to SlimerJS and xvfb. Phantomjs is less resource heavy if you're constantly spooling up and down lots of instances but I prefer SlimerJS w/ Firefox since it lets you keep up to date with a modern version of Firefox (rather than relying on sporadic QTWebkit updates from Phantomjs). If you're using Casperjs, SlimerJS is virtually a drop in…
One can use Xvfb to run normal Chrome as well (with few gotchas like --no-sandbox, --disable-gpu and dep on dbus-x11). A test I'm working on at the moment takes 28 seconds in PhantonJS and 6 in Chrome under Docker and Xvfb.
In my last job, I used PhantomJS with highcharts to provide a web service for generating charts. And used it with the poltergeist gem for headless testing.
IMO it'd be a really smart move for Google to hire Vitaly to help with the launching of this feature and things around it. He has done a great job with PhantomJS. Even an acquisition [1] of PhantomJS would totally make sense, then let him keep working on it but based on headless Chrome and with real resources. [1] Careful how you spin it for this route, learn from TJ/Express https://medium.com/@tjholowaychuk/stronglo…
Could you elaborate on the TJ/Express? The post you provided looks like the last one of series of events.
So if an open source project is being sold:
- Make sure everyone knows it's because it'll be better handled and not because of the money.
- At least get a decent amount of money! According to TJ it was half a month worth of money.
- If you are the company buying it don't leave it unattended afterwards.
Anyway, now TJ is surely remembered with a lot of gratitude in the Node.js community and I'm so happy he helped it grow so much!
This is all better explained here (and read the comments for TJ opinion): http://thefullstack.xyz/history-express-javascript-framework...
I found PhantomJS pretty unusable for my use-case. It always spits logs to stdout and there's no way to change that. Filed a bug and he said "fix it yourself"...sorry I don't know Qt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a classic "public good" - an economic activity whose benefits are impractical or unworthwhile to deny to those who don't pay. Things like emergency services, last-mile road infrastructure, and environmental protection work. A special-case of positive externalities. These are a classic example used by economists of a natural place for government in the economy.
> It's a classic "public good" - an economic activity whose benefits are impractical or unworthwhile to deny to those who don't pay. Open source software is not a public good, in the economic sense. There are two criteria for being a public good: non-rivalry and non-excludability. Open-source software satisfies the first criterion (my using it doesn't prevent you from using it), but it's fairly excludable (I can prev…
I'm imagining a clause like: "this source and any modifications is irrevocably eligible for use by all, provided that its creation did not break any other laws".
So, cheers to you Vitaly and anyone else who's helped make Phantom & Poltergeist into my favorite Capybara web driver!
But can he invert a binary tree? https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768 Edit: some people don't get sarcasm