So the concern of being able to cache the CSS (and delivering a smaller amount of data in subsequent requests) is now a non-factor when it comes to maximizing your page speed (or minimizing paint time, or however you want to describe it)?
I would lean towards 'no'. Adding letters to a common word is currently much less common than removing vowels or combining consonants, so will be slightly harder for people to remember.
The exception might be if you have social curating, in which case a play on Digg might work out - vidd.io would be a good domain for that :)
Personally I would look for a word that is related to video, but is not a direct step from misspelling it.
Helpful answer: Python is a programming language. It can be used to create scripts, making it a scripting language as well.
More or less by definition, a scripting language is a programming language.
In a practical sense, and as stonemetal says, there is no real-world difference between a programming language and a scripting language.
In a technical sense though, one might consider a programming language to have a compiler and linker and debugger and able to create stand-alone executable files. Most scripting languages can also do that these days.
Perhaps the best guide then is intent - if a language is intended for script tasks (Windows/DOS batch files, for example, or even PHP), it is a scripting language. If the language supports a wider focus, it is a more general purpose programming language (Python, C, PERL, Java, etc.).
Ultimately, the best tool for the job, selected from the tools you know :) If you're writing a web application, there are a few languages either explicitly designed for that (PHP is a good/bad example), but many other languages can do it as well (Python, C, PERL, Java, etc.). If you're writing a desktop application, PHP would not be your best bet, but Python might not be either. Ditto mobile apps.
MF lets you add custom fields to any existing post type, and MT lets you create new custom post types (like, say, Music Events) that you can attach fields to using the MT plugin.
I've started doing DDP Yoga (http://www.ddpyoga.com/ - warning, autoplaying video) along with push-ups, squats and a bunch of stuff with a pile of dumbbells. With the help of an in-home personal trainer, I've gone from weighing 265 pounds (and getting shin splints going up a steep flight of stairs) to 215 pounds in 7 months. I took January off to rest up and give my ankles some time to relax (I broke both of them in 2000 and they sometimes hurt), and only gained 5 pounds.
Now I've added the yoga to my routine, I'll be going pretty strict on the diet starting this weekend (yes, I still drank pop and alcohol and ate chips and occasional McDonald's during those first 7 months). My goal is 190 pounds by June 1 - here's hoping!
My brains alone. Over the years I've developed a pattern I can remember easily, and apply another pattern to it based on the site or app's name. It's a simple math formula that changes the entire password instead of just applying a suffix or prefix to an existing strong password.
Ironically, the only site this fails on is my banking site which has wish-it-was-2-factor authentication and a limit of 8 characters for the password. Stupid.
Right on! But what if you have a team of employees and interns that need access to different accounts. You can't expect them all to memorize unique passwords.
True enough. But all they'd have to memorize is one hard password (or even a pattern like 102938), and one modifier pattern based on the URL of the site.
A simple example, using 102938 as the base password would be taking the main name part of the url (eg. www.google.com would just be "google"), converting each letter to a number (g = 7, o = 15, o = 15, g = 7, l = 12, e = 5), adding them all together (61), divide that by the number of characters used (61 / 6 = int(10.16) = 10), then add that result to every pair of numbers in the original password (10 + 10 = 20, 29 + 10 = 39, 38 + 10 = 48), giving you a password of 203940 for that site :)
EDIT: forgot to make this hard to crack. Again, the pattern approach can work - 203948 for "google" could easily and predictably become "go20og39le48@mycompany" or some such.
