beza1e1

I'd rather ask:

Why do people prefer to run for hours instead of a more intensive workout in a minutes?

Looking at the typical runners [0], why would you desire a physique like that?

[0] http://diaryofakalechic.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/marathon...

For calorie burning short intensive work outs are better. For example, deadlifts or playing squash for 30minutes is comparable to multiple hours of jogging.

I cannot find this "work out" advice in the article you linked [2].

The problem, I experience, is not that action items are missing. The point is that you must write the name of the responsible person next to each action item. Maybe even her email, so people can nag her. If possible, set deadlines.

However, the problem seems to be an inherently social one. I cannot imagine any etherpad plugin or something to help with this.

The best online meeting tool in my opinion is etherpad.

The meeting starts with a document containing the agenda. Now everybody chats and rewrites the agenda into a protocol of the decisions made. Meeting ends.

Pros: The discussion is usually clearer, because you talk about text. No need to talk about old protocols, which are written afterwards.

Cons: Does not solve the problem that usually nobody feels responsible afterwards.

Usually the latest draft is available for free and has the same content as the standard. That should be the N1570 document.

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1570.pdf

I think you should market your manual process more aggressively. Generating from templates is easy and cheap, but that a professional graphic artist is doing it, makes quite a difference.

Would you be impressed by more subtle qualities? Let's say a design with special effects, but printed with a professional printer on thicker paper. Maybe subtle effects like watermarks or micro embossing.

"Now explain that to me like i'm five"

kudos

Recently, there is some activity to revive Dylan.

http://opendylan.org/

Yes, OOP is not clearly defined: http://beza1e1.tuxen.de/articles/oop.html

I do not think your blog examples goes beyond REST. You just need to represent different resources. For example a "title list" or "article set".

Nearly correct. POST does not specify the name of the resource. So you do

  /orders/42 # with { order: { paid: true  } }

I have to correct myself. You do not want a 50% chance, because the answer does not provide 1Bit of information. If we get it right, we also know the position(s) of the letter.

More precisely: Given a dictionary of all possible words and a letter to guess, we can split the dictionary into k parts. One sub-dictionary contains all words for which the answer is negative. Additionally, we have k-1 sub-dictionaries for each equivalence class of letter positions.

For each letter, we can compute the partition. Now we need to choose the strategically best partition. I believe it should be the one with "the lowest average sub-dictionary size".

Why don't you link your articlecls [0] here? ;)

http://wannesm.be/articlecls/

Assuming there is always a letter with a 50% chance and we choose wrong 11 times in a row. One more and game over. At this point we have 11 Bits of information, which is enough to distuingish between 2048 words.

Actually, we should be correct 50% of the time. Which means 22 Bits of information or 4194304 words.

Additionally, we know the length of the word.

The english dictionaries seem to have between 400k and 1000k words [0] of all word sizes. With 22 Bits we get 4000k words. We do not have to worry about getting hanged using the information-reduction algorithm. ;)

[0] http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/JohnnyLing.shtml

If you want to minimize the number of errors, you should try the letter with the most information. In other words, minimize the search space. That is what hythloday suggested.

The mission of TeXLive is to include everything and the kitchen sink. However, why should their TeXpad support everything? They could go the XeTeX+biber+TikZ route and educate their users how to switch from pdflatex,bibtex,pstricks,etc.

Off-topic: Generating slides from an outliner like Org-mode produces those ugly bullet points en mass, doesn't it? The upside is of course, that they are easy and fast to generate. Why do you need that?

That is correct for the general style. However, then you have to hunt for packages for pseudocode, nicer tables, diagrams, pdf bookmarks and hyperlinks, subfigures, etc.

I tried [0]. Firefox does an ok page layout, if you print it. I did not try Prince.

One big TODO is the copyright notice in the bottom left column first page. Two column-wide figures are also an issue.

Thanks for citationstyles.org. When i have time, I'll try to integrate that.

[0] http://beza1e1.tuxen.de/acm_html/test.html

Disclaimer: This is very subjective and from a Python guy

1. While Python and Ruby are roughly of the same age, Ruby was only popular in Asia before Rails. At that point Python already had a solid base of non-web stuff.

2. Ruby feels more wild and crazy to me. Is monkey-patching still considered cool in the Ruby community? As a Pythonista I try to avoid such confusing stunts.

Due to both of those reasons I believe Python has more solid libraries. For example, Rails was extracted from a small productivity app, while Django was extracted from a serious newspaper website. While Ruby was fixing memory leaks, the Python interpreter was speeding up its hash map.

As a language enthusiast I envy Ruby for the blocks. As a Python programmer I never felt the need for them.

Not everybody can downvote. That adds significant noise to this data.

Citation needed! Who wrote that sentence?

Looks like a good argument for the Snowflake method [0]. This method is basically to "develop" a novel, by starting with a single sentence and gradually expanding it into the novel. In contrast, the other method (pansing) is to start writing the first chapter immediately.

For either approach you find great writers using them. It seems to be a question of personality.

[0] http://www.advancedfictionwriting.com/art/snowflake.php

For a clean room reverse engineering they could analyse the Skype binaries to document the protocol.

movdq is only used, if appropriate. There is a check, whether the pointer are at least 16 bytes apart.

Expanded into blog post: http://beza1e1.tuxen.de/articles/writing_speaking.html

Hard to call it a failure, because it is not over yet. They are happily failing for 20 years now. :)

http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/