nsmartt

23 ms·

181.
by nsmartt 14y ago
You needn't love the project to consider this a win.
182.
by nsmartt 14y ago
It isn't that I don't believe you, but I don't see a license file in any of the Google-owned extensions I have installed. Source?
183.
by nsmartt 14y ago
I can't edit my post, but I just saw http://paulrouget.com/e/australis-ux/ . I'm beyond excited for this.
184.
by nsmartt 14y ago
Fair enough. +1
185.
by nsmartt 14y ago
I'm loving all of this. With these improvements, I have only one complaint. The tab bar is beautiful on Windows and OS X, but it's awful on Linux. Tabs should be the same on each OS.
186.
by nsmartt 14y ago
He had to click accept connection before it allowed him to edit the CSS.
187.
by nsmartt 14y ago
I wish I could agree, but I recently explained to one of my most intelligent friends just how much tracking is done, by whom, and how. She just argued that she didn't have anything to hide. A few days later, she admitted that I might have a
188.
by nsmartt 14y ago
unfortunately, the average user is convinced that one has no problem if one has nothing to hide. i don't foresee the average user deciding to jump ship without a strong push.
189.
by nsmartt 14y ago
There's one thing I've long wondered. How do you perfect the pricing of your product? Is it really safe to adjust pricing after launching your product (especially with a subscription model)?
190.
by nsmartt 14y ago
According to http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5351887 , the flatness is temporary.
191.
by nsmartt 14y ago
I understand the potential harm when working with teams, but I also recognize that it's a shame to limit your use of the language to avoid potential trouble. Surely there's some middle ground to be found over dogma such as Never use <f
192.
by nsmartt 14y ago
To avoid a potentially useful language feature because you might make a mistake with it is, to me, a absurd. A much better argument might be Use <feature> only when you fully grasp its use , which is true of any feature. Some are
193.
by nsmartt 14y ago
That has no relation to the idea that "serious developers" use Python.
194.
by nsmartt 14y ago
Sure, but now you're utilizing the keyboard and mouse together, and, as you said, it isn't necessarily faster. That's an argument for sticking to the mouse. It's mostly justification. It isn't an argument in favor of consistently preferring
195.
by nsmartt 14y ago
If you check my profile, you'll see that I have less than 500 karma and therefore could not have downvoted you. edit: wording/lower verbosity edit: typo
196.
by nsmartt 14y ago
Moving my hand over to the mouse, moving the mouse cursor to wherever I need, selecting that text and dragging while my editor slowly scrolls with my cursor when I could use a few key sequences with no context switch is the opposite of effi
197.
by nsmartt 14y ago
How is a mouse more efficient than an ability to move to a phrase with a bit of typing, skip words ahead with a single letter instead of ctrl + shift, move to a new line and a specific place on that line with a couple of button presses, etc
198.
by nsmartt 14y ago
Shift + page down allows you to select entire pages of text, cut it, and move it to whatever other position. It's also probably faster given that autoscrolling moves at a slower speed than page down.
199.
by nsmartt 14y ago
Exactly, but it isn't just vim and emacs. Using the mouse is terribly inefficient for any typing-oriented endeavor.
200.
by nsmartt 14y ago
I suppose that's true, but ideally there should be no situation in which you give a program or script access to a terminal with sudo's timeout unreached. Compromising information not stored on the machine should ideally require root.
201.
by nsmartt 14y ago
It sounds like you're overlooking the fact that software could do this without your knowledge.
202.
by nsmartt 14y ago
He mentions the point when the abstractions in the language are no longer sufficient. It seemed to me that this was more an argument in favor of using languages that are easily extended rather than languages full of abstraction with few opt
203.
by nsmartt 14y ago
That article horrifies me. People are already putting every question they have into Google. Every email they send and receive. Every video they watch on YouTube. Putting every little thought into a service by Google is just a horrifying tho
204.
by nsmartt 14y ago
The Air is arguably a push in the mobile direction.
205.
by nsmartt 14y ago
First, that's not nationwide in the US. I'm not aware of it being nationwide anywhere. In my school, there was a computer programming course on the list of choices. It disappeared when the time to actually register arrived. There was a web
206.
by nsmartt 14y ago
I think teaching students to program is a wonderful idea. Most people use computers every day-- be it work or leisure. Knowing how to automate your workflow in whatever career you choose would be a wonderful asset. However, I'm concerned th
207.
by nsmartt 14y ago
It all depends on what we mean by "trust." Realistically, you should be cautious when trusting any company with anything.
208.
by nsmartt 14y ago
It depends on your definition of trust. I would trust my doctor to some extent, but I wouldn't blindly assume that anything s/he said was correct.
209.
by nsmartt 14y ago
> You shouldn't trust any company. Not Apple, not Microsoft, and not Google Agreed. It's very difficult to convey this point, however. People don't really listen once you say these sorts of things. Even if they do, they don't change th
210.
by nsmartt 14y ago
Right, but it does create a barrier to entry if you want laymen to run your software. This is especially annoying if you're a developer who doesn't own an Apple PC.

More ›