I think he's betting on being able to implement better than apple.
He states:
My biggest challenge isn’t winning over converts from my competitors: it’s explaining what Instapaper does and convincing people that they actually need it.
So if apple deploys this everywhere, more people will understand it. Since Instapaper already has such a huge user base, established users will (supposedly) say 'oh, I use instapaper. It's much better'.
So apple creates new users, which are then drawn to Instapaper's superior service.
This is all dependent upon Instapaper actually implementing substantially better, but so far apple has sucked at multi-device syncing of, well, just about anything.
I don't buy it. If Apple creates new users, more often than not they will keep them. I wouldn't count on Instapaper's huge user base (which I'm guessing is mainly the tech crowd) influencing normal, everyday users.
Sherlock beating Watson was a prime example where Apple's execution was somewhat similar (some say worse), but it still killed that product.
I'd argue that apple is largely responsible for android's success - normal, everyday people knew they wanted a touchscreen smartphone only after apple made it possible to own one, but more importantly, made it popular to own one with the iPhone. As long as there is enough of a difference between them to choose one over the other, I think he's right to bet on it being a net-win for him.
Ah, that explains it. I had just assumed it was a blog post, but it was actually supposed to be journalism. Through that lens, what you say makes perfect sense.
Everyone’s dreamt of flying free as a bird. Nano is for the fun of flying
Interesting how true this must be. We've heard promise of practical personal flying machines for decades, usually complete with artists renditions or renders, but few have seemed to materialize yet.
Ultralights are probably the closest, fairly cheap and requiring little infrastructure. Just a seat with a big fan attached to a parachute really.
Even these though take a surprising amount of work to be able to operate safely.
Iconaircraft.com is a realistic attempt at making flight more widely available. They are designing their aircraft around the "sport flight" rules of recent years, which mean you need less training but you can only fly in good conditions. They haven't shipped yet, however.
I'm really liking this thread. Everytime someone tries to dismiss a major or course as being somehow inferior, another person chimes in with a view point that blows said dismissal out of the water.
I'm sure there are CS majors now in the workforce that just crank out their requisite number of lines each day, the work that many like to deify as an analytical blend of art and science becoming a routine drag.
And there are welders who take pride in their work and are treated with religious respect by civil engineers.
CMU is big into big robots (as opposed to e.g. MIT's Randy Brooks' little robots), and in one book or article on their program one of their CS undergraduates who was "perfect" at welding stainless steel was mentioned. "I don't think we're going to let him graduate", one of his professors said in jest.
Good point about not needing semicolons for multiple-line stuff (assuming the EOL's are not escaped, as you have it in your example). I blame the PHP I spent all week immersed in...bleh.
If he understands how PKI works. If he understands that people share a public key which is in turn paired with a private key. And if he understands that said private key is the only key capable of decrypting messages that were encrypted using the public key, that should be fine.
If he knew that much, he'd probably be able to reason out what 'symmetric' vs 'asymmetric' meant, if given enough time.
Is knowing the exact terms better? Yes.
Is it shameful to understand the concept pretty well without knowing every bit of terminology used to describe it? I'd say no.
ifconfig is deprecated, so probably a good idea to get out of that habit. Particularly if you are using it in scripts.
'ip addr' should give you all the information that 'ifconfig' does. You can also make the output a little less chatty by doing 'ip -o -4 addr' to get IPv4 addresses on one line per interface, or 'ip -o -0 addr' to get MAC addresses displayed similarly. This can make awking / cutting for addresses to use in scripts a little more elegant.
I didn't know about the one-per-line option, so thanks for that.
Commands I use regularly instead of using ifconfig:
# link up/down
ip link set dev eth0 up|down
# add a new address
ip addr add dev eth0 172.16.43.124/24
# to clear all IP addresses from eth0
ip addr flush dev eth0
# delete an address
ip addr del dev eth0 172.16.43.124/24
# add default route
ip route add default via 172.16.43.254
Why would I want to type more to accomplish the same task?
This is the same reason as to why I hated that Linux decided to have an ifconfig for physical interfaces, an iwconfig for wireless interfaces. It seems redundant...
Nothing, as long as it's working for you (your Linux distribution probably patched some of the remaining ifconfig problems themselves). You likely won't have a problem until you want to use network features that were implemented after 2001.
