glesica

It was open sourced because it was a cool piece of technology and it would have been a shame to keep it back, but it is no longer in use at Workiva.

Source: I work there, although I have literally nothing to do with this project.

Isn't the Python interpreter implemented in C? How could Python run someplace that C can't?

> Wikipedia is good for historical references (pre 1900 or so), and a good place to start if you just don't know anything about the thing you're looking up.

Whenever I see people say stuff like this I mentally replace what they said with "Wikipedia is a general-knowledge encyclopedia." Not a dig at you, but this should have always gone without saying.

Meh, Americans also don't like dying horribly and will freakout if they think something makes that more likely. The FDA is relatively conservative compared to many other countries and, especially after Thalidomide, most people probably appreciate that.

I haven't used Photoshop in quite a few years, but I'm pretty sure it works (or worked) the same way as Gimp. Maybe people who do a lot of work in image editing software are accustomed to this workflow? It seems reasonable, since exporting flattens layers and such, which a professional would probably want to preserve (and may not want to risk accidentally losing).

> This will probably be the last release. I won't be able to work on Shoebill going forward (by contractual obligation), so I wanted to race out one last release.

Really sad that companies put these kinds of restrictions on their employees...

I don't know a ton about Common Core (I don't have kids and I'm not a teacher). However, I know enough to agree with you that, assuming they got it right, Common Core should be a terrific thing. However, I spent some time helping a young relative with her math homework and it didn't inspire much confidence. Not because the assignment wasn't attempting to teach the things you mention (once I figured it out, I thought it was a great assignment), but because the assignment's instructions were vague and apparently incomplete. I struggled t figure out, based on the instructions, what the finished product should even look like. If they want to get parents on their side, they have to at least make it so that parents can check students' work, if not understand it themselves.

> buy deferred annuities from AAA rated insurance companies and build their own "pensions".

Which, in a post-financial crisis world, also obviously involves relying on government-backing of the insurance companies and bailouts when ratings agencies hand out AAA ratings like candy. Ultimately, only the government can guarantee people a retirement. Which is why I personally think we should say "screw it" and just guarantee everyone a reasonable (livable) payout from social security...

Then quit and take a lower-stress job. Once you're at that point you can afford it (in fact most people in that position these days could just quit and reduce their living costs, maybe not even that). I think that's what GP was saying.

It's a shame that casino rights is the only meaningful form of recognition being offered...

People like Warren Buffet talk about things being "mis-priced" all the time, that's how people like him make money. So yes, some risk might be priced in, but how much, and how accurately? In some cases, investors may have a very good idea of how much risk a venture entails, in other cases they may think they have a good idea but be completely wrong. The market price is, yes, the market price, that's a tautology. Whether the market price reflects a sustainable reality is an entirely different matter.

The parenthetical in my original comment was important. If everyone thinks they know what is going on, and they're all wrong, then the price isn't a good reflection of reality.

There are a ton of reasons for the price to be "wrong" if a particular practice is unusual or new. Markets only function as well as the people involved in them. If the people are all acting (unwittingly) on incomplete, incorrect, or insufficient information, then one would expect there to be risks that haven't been "priced in".

I didn't downvote you, but I also don't agree with your assumptions. First, I don't think that desktop sites are such a big problem on mobile (though some are, admittedly, unusable). At least with a desktop site I can zoom and figure out a way to get to the content I want (in fact iOS does, or used to, to let you double-tap on the content and it would intelligently zoom to fit). Most mobile sites with which I interact, on the other hand, are terrible. Either the text is too small and the page has disabled zooming, or content overflows and doesn't allow me to pan to see it, or some other terribleness. "Responsive" sites are actually some of the worst to interact with on mobile (for me).

I really don't believe that most developers of "desktop sites" care about mobile or do anything to optimize for it, and therefore wouldn't care about a 350ms delay, or even be aware of it. The people who are going to foul this up, it seems to me, are the "mobile web" developers who try to make their sites act like apps instead of just presenting content in a flexible manner.

One important side-effect of a an author providing data and code, even though it is only good for re-analysis, is that it provides completely unambiguous documentation for what the original author "did".

For example, if the original paper made a critical mistake, then there is no point is carrying out a replication, it won't work anyway. The Reinhart and Rogoff paper is a great example of this.

We really should require that ALL papers in ALL disciplines allow for re-analysis, it is basically like an extended, and ongoing peer review process.