So your recommendation would be to assess an individuals contribution as a part of the whole, assign a percentage value, and vest that over 4 years with a 1 year cliff?
Hopefully browser companies will be more rigorous about migrating their users to newer versions so that we avoid the issues IE6 has presented by still having a large install base even after two subsequent versions have been released.
And still no full release version for Mac / Linux. I find this particularly interesting considering the Google "Operating System" is going to be a custom interface on top of a Linux kernel.
I've been using the Linux version for several month now and honestly cannot tell the difference between it and the windows version. Just as stable, just as fast, and flash works without any problems. I'm guessing there is a good reason why they're not comfortable releasing it yet, but as an end user I haven't run across that reason.
It depends on whether you're using the chromium-daily PPA or you used Google's deb (the former looks for Firefox's libflashplayer.so, the latter needs you to install it).
If you're using the chromium-daily PPA (https://launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/ppa), Chromium will look in a bunch of folders[1] for plugins, including ~/.mozilla/plugins. I suggest you get the tarball from http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/ and put its libflashplayer.so in ~/.mozilla/plugins. Chromium will look here for it upon startup and you're set.
If you installed using Google's deb (http://dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-channel), it doesn't yet search the Mozilla plugin dirs, and thus you need to make an /opt/google/chrome/plugins dir and put the libflashplayer.so in there and it'll work.
Edit: if you're using Google's deb, you have to run google-chrome with the --enable-plugins switch. The deb adds their repo to sources.list.d, but I have no idea when they'll enable plugins by default in their repo. I'd ride the chromium-daily channel, since lots of shit is broken anyway.
For those running Ubuntu AMD64, you can put both 32 and 64-bit versions of libflashplayer.so in ~/.mozilla/plugins (call them libflashplayer32.so and libflashplayer64.so if you like), and 32-bit Firefox will load the 32-bit plugin, and Chromium 64-bit will load the 64-bit plugin. You can get the 64-bit Flash plugin here:
And if anyone's wondering why I'm not running 64-bit Firefox 3.5, it's because the Ubuntu (and possibly Debian, I've no idea) packagers still have it branded 'Shiretoko', which throws off every site searching for 'Firefox' in your UA. Hopefully by Karmic's release they'll have this sorted out.
I have --enable-plugins turned on atm and I don't see any difference between chromium's flash and firefox's, except that when the plugin crashes on chromium, I reload the page instead of the entire browser.
Judging by the number of Erlang stories on the front page (19 out of 25 currently) I would say that's your problem right there...(wholly in jest, half in earnest)
I agree and think this is especially relevant for sites and apps that target tech-savvy users - as a group they will most likely already be using a browser other than IE and even if they do will be more likely to understand the reason for lack of total cross browser compatibility. If this became a trend it would begin to do one of two things - either cause Microsoft to consider adopting web standards compliance or cause users to adopt alternate browsers. Both options should be equally as welcome in the web development field and help to reduce the time wasted on needless hacks and workarounds to accommodate one product.
Unfortunately a lot of users are already adopting alternate browsers, but it doesn't reduce the pain of web development until IE6 becomes a negligible part of the market. What could help more than anything is if Microsoft took a stronger stance on forcing users to upgrade from IE6 to IE7. Once IE6 drops below perhaps 5-10% of the market it becomes ignorable. But for IE as a whole to become negligible - I wish I could but I don't see that day any time soon.
Yeah, I first thought that tpb was just trying to get get media attention by declaring that the trial was a spectacle. I mean, this is probably one of the most important trials concerning copyright and filesharing today. But the prosecution really has no idea what they are doing. It's kind of funny. You'd think that the MPAA would choose a lawyer who is actually somewhat familiar with technology.
I am really interested to see where Andriod devices go in the marketplace. I really like my iPhone but would happily consider an Android phone if it offered the same level of hardware/software integration and polish of operating system I enjoy with the iPhone. I think the biggest struggle for Google may be providing that experience since they do not manufacture the hardware.
If Mac, Windows and Linux are anything to go by, no one else will really make something quite as nice as the iPhone. What they will do is make things that are good enough looking, open enough, and diverse enough, that they will grab segments of the market that Apple will never even go after. That's my hope at least, I'm just not interested in being locked into Apple's world. And the fact that Android is open source is seriously cool for people who want to really do interesting things.
I would definitely pay (whether $5 or $50 doesnt matter) a year but feel that paying just to post/comment would merely serve to limit the number of people committed to quality contribution without offering added value to the core community. Essentially you would have to pay to help other HN users. What if the stories remained public but viewing/participating in the discussion required membership (at a cost)?
One of the really great aspects of Dropbox is that it versions all content and just transmits/saved the delta's after the original file is saved. It there an easy way of achieving that around a webdav share?
I am really glad to see that they are updating it for Django 1.x. I have not programming background but have been trying to decide on a web-focused language/framework to learn, and Django was highest on my list. Up until now, however, there weren't any online resources (that I had found) that detailed getting started with Django 1.x. I've started looking at Ruby/Rails, but may have to reconsider my decision now that there is a good resource available.
Agreed, they're just 4 pages, but they cover a great deal and you can definitely start a decent site after going through the tutorial. At its end, it also points you to more docs that describe specific things such as forms, urls, and caching in great detail.
