MrEnigma

I thought this as well, except this is an actual mock up. So good it fooled you.

For double quotes you can use curly braces instead of concatenation. $foo = "I like {$hacker['news']}"; depending on how you want it evaluated you can drop the dollar sign on the outside of the curly brackets as well.

The judge asked for events in the last 10 years. The Seagate event happened in 1993.

His irate interviews made him sound questionable, but the interviews refuting samsungs data here are very much on point and concise.

There are a couple of things that cause a lot of pain.

One of those is the backup not being from the same iOS version. It will let you restore it to a new device, but then it doesn't complete (ie apps and such).

Just went through this going from an iOS 5 iPod Touch and an iOS 6 iPhone 5. The downside is that it makes old devices like the iPad 1 (which can't run iOS 6) going to say iPhone 5 (which can't run iOS 5), impossible to restore.

The RSS feed doesn't show the domain next to the headlines, so if I don't click through to the comments, the cryptic headline is even worse.

I think it depends on who you ask.

I think it's assumed that 2+ years is a normal stepping away point. Personally I've done a nearly 7 year stint, then a 2.5 year stint, and currently nearly a year into my current position. My thoughts are that I wish I would have changed jobs more often for my first job when I was learning, to open up my mind to what was out there. Although I still think it's important to move around. 5 years seems like you're stagnating (unless you're in a position where you are driving the direction).

Isn't PHPStorm 4.0 still in beta? Or just come off beta recently? Last time I used it, it was quite buggy, and that was only a few months ago.

Now there is 5.0, Firefox has messed up our release versioning.

When are email addresses going to be considered something that should be protected as well. Obviously you can't one-way hash these, but you can secure them, and definitely not leave them in project documents.

Well, we know the ones it turns out badly for. Who knows how many out there got away with it.

I think the hardest part about this, is like Jason here a lot of people think it's ok for people to own guns, but not get crazy about it.

Unfortunately there isn't great qualifications for defining what an assault rifle is. You can do specific models, which then require lots of updated and political maneuvering to keep updated. Length, speed, etc all end up catch too many other guns.

We could do federally what california has done, and prevent magazines over 10 rounds, or do like Illinois and require a permit to buy ammunition, unfortunately incidents still happen, and legitimate owners get upset over what they perceive as draconian rule.

Ultimately I think banning something like semi-automatic weapons would be the best in theory. But with 300+ million guns out there, with many of those being semi-automatic, it might be kind of an issue. If you grandfather them in, then you just drive the price up for these weapons. If you make it illegal 'overnight' you may make felons out a lot of people unknowingly.

One of things that has been going around, mostly because of Ebert bringing it up. Is the idea that gun rights advocates say that these incidents can be prevented by concealed carry, but Ebert points out none of the people in the cinema shot back. Unfortunately the argument, and for the situation, that specific theater specifically does not allow concealed weapons. Unfairly, and I believe incorrectly gun rights advocates say that it happened there because he knew everyone would be unarmed.

It's a very tricky situation. I think ultimately we need a better algorithm to detect and flag situations like this. Which would also require massive databases and registrations which people seem very against.

If these guns were illegal to obtain, it would also mean that he would have had to actively be doing something illegal, unfortunately as it stands, if he would have been stopped on the way to the theater, he would have been found suspicious, but ultimately legal (assuming his guns were cased and such).

Title makes it sound like security issues. But really it's just a list of 'improvements' you can make. Fun.

If this was in PHP people would be crying out what a bad and horrible language it is.

Javascript it's seen as an amusing conundrum.

I don't enjoy it either, to me even though some principles are quite different, it seems like a series of mini waterfalls.

The other thing is that it seemed to remove any creativity of control from the developers. In some cases this is a good thing because developers get stuck in ruts and heads way in the sand. But small tweaks improvements that only show themselves to be available when you get into the code, can't' be done. They'll be put in the backlog, and generally never lifted to the top. And if you put them in, then it 'adds risk to the sprint'.

Ultimately it feels like it removes a lot of fun from the role of developing. Granted a lot of the above stem from the company and not necessarily the process.

When I saw this title, I thought "Oh no someone has figured out what plus addressing is"

There are already enough people not allowing + in address fields, by pure neglect. Now if we add FUD to that...us geeks who love and know these things will be the ones suffering.

Always great when people think they know how the world works stumble into something they clearly don't understand. And instead of trying to understand it, or admitting they don't get it, they flail around using their old tricks.