Nope, numpy needs libblas and scipy needs libatlas, both of which have to installed from the system package manager. I slap my forehead every time I move to a new system and find that the pip install in the virtualenv failed.
CM7 user here. Can confirm that it is vulnerable. Easily fixed by installing a second dialer so that you'll always get a prompt.
Also I can't find any info on whether cm7 supports USSD factory reset. Anybody aware?
There's still this lingering belief that Java is slow, maybe related to the terrible start-up times of the JVM. But once it's going, Java is fast - really fast. And since its niche is basically enterprise webapps, a lot of attention has been paid to scalability and concurrency.
1 - There has been a lot of man years put into the JVM (threading and garbage collection), and Java memory model. I'm somewhat surprised by the magnitude of the difference. Java and JVM are very mature technologies.
2 - Go's CPM paradigm is not necessarily more performant than the preemptive threading model of Java, and I don't believe that has ever been claimed for CPM. It is claimed that it is "easier" to write concurrent code using the (CPM/Go) message passing paradigm, but in my experience, you either get concurrency (and can do both variants ok) or you don't, in which case any real world concurrent system will hardly be "easy". That said, for the concurrency novice, Go is far less intimidating experience given the language level support for goroutines (fibers), channels, selectors, etc. (think Java NIO ...)
I have no idea if it is "right" since I'm not going to duplicate this exact benchmark, but it seems likely. Raw performance hasn't been a huge focus for Go, though this has been changing. The tip version produces much faster code than the last official release that seems to have been used here. Also you often get more efficient Go from the gccgo frontend than from the Google compiler since it can take advantage of a lot of front-end-neutral optimizations that gcc already has (though this gap is closing as the Google compiler gets improved). For the runtime, work continues on the goroutine scheduling, gc, etc.
I have been really impressed with Go's portability. I recently cross compiled a binary from a Linux machine for an ARM target and had it running from scratch in less than 15 minutes. Go could become a serious option for embedded Linux targets.
I agree. My current spare-time project involves programming in Go for ARMv5-based boards (old chumby devices).
I write the code in Windows (Sublime Text 2), compile in Windows, but target GOOS=linux, GOARCH=ARM, GOARM=5 and end up with an executable that I can easily rsync and run over on the ARM device. The cross-compiling available in Go is much easier to setup initially than the usual situation of having to build an entire toolchain for your target.
It's not. It's really not. I've heard good things about PyCharm, but the best environment for Python that I have seen so far is Emacs. And Light Table definitely looks like an improvement on that. My only concern with this is the speed. I want this to have the same response time as Emacs or Vim. Then there would be no reason not to use it.
I specifically chose the description "pretty good" (as opposed to "great" or something more flowery) for PyDev, because I think that best summarizes it. It's got a number of issues with it (and it's sometimes as slow as a dog), but for the hobby developer it's more than enough.
Once I started working in Python and spending 30-something hours/week in the environment, its flaws started to overcome its benefits (namely: it was free, and I knew how to use it), and it was time to move to PyCharm...which is also slow, unless you throw a few gigs of RAM at it and at which point it becomes amazing.
(Disclaimer: Google employee, previously unaware of this program until it showed up on HN, speaking for myself and not the company.)
My guess is that this is trying to advocate for the open web, draw attention to all the ways that the web has changed our lives, and brainstorm new ways for it to continue impacting lives. It feels like the open web is under attack a lot these days, from various angles like walled-garden social networks, proprietary app stores, spammers, etc.
Remember that the vast majority of Google's revenue still comes from AdWords and AdSense. The more people use the open web, the more they search, the more they click on ads, and the bigger Google's revenue. Also, the more data that's available to Google and the better their algorithms can perform, which lets them put out better products.
When people use the open web, Google's stock price rises with no extra effort needed. When people switch to proprietary products, it's an existential threat to Google's business model.
So yes, this is done out of self-interest, but it's a case where a corporation's interests align with consumers. As a user (& a potential startup founder in the future), I very much want to keep the Internet free & open.